therefore figuratiue against your opinion You shall heare the Church of Rome deliuer her owne minde with her owne mouth which you cannot denie her wordes be these Ipsa immolatio carnis quae sacerdotis manibus fit Christi passio mors crucifixio dicitur non rei veritate sed significante misterio That offering of the flesh which is done by the hand of the Priest is called the passion death Dist. 2. de consecratione canon Hoc est pag 434 You cannot denâ—â— but this Popâ— was a Protestant and if this canon be Catholicke then is your carnall presence antichristian and crucifying of Christ but not in exactnesse of trueth but in misterie of that which was signified 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 sence it is called the bodie of Christ that is it signifieth the bodie of Christ Fitzimon 57. How M. Rider abused the decretals and how by them he receaued vtter destruction to his cause is demonstrated in the 46. number Yet now agayne he kicketh against the prick wel then doth the text and glosse say that the immolation of the preist is called improprely the passion and death of Christ Truly and so will all Catholicks say the same For who euer heard the masse of the preist to be proprely the cruental acte of the Iewes against Christ or called the cruental sacrifice on the Crosse This is as much against vs as when we graunt it to be true we loose no more therby then a candle doth in giuing light to another candle reseruing as much light in it selfe as if it had lighted none So although we affirme all that is now produced M. Riders sute is graunted and our light nothing deminished Rider 58. I will alleadge in this case other Popes and the faith of the Church of Rome in another age whereby the Reader may plainelie see that the auncient Popes 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 De consecratione dist 2 Panis est in altare Glossa ibid. page 435. the glosse speaketh thus against your litteral sence of Hoc est corpus meum Hoc tamen est impossibile quod panis sit corpus Christi yet this is impossible that bread should be the body of Christ Not possible by their owne confession that bread should bee the bodie 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 for faith which the old Church of Rome held for heresie that for possibilitie 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 erred 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 litteral 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 Fitzimon 58. Here is great want of integritie In the glosse alleaged is affirmed that the saying it is impossible that bread should be the body of Christ should be takeÌ„ according to a sound maner to witt during the being therof bread For the saying that of bread is made the body of Christ Ita vt post consecrationem non sit iam ibi panis sed verum corpus Christi So that after consecration bread is ther no longer but the true body of Christ is towld to be the sound maner and meaning intended in the very same text and glosse Whether then can he seeme to any men Catholicks or others which had the face and conscience to misreport this glosse and to informe the decretals thus distroying protestantcie to stand for protestantcie woorthy to be houlden a lawfull Preacher or a faithfull witnes or conscionable informer or as being a godly spiritual honest preacher when so many others his betters are in great extremitie to haue yearly aboue 1500. raziers or cowmbs of corne besyds other commodities in such a choise deanry I know not how many vntruethes besyd all other faultines any other would skore vp in these woords which I calculat but for the 43 vntrueth only The 43. vntruth Let others imagin what discontentment and tediousnes any religious mynde might conceaue to incountre so contrarious a spirit or such a spirit of contradiction against knowen trueth 59. And I will adde one other Popes Canon Rider Corpus Christi quod sumitur de Altari figura est dum panis vinum videntur extra Dist 2. can Corpus Christi pag. 438. col 4. You cannot denie this Pope to be a protestant in this point veritas autem dum corpus sanguis Christi in veritate interius creditur The bodie of Christ which is taken from the Altar is a figure so long as the bread and wine are seene vnreceiued but the truth of the figure is seene when the bodie and bloud are receiued trulie inwardly and by faith into the heart Now the glosse in that place expoundeth the text and saith Corpus Christi 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 the Church of Rome cals the outward Elements Christs bodie that is a figure of his bodie being not receiued though consecrated Secondly that the bodie of Christ wherof the Sacrament must be a figure The Popes glosse against the Popes text must be receiued by faith into the soule not by the mouth into the stomacke Now the glosse saieth the text is false vnlesse c. But I leaue the iarre to be reconciled by you who be the Popes friends yet this I say And Gelasius another Pope more auncient then those against Eut. is of this opinion Maledicta glossa quae corrumpit textum These three Popes and the Church of Rome in those dayes it was before the birth of your Transubstantiation and your carnall presence jumpt with all the old Fathers and the Primitiue Church that liued the first sixe hundred yeares after Christ and say it is called the bodie of Christ the flesh of Christ the passion and death of Christ but not rei veritate not indeed and
and others to accompt their wrytings but meere philopatrial forgeries and to haue taken our defense generaly against them The rule then a forspoken is vniuersal that whersoeuer any Scot is mentioned befor the forsayd tyme S. Bernardus in v. S. Malachie Decretal de dolo contumacia cap. cum olim Caesarius lib. 12. c. 38. Fr. Malachias Mino rita de veneno peccatum cap. xi he could be noe other then an Irishman When many also long after be so called without other diuersitie the doubt of them to be vncertayne till after the tyme that Irland reiected that name For S. Bernard the ould edition of the Canon law Cesarius Malachias Minorita doe referr the name of Scotand to our Contry 400. yeares after the fatal ruine of the Picts 38. Therfor Albanian Scots doe lose their paynes and credit in repyning that all forsayd Scots weare belonging to Irland S. Bryde or Brigida wil be an Irish Virgin as long as the volumes and wrytings of all Martyrologes of Beda Marianus Sigebertus Isingrenas Capsgrauius S. Bernard Genebrard Baronius and of the histories of S. Patrick S. Ethkin S. Laurence and of hir selfe be vnburned or vnburied S. Columbanus wil be ane Irishman while the monumente of Ionas VValafridus all martyrologes the liues of S. Kilian of S. Rumuld Beda Sigebert Trithemius Vincent Antonin Vsuard Volateran Mermanius Molanus Bosius Baronius VVion Bernard yea Bale or Camden beare any reputation So will S. Fiacre yf Surius Clictouaeus Hareus Gazetus Molanus and ecclesiastical hymnes be of greater reputation then some out-cryed or Horned Hector Thomson or the like without all proofe or probabilitie auerring Bardical fictions Among which a forsayd hymnes it of S. Fiacre contayneth Lucernae nouae specula illustratur Ibernia illa misit Fiacrium Irlands high tower is bright with a new shyning light Clictouenâ— de hymnis Ecclesiasticis it sent Feach man of might And so in lyke maner of all others whether ould or late sacred â—r prophane freÌ„ds or foes domestical or forreiners general or parâ—icular wryters or rules be allowed the former rule is out of all controuersie that howsoeuer any Scots be graunted to haue in â—nnual incursions troubled Britanie in few numbers and vnder â—ubiection of Picts till the Picts weare razed out of being memorie inhabited Britanie yet that they transferred not the Kingdome of Scotland and name of Scots from Irland till and after the forsayd destruction of Picts Thus much without offending any 〈◊〉 for allthough ther be much against preiudicated suppositions yet the reuelation of trueth deserueth thankfull acception of euery one it being a singular benifit to depriue any of errours be declared to the honor of God glorie of his Saincts and confort of my Contrymen Catholicks 39. These premisses considered giue you your selues as now a lawfull impaneled well instructed Iurie your verdict of these wordes of M. Rider in his pretended frendly Caueat to your selues That fayth which can be proued to be taught in Christs tyme M. Rider in the 34. numbre of his Caueat and so reâ—eaued and continued in the primatiue Church for the first fiue hundred yeares after Christs ascension must needs be the true ancient Apostolical and Cathoâ—ick fayth And that other fayth that can not be so proued but base bastard and counterfet Censure I say and award my deere Contrymen whether the fayth of your ancieÌ„t MoÌ„cks Heremits Pilgrims vowed Virgins Prelats Preists or the puritan fayth be most ancient most receaued and continued in the primatiue Church Since that now you vnderstand S. Patrick your Apostle to haue bene a monck and his disciples no lesse and in their profession of confessed singular holines and learning Censure I say agayne whether his owne fayth be not by him selfe confessed to be base bastard and counterfeit not which erecteth Abbayes but subuerteth them not which inricheth ornaments of Gods seruice Churches but which turneth them into breches cushions curteins Not which imployeth plate and iuwels to the vse of Pixes and Chalices but which conuerteth these into swilling bowles Not which renteth cloisters and hospitals but which in riote and licentiousnes consumeth their reuenues l. 7. hist c. 12. 40. To this ende I haue carefully and curiously layd open your owne aÌ„tiquities that by your owne predecessors you might know your professions antiquitie and iudge your owne cause accordingly Sozomenus relateth a prudeÌ„t fact of Theodose Emperor who perceauing heresies plentifully to aryse he summoned their cheefe patrons They being assembled he demanded what thinke you my masters our first teachers of Christianitie did they hould the trueth or noe were they godly and honest or noe It was avnswered that they held the trueth and were godly Why then quoth he let vs examin your doctrin and theirs your liues and theirs and yf we fynd them conformable you shal be and your doctrin imbraced otherwyse you must be suppressed Therby they weare in dede suppressed You Contrymen Catholicks may demand the same of them and vs. Whom you fynde coÌ„formable to your first teachers them imbrace the others eschue and detest Galat. 1.9 1. Ioan. 2.24 41. Wheras therfor S. Paul aduiseth vs Yf any preach otherwyse then as we haue receaued to hould him accursed S. Ihon what we haue heard from the begyning to walke in the same because many seducers are gone into the world our first preachers and preaching being manifested vnto vs shal we for pelfe and trash of the world for honors for lyfe for death Luc. 9. 11. Mat. 11. Mar 8. Christ saying to vs that yf we be ashamed to confess him befor men that he also wil be ashamed to confess vs befor his heuenly father and angels be either trayned or terrifyed from our ancient professioÌ„ to profess this new as yet not fashioned and vnder the stampe all shapes that hitherto it hath shewed dislyking the forgers them selues and degusting the followers Twelue duble reasons to be constant Catholicks 42. First our ould profession that auerreth all scriptures from Christs tyme accompted Canonical for the profession that dismembreth whole volumes depraueth more reiecteth all that it dislyketh vpon priuat Scripturs and partial iudgment 2. It that imbraceth without exception all articles of the Apostles Crede for it which denyeth Christs discension The Crede of the Apostles the Catholick Church the communion of saincts the forgiuenes of synns 3. It which iustifyeth and obserueth all Apostolical traditions Traditions for it which abhorreth the very name of them 4. It which consenteth to expositions of scripture allowed by all ancient fathers Fathers and Doctors and primatiue Doctors for it which standeth only to selfe vnderstanding 5. It which remayneth in the doctrine of two hondred twelue coÌ„senting Councils Councils for it which neuer had Council or CoÌ„uenticle concordant 6. It which hath sanctifying Sacraments and operaâ—ing saluation for it which hath but simple signes Sacraments sanctifying friuolouse
visiting him by the scourg of his furie Conrad Schluss lib. 2. art 9. fol. 72. in loc cit and horribly punishing him before the day of his death For he strooke this sacramental heretick in such sort as he dyed desperat swearing and inuoking the deuils to whom he rendred his spirit He dyed of the lowsie disease gnawed with worms issuing out of a filthy sore in his priuie meÌ„bres so stinking as the people weare not able to indure the stenche These things are publickly written Besyd all this he was infamous by Sodomie for which be was marked on his shoulder with a hoat yron by appointmeÌ„t of the magistrat He was cruel Hosnus defen con Caluin bloody tyranous deceitfull treacherous babler contemner sophist Epicure corrupter and tosser of Scripturs as Ouid in his metamorphosis This being reuealed by the holy brotherhood them selues by after occasions I will confirme Now I wil examin whether the â—ood degenerateth from the parents Yet will I not touch them 〈◊〉 our contries that I may haue their greater good will and paâ—ences to vnderstand the trueth â— Of the followers of thes two much is to be mentioned in â—e 18. number of the examination of the creed Calu. lib. de Scandali pag. 118. 127 Of the greater part 〈◊〉 them who betake them selues sayth Caluin to the gospell what other inâ—â—ntion had they nisi vt excusso superstitionum iugo solutius in omnem lasciâ—am diffluerent then hauing shaken of the yoake of superstition they might â—ore dissolutly plunge them selues in all riot and lasciuiousnes â—econdly Smidelin sayth That the world may know they are no Papists Smidelinus conc 4. super c. 2. Luc. conc 1. sâ—per c. 21. â—r to haue trust in their good woorks not one good will they practise In stide 〈◊〉 fasting they are altogether in feasting For being more bowntifull toward â—e poore they vnfleece and fley them Prayers they turne to oathes c. â—hirdly Spangenberg fayth Post reuelatum euangelium Spangenbergius in sua vera narratione beneficiorum per Diuum Mart. Lutherum reiectum Ponâ—icatum euasisse homines adeò feros vt Deum non agnoscant nec vllam eius raâ—nem habeant velintque rectum iustum sit quicquid vnicuique visum fuerit â—fter the reuelation of the gospell and the papacie cast off men to haue become 〈◊〉 wild as they acknouledg not God nor hould any accompt of him and make 〈◊〉 to be right and lawfull which euery one lyketh Fowerthly Castal apud Rescium pag. 54. Castalion â—â—yth of them of Geneua They are prowd puffed with glorie and reâ—enge that with lesse danger you might offend princes then exasperat these â—ierce Caluinians Their lyfe is infamous and villanous They are masters of â—rte in reproaches lyes crueltie treason and insupportable arrogance They â—ame their GENEVA the HOLY CITIE and their assemblie IERVSALEM â—ut in very truth he dwelled long among them and was a most peâ—uliar frend of BEZA we should call it O BABILON BABILON 〈◊〉 AEGIPT and the true frontiers of Egiptian and Babilonical inchanters 〈◊〉 most infamous SODOME and children of GOMORRHE Truely I â—ould fill not a few sheets of paper with these euidences of theirâ—wne of the deformations following their pretended Reformaâ—â—ons But what need lanterns in the sunne â—4 A woord or two in particular besyde that which God willing shal be sayd in treating of Puritanisme Schlusselburg lib. 1. fol. 92. 93. lib. 2. art 1. lib. 3. art 8. Beza not in the â—â—me of his papistrie but euer after in all his lyfe imployed him selfe 〈◊〉 â—oly in fullfilling his lusts writing his loues reuenging his corriuals Who â—uing long deliberated vvhether to vse more of the two offences â—rlotrie with another mans wyfe or Sodomie with a boye he â—olued by his owne confession to follow more this later I may â—â—rhapps translate his elegie containing the sayd confession Luther de missa priuata Of â—colampadius Carolostadius and Bucer the brethren them selues confesse they were in the ende smuthered with deuils Among the Caluinists Schlusselburg in catal haerit lib. 1. pag. 4. all the principal became Turcks or Arians as Alemanus Adam Neuser Alciatus Siluanus Gregorius Paulus Andraeas Volanus Seruetâ—â— Blandrata Franciscus Dauid Gentilis Gribaldus c. euen by ther oune brethrens confession Reserue your appetit for more of this kynde to the examination of the Creed Vide num 18. super symbolum ApostoloruÌ„ Of Zuinglius he confessed of him selfe and his brethren that their leacherie had made them infamous In the ende he dyed in rebellion armed wherof in remembrance is this verse in Germanie vsual Occubuit patrio bellator Zuinglius ense In ciuil broyle was Martial Zuinglius sllayne 25. And that also the Ministers haue noe regarde to Gods glorie but only to their temporal licentiousnes these few euidences may demonstrat Menno in fundam tit de doctr praedicaÌ„t First saith Menno I haue knowen most assuredly that they are without the spirit mission and woord of Christ. That by their teaching and woorks they hunte only after fauoure of men honours pryde reuenues fayre building Calu. in tract pag. 150. epist 54. l. de scan pag. 131. and lousnes of lyfe Secondly saith Caluin The ministers of Geneua as empty bellyes giuen vp to all idlenes so they may inioye their delights do not regard whether heauen and earth be consounded together VVherof peruse amply in the 18. number vpon the Creed So that what the leaders what the followers what the vnder leaders in general and particular haue bene is sufficiently now notorious What their Doctrin is defending of all these mischeefs God to be the authour and nothing to be synfull in his sight but only infidelitie shal be by gods permission abundantly declared in the examination of the creed and compendiously in the conclusion thervpon numbers 22. I trust by this tyme this mater to be so tarte as he that would not digest but it should be aunswered novv that it is avnswered vvill requyre no more savvce to digest it I beleeue he vvill make as sovvre countenances in vvell digesting it as yf he had bene crammed vvith a bankett of sovver crabbs For yf as he inferreth by prelats lyfe their doctrin be esteemed such greaceless doctours could neuer follovv but sutable doctrin I say nothing as you behould of Eaton the preacher first pilloried in cheap syde and after at Pauls cross for lying vvith his one dawghter I vvil not recompt rapes Sodomies Murders Piracies not so much to tell the truth for sparing the doers as the hearers and my selfe especialy desiring only to discouer the weaknes and falshod of his exceptions and for that purpose to relat brefly sufficient demoÌ„strations and instances as farr as might be from incensing domestical readers to impatience â—â— And your friend Bernard tells the Pope Eugenius to his face Bern. in all his fiue bookes de considerat that for
thinke that he is Perseus on his wynged horse Pegasus traÌ„sforming alâ— his aduersaries into stones that they can not discerne these prooft to be no proofs Cal. in 7. mat et in 9. 12 16 18. Ia c. 6. mac v. 16.17.18 in c. 26. mat In c. 2. Luc. 16. In Ioan. 1. Castal in pref Bibl. ad Edw 6. D. Whitg a pag. 31. ad 51. Stow chron pag. 1022. 1189. 1283. 1551. Melan. in loc con An. 1539. Fol. 8. 10. An. 1545. fol. 53. An. 1558. loco de filio Sebast. Fran. apud Bezam ep 6. Cartwr in 2. replie pag. 191. Ioan. 10.31 but of stupiditie in them alleaging them To haâ—e the forsayd woords wel applyed in dede let them first procure that Caluinians leaue to doubt of the diuinitie of Christ. Let them be opposed to Castalio mistrusting the Messias to be yet come Let them be opposed to Atheists abounding euery where since reformation began Let them debarr that there be no successours to Francis Kett master of Art to George Paris and Ihon Lewes lately executed in England for denial of Christs diuinitie Let them confound Melancthon allowing but a parcel of diuinie nature to our Saluiour Let them coÌ„found Sebastiaâ— Franck accompting Christ no more God then Socrates or Trismegistus Let them confound Cartwright saying the Iewes had bene fooles to accompt him their liuing God whom they did behould a seely aend miserable man These things are written that such should beleeue Iesus is the Sonne of God and that beleeuing they might haue life in his name To proue any thing against vs there can not possibly be any wyse application of them Rider 34. For that faith which can bee prooued to bee taught in Christs tyme 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 proued 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 neuer taught by Christ nor once dreamed on by the auncient Fathers but inuented and deuised a thousand yeares after Christ by the late Church of Rome grounding their proofes onelie of an emptie sound of syllables without Apostolical or Catholicque sence enforcing both Scriptures and Fathers to speake what they and you pleased not what the holie Ghost and the Fathers purposed VVhether M. Rider hath condemned his Church to be base bastard and cownterfet Fitzimon All this appâ—areth in our 20. number or 30. number 34. YF any thing by him was vnaduisedly affirmed by this his verdict against his owne Church he hath especialy disconfited his profession For first therby he hath condemned Luther and Caluin and their adherents affirming them to haue bene first preachers of Christ and greatest doctours of trueth not only aboue the primatiue â—thers but aboue all that euer were or euer wil be whether they 〈◊〉 Apostles or noe Yf then the religion of the first fiue hundred â—â—res be only true and all other but base bastard and counterfet â—w can this new religion Haddon in the end of his epistle Bale cent 1. pag. 66. 72 cent 8. pag. 678. Epistle to the Confer betwixt Latimer and Ridley-Harborough in the last oration which Haddon professed to haue bene â—t thirtie yeares knowen of which all English late writters â—compt Latimer to be the Apostle and saying Luther to haue bene not â—ly the reformer of abuses but the very Father of trueth but therby 〈◊〉 condemned Nay how are not the two most glorifyed Foxian â—artyrs Ridley and Cranmer therby coÌ„demned saying they would â—oue all the doctrin sett foorth by K. Edward to be more pure then â—y other vsed in England a 1000. yeares befor Is it not therby â—oth professed vnknowen till that time as also not to be the doâ—rin of Christ For had it bene knowen and his promise true of â—e inuincibilitie therof 16. Matth. it could neuer haue had a 1000. â—ares interruption And what may be sayd of the Prince of Condees â—â—scription in his coyne of Golde Lud. XIII Dei gratia Francorum Rex â—imus Christianus Secondly all the disputations and monuments of all principall â—otestaÌ„ts professing the primatiue Fathers of the first secoÌ„d third â—nd fowerth hundred yeares repugnant to protestantcie as appeaâ—eth in the 30. nuÌ„ber by induction are therby coÌ„demned Awnswer to Sawnders Rock pag. 248. 278. Beza conf Geneu c. 7. 12. Et in c. 2. ad Thes. Thirdly â—ll the learnedest protestants condemning the Church of the Apoâ—les tyme and saying Antichrist to haue then begunne and condemning â—l and euery of the Apostles them selues Euangelists and their â—nmediat disciples all these I say are therby condemned For yf â—ese were fauorable to protestantcye Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 10. col 558. 559. 560. Cal. in 1. Cor. c. 4. v. 4. c. 7. v. 9. Rom. c. 9. v. â— Quintin apud ResciaÌ„ in pref nimistromachie Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 10. Vide Calu. loc cit Bullinger com in 19. 22. Apoc. Quintin loc cit Calu. apud Feuard pref in Ruth Beza de hist adultere Luth. tom 5. fol. 439 440. vitus Theod. pag. vlt. in nou test there had bene no occasion 〈◊〉 despise or disprayse them in such maner as to affirme such deâ—cts in S. Peter as by the Centuriasts who curiously and not only â—refully haue calculated 15. synnes of his by Beza by Illyricus are 〈◊〉 disparage him carefully and plentifully registred To affirme of 〈◊〉 Paul with Caluin that he was full of colde and heat of presumption teâ—eritie confusion and precipitation And with Quintinus that he was not a â—oseÌ„ vessel but a brokeÌ„ vessel with the CeÌ„turiasts that he was impatieÌ„t 〈◊〉 in desperation during his afflictioÌ„s in Asia dissentioÌ„s toward Barnabas hypoâ—tical toward Iames others To affirme of S. Ihon with Bullinger that â—his proÌ„ptnes to adore the angel he had synned in apostasie With Quintinus to â—arme him IuueneÌ„ stoliduluÌ„ a foolish youth With Caluin to distrust his 6. Cap. â—nd with Beza his 8. Cap. for vntrue To affirme of S. Iames that he was a â—ruerter of S. Pauls doctrin his epistle bastard couÌ„terfet wicked vnapostolical To affirme with Luther Luth. pref ad nou test in ep Petri tom 3. Wittemb Calu. in c. 2. Mat. v. 15. c. 4. v. 13. c. 8. v. 17. c. 21. v. 9. c. 27. v. 9. Idem Act. 15. v. 40. Tower disp 4. dayes Conference Calu. in c. 21. Act. v. 23. the three first Euangelists to be apochriphal To affirme in particular with Caluin that S. Mathew abused distorted and alleadged vnaptly diuers citations That S. Marke was an Apostat and disloial not to be excused To affirme with Luther that S. Luke was excessiue
true bread of life which as farre excelled Manna as the soule the bodie life death eternitie time and heauen earth NOw let vs see according to which of Christs natures 3. Point he is called our liuing Bread whether according to his manhood or godhead or both Christ calls this bread his flesh and Christ and his flesh are al one and therefore Christ and his flesh are all one and the same bread and as our bodies are fed with materiel bread so are our soules fed with the flesh of Christ and this flesh hee will giue for the life of the world which flesh is not Christs bodie separated from his soule as some of you imagine and vntruelie teach nor Christs bodie and soule separated from his diuinitie but euen his quickninge flesh which being personally vnited to his eternall spirit was by the same giuen for the life of the world not corporallie and really in the Sacrament as you vntruly teach But in the sacrifice of his bodie and bloud once on the crosse as the Scriptures record for the flesh of Christ profiteth not but as it is made quickning by the spirit Neither do we participate the life of his spirit but as it is communicated vnto vs by his flesh by which we are made flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone as hath bin shewed before Which holie misterie is represented vnto vs in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and the trueth thereof assured and sealed in the due administration and receiuing of the same So this true bread spoken of in the sixt of Iohn which hath this spirituall quickning and nourâ—shing power is compleate Christ God and man with all his soule sauing merits And neither Manna in the wildernesse nor your round Wafer cakes vppon your supposed hallowed Altars Manna it could not be for it ceased manie hundred years before Your imagined and transnatured bread it could not bee because the Sacrament was not then instituted And so to the third point The manner how this true bread Christ must be eaten 3. Point THe meat is spirituall and therefore the manner of eating must not bee corporall for such as is the meat such must be the mouth but the meat is spirituall therefore the mouth must be spirituall as before you haue heard Fide non dente In the epistle to the Reader c. which thing being there handled befor out of holy Scripture Fathers and your Popes Canons I wille onelie referre you thither where you may vnlesse you bee malecontents be fully satisfied toucheing the true manner of eating Christ where you may find proued out of Gods booke that comming to Christ beleeuing in Christ abiding in Christ dwelling in Christ and to be clad with Christ and to eate Christ are all one so that out of everie one you might frame this or the like vnaunswerable argument How sacred Scriptures are exorbitantly depraued Fitzimon 37. ALas what miserie and impietie is euery lyne fraught with all in this his exposition Considre but how many falsifications of the text are here vsed First that some belly-gods had moued question whether Moises or Christ were more liberal in feeding men Ther is no such mater Nether also their commending of Moises greatnes For only Christ lightly mentioned him the residue not thinking of him by owght appearing in Scripture Nether do they coÌ„mend the bread from the vertue of it but only tell that their Forfathers had eaten thereof without any further relation Nether doth Christ deny Manna to be true bread for ther is no such woord The fowrtenth vntrueth The 14. vntruth besyd others wincked at shal be registred by M. Rider against him selfe Here he saith that our doctrine is that the body must first feed on Christ corporaly so it should be to approach to trueth then the sowle shal be therby fedd spiritualy How is this saying sutable to these words in his preface You teache the communicants to receaue Christ with their mowthes corporaly not with their faith spiritualy You make your selfe ridiculous by such palpable contradiction that we teache and that we do not teache Christ to be receaued spiritualy that we teache only corporaly and yet that we teache first corporaly after spiritualy Would not any other display all the figurs of rhetorick against this figure of a learned man He telleth after that Christ and his fleash are all one and all one bread yet will he tell you presently that nether of bothe are any bread at al. Next that some of vs teache Christs fleash to be Christs body separated from his sowle A fowle vntrueth and the fowler that vntestifyed after so many promises to haue all our dealings published by our owne prints books leaues lynes c. Then that the fleash of Christ proffiteth nowght but as it is quickned by the Spirit This he him selfe shall testifye to be the fifteenth vntrueth in these woords The 15. vntruth Christ would receaue a bloody speare into his syde before mans synne could be satisfyed This speare to haue pearced Christ after his death and not when his fleash was quickned by his Spirit is testifyed by S. Ihon saying that he had then deliuered vp his Spirit Ioan. 19. a v. 31. ad 35. the Iewes had informed Pilat of his death the Sowldiours Vt viderunt eum iam mortuum non fregerunt eius crura Sed vnus militum lancea latus eius aperuit when they beheld him dead they did not breake his thighes But one of the Sowldiours with a lance opened his syde Now make vp these two together that Christs fleash withowt his Spirit proffiteth nothing and yet that mans synne cowld not be satisfyed but after Christs fleashe was separated from his Spirit and then pearced I neuer in my lyfe nor I thinke any other noted such implications before in any booke hitherto printed But yet ther followeth more That we do not coÌ„municat the life of Christs Spirit but by his flesh Is not this to coÌ„tradict all benifit fullfilled to the Patriarches by Christs discension of Spirit without his fleashe Then saith he what is spiritual can not be receaued by a corporal maner Was ther euer any thing more contrarie to Diuinitie philosophie or reason First faith is spiritual yet it is by hearing Rom. 10.17 which is a corporal maner Regeneration is spiritual yet it is by maner of a corporal washing Yea God is a most spiritual Spirit yet the Apostle coÌ„mandeth vs to beare him in our bodyes 1. Cor. 6. Contrarywyse Christs birth his body made inuisible his issueing out of his sepulchre his entring among his shut disciples walking on the sea his ascension were verlye corporal yet the maner was not corporal but spiritual So that nether spiritual gifts are continualy conioyned with spiritual maners but often with corporal and corporal gifts often conioiyned with spiritual maners The sowle of man is a spiritual forme and not material and yet it is receaued
egena elementa weake and poore elements Or as the English bibles translate weake and beggerly ordonances Against which disordre and deformation of Reformers Hebr. 10.28 the sayd Apostle worthely disputeth saying A man making frustrat the law of Moises is therfor adiudged to death by the verdict of 2. or 3. witnesses How much more deserueth he more extreame punishments which thus treadeth the Sonne of God vnder foote To conclude Christian reader thow perceauest by these confessions that in their owne opinion ther is no more benifit contayned in their sacramēt then by remembring Christ by any other means ether of sermons or representations in the owld or new testament Vide Petr. Mart. in 1. Cor. c. 10. u. 1 2. What then should hinder me to graunt all this to be true of their sacrament considering that I finde the Manna of the Iewes much more liuely expressing and representing Christ by raining downe from heauen in a miraculous maner so as it was wondred at by the Iewes which had all sweetnes of delitesomnes was very whyte wheras the communion bread retayning stil his nature came from the earth without all miraculous maner to be wondred at hath only the tast of bread sometymes also mowldie and is not of the whytest and consequently not so conuenient to represent the descending of the Messias our Saluioure among mankinde his wonderfull incarnation and lyfe his delytesome feeding our sowles his innocencie as the former representation Manna yea I reporte me to all indifferent wysdomes whether it be not rather farr inferiour in way of signification which by protestants is called the cheefe lyfe of Sacraments therunto Now then do not meruayle good reader that M. Rider dilated not vnto thee how by communion thow art to haue resurrection of the fleash and euerlasting lyfe of the sowle for it is sufficient in his mynde to giue the great promises paynted woords sweet benedictions to captiuat thy sowle and in effect to bestow only on thee a peece of bread extolled against truthe to make thee leaue the true bread of lyfe dispraysed as a sacrament instituted by Christ to euacuat the new testament praysed as a bigg shaddow to make thee forsake and misbeleeue the substance of Christs body and dispraysed as a substantial healpe to frustrat thy saluation Whervpon I remitt you to the 63. number to haue a pertinent relation of S. Epiphanius Rider 40. But an opposition being made betwixt this true bread Christ and this Sacramentall bread as was betwixt Christ and Manna it will bee cleere nay impossible that your consecrated bread should bee the bread of life which is spoken of in the sixth of Ihon 1 Your consecrated bread neuer came from the heauen of heauens therefore it is not the true bread of life spoken of in this place 2 All that eate of this true bread Christ are saued but manie that eate of your Sacramentall bread are damned therefore it is not that bread spoken of in the sixth of Iohn 3 Your bread onelie enters the bodilie mouth and is receiued into the stomacke of the bodie and so passeth the way of all excrements and therefore is not the true bread 4 Your bread cannot for euer preserue temporall life much lesse giue it but not at all life eternal and therefore it is not the true bread of life spoken of in this sixth of Iohn VVhether there be any opposition betwixt our Sacrament and Christ And whether by entring our stomaches Christ be payned or hurt 40. OVr consecrated bread after consecration is Christ and therfor is the true bread spoken of in this place Fitzimon And saluation is gotten only by him whom we eate and by no other deuotion so much as by eating him Wherby it is sayd they that eate him shall haue lyfe euerlasting viz. as by a most principal meane to come therto Yet diuers eate him vnworthely to their damnation other after eating depriue them selues from the benifit of him by new wickednes to whom may be sayd Ozec 13.9 their saluation is by him their damnation by them selues I pray let vs as well examin these sayd oppositions and your holy supper Came your supper from heauen Are all that eate of it saued Are all receauers therof immortal I pray you good Sir tell vs of one only that is assuredly saued of your sorte or immortal by your Lords supper Nay how can you affirme conformably to your sayings in the next precedent number that any haue help or benifit therby vnles they were forgetfull of their fayth But you will say neuer thelesse where is any answear to that obiection your bread entreth the mouthe passeth the stomack departeth with other excrements and therfor not Christ I answere therto that it is not very Christian to thinke that Christ after his resurrection hath a mortal body and that it is a conceit altogether Capharnaical to suppose he is eaten in so grosse a maner as by you is specified Our Sacrament therfor which is Christ remayneth realy in vs during the remayning of the forme of bread intierly which formes by the heate of our stomacks being digested Christ after powring his grace into our soule ceaseth realy to be in vs. And this aunswear may suffice any Christian mynde I will here also wynke at seueral vntruethes for breuites sake and axamin further Nether let any one maruayle that I am very succinct in treating the forsayd point Origen hom 9. 13. in Leuitic Hebr. cap. 5. S. August serm 46. de verbis De Ciu l. 10. c. 6. In Ps 39 lib. 50. hom 42. Tra. 11. in Ioan. how long Christ remayneth in the receauers because I imitate the primatiue Fathers saying Non immoremur in his quae scientibus nota sunt ignorantibus patere non possunt Let vs not be prolix in such things as are knowen to the beleeuers and can be notifyed to the ignorāt This made S. Paul mentioning the sacrifice of Melchisedech to haue streight abrupted it as not to be diuulgated to faithles conceyts This made S. Augustin sildome to name otherwyse this mysterie then the Sacrament knowen to the faithfull 41. Rider Ioh. 6.54.50 Now seeing that Christ had not all this time when he made this sermon in the sixth of Iohn ordained his last Super and therefore not the bread in the Supper And seeing this bread can neither assure the bodie of the receiuers of resurrection nor their soules of saluation it cannot be that this bread in the Sacrament was the same that Christ spake of in Iohn And therefore your proofes brought to prooue your carnall presence of Christ by these texts be impertinent sauouring by your leaue of smale reading in the Fathers and lesse vnderstanding in the Scriptures But that all men that read this may see your errours and so beware of your new daungerous doctrine I will bring Augustine and other Fathers to disprooue you in plaine termes for misalleadging these texts Augustine bringeth forth
he againe and all other Fathers noe Sacrament is thought duely ministred Saint Hierom telleth you how thronges of people flocked to haue S. Epiphanius and Hilarions blessing to them and their children And writing to Rustic bishop of Narbon he blameth him for disalowing a simple secular priest to blesse the people saying Benedicere populo non debet qui Christum etiam meruit consecrare Should not he blesse the people who deserueth to consecrat Christ S. Augustin relateth him selfe and others to haue vsed lyke deuotion Beda telleth how in England the godly Christians would trudge befor in highe wayes and crosse passages to obtayne preests blessing by mowthe or hand For the one doth not exclude the other So that it is tyme M. Rider to leaue this forme of argument by one trueth to exclude the other when both may consist together I grant you spent this trauayle against the Crosse when you were a puritan now perhapps you dare not Christen a child without it In the mean tyme by your great wysdome you haue made to Catholicks and protestants many good points God be praysed knowen which had bene more to your behoofe vnreuealed To conclude the vanitie of his long digression manifowldly appearing otherwise it is not also obscure in this that whether blessing and thanksgiuing had bene all one as is demōstrated not haue to bene yet it had imported nothing in the world to our cōtrouersie For the blessing being accidental not essential to the mater and forme of consecration the vse of it did only shew a greater solemnitie followed by Christ in the institution of the Sacrament and no necessitie That we are often bidd by M. Rider to read these and those in greeke gentle Reader he biddeth vs to doe for ostentation what he can not doe him selfe For in my particular knowledge and experience a blynd man hath as much sight in his eyes as he hathe good greeke in his head And yf we had found in greeke what he pretendeth you now vnderstand how litle it had bene to his proffit or our hinderance The 24. 25. 26 27 vntruth Vntruethes are heaped in this last discourse plentifully The 24. notoriouse vntrueth is that we teache our spiritual children they be pardoned from synns and preserued from dangers and spirits yf we crosse them with two fingers and a thumb The 25. that the pope and not God commandeth our blessing with the Crosse The 26. that we vse mumbling woords and charming Crosses We leaue charmings and coniurings for hereticks Nota sunt commercia haereticorum cum magis Tertul. de prescrip c. 43. Vide num 100. Ezech. 9.4 the intermedling of hereticks and magitians saith Tertullian are notorious Our crossing is no charming vnles God his angels were charmers of which see after in the 100. number The 27. that we teache a certayne power to be in our breath and fingers Such maters as these would seeme to deserue our allegations wher we teach these points But it is sufficient that vnles they be beleeued vpon puritan faith troth and honestie ther is no other proofe to auerr them Now I will in this conuict M. Rider both to be a puritan although the puritants respect him not and also to mis-informe our doctrin and that by the protestants euen of England and that befor his Maiestie in the conference sett foorth by Barlow anno 1605. pag. 73.74 as his royal Maiestie doubted not to acknowledge saying I am giuen to vnderstand by the bishops and I fynd it true that the papists them selues did neuer ascribe any power or spiritual grace to the signe of the Crosse Such a testimonie is a lawfull defense I trow against M. Rider both that he degenerateth from the doctrin of the bishops of England and falsifyeth our doctrin which is now lawfully warranted to thinke so of the Crosse as the best protestants do approue it The 28. vntruth The 28. that our blessing agreeth with Gods preists blessing no more then superstition with religion For I haue shewed it to haue proceeded from God by his Angel to haue bene practised by his Apostles and receaued by all the Fathers and primatiue Church The 29. 30. 31. vntruth The 29. 30. and 31. at least are included from the parcell your Apish toyes childishe tricks c. to the ende so perspicuously as no auditour most fauorable would take in his accompts and discharge him more sparingly Now let vs giue place M. Rider is at leyngthe to tumble into his mater in controuersie after his long peregrination to crossings charmings greeke and reprehensions Rider 54. But now to the rest of the bodie of the text and controuersie Wherein first let vs examine whether your two propositions this is my bodie and this is my bloud of the new Testament c. be proper or figuratiue litterall or Sacramentall For if they be improper borrowed figuratiue and Sacramental they prooue neither your Transubstantiation nor your carnall reall presence but euen plainlie disprooue them Augustin de doctr christiana lib. 3 cap. 16. pag. 23. Parisijs 1586. Saint Augustines rule before recited if you would be ruled by it but neither Scriptures nor Fathers can rule you but you will ouer rule them would presentlie satisfie you that these two propositions must be figuratiue the latter you confesse but the former as yet you wil not His words againe for the Readers good I wil repeat and they be these If the scripture seem to command 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 iubere Christ seemeth to commaund a wicked act that is carnallie and grosly to eate Christs flesh Ether confute S. Aug. or confesse your error the firste is impossible the second were commendable Read it it containes but 6. or 7. lines The marginall note there condemes your litterall fence 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 Christes 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 fence of these your two propositions against trueth against faith and the auncient Fathers Augustine in that short 15. chap. of the same booke immediatly going before wisheth alwayes the interpretation of these and all other figuratiue speeches to be brought ad regnum charitatis to the kingdome of charitie to haue their true exposition Now if you expounde this litterallie and properlie you forsake Augustines rule charities kingdome and the Apostolicall and Catholike exposition It is but small charitie to deuoure the food of a friend but to eate and deuoure corporallie and gutturallie the precious bodie and
And Origin saith Not the matter of bread but the words recited ouer it doth profit the worthy receiuer this I speake saith he of the typicall and figuratiue bodie which is in deede the Sacramentall bread Vpon the 15. of Mathew Augustine confuting Adimantus the Hereticke that held that the bloud in man was the onely soule of man aunswered it was so figuratiuely 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 positum esse non enim dubitauit Dominus dicere hoc est corpus meum cùm signum daret corporis sui I maye saith Augustine expound the precept of Christ figuratiuelie for the Lord doubted not to say this is my bodie when he gaue the figure of his bodie Augustine saith Hoc est corpus meum is a phrase figuratiue you say no but it is litterall Now let the Catholicks take this Friendlie Caueat to heart for they haue no reason to follow you that forsake the Fathers and heere may you see that our exposition is auncient Catholicke and Apostolicall yours new priuate and hereticall Tertullian an ancient Father saith Acceptum panem distributum discipulis Tertull. lib. 4. contra Marcion pag. 133. line 26. c. The bread which was taken and giuen 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 Hierome super 26. Math. Ambrose in 1. Cor. 11. And Hierome calls it a representation of the truth of Christs bodie and bloud and not the body and bloud And Ambrose seconds his former sayings in these words In edendo c. In eating and drinking the bread and wine we doe signifie the flesh and 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 Chris in hom 17 in Hebr. super 1. Cor. 11. Offerimus quidem sed ad recordationem and afterward Hoc autem sacrificium exemplar est illius c. We offer indeed but in rememberance of his death this sacrifice is a token or figure of that sacrifice the thing that we do is done in remēberance of the thing that was done by Christ before c. Here is a manifest place against you Chrisost in hom 11. Math. which you shall neuer aunswere And elsewhere he saith in the same sanctified vessels there is not the bodie of Christ indeed but a misterie of the bodie is contained Clemens Alex. in padago lib. 1. cap. 6. pag. 18. line vlt. pag. 19. line 1. And Clemens Alexandrinus who liued 1300. yeares agoe saith Comedite carnes meas bibite sanguinem meum c. Eate yee my flesh and drincke my bloud meaning heereby vnder an allegorie or figure the meat drincke that is of faith of promise And the same reuerend Father in his second booke and second chapter of his Padagogi and 5. pag. and line 21 22 23. hath these words Ipse quoque vino vsus est nam ipse quoque homo vinum benedixit cùm dixit accipite bibite hoc est sanguis meus sanguis vitis c. For our Lord Christ vsed wine and blessed wine when he said take drincke this my bloud the bloud of the vine the word which is shed for manie for the remissiō of sinnes doth signifie allegorically the holy riuer of gladnesse Out of which I note First it is sanguis vitis the bloud of the grape properlie and that is wine It is called Christs bloud Sacramentallie and by way of signification Secōdlie it appeares to be figuratiue in this word shed for the bloud of the grape which is wine was not shed for manie but the bloud of Christ But you wil saye it is true before consecration but after consecration it is Christs verie naturall bloud No saith Clement immediatlie following Quod autem vinum 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 drincke of the fruit of the vine c. Out of which premisses I note three things Read Clement follow Clem. First that that which you call cōsecration this learned Father calls it benediction Secondlie 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 Beda in Luc. 22. page 476. And venerable Beda our countrieman tells you that in England in his time the text was taken figuratiuely The solemnities of the old Passouer saith he being ended Christ commeth to the newe which the Church is desirous 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 be the same to whom the Lord sware and will not repent c. Beda called it not the naturall bodie of Christ that worketh out redemption but a remembrance of our redemption and a figure of it Thus the indifferent Reader may see that Augustine Ambrose Origin Tertullian Hierome Clemens Alexandrinus Beda and manie others which I omit for breuities sake all of them being auncient approoued writers 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 How the Fathers graunting a figure yet deny à figure as it is taken by protestants 56. I Graunt with S. Augustin the B. Sacrament to be a figure of Christ but requyre that you shew him to approue it Fitzimon a figure only I graunt with Origen it is Christs typical body grant you the rest of his opiniō in his owne woords deliuered The law of God sayth he now not in figurs or images as befor but in the very forme of trueth is acknowledged Origen hom 7. in lib. Num. And what befor were in an obscuritie shaddowed are now acclomplished in their forme and trueth It followeth Befor was baptisme in a figure in the clowd and in the sea but now regeneration is in forme in water and the holy Ghost Then was Manna in a figure meat now in forme is the fleash of the woord of God true meat according as he sayd my fleash is meat truely and my blood is drinke truely I craue no more then Tertullian affoordeth Tertull. l. 4. con Marcion as appeareth in the numbers cited in the 54. That Christ made the bread which was giuen to his disciples his body by saying this is my body that is the figure of his body in owtward apparence as in the forsayd numbers is
trueth but mistically significatiuelie improperly figuratiuely and by way of representation and that it is impossible otherwise to bee the bodie of Christ Yet when we speake of figures in the Sacrament you mocke vs. When we say the phrase is figuratiue therefore the sence must be spirituall You deride vs as mis-interpreters of Scriptures and Fathers But if your leisure and learning would affoord you but fauour to read with a holie deuotion the canonicall Scriptures the ancient doctors of Christs Primitiue Church that left vs these lessons for our learning you should see that we learne what they taught and doe what they said you follow not what they commanded because you knowe not what they haue recorded Fitzimon 59. As he goeth forward according to the Apostles saying Proficit in peius he increaseth in ill This same text is cited in the 46. number according to the expresse sense therof and title prefixed to this chapter to signifie our beleeuing Christs body bothe substantialy and also figuratiuely in the Sacrament Yf any learned man conferr this sayd text and as it is interpreted by M. Rider I request him not to spyte or spitt at his memorie but to pittie it For to haue thus construed it is a figure as bread and wyne are scene extra owtwardly he translateth as they are seene vnreceaued Secondly for what he should interprett but it is the veritie as the body and blood of Christ in trueth is beleeued inwardly he inserteth a parenthesis making the trueth to be of the veritie of the figure and not of the body of Christ I protest befor God and his Angels that greefe and shame of his misdemeanure do auert my mynde from being imployed to vnfould and refute him and procure me to ouerslipp much filthe deseruing to be sharply and in the most heynouse maner reproued But I pray you considre notwithstanding these faults apparent to all eyes in these woords of his in the text and margent This all the Iesuits priests in Christendom can not aunswer you can not deny this pope to be a protestant in this point confesse the trueth with vs and the owld Church of Rome He that tould you befor him selfe that S. Bernard liuing in the yeare 1190 was in the palpeblest tyme of grossest supersttion meaning therby papistrie here forgetting him selfe informeth that the decretals and popes therin alleaged collected by Gratian at the same tyme of S. Bernard by his saying most superstitiouse doe stand for protestantcy He that would not be tryed but by the Fathers of the first fiue hondred yeares professing the world soone after to haue apostated into papistrie is now come to clayme the decretals compyled after a thowsand yeares He that in clayming the same Fathers as appeareth in the 46. number the number precedent and in this present number is beyond all cōtrouersie vtterly foyled and forsaken of them and therfore iustly doth multiply the 44. and 45. vntrueth that the least be spoaken in the forsayd bowld assured and reiterated protestation The 44 45. vntruth Lactant. l. 5. c. 3. Anaxagoras is generaly reprehended by all men that contrary to sense and vnderstanding only to be singular he would cōfidetly shamlesly and contentiously affirme snow to be as black as inke Haue we not found an heyer to him who can face out black to be whyte that is reproofs to be approbations denials affirmations owld to be yong falshod to be trueth darknes to be light substance to be figurs preaching to be communion the owld testament to be as fruictfull as the new the primatiue Church and Fathers to haue bene late sectaries Catholick to be heretical c. I bequeath then as in my testament to ensuing posteritie that hereafter when men desyer to specifie any readers of such resolution as had Anaxagoras and his forsayd successour they bestow on them for a perpetual memorial of such ancestours not that they are impudent contentiouse frantick deprauers desperat falsifiers corrupters against all pregnant and palpable trueth but only without all iniurie that they ryde or are Ryders As for his annotations that the church calleth the outward elemēts according to their apparence a figure and that the body of Christ must be receaued into the soule vnlesse he doted he would not thinke any preiudice therby to our cause For we graunt both to be true but without being only a figure or foode of the only soule His opposing the glosse and text as contrarie they being euidently most cōcordant and the glosse only telling the text to be intended of Christs bodie not in extensiue maner but as it is a sacrifice also his addition that because it entreth the soule it can not not entre the body what stupiditie doth it not contayne 60. Rider Now briefly I will acquaint the Reader onely with the times when these Doctors liued and the places where they taught this doctrine and then wee shall see whether this your litterall exposition of Hoc est corpus meum be Catholicke or not Clemens Alexandrinus was diuinitie Reader in the famous cittie of Alexandria in Egypt In the yeare of our Lord. If you will read aduisedly these Fathers you shal see plainlie your owne errors 107 Origen was his scholler and succeeded Lectures in the same place 204 Tertullian Diuinitie Reader in Carthage in Affrick 206 Ambrose Bishop of Millaine in Italie 370 Hierome Diuinitie Reader in Stridona in Hungaria and sometime in Slauonia 387 Chrisostome Bishop of Constantinople in Gracia 406 Augustine Bishop of Hippo in Affricke 426 Venerable Beda a famous learned man in England 570 And thus you may see that neither Alexandria Carthage Milano Stridona Constantinople Hippo nor Rome which are famous Citties Nay which is more neither Egypt Italie Hungaria and Slauonia nor England which are famous kingdomes Nay which is most of all the three parts of the world Asia Affricke and Europe neuer heard or had such a litteral exposition of Hoc est corpus meum for at least eight hundred yeares after Christ and yet your Iesuits and priestes will haue their doctrine to be Catholicke Vincentius aduersus Hereticos That is truly catholicke saith he Quod semper vbique ab omnibus est creditum which cannot be vnlesse it were at all times and in all places and of all persons receiued for so your Vincentius defineth Catholicke doctrine And heere you see that for the three parts of the world and for many hundred yeares after Christ it was not knowne And therfore it is neither Apostolicall nor Catholicke Fitzimon 60. One that fayleth to be a physition might perchaunce not be an ignorant musition or not being a gardener might yet be a hors-corser So in degrees of learning he that can not wryte well might yet perhapp indyte wel he that is no rethorician might yet be a grammarian he that is no poet migt yet be a linguist he that is noe diuyne might yet be an antiquarist or chronicler But to
vntrulie teach Thirdlie 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 Either aunswere this fully or confesse the truth 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 they will also say with the Heretickes that Christ hath lost the nature of a true bodie now after his ascention And Chrysostome seconds Theodoret saying Chrisost ad CaesariuÌ„ Monach. Marck this well yee Preâ—sts Iesuits Ante sanctificationem c. Before it be sanctified we cal it bread but the deuine grace once sanctifying it by the ministrie of the Priest it is deliuered from the name of bread and counted worthy to be called the Lords body though the nature of bread continue there still Out of which I note first the father calles it sanctification not consecration Secondly it is called bread before sanctification is bread in nature after sanctification And thirdly after sanctification it is called the Lords body yet it is not the Lords body in deede because the nature of bread remaines VVhat can you saye to these pregnaÌ„te proofes to satisfie the doubtfull Catholiques And therefore in that it is called the Lords body it must be so Sacramentally figuratiuely improperly And Gelasius your owne Pope whom you dare not contradict saith plainely Non desinit esse substantia panis vel natura vini There seaceth not to be the substance of bread and the nature of wine Of the Circumcisions being called the Couenant And the Paschal Lambs being called the Passouer as yf the B. Sacrament no otherwyse is to be called the bodie of Christ. 62. FIrst in this discours M. Rider dealeth frendly with me Fitzimon and fraudulently with others Frendly in obiecting against my profession a stale obiection that Circumcision is called the Couenant and in affoording to me an aunswer to auoyd it that in the same place it is called a signe of the Couenant So that I need not trouble my selfe for other aunswer such exposition being conioyned with the obiection and no such in the Sacrament against which it is brought but rather many contrary clauses testifying it not to be only a signe Fraudulently in affirming that one aunswer will resolue both questions in heaping diuers dissonant maters as consonant in wreasting and peruerting Scriptures For the first one aunswer can not resolue both Circumcision being called a Couenant and the exposition being conioyned to such tearming therof only as being a signe Wheras in the B. Sacrament nether is ther any such exposition conioyned nether can the woords adioyned be vnderstood of a signe that it is the bodie which was to be deliuered and the blood which was to be shedde For what infidelitie were it to affirme a signe of Christs bodie to be deliuered for our redemption and a signe of his blood to be shedd for the remission of our synns A heaping of dissonant maters is perceaued when it is affirmed that the Paschal Lamb was a signe of the Passeouer as Circumcision of the Couenant For nether scripture reason not resemblance doth accompt the Lamb a signe of the passeouer Yf it had bene sayd to haue bene a solemnitie in memorial of the benifit or protection shewed toward the Iewes it might haue passed but to affirme it to be a tropical signe therof is a fowle wreasting of Scriptures Now it also hath a clause conioyned therwith importing that it was Victima transitus Domini the sacrifice of the passing of our Lord and therfor is distinguished from being the very passing it selfe which is otherwyse obserued as I sayd in the B. Sacrament These obiections being then to no purpose in our purpose they also are odious by their first authour to such their application Zuinglius him selfe confesseth the authour in these woords That he haueing preached how the woord is in this is my bodie Zuingl tom 2. in subsid de Eucharistia fol. 249. stood for it signifieth The Notarie in the Senat of two hondred excepted that howsoeuer such glosse might stand in parables it could not stand in Sacraments He troubled with such a replye went to bed At midnight an Aduiser whom he knew not whether he was black or whyte his language and discourse will easelie disguise what angel he was sayd VVhy thow Dunse aunswer out of Exod 12. v. 11. Est enim phase id est transitus Domini it is the paschal that is the passing of the Lord. The conclusion now is that yf this were a good angel Zuinglius must be confessed a Dunse Yf a badd angel I would wish all honest Protestants to be no longer disciples to his doctrin Howsoeuer good or badd nether ought he to be able to seduce vs from the doctrin we haue receaued nor is ther any material force in his obiection against vs vnaunswered But at the woords following Christians stopp your cares That Baptisme is not the fountayne of regeneration Tit. 3. but only an outward Signe therof and that to the faythfull O pestiferous puritantcie Could not S. Paul bridle you from ryding against his expresse testimonie that we are saued by the lauer of regeneration Could not the maiestie of Gods sacred woord Mat. 3.11 Mar. 1.8 Luc. 3.16 Ioa 1 32 Acts. 2.38 Mar. 16. euery where extant hinder you from euacuating also that Sacrament It which bringeth the holy Ghost It which giueth remission of synns it which besyd beleefe is necessarie for remission of synns and eternal lyfe It by which and the woord of lyfe we are clensed Acts. 2.37 38. c. 22.17 1. Pet. 3.21 from synn and saued as truly as Noe and his familie was saued by the arke and water supporting it But of this God willing in the 122. number and els wher Vide num 36. when I proue M. Rider a profund puritan Wherof also not a litle is forspoken in the 39. number wher is demonstrated these very two sacraments only left to be esteemed forcelesse At least this counterpoint to Gods woord in making Baptisme no regeneration but a naked signe therof is the 52. vntrueth The 52 vntruth The testimonie of S. Augustin is Ridericaly also interpreted By the first note he maketh sacraments for hauing similitude with that they signifie such as Christs bodie and bread by nourrishing and Christs Passion and Baptisme haue by clensing to be nothing els but similituds only and not the things them selues Which yf it were true Christ being sayd in Scripture Sap. 1.2 Cor. 4. Hebr. 1. Coloss 1. to be the image or lykenes of
bread and wyne which in Cambridge by the Bishop D. Ridley was denyed So that M. Rider hath giuen doctor Ridley a knock for denial of a change I thinke you would now know how this change is wrought Attend the means and maner VVe looke saith he vpon the dredfull and reuerend mysteries of Christ crucified not as vpon bare naked elements but as sanctifyed foode I aske you first 1. Pet. 3. in confidence that you are readie alwayes to satisfie euery one that asketh you a reason of that hope that is in you according as S. Peter aduiseth since when these mysteries in your religion haue bene allowed to be called dreadfull and reuerend In the forsayd 39. number the meanest sermon of a Puritan minister is made more auaylable then they They are then declared superfluous but among forgetfull persons no better then bare beggerlie ordonances no more to be regarded then any other common bread c. Yet here they are made very terrible and venerable as in the last woords is contayned I can not among other obseruations conceal that by imputing lesse to the sacraments then to a Puritan sermon you preferre Puritan sermons befor any euer made by Christ or his Apostles How soe For they preached oft yet made not all hearers to ether receaue our Saluiour into hart or harborow no not in Bethsaida or Corozain wher he him self preached most vsualy nor much lesse at his preaching did make them to be true beleeuers Yf therfor none can receaue the sacraments but by faith as you say and yet that by a Puritan sermon ther is more good and proffit attayned then by the sacraments to my slender capacitie Puritan sermons are implyed to make all hearers faithfull considering that sacraments of lesse worth by your surmises then such sermons make all receauers to be faithfull as being receaued by no others Yet that the sermons of S. Paul were not comparable in operation to our sacrament in controuersie S. Aug. l. 3. de Trin. c. 4. is sayd by S. Augustin Nether the tong of Paul nor his paper nor inke nor woords nor wrytings de we esteeme as the bodie or blood of Christ so farr was he from thinking that any Puritan sermon was so effectual as this sacrament Secondly I craue how your supper is sanctified For the Crosse or blessing you will not allow and of prayer and the woord of true Scripture in this discourse you make no mention and other sanctification you can not iustifie Thirdly how by only looking you make the foode to be sanctified Haue you any Gorgonical vertue in your looking that all that you looke on is sanctified as all that looked on Gorgons head were sayd trāsformed Fowerthly how for all this dreadfull and reuerend change ther is any alteration from a bare figure considering that the Iewes ceremonies were as much sanctified and looked at as your supper and also by all protestāts of your sorte equaled therto Fiftly how hath your looking changed the vse of bread which is only to nourish you confessing the vse therof in the sacrament to be no other then to represent Christs feeding and conforting our soules as bread doth feed and confort our bodies The vse therfor therof seemeth to me not to be changed Because I know these demāds insoluble by your whole professiō and that I see your extremitie and perplexitie by your figures and darke woords neuer at an ende or staye but that by means of your figures and signes you can not tell whether to vse great or smal tearmes or deuotion toward them nor do not constantly determine what conceils may be had or held of them but some tyme kneeling therto is requisit and some tyme sitting therat will suffice and some tyme as Barlow in the summe of the conference befor the K. Maiestie pag. 98. saith it must be receaued in ambling therto wherof the indecencie is ther sayd to haue bene very offensiue I will conclude in the woords of S. Epiphanius S. Epiphan l. 2. c. 12 cont Cerdon Vide num 36. Veritati non credentes in mendacio autem volutantes perdiderunt panem verae vitae in profundum vmbrae iacentes similes Aesopi cani qui panem reliquit in vmbram autem eius impetum fecit perdidit escam Not beleeuing trueth and wallowing in falshood they haue lost the bread of true lyfe tumbling in the bottom of a shaddow lyke Esops dogg who left the bread and snatching the shaddow lost his bayt Then which sentence neuer was ther any more pertinent against our figurists For their glosing the sacrament with dreadfull and reuerend woords hauing euacuated the fruict therof and making it but a shaddow when shaddowes are changed into substance and trueth how could any thing more aptly be applyed vnto them then by saying they had left the bread snatched the shaddow and lost the bayte 64. But first I must tell you the word is new Rider neither vsed by Christ or his Apostles in the institution of the sacrament nor heard of in any ancient Father for manie hundred yeares after Christ Again neuer read in anie author sacred or prophane that consecration should signifie to change one substance into another for the nature of the word wil not beare it Now seeing by Christ or his Apostle Paul it was not vsed nor ancient Father euer tooke it in this sence Again the nature of the word hath no such signification I see not but you deserue much blame in binding the Catholickes consciences to beleeue that which is against diuinitie antiquitie and comon sence Now Gentlemen pardon me to demand of you but this question what words be they that consecrat that is which turn the substances of bread and wine into the naturall and substantial bodie and bloud of Christ Me thinkes I heare you Iesuits and Priests calling me a foole for demaunding such a question Such fathers as liued next to Christs time shold know best the practise of the primitiue church these fathers you refuse and chose others a thousād years yonger therefore they be of lesse credit considering as yee pretend that the Church of Rome and ther learned men haue euer from Christs time held with one consent one manner of consecration with a certaine set number of words without addition or alteration and therefore my question is friuolous and needlesse and no doubt you make your Catholickes beleeue so but alasse you deceiue them it is not so for I will shew you manie seueral opinions amongst your learned men yea Popes themselues one contrarie to another I praye you let me and the Catholickes of this kingdome therefore be certified and satisfied by Gods word and the practise of the Primitiue Church for the first six hundred years which be the words of consecration that worketh this miraculous alteration of substances which if you cannot prooue as I am sure you cannot then the Catholickes haue good cause to looke to their consciences and to
Qui pridie be the wordes of the Priest so that Christs words without the Priests words worke nothing or are nothing worth And the same Frier deliuers the opinion of Doctour Soto touching the intention of the Priest in consecration of the cup but checks his Doctor ship in his immediat conclusion verie sharplie I will not say shamefullie saying Magister Soto hoc in loco sibi repugnat Maister Soto in this place disagreeth with himselfe olde Cato tells vs that he that disagreeth with himselfe cannot agree with anie (a) pag. 113. Read the place But in the next pages he setteth down six seuerall opinioÌ„s touching the forme of consecration one contrarie to another and all of them held and maintained verie stiflie for the truth whereof fiue of them must needs be false But I assure you there is none of them of Christs institution and therefore neither true Apostolical nor Catholique If they were not fabulous and friuolous I would pen them down verbatim But if you list to see their errrors I haue trulie quoted their places you may see them without paine and I trust you will not read them without dâ—slike Now let me intreate you to heare some other of your friends speake that liued in another age that the Catholickes may see your vncertaintie in this point that none of you all knowe what to say nor what to beleeue and the reason is because you haue denied and refused the cleere waters of Gods truth therefore drinke of the puddels of mens inuentions which are nothing else but fables and lies without certaintie or veritie Gabriel Biel. lect 36. Mark this you Priests and Iesuits Gabriel a learned man on your side saith Christus potuit sine verbo tanquam verus Deus substantiam panis vini consecrare vel potius verba quaedam secreto proferre per illa consecrare vol per haec verba hoc est corpus meum consecrare potuit vel potuit prius consecrare postea distribuere vel primum distribuere postea consecrare Behould I pray you the vncerteinty of your consecration therefore ceasse to deceaue Petrus de Aliaco in 4 lib. sent Q 5. Quid autem horum fecerit ex sacris scripturis non constat Christ as being verie God might consecrate the bread and wine without anie word Or else he might speake certaine words in secret and by them consecrate or else might consecrate by these words This is my bodie or he might first consecrat and after deliuer or else first deliuer and then consecrate but which of all these he did by the holie scriptures it appeareth not But Petrus de Alliaco crosseth them all and saith that Christ consecrated before these words of Hoc est corpus meum Marke this good Reader for saith hee Quia nisi ante fuisset corpus Christi Christus non vere dixisset hoc est corpus meum If it had not bene Christs bodie before Christ could not haue said trulie This is my bodie This now toucheth your free-hold for hee saith plainlie vnlesse consecration goe before these words This is my bodie both Christ and priest should lye This tramples your consecration in the durt And your Antididagma printed at Collen How blasphemous this is let the learned in Christ iudge Bonauentura in 4. lib. Sententiarum dist 8. q. 2. with the approbation of all the learned Doctors in that age saith preciselie that the bare words of Christs institution without the words of the Canon of the Masse are not sufficient to worke consecration And Bonauentura is not ashamed to say that if wee will rightlie consecrate wee must not seeke to the Gospell of Christ but to the Canon of the Masse Now Scotus though he be maister Doctour Subtilis is put to his dumpes what to do in this doubtfull case of consecration when there be twentie seuerall opinions one contrarie to another and all contrarie to Christs trueth in the end this is his resolution Quod ergo est consilium Dico quod sacerdos intendens facere quod facit ecclesia legens distinctè verba canonis à principio vsque ad finem verè conficit nec est tutum alicui reputare se valdè peritum in scieÌ„tia sua dicere volo vti praecisè istis verbis pro consecratione The matter being so doubtfull what then is your aduise I say that the priest intending to doe whatsoeuer the Church doth and reading the words of the Canon distinctlie and plainly from the beginning to the end doth verelie consecrate neither is it wisedome for a man to account himselfe verie skillful in his knowledge and to say I will vse without all doubt these or these words to worke consecration Here your champion Scotus cares not a point for your three Euangelists nor the Apostle Paul for reading of the Canon distinctly is sufficient Oh damnable heresie that renounceth Christs institution and followeth mans inuentions And the wordes of your Masse-booke are distinctè secretè attentè And also it must be pronounced vno spiritu nulla pausatione interposita If the foresaid cautions be not performed by the priest your consecration and appliccation is marred and not worth a pin Now Gentlemen these be your Doctors this is your doctrine here betwentie seuerall opinions of consecration in seuerall ages none tells the trueth Haue you vsed Gods people the Queenes subiects Christianlie in perswading them that all Churches and all Fathers in all ages with one consent haue embraced this your opinion touching consecration for Catholicke without discord or dissention I tell you no for in this you haue crackt their conscience do hazard their soules to maintaine your superstition But perchance you will perswade the Catholickes False witnesses examined a sunder must needs be taken tripping founde liars for how should you agree in that yee knowe not nay in that which is not that though these Doctors grosly erred yet the Church of Rome euer held one manner of consecration but that is as vntrue as the rest For I will shew you plainlie that your late Popes and Church of Rome since three hundred or three hundred and seuentie yeares last past knewe not what to hold nor what to affirme touching the fourme of consecration And therefore in this your new doctrine there is neither vnitie antiquitie vniuersalitie nor veritie with which termes you so long haue deceued the people 66. Fitzimon Wheras the doctrin of the Catholick Churche is manifoudly expressed that consecration is essentialy wrought by the very and only woords of Christ Hoc est corpus meum hic est sanguis meus This is my bodie this is my blood lett all indifferent readers maruayle at M. Rider for affirming Guido and Angles teaching by his owne declaration the very selfe same doctrin in euident tearmes to be repugnant one to another or with Gods Churche And yf these all did assuredly determine that Christ ether in more words or
as deliuer bread to the hongry or to litle ones and the literal signification of deliuering is verifyed in Christs passion but not of breaking For he was deliuered for our synnes but I being able to say that he was also broken for vs in the B. Sacrifice of his body vnder the forme of bread and M. Rider denying such his sacrifice and not being able possibly to shew any other his breaking do you thinke that leauing to talke of deliuerie for breaking he knoweth what is with him or against him The amplifying of Christs promise in the present tence there being no promise in these woords this is my body which is broken for you sheweth such mates when they can gett a woord to wander against the trueth for Christ vsed then a present tence to testifye the efficacie of his institution of the B. Sacrament in which his body was presently deliuered inuisibly which was the next day to be deliuered visiblye therevpon they amplifie and descant at full wheras vpon the true and literal institution of Christ arcording the propre signification therof they walke so nicely Luth. tom 7. defen verb. caenae fol 383. as yf they were treading vpon egges Fearing sayth Luther to stumble and breake their necks at euery woord which Christ pronownced 83. In the first that Christs Rider birth and life though both innocent was not sufficient to cleanse my sinne In the second Christ would vndergoe shamefull buffets on the face pricking of thornes vpon his head piercing nailes into his hands and feete a bloudie speare into his blessed side before mans sinne could bee satisfied Gods wrath appeased Sathan death and hell conquered this our liuing Christ would haue his bodie broken for vs he would not leaue one sighein his soule for our sakes nor one drop of bloud in his bodie vnshed for our sinnes These comforts are expressed by this word broken which are not nor can be gathered by this word deliuered 83. In my Examination of the Creed in the 14. numbre Pitzsimon I haue shewed that euery meritt of Christ being of infinit valew had bene sufficient to redeeme a thowsand worlds and that his death and passion were suffred vpon his excessiue abundance of loue which was not content with what had bene sufficient but also powred owt it selfe beyond all respect and measure to the last drop of blood in his bodye for greater manifestation of his bountifull charitie toward mankinde How cometh my Warr-man and sayth that Christs death it selfe was not only not of superabundant affection but that beyond his death the very pearcing of his syde with a speare was necessary to clense his synne Which is blasphemie against all Scripture and Christianitie referring always our redemption to Christs holye passion I knowe not whence it coulde come to him but only to fulfill the saying of S. Nazianzen Inter se certant perinde atque non id metuant ne impijs erroribus sese constringant sed ne in hac re leuius tolerabiliusque peccent quà m alij They stryue among them selues as yf they had no feare to intangle them selues in impious errours but that euery of them be not behinde his compagnions in lesse offendinge Other aunswer is in the forsayd 14. number Rider 84. Another comfort is concealed from the Catholickes in omitting the 25. verse in these words Math. 25.40 Heb. 2.12.13.17 Ioh. 10.27 The newe Testament in my bloud Out of which euerie man may gather these comforts to himselfe by particular application First that I am not a straunger to Christ but one of his younger brethren and not onelie well knowne vnto him but also as well beloued of him which appeareth in this that hee did not onelie remember me in his last will but also most freelie and liberallie bequeathed vnto my soule and bodie most precious Legacies where wee may finde them registred most safelie kept in Gods booke and daylie pronounced in our Creed as remission of sinnes of both guilt punishment peace of conscience in this life at the latter day rising of my bodie from death and dust af erwards life eternall both to soule and bodie These Legacies be bequeathed and contained in this Testament which be hath not onely sealed outwardlie with Sacraments but also inwardlie with his bloud by faith to assure vs of the performance of his promise and therefore he addeth in my bloud so that all other Testaments Wils Buls or Pardons which are not sealed with Christs bloud but with lead or war are but counterfeit labels stitcht to Christs testament by some false forgeries of periured Notaries wherin they doe falselie promise remission of sinnes and the kingdome of heauen Fitzsimon 84. M. Rider shall pull off with his owne hands his maske of consolation by these woords the new testament in my blood and acknowledge to all Readers his contentment to be but forged and his cause and coÌ„science to be full of desolation by means of them First then he sayd in his 78 number that thes woords of Christ ordayned by one authoure haue one sense one sounde one ende with these woords of the ould testament this is the blood of the Couenant Exod. 24.8 But the sense of thes woords of Moises is that the ould testament was ratified by true and real blood substantialy sprinkled vpon the Israelits therfor the sense of Christs woords must lykewyse be yf as he saith they haue one sense that his new testament was made at his last supper and his true and real blood was substantialy powred into the mowthes of his Apostles which blood deliuered them after as S. Luke saith Lâ—c. 22.20 was to be shedd for them Now Sir what consolation haue you about yourt hart Are not you made your selfe to disguise your fayned countenance That Christ made his testament at his last supper it is first the confession of Musculus saying In the same supper being then nighe his death he made his testament How did Musculus ground his opinion because saith he Musculus in locis coÌ„ Cap. de cana n. 2. pag. 332. that a testament be made auaylably is requyred first that the maker therof be at his owne libertie for a slaue a seruant a sonn in his Fathers gouernement can make no testament This libertie had Christ at his supper and not at his death Also he must make executours so did Christ make his Apostles by this institution appointing them to dispense the grace of this testameÌ„t c. wheras ther was no such mater at his death I add that lawfull testaments are made by men befor their death when they are in good memorie and not at the instant of their death Which according to good protestantcie had great occasion in Christ our Saluiour whom at the tyme of his death they affirme to haue bene in desperation in torments of conscience c. as is assured in the 14. and 15. numbers of the Examination Is not this a good
brotherly helpe to M. Riders consolation by thes woords of Christ the new testament in my blood Math. 25.40 For a testament is not a testament till the partie dye And Christ at his supper dyed not otherwyse but mysticaly as in sacrifice therfor yf ther was a testament made such sacrifice is to be confessed Will you haue Christ him selfe manifest his making the new testament at his supper Why then at it he sayd mandatum nouum do vobis Ioan. 13.34 a new law I giue you Marke this sequel vpon this planted foundation Christ by confession of greatest protestants made his testament at his last supper and M. Rider accordeth therto confessing him in this present place and numbre to haue made his last will bequeathed legacies c. Well then I inferr both that he shedd or deliuered his blood at this table and also that he sacrificed him selfe which in effect is all one For by M. Riders confession among his legacies Ad Hebr. 9.22 at his supper one principal is the remission of our synnes But S. Paul saith Sine fanguinis effusione non fit remissio withowt shedding of blood ther is no remission Ergo or therfor Christ in his supper shed his blood by which he bequeathed such legacie of remission of synns Now yf Christ as M. Rider sayd in the precedent number could not clense his synn without death and yet that at his supper he bequeathed vnto him by his last wil remission of synns of both guilt and punishment as is saith he pronounced in the Creed wherof others may be iudges whether he vnderstand his Creede or noe considering that to this day all mortal men do feele the punishment at least of Adams guilt to be vnforgiuen as to one not only well knowen by him but also well beloued of him as his yonger brother they are his owne woords It must followe that Christ was sacrificed I mean incruentally to his heuenly Father at his last supper Ad Hebr. 9.16 both for his making then his testament vbi enim testamentum est mors necesse est intercedat authoris for wher a testament is it is necessarie the deathe of the testator happen as also for shedding his blood and fullfilling all figuratiue sacrifices of the owld law in which the blood was not only shedd but also the things sacrificed were first putt to deathe yet this shedding of blood is not to be vnderstood in any other then in a mysticall and impossible maner No body hathe ingaged M. Rider to confesse this trueth but him selfe Wherfor yf his pew-fellowes exclaime at him and say that he hath confessed the true shedding of Christs blood substantialy although not in propre forme but only vnder the forme of wyne vnderstanding by shedding only the powring therof into the mouthe of the Apostles at his Supper and also the Sacrifice of Christ therby which is the Masse without which his blood could not then be shedd nor his testament had bene auaylable for nondum valet dum viuit qui testatus est Ad Hebr. 9.17 it is not of force while the testator without all death mystical or corporal liueth and therby ratifyed all papistry and confownded all protestantcy and which might seeme most absurd allowed a duble death of Christ one at his Supper another vpon the cross S. August tom 8. in Psal 61. Let him aunswer first for the residue out of S Augustin Occultari potest ad tempus veritas vinci non potest Florere potest ad tempus iniquitas permanere non potest Veritie for a tyme may be hydd but it can not be vanquished Iniquitie may florishe for a space but can not continue And to that heynouse doctrin of Christs duble death let him denye it hardely and say that at his Supper was only anticipated in an incruental and incomprehensible maner and mysticaly not in his propre forme but of bread and wine and without violence the same death which succeeded in a cruental violent maner as it was one the same lambe of God sacrificed in bothe maners first incruentaly after cruentaly In teaching this doctrin first he hathe it assured to him by the connection of Scripturs here produced Secondly by Musculus an arche Protestant Calu. in libell de caena de vera Eccles refor Zuing. to 1. de canone misse fol 183 â—iblia de Trinit l. 2. pag. 89. Thirdly by the ancient Fathers vniuersaly whom Caluin and Zuinglius testifye to establishe this incruental sacrifice And Bibliander certifyeth it was the vndowbted beleefe of the ancient Israelits that Christ would institute such a sacrifice in bread and wyne Therfor Gentle M. Rider reioyce at those sugred woords of Christ this is my blood in the new testament not faynedly or by dissembling those remote causes alleaged but for the riche treasure left perpetualy to Gods Church of so pretious a sacrifice wherby force is giuen to all bulls and pardons necessarie for remission of our synns In truth I had forgotten to calculate incident vntruthes in a long tyme yet now am constrayned to score vp at least the 81. grosse vntruth The 81. vntruth that we teache other remission of synns then by Christs testament My good Sir affoord vs some citation of such our doctrin according to your promise to alleadge booke leafe c. or elss we will thinke that we may lawfully say yow ryde c. 85. These deceiuers must be told as Peter told Ananias Rider why hath Sathan fild thy heart that thou shouldest lie not onelie vnto men but also vnto the holie Gost Acts. 5.3 In Ananias heart there was a wicked conceit in his practises a wicked deceit and for his reward a suddaine death You Chaplens of the Pope doe tell the poore people many waies to haue remission of their sinnes besides Christes Testament Christes blood which I will deliuer particularlie if I be vrged but you are deceiued and so you deceiue them and because you would keepe them still blinde that they should neither see your deceit nor theyr owne daunger therefore you kept this comfortable clause from them The new Testament in my bloud whithout which there is neither remission of sinns nor sauing of soules Another comfort you conceale from the deuout meditation of euerie good Christian which is In rememberance of me We read in histories after Iulius Caesar was slaine Suetonius Plutarch Marcus Anthonius made an Oration to the people of Rome in which he shewed Caesars loue and painted out verie Rhetoricallie Caesars bountie to them while he liued but in the heat of his speech he made a pause shewed them Caesars robes sprinkled with his princelie bloud shed by the bloudie hand of his cruell and malicious enemies which when the Cittizens sawe remembring his loue presentlie they ranne vpon the murtherers and slew them Did the Cittizens of Rome being Pagans reuenge Caesars death vppon his enemies onelie remembring his loue and liberalitie Then
accessorie in like eloquence to witt in moste deceitful vehemencie iustifyinge a falshoode which is by him selfe and al others for such accompted For to be truly acquainted with the truth herein whether the wicked receaue the whole Sacrament vnderstand the doctrin of Gods Church to be expressed in this controuersie aboue a thousand yeares paste although M. Rider immediatelye before saith S. Gregorius S. August l. coÌ„ Fulg. Donat. c. 6. Idem l. 2 con Lit. Petil. c. 40. In Psal 10. Theodoret. 1. Cor. c. 11. S. Chrysost ho. 8. in Math. in cap. 11. 1. Cor. Ser. 3. in c. 1. ad Ephes. c. S. Hieron in Psal 54. that it is an inuention of late writers by S. Gregorie saing Est quidem in peccatoribus et indignè sumentibus vera Christi caro verus sanguis sed essentia non salubri efficientia The true fleash of Christ and true blood is certainely in sinners and vnworthy receauers but in essence and not in healthful efficacie S. Augustine more ancient said Iudas the traitoure receaued the bodye of Christ and Simon Magus the good Baptisme but because they vsed not wel the good by vsing it ill they perished The same doctrine he els where manifouldly inculcateth Theodoret Bishope about the same time said Iesus Christ did not only giue his pretious body and blood to eleauen Apostles but also to Iudas the traitour By S. Chrisostom is said The traitour was made partaker of diuine presents He also of this matter hath written certaine expresse homilies plentifully containing Iudas to haue receaued the B. Sacrament By S. Hierom Cibus dulcis est corpus Christi quod ipse accipit indignus Sweete meate is the body of Christ which he Iudas receaued vnworthely What need I any witnesse to conuict the 86. The 86. vntruth vntruth in this matter then M. Rider againste him selfe Who so often is made to ouerthrow him selfe that he confirmeth the saying of Gods holy word Micheae l. 7.6 Math. 10.25 Inimici hominis domestici eius The enimyes of a man are his owne domesticalles He then repeating soone after S. Augustins woordes that the wicked presse with their teeth the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ thereby eateing them to their iudgment because they are vncleane in hart What doe wee craue more then that the wicked eate the Sacrament of Christs bodie and blood and consequently not of his figure only to their iudgment What heapes of Doctors and Fathers might I produce to auerre this doctrin 1. Cor. 11. if in this so cleere a case S. Paul so manifestlye auouching those to be guiltie of the bodye and bloode of our Lorde and to eate their owne iudgment not who did not beleeue in Christ or who did abuse a figure of Christ but they who did eate and drinke his bodye and blood vnworthely not discerning the body of Christ the few testimonies here alleaged and M. Riders owne interpretation of S. Augustin did not commaunde me to forbeare superfluitie Origen produced by M. Rider Origen in Psal 37. telleth the 87 The 87. vntruth Origen in Psal 37. vntruth to be that he denieth the wicked to coÌ„municate the B. Sacrament he saying to the wicked Doste thou not feare to communicate the body of Christ approaching to the Eucharist as if thou werst pure and cleane and as if there were nothing in the vnworthy c. Doste thou thinke that in all this thou wilt auoyde the indignation of God Doste thou not remember what is written that for this cause many are become sick and feeble yea and stroken to death Continually you behoulde that M. Riders sayinges are true like dreames rather by being true contrariously then as they were by him related The 88. vntruth S. Chrisostom also craueth to haue numbered the 88. vntruth that he denieth the wicked in that homilie to communicate Christs true body he only exhorting that they who should receaue would omitt to be wicked and to that end heaping most goulden sentences to perswade them thereto Is shame and fidelitie vanished out of the worlde Can such Fathers by any honest hart be wreasted to denye when they affirme to affirme when they denye Aurifaber a Protestant Aurifaber apud Ministro machiâ— pag. 7. affirmeth that Luther on a time complained that Post reuelatum euangelium virtus est occisa iustitia oppressa temperantia ligata veritaâ—a canibus lacerata fides clauda nequitia quotidiana deuotio pulsa heresis relicta After the gospel of pretended reformation reuealed vertu is slaine iustice oppressed temperance tyed truth torne by dogges faith lame wickednesse continuall deuotion fled heresie remaining If Luther had knowne M. Riders dealing among the rest thinke you would he not applaud to him selfe that he was become a prophet S. Augustin whom he by ignorance maketh a Pope claymeth to haue the 89. The 89. vntruth vntruth marked because in saying he that dissenteth from Christ eateth him to his perdition for as the glosse contayneth mali accipiunt corpus de virgine natum the wicked receaue the body borne of a virgin he is made by M. Rider absolutly to affirm In cap. citatum à Ridero that the wicked doth nether eathe his fleashe nor drinke his blood The 90. The 90. vntruth vntruth is that in the third chapter following any such mater as he informeth is ether contayned or mentioned I leaue and report all arbitrement of such proceeding not only to all others but euen to my good Reformer him selfe especialy yf he be not in his furious but in his merry moode wherin diuers tymes he acknowledgeth many trueths wherof otherwyse he had not bene so liberal But I must confesse by the way that he affoordeth once a varietie yet not in true learning but deceytfull sophistry saying That the wicked haue not a liuely and iustifying faythe as nether we nor all our syde can denye This caption or fallacie is called Captio plurimum interrogationum vt vnius of sundrie demandes as beinge all one As if one woulde require 1. Elench 4. Note wel is Peter a man and a woman If you answere affirmatiuely the Sophist therupon inferreth that Peter is a woman if you answere negatiuely he inferreth that Peter is not a man So M. Rider knoweth that we will not say that the wicked haue a liuely iustifying faythe for how can they be iustifyed yf they be wicked and he is not ignorant but we would and should say that wicked people may haue fayth or that they become not infidels or hereticks by euery act of wickednes and therupon as yf these two were all one he inferreth that we and all our syde can not deny but that they are without faythe and dead men not able to eate spiritual meat c. How they are able to eate such meat namely not to their benefit but to their perdition is often towld and contayned in S. Gregories woords before alleaged This sophistrie of
cupps that we are maintayned in glorie and therby many Catholicks beggered that Christs blood is an effect of our consecration that our diuinitie is hellishe and damnable and fitt to be taught in hell that we can not proue the benediction to belong to the cupp that the first Fathers neuer heard of such our doctrin To all which I can say no lesse The 93. vntruth then that all these being most vntrue may by liberal allowance stand vp for the 93. vntrueth Verilie neuer did I reade before to my knowledge so many disioynted maters shuffled together without method or measure but some one of them at least would haue relation to the subiect in discourse Now let all men ad women iudge what haue all these related points to doe with our controuersie of wyne to be the communication of the blood of Christ and bread to be the participation of his fleashe Or how do all these tergiuersations auoyd impugne or reproue that which is in controuersie 101. Chrisostome vpon this place calleth it the cuppe of blessing Rider because when we haue it in our hands with admiration and a certain horror of that vnspeakable gift Chry. super 1. Cor. 10. we praise and blesse him because he hath shed his bloud that we should not remaine in error and hath not onelie shed it but made vs all partakers of it In like sort did Photius and Occumenius expounde this word which wee blesse Photius Oecumenius which hauing in our handes blesse him which hath graciously giuen vs his bloud that is we giue him thanks or which we prepare when we blesse or giue thankes Now the Catholickes may see by the auncient fathers whom your selues doe brag of that they condemne your cup blessed exposition And the Catholickes may see aâ— in a glasse that wee ioine with the scriptures fathers in the true sence of these words The cup which we blesse and that your exposition is erronious and superstitious and therefore to be recanted by you and shunned by the Catholickes and my reasons be drawne out of the foresaid fathers not made on my owne fingers Fitzsimon 101. S. Chrysostom aduertiseth to all the world that you here deliuer the 94. â—he 94. vntruth S. Chrysost in c. 5. Math. hom 11. vntruth both because he hath no such matter as you inferr as also because els where he hath expresly the contrarie Saying Si enim vasa sanctificata ad priuatos vsus transferre peccatum est periculâ—m sicut docet nos Balthazar qui bibens in calicibus sacratis de regno depositus est de vita Si ergo haec vasa sanctificata ad priuatos vsus transferre sic periculosum est in quibus non est verum corpus Christi sed mysterium corporis eius continetur quanto magis vasa corporis Christi c. If then it be synne and danger to transferre sanctifyed note well M. Rider for euery clause of this speeche will wounde your profession vessells as Balthazar teacheth vs who drinking in sanctifyed chalices was deposed from kingdome and lyfe yf then to transferre these sanctifyed vessels to priuat vses be so dangerous in which not the true body of Christ but the mysterie of his body was contayned how much more the vessells of the body of Christ c. Here you haue sanctification of vessels such not to be prophaned Christ to be otherwyse with vs then with the Israelits and our vessels to haue his true bodye How lyke you all these toward your imaginations Photius you produce against your selfe by his saying that Christ gratiously giueth vs his blood Why then he giueth not only a figure of his blood Oecumenius hath noe such mater as neuer expounding any woord beyond the 9. chapter of S. Pauls epistle to the Corinthians ether of the second or the first And so is discouered the 95. The 95. vntruth vntruth Where are the promised citations of books and chapters leaues and lynes Whether you or I will or noe our dealings wil be iudged when we deale vnsincerly and impiouslie For other exclamations of such citations and discourses I can not thinke them conuenient when your dealings are so notorious only I will intreat the glorious S. Augustin S. Aug. l. 2. de Ciu. c. 1. â— 5. c. 27. to giue you your aunswer and let you be gone Quorum dicta contraria si toties velimus refellere quoties obnixa frome statuerint non curare quid dicant dum quocumque modo nostris disputationibus contradicant quam sit infinitum erumnosum infructuosum vides Facile est cuiquam videri respondisse que tacere noluerit Aut quid est loquacius vanitate Quae non ideo potest quod veritas quia si noluerit tacere etiam plus potest clamare quam veritas VVhose contrarie sayings yf we sayth S. Augustin would refell as oft as they with an impudent forhead neglect what they affirme so that any way they contradict our disputations how infinit toylsome and how fruictles it is you behould It is easie for euery one to see to aunswer what he cowld not conceale And what is more talkeatiue then vanitie Yet therfor it can not compare with trueth because yf it will not be silent it can exclame more then truth 102. First he saith that benediction blessing or thanksgiuing Rider is referred to him that shed his bloud for vs I hope you will not say the cup shed anie bloud for vs. 2. Secondlie this father saith that blessing God and praising God is all one and therefore when we say the cup of thanksgiuing we follow Christ Paul the Greek text and the olde fathers And when you translate it The challice of benediction it is flat contraire to Christ Paul veritie and antiquitie And there is as great difference betwixt your opinion and the old fathers faith as betwixt praising with mouth and crossing with fingers nay as much as betwixt your superstitious challice and our soulesauing Christ for so if you marke the fathers words the difference stands The text it selfe offers vs three things in a comfortable distinction and you would confound them with your new imagined transubstantiation 1. The first is Christs bodie crucified and his bloud shed with all his purchased benefits 2. Secondlie our communion fellow ship which all beleeuers haue in that crucified Christ and those soulesauing merits 3. Thirdly the outward seals of those benefits which are called The cup which we blesse and the bread which we breake to witnesse to the world and to confirme to our selues the fruition and possession of all those benefits Now if I should say that the bread cup being outward seals were our coÌ„munion with Christ the wicked would laugh at my folly though the godly would pittie my ignorance in the trueth or my malice against the trueth and the reason is this because the seals be things outward and the communion of Christs bodie and
109. The 109. vntruth that this proofe of S. Hilarie proueth we should not receaue Christ by our mouth Nothing remaineth in the world of the bodie and bloud of Christ Catholick Priests but that which daylie is made by the Priest on the Altar 108. GEntlemen I perceiue you are soone wearie of well doing Athan. lib. de Passione Imaginis Christi cap. 7. floruit 375. in your last proofe you confessed a truth with vs 109. euen against your selues But now you leaue Fathers and bring fables 110. Rider and so produce one fable to prooue another fable that is you produce one fable of the crucifying of the image of Christ Like opinion like proofe and the miraculous aboundant gushing of water and bloud out of the image his side that cured all diseases in all parts and places of the world to prooue your carnall presence of the Sacrament by your fained transubstantiation For aunswere to which first I say VVhen fathers helpe not you bringe fables that you should fitter haue placed this proofe in the ranke of your fained miracles following or in your question of images hereafter But to couer the foolerie and forgerie thereof you couch it amongest the auncient Doctors and Fathers of the Church thereby hoping to haue him passe with more credit But I will shew first that you haue not dealt well nor trulie with the Author of this fable nor with the Catholickes of this kingdome because you haue left out such wordes as would wound both your credit in this case and spoile your cause besides your Translation is nothing found You leaue out in two lines these foure words Quasi per manus and spiritualiter you left out quasi because belike it was but an Aduerb of likenesse and so because omne simile is not idem you thought it were better to leaue it behinde then to bring it to your hurt Secondlie you leaue out per manus for your Authour saith per manus sacerdotum by the handes of the Priestes and you leaue them both out and say per sacerdotem least the people should thinke and say if onelie the Priest made it then it can neither haue flesh nor bloud and so the miracle were marred And therfore it were better to leaue out per manus and to say per sacerdotem by the Priest for then might be vnderstood not onelie all the members of his bodie and intentions of his minde but also the gestures and motions of both required to the conception of such a wodden Sauiour And lastlie you leaue out spiritualiter spirituallie hee saith not carnallie and therefore this proofe is verie vnschollerlike alleadged when our question is of a presence carnall you produce a presence spirituall this word makes for vs but that wee scorne and knowe it sinfull to bring in such forgerie for proofe in a question of diuinitie For this you shoulde haue brought in thus which is dailie made by the Priest spirituallie Now how this proofe fitteth you let others censure shame makes mee scilent This fable containeth seuen chapters of the crucifying of the images of CHRIST done by the Iewes for enuie to CHRIST who no sooner pierced the Image his side but Continuò exiuit sanguis aqua The word is Hydria which you may see Iohn 2. verse 6. containes two or three measures or firk nes a piece which shewes it to be a notable loudlie lewd legend forthwith gushed out both water and bloud in such aboundance that they filled manie vesseles with the same and this bloud was carried into all the parts of the world through Asia Affricke Europe and cured all manner of diseases Vpon sight of which miracle the cruell Iewes repented were baptised and presentlie there was a holie (a) Quinto Idus Nouemb. day made in rememberance thereof which was kept with no lesse solemnitie then the feast of Easter and the Natiuitie of our Lord as the Author saith Then in the seuenth and last chapter comes in your proofe which coÌ„cludeth a peace amongst the Cleargie touching the trueth of Christs bloud for now saith the Author there can no other flesh nor bloud of Christ be found in the world then that which is daylie made by the hands of the Priests spirituallie vpon the Altar But this your profe is not trulie translated according to the Latten but because it is a loudelie I will neither reprooue you for your defectiue translation nor correct it for anie mans direction (b) Like Translation like truth for I see no reason to bestow a true traÌ„slation vpon a false miracle or forged fable Other circumstances as where this image was saide to bee kept and brought soorth c. I referre the curious Reader to the foolish 〈◊〉 forged Author But that all the Catholicks of this kingdome may see the reasons that mooue me to think it to be a fable be these all of them gathered out of the bodie of this fable falselie fathered vpon Athanasius Reason 1 The first reason is the occasion for no small error sprung vp in those daies touching the bloud that issued sorth of Christs side on the crosse So seuerall places persons falsly chaleng to them selus that euery one hath a proper piece of Christs crosse Athanasius printed at Paris 1581. pag. 534 c. So our Iesuits and Priests now would perswade the Catho one sort of Priests said that they had the right bloud and another sort of Priests in other citties said that they had Christs verie bloud that issued forth of his side and so the contention among the Priests grew to bee verie hote as it is this day betwixt you Iesuits and Priestes about other matters wherevpon the whole Cleargie met togither at Caesaria in Cappeâ—â—cia for the appeasing of this dangerous broile The reuerend Fathers were no sooner set but vpstart Don Petrus Bishop of Nicomedia said Reuerend Fathers I haue a little booke heere of Athanasius which I greatlie desire to present to your fatherhoode view and consideration Sancta Synodus respondit placet bene vt legatur optaâ—â—â— The holy Synode aunswered wee are verie well pleased and desire it may be read Thus concerning the occasion which was a solemne Synode to appease a foolish superstitious contention amongst the lying couetous Priests of that age when euerie hedge-priest would perswade the simple people that he had in his viall the very bloud of Christ which was of force to pardon their sinnes Reason 2 The stile of this agreeth not with the booke which is knowne to bee Athanasius worke contra Idola a meane Grammarian may see it and discerne it and therefore it cannot be his worke Reason 3 Athanasius writ a most sharp tractate against Idolatrie when he was liuing and now they would father this fable vpon him after his death and therefore it cannot bee his worke for so wee should wickedlie charge that godlie father either with recantation of trueth
by a 186. vntrueth For nether Pope The 186. vntruth nor Papist assaulted them how could they then defend them selues with their swoords against the Pope especialy not hate of papistrie but loue of sacrilege being their impulsion to suche vprore The 187. vntrueth is The 187. vntruth that they refused to receaue Orders Bishopricks or decrees from Rome For nether is any profre nor any such refuse recorded Yf Bernard so sharply reprehended them in the Popes quarell for not being subiect to the Popes orders or decrees in the name of Iesus why did you in your Preface informe your readers that S. Bernard tould the Pope to his face that his supremacie was vnlawfull O quantum mutantur ab illis O how farr are these woords repugnant to those That those eight preached the gospell and ministred the Sacraments is an addition of your making As also that the nobilitie and gentilitie cared not two pence for Papal blessings or curssings Whether they came to such infidelitie or noe there is great want of fidelitie in your deprauation of the historie as S. Bernard affoordeth it That they changed their ould Apostolical religion yf you meane according as your authour informeth them to haue changed as you should be tyed to your autheurs relation and the sense therof vnlesse you would be accompted a falsifier rather then interpreter what you call owld Apostolical religiō according to your conceit is according to trueth and your authour S. Bernard deuilish ambition dissolution of ecclesiastical disciplin ouerthrow of religion and Christianitie c. O quantum mutantur ab illis O how farr are these woords of the authour dissenting from these woords of the interpreter That they are become slaues to the late Italian Preist the Pope Gods enemye and the Queens butcher I know not how wyse a speeche it may seeme to any this I am suer yf they be slaues by being only Catholicks for other slauerie I thinke the Pope expecteth not at their hands it should not repent them for seruire Deo regnare est to serue God is to raigne And I could wishe that as they affect to be accompted such so they would better effect the dutie belonging to such Yf the Pope be no truer Gods enemie then he is late The 188. vntruth or the Queens butcher the 188. vntrueth may to all mens seeming be calculated That then they drew then swoords against the Pope to defend trueth the informer of the mater the punishmēt sent from heauen the former Protestant resolutions related in our answer to your Preface that trueth was vnbegotten till Luthers tyme The 189. vntruth do conioyntly register for the 189. vntrueth Wheras you prouoke the Noble men and Gentlemen of Irland to imitat such ancestours in their true honor you flatly perswad them to insurrection and rebellion For yf they imitat them they will indeuour to kill their King and such Bishop as he would establish they will enter into diuelish ambition c. For so did they by information of S. Bernard to whom you would induce these to conforme them selues From the profoundest bottom of my hart I beseeche the omnipotent Saluiour of the world long to preserue his sacred Maiestie now regnant against such Puritanical sequels and other their disloial and desperat dissignes long since not vnknowen to his wysdome nor vnfelt to his person nor parents 139. And that golden mouthed father Chrisost Vpon this place of Paul Rider Chrysost hom 2. vpon first of Titus That a Bishop must be the husband of one wife asked this question what mooued Paul thus to write to Timothie he aunswereth himselfe saying obstrure prorsus intendit haereticorum ora qui nuptias damnant ostendens c. The Apostle intendeth to stoppe the mouthes of all hereticks that condemneth marriage shewing that the thing in it selfe is faultlesse and a thing so precious vt cum ipsa etiam possit quispiam ad sanctum Episcopatus solium subuehi that a man beeing married may bee promoted to the holie function of a bishoppe And your Pope Gregorie saieth plainlie writing ad Theotistam Patricium that if marriage must be dissolued because of religion Sciendum est inquit yet saith he you must vnderstand quia etsi hoc lex humana concessit lex tamen diuina prohibuit that if mans law graunt that yet Gods law forbideth that VVhether S. Chrysostom and S Gregorie allowed Preists Mariadges 139. I graunt as before is sayd in the 133. number Fitzsimon that to forbidd marriage as damnable is vnlawfull and heretical and diuelish which is not done by vs as there appeareth but in ould tyme was done by Tatian Marcion and Manichee and lately by such of whom afterward Secondly S. Chrysostom telleth you that the cause why the husband of one wyfe may be Bishop and not of more then one is That he who had more then one cna neuer be good instructer or master of the Church who might not perseuer in loue toward his wyfe she being dead So that it is supposed the wyfe should be dead from affection toward whom kept or violated the one might be elected Bishop and not the other he to be Bishop who conserued such affection and not he who had reiected it Also in the 136. number other answer is found that a marryed man liuing absque vlla suspicione carnalis commercij without any suspition of carnal compagnie may not only be Bishop after his wyfes death but also during hir lyfe Thirdly S. Chrysostom him selfe answereth in forme to your argument saying Dixit vnius vxoris virum non ea ratione vt id nunc in Ecclesia obseruetur S. Chrysost hom 2. de patientia Iob. oportet enim omni castitate Sacerdotem ornatum esse He sayd the husband of one wyfe not so as that now should be obserued in the Church for a preest must be adorned with all chastitie Certainly I do not beleeue that a man might be more often discomfited by his owne conforts then it hapeneth to my Antisophist For here the gowlden mouthed S. Chrysostom brought to auouch marriage of Preests is found most repugnant therto as euer befor also the lyke was done toward S. Chrysostom and all others Let vs inquyre whether he thriueth better in the confort out of S. Gregorie First to my thinking he should not because I remembre to haue redd in S. Gregorie S. Greg. l. 6. c. 1. in lib. reg Errare eos qui propter verbum Pauli vnusquisque vxorem suam habeat putant licere Ecclesiasticis vxores habere Them to erre who for the speeche of S. Paul Let euery on haue his wyfe thinke it lawfull for Church men to haue wiues Secondly to my thinking in saying S. Gregorie to be ours and that he mantayneth marriages not to be dissolued according to Gods law is to confesse that he him selfe had not sayd truely befor in saying the ould Fathers to be his frends or that our doctrin condemneth
filthie flying from the point according to the saying of I â—rece Lucret. l. 6. Et craâ—â—oluit caligine fumum he in deepe mist infowlded dimming smooke Rider 4 Hee also appealed to the College to bee Vmpier betwixt vs whither of vs had alleaged Scriptures and Fathers with more trueth and whither be had altered the state of the Question as I charged him afore 4. Title VVhether it be true that I refused to stand to the arbitrement of the college And vvhat arbitrement the collegists affoorded 4. THer being a iealousie betwixt them of the College Fitzimon and M. Rider my appeal to their arbitrement was a heauie load vpon his reputation they apparently not being partial in my part of the cause and yet he loath to stand to their kyndnes Therfor first to gayne tyme and delaye he would be tryed no wher but in Oxford When this euasion by all men as ridiculouse was hissed at and that in all meetings at his owne table and euery wher else his slacknes to a publick conflict was reproached all other vayne excuses vanishing of themselues he at leingth was constrayned to incroach vnder the lee and into the frindshipp of them of the College What packing ther was betwixt theÌ„ I know not but this I know that he that neuer durst befor stand to their arbitrement at that tyme seemed forward to resigne his cause to their decision Yf any coÌ„iecture vpon probable occasioÌ„ be allowed in this conference they of the College informed him that he had vtterly betrayed him selfe in the mayne point of the controuersie but yet that one only refuge remayned to wrest the mater of Christs true presence which my allegations did demonstrat to the name or tearme of transubstantiation by which all late papists do expresse such presence of Christ in the B. Sacrament that yf I showld not discouer this foisting in the questioÌ„ of the name in steed of the question of the mater M. Rider might be well supported against my proofs wherby the mater and not the forsayd name is auerred Such to haue bene the quirk of all their consultation and the only hope wherupon M. Rider hanged his confidence by dilligent obseruation of the circumstances may be collected But as I sayd neuer befor the moneth of Apriel 1604. could M. Rider be purchased to abyde the arbitrement of his owne pew-fellowes the Collegists Now was my banishment by his Maiestie licenced to the disgust and distrust of M. Rider least that being out of his gryphs I would publish the certaintie of all our courses and to the greater terror of him because I certifyed all Protestants reparing to the Castle that I was syncerly determined to doe no lesse then he feared at my first leasure and commoditie Wherat new exprobations at euery incowntre falling vpon him he made that wyse Rescript to which now I answere Which being made the right Wor. Mayor of the Citie not being ignorant of all circumstances althowgh to his immortal infamie a most timorous Catholick as one that most exactly knew their impietie yet for worldly feare conformed him selfe therto challenged him publickly of dastardlines in wounding a man bownd trampling on one in restraint and triumphing against one not permitted to resist by wryting publickly against me who was not allowed to defend my selfe For according to Seneca in his prouerbs victoria sine aduersario breuis est laus it is a seelie and short commendation to brag of victorie without an aduersarie Or as Faustus some what plainer sayth nil tacito quesita dolo victoria durat the victorie obtayned by treacherie doth neuer auayle M. Rider therat blustring into choler assured him in the publick market that euen to my face he would confownd me to be guiltie of all tergiuersation vsed in the proceedings yf the Mayor would vouchsafe to accompagnie him to the Castle To which motion the Mayor condiscended in the meane tyme inuiting him to diner least that he would relent or repent his wounted resolution At diner tyme the Mayor sent one of his sergeants to certifie me distinctly of all the forsayd occurents I aunswered notwith standing my former alienation for the forsayd scisme of the Mayor not denying but he had otherwyse euer obliged me that I would most willingly that such motion in any case should not be ouerslipped but brought to examination In May 1604. The Mayor Iustice Palmer Captain Godl the Councelor Cooke being within hearing and others to the numbre with them of the guarde of abowt a hondred standing in the Castle cowrt I was sumoned by my keeper to appeare Some litle pause ther was before I came and suddenly M. Rider began to glorifie that he knew I durst not come At leinght I came and inquyred their pleasure M. Rider declared that he came to haue a promised legible copie or my subscribing to that which I had deliuered or my going to trial before them of the College To the first of these three points I aunswered his owne mowth showld confesse the copie to be legible which I proued in maner premised To the second that yf I cowld not proue his falsification of my priuat leter I would subscribe to my whole aunswer Which when I did proue as all or any then present will auowch so directly and perspicuously as he blushed and they all blamed him for abhominable falsification I tould them there should neede noe such approbation considering that our issue should be not vpon the futur but euen vpon the Caueat and my allegations therin contayned in legible print To the last of going to the College I accepted it at that instant reaching him a gowld ring which he showld not deliuer me but in that place He tooke it and now as Iulius Caesar sayd when he had passed the riuer Rubicon Sueton de Iul. Cesarâ— Iacta est alâ—a the diâ—is cast their cowld be no tergiuersation ether we must haue gone forward with mayne force or we could not retyre without both foyle and dishonor What was thinke you the issue M. Rider would needs restore me my ring pretending that he must haue licence of the state to so publick an act which licence he dowted not to obtayne at their fitting the day following Nay sayd I you haue had licence from the begining to this disputation by lawfull warrant as yow shewed me your selfe So that I will not receaue my ring vntill you present it me vnles yow haue other excuse in place accorded His owne consociats the Reformed crue what in wayling what in rayling sought to draw or driue him from so ignominious reuolting from the trial by him selfe first sought in three yeares space dayly boasted of at this tyme before my departure to be effected or not at all and then disclaymed in the face of the world vntill needles new licence might be obtayned But he deuyding vp and downe sparkles of rayling rage gaue them leaue to say their pleasure and to swallow their displeasure and threatned yf
right qualitie of forging Impostors to chawnt vpon woords and to adulterat them from their signification Fiftly they resolue that I haue alleadged noe Concil Father or Antiquitie prouing transubstantiation In this agayne they depraue the question committed to their arbitrement in two maners First the peruerting dissembling denying of the Authors mynds in our seueral causes was by them to be iudged and not what I proued or not proued Secondly by intimating that I intended to proue the name and not the mater of transubstantion For the position of M. Rider was that transubstantiation or the corporal presence of Christs bodie and bloud in the sacrament was neuer tawght by the ancient Fathers By which euen he whom you defending haue destroyed your selues sheweth that he consisted noâ— in the woord but in the signification newly explicating it with the disiunction Or Take that fling as a reward of M. Riders Mule Nay you shal not by your leaue be quitt of him soe S. Ambr. l. 4. de Sacr. c. 4. We alleadging S. Ambrose saying The bread is bread befor the consecration but when it is consecrated of bread it is made the fleash of Christ sayth M. Rider therupon all this we graunt to be true but you come not to the point whether Christs fleash be made of bread by way of transubstantiation that is by the changing of one nature into another by hoc est corpus meâ—m This is our question So that not the woord of transubstantiation but the changing of one nature into another by hoc est corpus meum is maintayned to be the question and consequently the former infidelitie of the Collegists is euidently euen by M. Rider contestated Yet againe they shal haue from their beloued brother 2. reg 20. Iudic. 14. 1. Machab. 13. a Ioabs kisse to Amassa a Dalilaes teares to Samson a Triphons feast to Ionathas in this his awnswer to the forsayd woords of S. Ambrose He graunteth all to be true but requyreth a conuersion of one nature into another by the forsayd woords In such graunt of trueth he giueth perspicuously the lye to both him selfe and his supportors For yf it be true that by consecration the bread is made the fleash of Christ then must the nature of bread be conuerted into the fleash of Christ and so one nature transubstantiated or conuerted into another Which also S. Ambrose in all that chapter intendeth to proue S. Ambr. loc cit saying Moises his rodde was changed into a serpent and agayne into a rodd Note the riuers of Aegipt into bloude and agayne into riuers c. And can not then the woords of Christ transforme bread and wyne The heauens the earth and sea were not nor any creature and by a woord they were made he commanded and they were created yf then of nothing his powerfull woord could make things to be how much more can he alter one thing into another The changing then of one nature into a nother or transubstantiation according to M. Riders mynde and myne being true I say that disproofe is giuen by M. Rider against him selfe in pretending that the ancient Fathers within the first fiue hondred yeares had noe such mater and against the Iudgment of the Collegists in his fauor containing that I had proued noe such mater Besyd which sufficient confutation of their arbitrement euen by M. Rider let all the rest of my proofs in sifting M. Riders Caueat without recapitulation of them in this place declare these Puritans to be the schismatical Collegians or vncircumcised gymnasists in Hierusalem of whom the Scripture sayth 1. Mach. 1.16 Recesserunt a testamento sancto iuncti sunt nationibus venundati sunt vt facerent malum they haue departed from the holy testament and are ioyned to the Gentiles and are sowld to doe euil not at this tyme for any price but to dispawne M. Riders credit Lastly they affirme that allegations are brought by M. Rider in the same tyme that euidently conuince the contrary to witt that no transubstantiation was acknowledged for 500. hondred yeares after Christ But first the late aunswer of M. Rider him selfe to the place of S. Ambrose who liued within 400. yeares after Christ confessing it to be true wherin the change or transubstantiation of one nature into another is playnly veryfied such his aunswer I say doth refelle this fauorable sentence as false Next I craue of these Puritans not how some tyme they durst controwle the contrary sentence of the state for that demande would implye an ignorance of their general inclination which is by me els where detected how at least they durst condemne in such couert contradiaction so malepertly the wysdome of the state as ether to be ignorant of such M. Riders sufficient proofs or knowing them of not confronting vs together to so manifest aduantage therby of the publick cause by my being conuicted by them And in particular how iniurious they haue made sir Iames Fullerton to the whole profession that not only he did not commend M. Riders proofs in their maner but that in greatest vehemencie he did condemne them to be guiltie of all defectiuenes To these demands yf they refuse to aunswer by woords yet they will neuer escape the infamie ingendred in the mynds of all that will looke on them by not daring to iustifie their noe lesse punical censure toward me then their desperat presumption against the bodie of the Concil in so thwarting their act and discretion Valer. max. l. 6. c. 3. Helinand l. 15. hist. This iudgment had it bene vnder king Cambyses how he would punish it appeareth by his memorable iustice against a corrupt Iudge whose skinne he caused to be flaed of and to be nayled on the chaire of Iudgment Then electing the very sonne of the sayd Iudge and installing him in his Fathers office and seate he willed him now to learne how to iudge by such his fathers example Yf as I sayd a Cambises had the collegists in hand for this iudgment by them selues by him whom falsely they defended by the state by all learned of the world detected to be treacherous filthie and vnchristian how would he vncase and dismember them But I leaue them as they are Rider I dealt not so vvith him in printing his booke vvith mine not one vvord of his I omitted 6. But to my last leter this is his last shift and as he thinkes a sufficient excuse That vnlesse he may print alone I shal haue no Copie but this was nauer spoken of at first neither is fitting to bee yeelded vnto by me at last Now you may see plainly that Maister Fitzsimon is afraid of being called to Repetitions he would passe the Presse with an ipse dixit If any man must see his labors before they be printed then they shal not passe indeed his last was so sifted that nothing was left but dust and if this be well boulted I doubt not but prooue it Branne He
two thowsand deprauations I abstayne from obiecting one of ours against them that them selues of them selues be both witnesses and iudges I will begin with EnglaÌ„d such therin as were Carlile in his booke that Christ descended not into hell and are most esteemed Carlile then for whose credit Puritans denye the descension of Christ into hell sayth of the translations in England Thâ—y detorte the Scriptures from the right sense They shew them selues to loue darkenes more then light Brovvghtons epistle to the Counsell Browghton who being of the feruentest sorte of Puritans brooked not to dwell in England as being a contrie drowned in error but came to Midleburg in Zeland and â—her wrote his booke admonishing therin the Lords of the Cownsell of England In the booke of the sayd conference by vvilliam Barlovv D. of Diuinitie deane of Chester pag. 45. printed by V. S. anno 1605. pag. 46. in lyke woords to the former that the Bibles of England were fowly corrupted And now lately the 13 of Ian. 1604. according our computation at Hampton court in the summe of Conference befor the Kings Maiestie thus speaketh the formaÌ„ of the queast of Puritans D. Reinolds that there might be a new Translation of the Bible because those that were allowed in the reignes of K. Henry the eight and Edward the sixt were corrupt and not aunswerable to the truthe of the original To which accorded his Maiestie saying as is there expressed that he cowld neuer yet Bible anno 1588. see a Bible well translated in English but the woorst of all he thowght the Geneua to be Which his iudgment the translators of the Bible in english professing to translate the Geneua Bible and yet declining from it in very many places Luke 3.36 Act. 1.14 c. 2.23 c. 3.21 c. as by the quotations may be gathered being ashamed vniuersaly to conforme them selues therto do apparently confirme and iustifie Thus then we haue for the first consideration that the Scriptures hetherto deliuered in England are corrupt Vide VVitaker pag. 15. contra rat Campiani pag. 15. louing darkenes more then light and neuer well translated euen by their owne declarations Of Luthers translation for the owld Testament he him selfe in seueral clauses sayth that it is no woord of God belonging to Christians Moises Luth. serm de Mose De 10. precep lib. 2. con Rusticos nihil ad nos pertinet Seditiosi prophetae dicebant oportet vetâ— testamentum seruari Non mihi ecclesiastes sed Iudeis Mosen tuum predica Nullus apex aut punctus in Mose ad nos pertinet legem ad me nihil pertinere sed euangelium etiam decem precepta ad nos non pertinent c. Moses pertaineth nothing to vs. Seditiouse preachers affirmed that the owld testament is also to be obserued Preacher not to me but to the Iewes preach thy Moses not a title or point of Moses belongeth to vs the law not to concerne vs but the gospel Yea euen the ten commandements not to belong to vs. c. This is playne dealing owt of the woord of God to shuffle and cutt away all the owld testament But what thowght Luther thinke you of the new testament Listen to him selfe rowndly and resolutely declaring his mynde Non immerito igitur admonui in prologo noui testamenti Lectores vt hanc falsam aboleant opinionem quod scilicet quatuor sint euangelia quatuor tantum Euangelistae Dixit autem Ioannis euangelium esse vnicum pulchrum Luth. serm de pharisee publ in 2. proem noui test primae editionis verum Not vnworthely did I admonish the Readers in my prologue of the new testament that they should abolish this false opinion that ther are fower gospells and only fower euangelists For I sayd that the gospell of Iohn was only be wiâ—full and true I might alleage besyd thes blasphemies against so much of the owld and new testament his like impietie toward the epistle of S. Iames the Apocalips c but what needeth any specification of parcels when he determineth in expresse tearmes Nihil est cum scriptura Luth. in Assert in prologo Bibel Buhel Babel the Bibel Bubel Babel together with the Scripture is nothing Is not this a strange maner of translating and reforming Scripâ—ures to make them finaly not to be any woord of God or of any importance but all the bible to be only a buble and a Babel What greater modestie or synceritie might be attended in Caluins translation when he taxed thus the Apostles and Euangelists altogether Si Apostoli sint ne garriant quicquid illis collibitum fuerit Calu. Instit l. 4. c. 8. §. 4. Calu. in c. 19. Ioan. v. 23.24 In cap. 2. Mat. v. 15. in c. Mat. v. 13. in c. 8. Mat. v. 17. in c. 27. Mat. 9. In cap. 6. Luce v. 40. Calu. in prefat noui test Gal. 1567. Yf they be Apostles let them not bable all that they list Of the Euangelists he also sayth them intempestiue trahere loca à natiuo sensu discedere multos sententias ex abrupto inseruisse nominare impropriè verbis vti impropriè to wreast allegations to depart from the right meaning of them to shuffle abruptly many sentences into their writings to tearme improprely to vse woords improprely Wherupon most truely sayth he against him selfe and his lyke I confesse that Sathan hath gayned more by these new Interpreters then by keeping the woord from the people To conclude his odiouse exprobration I must reporte for a wofull conclusion toward all late translations the saying of Zuinglians or Tigurins No translations yet extant nor which wil be here after is the exact woord of God and the expresse meaning of the holy Ghost Which yf any temperat mynde ether of Catholicks or Protestants may now distrust to be true in all their translations I can not imagin what satisfaction greater to be resolued might be ether imagined or requyred since that it is proued as S. S. Aug. l. 11. con Faust. c. 2. Austin sayd to Faustus and his consorts You are the rule of trueth what soeuer is for you is true what soeuer is against you is false Let their Etheocleal discords next present themselues to your consideration God gaue some Apostles some Prophets othersome Euangelists Thes. c. 4. v. 12.13 and othersome Pastors Doctors to the consuÌ„mation of the saincts vnto the worke of the Ministerie vnto the edifying of the bodie of Christ vntill we meete all into the vnitie of fayth and knowledge of the sonne of God Such teachers of one vniforme permanent doctrin alwayes to continue our Reformers may not possibly be accompted first because of their long interruption without predecessors which in professing their noueltie they both acknowledge Fulke lib. lat con Stapleton and mantayne saying parum referre si nullos proferre potuerint antecessores it to be of small importance althowgh they
defend all priuileges and liberties graunted to the Church and clergie that euer were graunted from K. Edward the confessor to that tyme and toward the laitie or all other subiects that he will administer to them equitie and will abrogate all vniust lawes and customes Which ceremonie finished the Archbishop of Canturburie lowdly inquyreth of the people will they submitt them selues to such Prince Wherto they condiscending he anointeth him girdeth him with the sword crowneth him putteth a ring on his finger betrouthing him to the common wealth and giueth a scepter into his hand adiuring him by God omnipotent that he vndertake not that charge Sleidan l. 1. an 1519. Alex. ab Oriâ—ho in Chim fol. 106. 288. Massâ—nus in vita Henr. 1. Conc. Fol. 6. c. 3. without intention to accomplish such plighted protestation Conformable in all respects is the oath of the Emperor K. of France and the residue with this particularitie in the K. of Spaine from the yeare 686. that he sweareth neuer to suffre any heretike to abyde in his realmes And this oath for greater solemnitie was giuen in wryting and placed vpon the altar as of certayne Emperours of Grece Zonaras Zonar to 3. in Anast Dicoro Michalë◠Râ—ngabe V.S. Th. Cantuar. and others intimate and of the K. of England appeareth by this speach of S. Thomas of Canturburie to K. Henry the second Be myndfull of your protestation which you made and putt vpon the altar at westmonaster to defend the libertie of the Church c. And for more manifestation of their setled resolution to fullfill their promise the K. at least of Polonia declareth after the coronation ended Bodin de la rep l. 2. c. 9. Si quod absit iuramentum meum violauero nullam nobis incolae regni obedientiam debebunt yf which God forsend I shall violat my oath the inhabitants of the realme shall owe me noe obedience Which is according to the rule of law Nec obstringitur quis iuramento ad implendum quod iurauit si ab alia parte non impletur cuius respectu praebuit iuramentum Nether is any bound to his oath Decret Greg. tit 24. c. 21. 29. yf the other partie fayle in his obligation Thirdly vnderstand that at the Princes will Conc. Later c. 43. habetur in c. Nimis De iureiurando there is a reciprocat oath due to him by his lay subiects for them of the clergie are exempted by the general Lateran councell And this some tyme they make by them selues some tyme by their nobles and magistrats some tymes rather by some real signe of howlding vp hands Vide vvitichindum lib. 1. Gest Saxon. in fine anno 936. throwing vp hatts acclamations c. then by any verbal speech How soeuer it be made or not made the law of God and man doth determin and resolue that allegiance subiection loialtie which in any equitie may be demanded is due and belonging to Princes not only for pollicie but also for conscience This is and euer hath bene Rom. 13.5 the Doctrin of Catholikes Not so of our aduersaries as is manifested in treating of Puritan Plotts they maligning all Monarchie and admitting only their coÌ„sistorian discipline which sayth his Maiestie agreeth with a Monarchie no better then the deuil with God Hampt Conference pag. 79. 4. 20. as wherby Kings are kept without state and honor Which is confirmed by the puritanical Synod at Cabillon in these wordes Exterminandos esse è rep Christiana tres illas orbis terrarum pestes quisquilias Prateol in Alphab l. 2. c. 22. Pontificiam Ecclesiam nobilitatem iuris prudentiam Those three plagues and chipps of the world the pontificial church Nobilitie and law to be banished out of the Christian common wealth Conformably to which sayth Beza Tota illa priore hominum principum generatione sublata Beza in ep theol 37. 40. That he hoped in God to see a new France the whole generation of former people and Princes being abolished So that according to Puritans we should haue noe loialtie subiection or subordination to Princes as not being to haue any Princes that might command Fowrthly vnderstand that our formentioned Apologist for the oath of allegiance producing needlesly many canons especialy out of the cowncells of Tolledo to certifie the dutie of subiects toward the Prince did heedfully auoyd the most pertinent instruction to the mater in the sayd cowncells although it laye in his way in these woordes of S. Isidor The oath that wickedly and vnaduisedly is made is not to be obserued Conc. Tollet 8. c. 2. S. Isidor in 22. q. 4. Non est In vnlawfull promises reuoke thy worde Change the purpose vowed dishonestly It is a wicked obligation that by wickednes is kept For by this Doctrin we might haue learned ether not to sweare any impious oath or what by impietie of weaklings had bene sworne by pietie and religion to be broken Which had answered the most of his exceptions against the two Breues of the Pope had testifyed his commending the oath of allegiance to be only for that which it hand commendable without intermedling the poison with the potion and notifyed a syncere intention of manifesting the truth that those spanish cowncels did not patronize any heretike but prouide for the safetie of a Catholike and Christian King against any Moorish or Iewish vsurper no other contry more or befor that hauing by general consent deposed Kings only for being heretikes as was by them done toward Swintill and Richimer in whose default they exalted Sisinand Vaseus But this was not to his purpose nor what he hath alleadged to any purpose against our doctrin or demeanure Were happily his Maiestie a Catholike the Apologist being a Caluinian might fynde for his purpose this decretal doctrin of Caluin Cal. l. 4. Instit c. 13. §. 21. Vt primum quis notitia veritatis illuminatus est simul vinculis omnibus obediendi Ecclesiae Regibus solutus est As soone as any is illuminated with the knowlege of the Caluinian truth instantly he is freed from all obligations of obeying Church or Prince Of which positions store is presented by Caluin in the same place without more fauor toward a good Prince then toward a badd WherupoÌ„ Lanoy being founded incensing the Rochellers to reiterat their rebellion only because some others of their brethren had reuolted and they answering that the K. had giuen them libertie of conscience and therupon that they had sworne fidelitie and allegiance to him Lanoy replyed Yow can not keepe any promise opposit to Gods glorie Histoire de Poplin l. 37. f. 203. Nay we assure to obserue any such oath would be a duble synne as it of Herod to giue his doughter the head of Iohan Baptist Wherupon the euer disloial Rochellers after such their oath made in Iuly befor Genebrard ab anno 1567. ad 1575. M. Pig l. 7. c. 17. rebelled in
maiore religione ad periurium quam ad mendacium perduci consueuit He that belyeth his conscience consenteth as lightly to periurie I had rather thinke them greaued by wanting such pretext to impouerish you then more confident of your loialtie after receauing your oath Who then shall separat vs from the charitie of Christ tribulation Rom. 8.35 or distresse or famin or nakednes or danger or persecution or the sword A litle after is a speech rather beseeming a celestial spirit then a mortal weakeling and such as wherby euery mynde of any Christian generositie should learne what to thinke and doe in Christs quarell I am suer that nether death nor lyfe nor angels 38. nor principalities nor powers nether things present nor things to come 39. nether might nor height nor depth nor other creature shal be able to seperat vs from the charite of God which is in Christ Iesus our Lord. These are the thoughts and woords beseeming as I sayd all worthie champions of Christ Which not only by men of strong resolution but also by women and children were most constantly fullfilled when Barbara Agatha Agnes Cecilia Catharina Lucia Dorothea Apollonia Margarita Christina and innumerable other virgins for the most parte of eminent degree and when Vitus and Mammes of seuen and Flocellus of ten yeares owld and such others dispised the terror of rageing lions the stings of serpents and teeth of tigres when they the scorned the stripes of riueted scourges the tearing of burning rakes and hookes when they contemned the burning fornaces the boiling lead the drownings precipitations butcherings quarterings of mans whole malice And should not we then thinke very abiectly of our selues yf in Gods cause any losse of temporal goods any affronts any suspitions any oppressions may moue vs to repine Therfor that which might seeme to you most heynous that being putt to death or torments they do taint you with the odiouse name of treasons and not with the title of martyr S. Ambros in Ps 118. sâ—r 21. that impaireth nothing your merit Gratis igitur persecutionem patitur qui impugnatur sine crimine impugnatur vt noxius cum sit in tali confessione laudabilis impugnatur quasi veneficus qui in nomine Dei gloriatur For in vaine sayth S. Ambros is he persecuted who is impugned without offense is he afflicted as a malefactor wheras he is laudable in that trial is he tormented as an inchanter who glorifieth in the name of God the name not making nor marring the martyr but the cause Yf then you aspire to their crowne who befor are commended to your imitation S. Aug. ser 47. de sanctis I say with S. Augustin Imitari non pigeat quos celebrare delectat let it not greeue yow to imitat whom in mynd you do consecrat Thinke happie to be the effusion of your teares and bloud wheras theternal fiar of hell is therby extinguished and wheras the robes of your sowles are therby blanched According to which is sayd in the Apocalips Apoc. 7.14 These are they that are come owt of great tribulation and haue washed their robes and haue made then whyte in the bloud of the lamb Thinke that in the fornace of aduersitie for godlines yf you were earth you are streinthned yf you were yron you are vnrusted and yf you were gowld yow are purifyed â—say 58.2 Lastly yf you be they of whom the Prophet sayth They day by day do seeke me and they would knowe my wayes as a people that hath done Iustice and hath not forsaken the iudgments of their God thinke whether you do not wrong to God that withowt amendment of your faults you would haue the freedome of innocents Psal 38.12 Hast 14. 6. Are you ignorant that for iniquitie God hath chastised Man and that therfor we are deliuered vp into the hands of our enemies because we haue offended in his sight Tobias then resolueth you Tob. 3. 4. because we haue not obeyed thy preceps therfor we are ahandoned to the spoile to captiuitie to death to a speach and to a reproach in all nations So doth Achior in informing Holofernes As oft as besyd their owne God they worshipped any other God Iudith 5. 18. they haue bene forlorne to a praye to the sword and to reproach So lastly doth Baruch VVhat is it Israel that thow art in the land of thy enemies Baruch 3. 10. 11. 1â— that thow becomest ancient in a strange land that thou art polluted with the dead that thou art reputed with them that discend into hell Thou hast forsaken the fontaine of wysdome For yf thou hadst walked in the way of God thou hadst without dowbt dwelled in peace vpon the land So that yf you would know the wayes of God you must do iustice and not forsake his iudgments Yf you lament to be a spoile c. obey his precepts worshipp God alone and walke in his wayes and as the psalmist sayth apprehend discipline least God be angrie and that you perish from the iust way Psal 2.12 Which because you seeme more willingly to fullfill of late then formerly as appeareth by your godly resolutions mentioned in your leters and by your constant standing for trueth you may I warrant you auayleably exclame in the woords of Dauid Synners haue vnsheathed their swoord they haue bent their bow that they might beguile the poore and needie and vpon Psalm 36.14 these woords receaue from aboue answer the enemies of our lord suddenly as they shal be honored and exalted fading they shall vanish away as smooke that is 20. as another Prophet expowndeth they shal be as yf they were not and the men shall perish that contradict the. Not that it is alwayes inteÌ„ded they should perish in persoÌ„ which we neuer ought absolutly to desyer but only in profession And not only because of your amendment may we presume of such diuine bountie but also least they should sayth God become prowd and say Our high hand and not the lord hath done all these things Deut. 22.27 By which their becoming insolent the spirit of God instructeth is in the person of Dauid to implore of God to auert his wrath and their opposition saying Do not ô lord abandon me from my desier to the synner They haue consulted against me forsake me not least by chance they be exalted Psalm 137.9 Finaly wheras you fynde them selues to professe their shame that they haue departed froÌ„ the mother Church of Rome as they tearme it in thes publick and plaine woords D. Couel in exam p. 185. we are sorie that their weaknes he speaketh against Puritans taketh offense at that which we bowld as an honor and vertue in the Church of England namely that we haue sparingly and as it were vnwillingly dissented from the Church of Rome c. In all ioye of mynde for a soueraigne consolation not with standing all extremities specified you may applaud to your selues that you abstained to depart at all from that Church which as Christ assureth nether in more nor lesse shal be euer ouercome ether by one error or many or by any other power of hell gates or which is all one which neuer is to haue spott or wrinkle how litle soeuer and is in nothing to fayle but to confirme all others it being assured that had you offended in one you had bene made guiltie of all â—ac 2. 10. although such one dissention from that Church had bene neuer so sparingly or vnwillingly followed And vpon this confession I say first to Doctor Couel it is in dede neere to honor and vertue sparingly and vnwillingly to dissent froÌ„ that Church but a true honor and vertue had it bene not to dissent at all And as by dissenting in one point the selfe same guiltines is incurred as by dissenting in all so there remayneth noe other maner to be free from all guiltines but to consent againe with that same Church in all Christ made it not a piller of trueth without being altogether sownd and free from euery crack He made not that Church his spowse withowt exempting it from euery spott and wrinkle He builded not that howse vpon a rock not to be permaneÌ„t in some but in all trials of sease wynds and rayne He assured it not against the infernal gates but that noe error or force or fraud of hell Iac. 2. 10. could preuaile ether first or last against it Therfor a primo ad vltimum he that offeÌ„deth in one toward it is made guiltie of all because it is altogether priuileged from defect Secondly I say to you Puritans Bel. in the dovvnfall of poperie pag. 134. that in the depth of all error and follie you exagitat the rytes and traditions of this Church For wheras you coÌ„fesse as to denie it had bene profouÌ„d impudeÌ„cie that you know not your bible to be the word of God but because you receaue it for such by a tradition of Papists for froÌ„ whom els could you haue receaued it you being as you affirme but in the infancie of your gospell I require thervpon whether you hould such authoritie or certificatioÌ„ in auowing the sayd bible to be infallible or noe What soeuer you answer you remayne ingaged For yf it be infallible in that point such infallibilitie must come from the former promises of Christ which being general do assure infallibilitie in all other points as well as in that And then cursed you for departing from that infallible fundation Yf you affirme that such allowance or traditioÌ„ is fallible then haue you noe infallible certaintie whether your Bible be authentical or noe The Survey vvith 177. queres as inioying it only from authoritie in your opinion but fallible Answer me only this one quere which is your owne new fangled tearme for a demand and I protest befor God and his angels and the world that I will consent with you The God of mercie and trueth be with vs all Amen 26. Sept. 1607. Yours to command in Christ HENRY FITZSIMON
some other qualities lest the receiuers should abhorre rawe and bloodie thinges and that beleeuing they should receiue greater rewards of their faith This faithe Church which dispersed through out the world is called Catholike helde from oulde time now holdeth Yow behowld him of sett purpose to deliuer the ancient fayth to affirme the change into the essence of Christs bodie the accidents to remayne the causes of not seeming what is contayned playnly expressed the same to haue euer befor and then bene the beleefe of the Catholik Church as is now by vs beleeued What thinke yow two such holy archbishops of Canterburie are they not more worthy of credit then M. Rider Alas it is a shamefull demaund to be had in controuersie since therfor he is not worthy to be their chaplins equal wil he not blush yf his forhead be not of brasse to tell hencfoorth our doctrin not to haue bene euer the same in the Catholick Church 73. That in the Popes Court and in his Consistorie Rider there bee diuers opinions touching transubstansiation yet the deniall of it or the contradicting of the Popes opinion was (a) Deniall of Transubstantiation in Rome was no death no death though in those mercilesse daies of Spanish Philip and Romish Marie it was made the thirteenth Article of our faith and it had been lesse daunger to haue denied those twelue old articles of our old faith then this one of your new faith for the one was dispensed with for monie but the deniall of the other was punished with death without mercie But you will replie and say not withstanding the dissentions aforesaid yet Christs words be true he cannot lie he hath said hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie therefor it is his bodie 73. I report me to all considerations Fitzsimon whether they euer obserued a style lesse steeled as I sayd befor or more friuolouse What might I imagin to awnswer to suche pregnant vntruethes In the Popes court and consistorie in this point ther is dissention of opinions Vnder spanish Philipp and Romish Marie transubstantiatoin was made a thirteenth article of beleefe he immediatly telling it was made vnder Innocent the third who liued 300. yeares befor Philipp Marie Then dispensation to haue bene grawnted for mony concerning all other articles of beleefe c. The least that I can do is to score vp of so many the 76. vntrueth The 76. vntruth 74. We confesse these words to be Christs words and therefore true Rider but the litterall sence is yours and therfore false But that I will not bee tedious vnto you I could shew you as manie seuerall opinions dissenting about the meaning of hoc est and corpus as I haue done in the premisses but that the Catholickes shall know there is no such vnitie not veritie in your doctrine as you confidentlie but vntrulie haue taught them therefore I will giue them but a taste till some other time onelie pointing you and them to their Authors and places and then read aduisedlie and iudge without partiall affection This Frier you heard latelie recited your seuerall jarres touching consecration Iosephus Angles do Essentialibus Euch. pag. 114. 115. 116. now heare him with your patience to deliuer his other seuerall opinions touching the exposition of these three words seuerallie hoc est corpus The first opinion is that this demonstratiue pronoune hoc must bee referred not to the bread 1. Iosephus but to the bodie of Christ that this should be the sence hoc est c. id est corpus est corpus meum That is this my bodie is my bodie but how absurd this is let the young Sophisters in the schooles giue their censures 2. Bonauentura 3. Occham in lib. 4. 1. S. Thom. 2. Ricar 3. Scotus Nec panem nec corpus sub ratione corporis sed corpus Christi sub ratione entis vel Indiuidui c. lib. 4. pag. 182 de sacro Altaris mysterio cap. 17. But the second opinion is of Bonauentura who saith this pronoune hoc must be referred to the bread that must be conuerted into Christs bodie but not to Christs bodie The third opinion is Occhams and he is of opinion with the first There followeth three other learned mens opinions contrarie to all the former and say flatlie that this demonstratiue hoc must not be referred to note either the bread or the bodie of Christ but that this might be the sence hoc ens vel hac substantia quae continetur sub speciebus c. This thing or this substance which is contained vnder the accidents of bread is my bodie but how well these opinions with their straunge Logicall manner of reasoning will content the learned Priests Iesuits I would faine knowe for this I am sure they sound not either of diuinitie or learning But this Frier for a farewell concludes pag. 118. pronomen hoc nihil This pronoune hoc signifieth nothing till the last sillable vm be pronounced Hoc nihil demōstrat In the same pag. Pope Innocentius the third saith that hoc signifieth neither bread nor Christs bodie because the whole words of consecration were not spoken vnlesse saith he you will say the Priest consecrates at this word Benedixit he blessed But the Pope saith hoc signifieth nothing and his reason is that the Priest sheweth or noteth nothing because he vseth hoc est c. not by way of demonstration but by way of cursorie repetion Marke this you Iesuits and priests so then this Pope will haue this sence hoc est corpus meum that is nothing is my bodie But in the three of the last lines of that chapter his wisedome changed his minde and said this is my bodie that is what soeuer is vnder the formes of bread is my bodie Is not this thinke you deepe diuinitie for a Pope You may see hereein how the Pope vseth shamefull shifts to couer his sensible errors and to deceiue Christs littell flocke In his Marc. Anton. Con. Stephen Gardner liuing but latelie seeing euery mans opinion expounding what hoc should be hee disliketh them all and faith it signifieth indiuiduum vagum as if Christ had said This but what it is I cannot tell but it must of necessitie be some what is my bodie De consec dist 2. can Timorem Glossa ibidem But I will conclude with your owne Popes Canon and Glosse which you hold for Canonicall though in deed hereticall solet quaeri quid demonstratur per pronomen hoc It is a common question what is meant by this pronoune this whether bread or the bodie of Christ not bread for that is not the bodie of Christ nor yet the bodie of Christ for it appereath not that there is anie transubstansiation till the words bee all pronounced yea the last fillable vm To this question this must be aunswered That by the word this nothing is meant but it is there put
materially without anie signification at all See now whither you are brought or rather whither haue you brought Gods people from trueth to false hood if hoc signifieth nothing where then is your transubstantiation For if in that word which should first worke in the change there bee no mention of bread how can that which is no way comprised in them be changed by them and so you speake against your selues Againe as you are rent in sundrie opinions touching hoc so also are you touching est for when you saw that est would not serue in his proper Euangelicall and Apostolicall signification then you gaue him a new exposition For Bonauenture seeing that est as Christ and Paul meant it would not fit their purpose VVhat est signifieth there is great variāce amōgst the Romish Prelats Est i. Fit Est est verbum anuntiatiuum non constitutium Est i. erit Iosephus Angles in loco praedicto pag. 115. then hee of purpose expounded it by Fit vt sit sensus panis fit corpus meum that it might be thus in sence The bread is made my bodie Yet Occham hee likes not Bonauentures 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 Eucharistia cap. 7. pag. 104. col 2. C. D. denieth est to haue anie such signification vnlesse it be in metaphors and parables But least that I shuld be too offensiue vnto you I could deliuer so many seueral 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. dinstinct 12. page 60. deliuers foure seuerall 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 innouation and vniuersalitie without limittation whereas there is nothing but jarres discords and dissentions in your consecration in your transubstantiation and in euery word almost nay perticle as hoc and est be so wrested by your construction that you haue brought both their proper significations to plaine destruction Is this exposition Catholicke what auncient father euer expounded it so let the Catholickes know or else they with vs will iudge neither you nor your doctrine Catholicke Will you follow a foolish Frier an ignorant Abbot a late vpstart Pope or Priest that writ and wrested within these foure hundred yeares and forsake Scriptures and the auncient Doctours of the Church Now let the indifferent minded Catholikes be iudges whether you or wee haue antiquitie consent and veritie on our sides And who differs from Scriptures and fathers from and amongst themselues not onelie in one point of religion but almost in euerie point particle of doctrine Thus much concerning your discords amongst your selues all against the auncien◠Apostolicall and Catholick truth 74. Spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici Fitzsimon being admitted to behowld this courser I would say discourser can yow good frends refrayne from smyling He telleth yow the third opinion is all one with the first and yet that it is the third and not all one but a seueral opinion This must needs make vp the 77. vntrueth The 77. vntruth Next that the fowerth fift and sixt opinions are all contrary to the former and yet that being different The 78. vntruth they are not different among thēselues but that they all agree This is the 78. Then he maketh a ragged argument yf nothing be conuerted by the first worde all our dealing is vndone Alas yf he would be capable he might thinke that this conuersion is done by Gods infinit vertue in an instant not by parts seueraly according to the woords Hoc est corpus meum as yf to euery woord a sondry part were correspondent but that to all the forme conioyntly all the conuersion is to be referred so that ther be conceaued a diuers substance present whiche was not befor not euery woord but the whole forme being pronownced Is not this a frantick kynde of cofuting to say only this is sayd I am suer it is false how absurd this is let young sophisters iudge I am suer they sound not of Diuinitie or learning is not this deepe diuinitie for a pope and no suche matter sayd but forged by him selfe his assurance childishe the absurditie only in his conceits the diuinitie and learning impugned so inexpugnable as nether in his brayne is ther any reason and by his mowth but Riderian blasts to contradict it Therfor to bring disputations of Doctors therby to testifie a disagreement betwixt them in their beleefe of the substance of transubstantiation they being only of the tyme therof is as wysely done especialy by one more frequent and seasoned with experience in law cowrts then learned colledges as yf he wowld assure that laweyers disagree in allowing the law because they plead seueraly for their Clyents of the construction or tyme of constitution or number of sillables of the law Or yf he wowld say that philosophers doubt whether ther be wynde rayne riuers because they diuersly imagin how when and whence they haue their original Remembre what was informed in the 65. numbre that it is impossible we can haue any dissentiōs among vs according to the saying of the Apostle Si quis autem videtur contentiosus esse 1. Cor. 11.16 nos talem consuetudinem non habemus neque Ecclesia Dei Yf any seeme contentiouse we haue noe suche custome nor the Churche of God Because a Christian wryter among vs must follow as Waldensis saythe Tho. Wald. l. 2. doctrinalis fidei cap. 21.23 the iudgement of the Churche vnder the payne of misbeleefe yf it be a point of faythe or vnder the payne of contumacie yf it be not And all Catholick students among vs doe read the disputations of Doctors vndecided by the Churche cum iudicandi libertate with libertie to censure according to S. Augustins woords S. Augustin cō Faustum lib. 11. c. 5. Et epist 48. ad Vincent and his instructiō toward himselfe and all others imbraceing whatsoeuer they fynde true and imputing it to the Catholick Churche and reiecting what they fynde false imputing it to deceaueable man This is a priuilege of Catholicks to be free from dissentions and neuer but to concurr in one Faythe Luther Zuinglius Cal. n. 19. examinis Not so the wicked not soe as appeareth in the 19. number of the precedent examination
bishops to haue any more authoritie then preests as also because as other puritans can not tolerat any honour to the name of Iesus so could not he to the name of Christ but sayde that it was a filthye name Alan Copus dial 6. c. 17. and all that did beleeue in the name of Christ were damned Also that Christ was not redeemer of the world but deceauer therof Which with many other lyke articles he professed at his deathe as is not only affirmed but also proued by Alanus Copus alias Nicholas Harpsfeld against Fox All which M. Rider hath bound himselfe to beleeue Fox loc proxime cit Fox pag. 1151. Tom. 1. Luth. in disp de baptism Art 3. Gagninus l 6. hist Fran. Item Gerson tr 3. in Mat. Paul Aemil. l. 6. hist. Gal. Genebr in Chron. an 1280. by his former woords Thirdly Ihon Wesell denyed the holy Ghost to proceed from the Father and the Sonne Yet he a Foxian Martyr Fowerthely Haux denyed baptisme of Children to be necessarie to saluation yet he a Foxian Martyr Yet Melancthon and he a Foxian Confessor pronounceth Furor est affirmare quod paruuli sine Sacramentis salâ— fiant it is furie to affirme that children may be saued without Baptisme Fiftly Almaricus as Gagnin relateth denyed resurrection heauen hell Christ in the Sacrament more then in a stone that God spake more in S. Augustin then in Ouid Yet he was a Foxian Martyr and by him made a great bishop which others could neuer haue knowen So he made Sr. Ihon Ould castle L. Cobham by his owne absolute authoritie as well allowed to make Lords and Knights as Martyrs and Confessours Fox pag 942. 943. 944 Sixtly Frith the learned and excellent Martyr of Fox affirmed the real presence no article of beleefe affirmatiue or negatiue although the expresse scripture record it and offred sayth Fox to Sr. Thomas More to beleeue the real presence without the adoration Ihon Clerke Fox in his Caleddar 12. 13 14. Nouemb. Iuly 3. Item Acts pag. 111. col 2. num 26. and Alice Potkins defended ther was no other Sacrament then Christ hanging on the crosse Antonie Person Testwod other assured the woords of Christ this is my body which is broken for you only to meane the breaking of Gods woord among the people All this by his former woords my Caualiero is bound to beleeue for these are Foxian Martyrs with whom he sayth he is consenting in vnitie and veritie of Doctrin So is againe William Cowbridge Alan Cop. dial pag. 6. 633. Fox pag 738. saying that nether the Apostles nor Euangelists nor sower Doctors of the Church haue hitherto reuealed how synners might be truely saued So Also is Richard Hunne saying that poore men and idiots haue the truth of the Scripturs more then a thousand Prelats and clercks of the schooles What say you M. Rider will you affirme the same according to your woord and bonde There is no remedie your obligation is to do it But I would know whether you now hould with the idiots rather then the Scholers Truly in any consequence you can not both for such promise and for being non proficiens accompagnie Scholers Yet yf you disdayne to be an idiot which your bond hath made you and perforce inuita Minerua will intrude your selfe among clercks listen how your Martyr in vnitie and veritie of doctrin Fox pag. 738. cometh ouer you he damned sayd Fox the vniuersitie of Oxford with all degrees and faculties in it So that vnlesse you take to be an idiot your Martyr condemneth you To be breefe in this ruthful obligation printed against your selfe to stand to such confederats besyd your making you selfe idiot c. you must auerr with Ihon Teuxburie Ibid. pag. 935. that it is impossible to consent to Gods law that all things are equaly belonging to all that the Iewes of good zeale putt Christ to death c. Of all othets mentioned in the examinatio of the Creed being all for the most parts saints of the same stamp add Calendarie you haue bound your selfe fast to ratifie their damnable blasphemies and to consent with them in vnitie and of doctrin You are to iustifie all that they haue affirmed or els your printed protestation will bewray your puritanical faythlesnes in performance of your promises 125. And next you bring in another learned Protestant Cheminitius Rider who you say alleadgeth Augustine Ambrose and Gregorie Naziazen to approoue your adoration in your sacrament Intimating to the world that we should either allow that in you which publikely we preach against or else that we should be at a discord amongst our selues touching this your opinion But the matter being exactlie examined out of these Fathers themselues and not by your Enchiridions or heresay the Catholickes shall see you wrong vs and abuse them And first it seemeth verie plaine you neuer saw or at least neuer read Chemnitius and my reasons bee these First you know not so much as his right name much lesse his precise opinion Chem pars 2. Canon 6. page 434. for you misspel his name Kemnitius for Chemnitius which had been a small fault if you had rightlie alleadged him touching the matter For your Tridentine Canon commandeth an externall or outward worship of Christ in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine And Chemnitius hee condemneth your outward worshippe for ydolatrous and teacheth onelie an inward spirituall worship And to prooue what I say I will trulie alleadge your Cannon then Chemnitius his examination of it and then let the Catholickes but iudge indifferentlie whether of vs deal more trulie and syncerelie in this case This is your Canon Si quis dixerit in sancto Eucharistiae sacramento Christum vnigenitum Dei Filium non esse cultu latriae etiam externo adorandum solemniter circumgestandum c. Anathema sit That is if anie man shall say that in the blessed sacrament of thanksgiuing that Christ the onelie begotten Sonne of God is not to bee worshipped with that outward and diuine worship which is proper and due onelie to God as well when the Sacrament is carried about in procession as in the lawfull vse of the same Page 435. 436. 437. let him be accursed Martyn Chemnitius examining this your Canon first condemneth your fained Transubstansiation and sheweth the reason for saith he vnlesse the Church of Rome had deuised this Transubstansiation you should haue been palpable ydolaters worshipping the creatures for Christ And therefore she imagined that the substance of bread wine were quite chaunged into Christs bodie and bloud no substance of them remaining lest the simplest should spie their ydolatrie Secondlie he expreslie condemneth your outward worship as ydolatrous and sheweth there that Christ must be receiued by faith and worshipped in spirit and truth Page 444. lines 2. 3. 4. And afterwards hee saith comprehenditur autem vera interior spirituali veneratio adoratio
Christi in illis verbis institutionis hoc facite c. for the true inward and spirituall worship of Christ is comprehended in the words of Christs institution Doe this in rememberance of me Now let the best minded Catholicks see your vniust dealing with both quick and dead pretending that either Chemnitius as you say allowed your outward worship in your Sacrament or that wee iarre amongst our selues touching the same which both bee vntrue For you hold the worship to bee outward hee and we inward you carnall he and we spirituall and brieflie if you will yet read him diligentlie you shall find he vtterlie condemned your carnall presence and your externall worship approuing the one to bee a fable the other blasphemie And thus much for your ignorance touching Martyn Chemnitius whom it semeth you neuer saw but onely tooke him by the eares as Water-beares do their Tankerds Againe you say that Chemnitius vpon the assurance of the real presence approueth the custome of the church in adoring Christ in the Sacrament by the authoritie of Saint Augustine Ambrose in Psal 98. by Eusebius Emissenus Saint Gregorie Naziazen charging as manie as doe the contrarie with impietie to euerie of which thus I aunswere This Psal according to the Hebrew is the 99. Psal and vpon this place S. Augustine writ Aug. in psal 98. as I will alleadge him of your Paris print his words be these Quid de carne Mariae carnem accepit quia in ipsa carne hic ambulauit c. ipsam carnem nobis manducandam ad salutem dedit Nemo autem illam carnem manducat nisi prius adorauerit which tooke flesh of the flesh of Marie and because in that flesh he walked here vpon the earth he gaue to vs that flesh to eat to our saluation for no man eateth that flesh vnlesse first he worship it Now let vs examine this place and see how that fitteth your purpose First the flesh of Christ that Augustine will haue worshipped must be thus conditioned 1 First it must be borne of the virgin Marie but yours was made of bread and therefore not that true flesh of Christ which Augustine speaketh of and so not to be worshipped without ydolatrie 2 Secondlie that flesh of Christ which Augustine will haue vs worship walked visiblie with his Church here vpon earth before Christs ascention And vntill you can approoue vnto vs by canonicall warrant such a Christ in your Sacraments as walked vpon the earth and died on the crosse Augustine will not haue him worshipped which you shall neuer be able to doe during the world 3 Thirdlie that flesh of Christ which Augustine will haue vs to worship was giuen to vs for our saluation which I hope you will say if you say trulie was actuallie reallie and in deed vpon the crosse And in the Sacrament misticallie or by representation as hath been proued out of your owne bookes Thus you wrest that which Augustine spake of the blessed flesh of Christ to your fabulous supposed flesh made by a priest whereby you wickedlie abuse the learned father and deceiue the simple Reader For this flesh of Christ which was conceiued by the holie Ghost and borne of the blessed virgin must be eaten with the spirit adored with the spirit as Augustine there speaketh and neither adored with your externall apish worship nor eaten with your corporall mouth But to speake according to Scriptures and Fathers the verie eating of Christ is the true adoring or worshipping of Christ because as he is eaten so he is adored but he is eaten spirituallie by faith For faith is the chiefest braunch of Gods honour Your next Author is Ambrose vpon the 98. Psal which you imagiue proueth your externall worship of Christ in the Sacrament 125. I ame glad that Kemnitius is auowed to be a protestant Fitzsimon to M. Riders lyking for therby we may perhaps haue some desyred sporte The reprehension of our Spelling Kemnitius for Chemnitius for Crantzius as a litle after appeareth might haue bene spared Yf M. Rider by Gods good prouidence had not bene reprobated to confusion in all maters and sciences wherof he hath made any mention Of his ignorance in Scripture in Fathers in Histories in Orthographie in Greeke in Frenche in Latin in English now in Spelling against my will he would needs conuict him selfe ignorant First then I answer that K. in greeke is all one and C. in Latin and therfor might indifferently be taken Secondly that German names such as are Kemnitius and Crantzius are written indifferently by ether C. or K. that these two forsayd names euen by the authours them selues are more written in our maner then according to M. Riders conceit which also is obserued in Bellarmine Stapleton and all other famous Controuertists Let him repayre but to the Colledge and inquyre for the Metropole of Crantzius and finding it as I had written after in all his lyfe let him abstayne from such fanatical exceptions For yf they were auayleable that who misspelled were ignorant in the mater how cowld M. Rider know how and when to be silent not knowing to wryte silence but scilence how could he professe him selfe a scholer wryting the name amisse scholler How could he tell what circumcision was he wryting it circumscision which neuer scholer would haue done that after would obiect lesse misspelling to another In what wysdome or learning or latin did he learne to wryte lattin for latin intollerable for intolerable subtilly for subtilie c. But of his palpable ignorance in latin after Well now to accompagnie him forward Of Kemnitius he sayth it is vntrue that he iarreth with M. Rider or contrary wyse Which yf it be not reuoked speedely M. Rider must recant affirme with Kemnitius that the opinion against the real presence is Blasphema impia damnata Kemnitius in sua epistola ad Ioan. Georgium Marchion Brandeburg 24. Ioā 1584. Extat in Incendio Caluinistico Kemnit 2. par exam Conc. Trid. sess 13. c. 5. blasphemous impious condemned Secondly Kemnitius sayth Nullam esse qui dubitet an Christi corpus in coena sit adorandum nisi qui cum Sacramentarijs aut neget aut dubitet in Cena verè Christum esse presentem Ther is none that doubteth the body of Christ to be adored in the supper but he who with the Sacramentarians to whom Kemnitius is diametricaly opposit denyeth or distrusteth that Christ is in the Sacrament Wherunto what thinke you may M. Rider replye Forsooth that Kemnitius alloweth only the internal adoration Which is an vntrue and a seely excuse For is not the adulterie of the mynde as vnlawfull as it of the woorke Yes truely yf Christ be true or the common doctrin of Diuins and Philosophers that the external act addeth nothing to the malice of the internal act although by other circumstances it may be conioyned with more offenses in being external then yf it were only internal Wherfor it had bene