Cyprianus De vnctio ne Chrismatis vera synceritas exponeret Gentibus quomodo vinuÌ„ panis caro esset sanguis et quibâ— roÌ„ibus causae effectibus coÌ„uenireÌ„t et diuersa noiÌ„a vel species ad vnaÌ„ reducereÌ„tur essentiaÌ„ et significaÌ„tia et significata eisdeÌ„ nacabulis ceÌ„serentur That the sincere truth and true sinceritie being secretly imprinted in th'Apostles might expouÌ„d vnto the GeÌ„tils how wine and bread should be his flesh and bloud and by what meanes the causes should be agreable to the effectes and diuers names and kindes should be brought vnto one substance and the thinges signifying and the thinges signified should be called by the same names Lo here it is declared what bread and wine it was as much to say the flesh and bloud of Christe which S. Cyprian saith he gaue at his last Supper vnto his Apostles This cleare and syncere truth or true synceritie so he calleth either the true doctrine of this Sacrifice or the Sacrifice it self in respect of the sundry impure and typical sacrifices of Moses Lawe he would secretly that is with th' inward knowledge of these secret mysteries to be imprinted and digested in th'Apostles to thinteÌ„t they should expound vnto the Gentils the Iewes with their olde sacrifices being now reiected how at this heauenly banket the bread and wine is flesh and bloud how the causes and effectes be agreable that is to say how the wordes of CoÌ„secratioÌ„ duely pronouÌ„ced by the Priest and the power of the holy Ghoste which are the causes doo produce and make the body and bloud of our Lord which be the effectes how thinges of diuers names and diuers in nature and therfore diuers kindes be brought vnto one essence or substaÌ„ce to wit bread and wine vnto the substance of Christes flesh and bloude TransubstantiatioÌ„â— whereby Transubstantiation is wrought briefly to conclude how wheras bread signifieth the body and wine the bloud the thinges signifiyng and the thinges signified be called by the same names Which thus appeareth to be true bicause that which before CoÌ„secration was and afterward semeth to be bread is called the flesh and in like case wine is called the bloud and so coÌ„trariwise sometimes the flesh is called the bread and the bloud is called the wine What can be said more directly against M. Iewels Sacramentarie Heresie and more piththily for coÌ„firmation of the Catholike doctrine touching this point And al this M. Iewel hath leaft out The same very thing S. Cyprian doth vtter more plainely in other places Cyprianus De coena Domini In his Treatise of the Supper of our Lorde he hath these most euident wordes Panis iste quem Dominus Discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed natura mutatus Omnipotentia Verbi factus est Caro. This bread Lib. 2. Epiâ—stola 3. which our Lorde gaue vnto his Disciples at his supper being changed not in shape but in nature by the almighty power of the Worde was made flesh Againe writing to Caâ—ilius he saith Qui magis sacerdos â— Dominus noster Iesus Christus qui sacrificiuÌ„ obtulit et obtulit hoc ideÌ„ quod Melchisedech id est paneÌ„ et vinum suuÌ„ scilicet corpus et sanguineÌ„ Who is more a Priest then our Lorde Iesus Christ who offred vp a Sacrifice and offred the very same that Melchisedech did that is to say bread and wine as much to say his owne body and bloude By these places S. Cyprian declareth his minde plainely what he meaneth by the bread and wine that Christe either gaue at the Supper vnto his Disciples or offered vnto his Father to render thankes for the great benefite of his passion soothly none other bread and wine then that which was made by the almighty power of the Woorde his body and bloude And behold Reader how vniforme his vtterance is and how he agreeth with him selfe In the Sermon De vnctione Chrismatis by M. Iewel with false leauing out that whiche made for the truth alleged he saith that diuers kindes are reduced into one substance in his Sermon De coena Domini he saith the bread by the omnipotencie of the Woorde is made flesh so bread and flesh being diuers kindes are brought to one substance There the thinges signifying and the thinges signified saith he be called with the same names as how I haue before declared In his Epistle to Cecilius naming bread and wine he expoundeth him selfe thus suum scilicet corpus sanguinem as much to say his owne body and bloude Where the body and bloude beare the names of bread and wine By this it is clearly seene what an impudent and wicked glose is that which M. Iewel incloseth in his parenthesis added by way of exposition vnto the maimed sentence of S. Cyprian wherewith to exclude the body and bloude of Christe the true bread and wine What haue you wonne here by S. Cyprian M. Iewel Who cutteth and maimeth the Doctours Who is now to be asked whether he haue the chynecoffe M. Ievvels Coffe which in a place of your Reply with out cause you twite me of What kinde of coffe I shal cal this I wote not I feare me the il mater of it lyeth not in your chyne a place so farre from the harte but in the harte it selfe For were not the same by Satans worke festred with the corruption of heresie you had not ben letted as with a coffe from bringing forth the later parte of S. Cyprians saying whose beginning you falsly abuse to obscure the cleare truthe Who so euer thus coffeth I wil not say he hath the chynecoffe as you ieast but verely sauing my charitie that he coffeth as like an heretique as a rotten yew cofâ—eth like a sheepe Laste of al whereas he saith that I am reprooued of vntruth and folie by S. Paule for saying Three lyes made by M. Iewel within three lines that Christe really sacrificed him selfe at two seueral times and twise really shed his bloude only vpon myne owne warrant he maketh no lesse then three lyes within three lines For neither said I in this place that Christe twise really shed his bloude nor onely vpon myne owne warrant said I that Christe sacrificed his body and bloud twise bicause I had the authoritie of Hesychius here as the authoritie of other Fathers before namely Gregorie Nyssen and Theophylacte for my warrant Nor for so saying am I reproued of any vntruth or folie by S. Paule For my assertion is true notwithstanding any thing that S. Paule saith What though S. Paule say Heb. 9. M. Iewel Christus semel oblatus est ad multoruÌ„ exhauriendâ— peccata Christ was once offered Heb. 10â— to take away the synnâ—s of Many Againe with one Sacrifice he hath made perâ—ite for euer them that be sanctified Bicause in these twoo sayinges you finde the termes one and once therefore suppose you that needes they must reprooue my assertion auouching that Christ was twise really
holy Doctours Remembreth he not they were for the more part such Act. 20. as by report of S. Paule the Holy Ghost hath made Bishops to gouerne the Churche of God which he hath purchased with his bloud If thei haue beÌ„ made gouernours of the Church by the holy Ghost may we not boldly say they haue ben taught the truth by the holy Ghost wherewith they might instruct the Church Either the Fathers vvere deceiued or the holy Ghost dissenteth froÌ„ him selfe by M. Ievvel Verily of this doctrine one of these two must folowe That either al the olde learned Fathers were deceiued and taught false doctrine or that the holy Ghost who ruled the penne of them that endited the Scriptures dissented from himselfe speaking in their Successours the learned Fathers For that the Fathers either of their own heads or of priuat inspiratioÌ„ without al warrant of Gods worde instituted this Sacrifice neither M. Iewel saith it nor is it so much as to be suspected The second that is that any dissension or contrarietie be ascribed to the holy Ghoste is hainous blasphemie The first that al the learned Fathers should be deceiued and also deceiue the Churche is not to be graunted For in asmuch as they receiued the spirite of truth which Christe promised to the Apostles Ioan. 14. and were gouerned by the spirite of God and by the same were lead into al truth it ought not to be thought of them in general that they haue inclined vnto falshod specially in so weighty a mater Wherfore it standeth M. Iewel vpon either to deny that the olde learned Fathers haue by their ofte mention of Priestes Aultars and Sacrifice acknowleged the singuler Sacrifice of the Churche or recant what he said of the Scriptures that by any clause or sentence of them it cannot appeare where God appointed any such Sacrifice to be made at al. If he wil say as he semeth to say The Fathers confesse not ne acknowledge not in dede the Sacrifice it selfe but yet ofte tymes they vse the woorde of Sacrifice that is to say they speake of it as also of the Priestes and Aulters to that may be answered that by their woordes we vnderstande their meaning Forasmuch as they confesse it with words and that very oft how can we iudge otherwise of them but that they beleued it also in harte What maketh he the auncient holy Fathers Gods dere frendes placed in authoritie by the holy Ghost to gouerne the Church of God to be double men such as say one thing and thinke an other Why taught they so but that the Churche should beleue so If they would al men to beleue it shal we say they beleued it not them selues When M. Iewel minding to mainteine his Chalenge A shifte deuised bi the schole of this nevve Gospel against the manifold testimonies of the Fathers for the Sacrifice had with him selfe considered this much knowing right wel as thereof he could not be ignoraÌ„t how easy a thing it were for the Catholikes to allege infinite places out of the olde learned Fathers for witnesse and proufe of their faith and of the Churches faith coÌ„cerning this Sacrifice for some shew at least of a colorable answer to be made he deuised this shift or rather vseth a shift inueÌ„ted by the deuisers of this newe Gospel in whose schoole he hath learned his newe diuinitie As the Fathers saith he delited themselues with the wordes Sabbatum Parasceâ—e Pascha Pentecoste and other termes of the olde Lawe notwithstanding the obseruation and Ceremonie thereof were then abolished so they delited themselues oftetimes with these wordes Sacerdos Altare SacrificiuÌ„ Sacrificer Aulter Sacrifice notwithstaÌ„ding the vse hereof were theÌ„ clearly expired This great mater is not so lightlye carried awaye M. Iewel Although with force of your sworde with your mattockes and pickaxes ye haue cut hewed and throweÌ„ downe al the holy Aulters of the Churches of Englande and therefore of the Churches of Christe haue made the Synagoges of Antichrist yet with this sclender worde of yours ye caÌ„ not bereue the whole Church of God of the priesthod of the Aulters of the Sacrifice apperteining to the newe Testament M. Ievvel maketh the Fathers to speak one thing aÌ„d to meane an other If there be no vse of Priestes Aulters and Sacrifice is it to be thought the olde learned Fathers hartes could serue them so ofteÌ„times to speake and write of theÌ„ aÌ„d to deceiue the people coÌ„mitted to their charge for their delite and pleasures sake BeloÌ„ged it to their grauitie holinesse and loue of truth to delite and solace them selues with falshod to vse hypocrisie and as it were legiérdemaine by speaking one thing aÌ„d meaning another to serue Gods people with voide and empty words as it were with pipt nuttes Whiles they teach theÌ„ a doctrin of great importaÌ„ce to vse words that coÌ„tein not the mater which their proper significatioÌ„ reporteth This were crafty cifring it were not right aÌ„d plaine teaching Verely we ought to iudge better of the holy Fathers aÌ„d to thinke that men endued with so great grace swarued not froÌ„ the vpright coÌ„science touching the vse of termes which one of the best lerned of theÌ„ speaketh of Whose words be these wherby it appereth how rightly warely aÌ„d circuÌ„spectly they vsed to speake Aug. de Ciuit. Dei libr. 10. cap. 23. Vse aâ—d obseruatioÌ„ of SabbatuÌ„ Pascha Altare etcâ— is double olde and nevve Nobis ad certaÌ„ regulaÌ„ loqui fas est ne verboruÌ„ liceÌ„tia etiaÌ„ de rebê° quae his significaÌ„tur impiaÌ„ gignat opinioneÌ„ It is right saith he that we speak after a certain rule least the ouermuch libertie of words ingeÌ„der an opinioÌ„ of the thiÌ„gs which by theÌ„ be signified But for a ful answer to you M. Iewel where as you affirme the ObseruatioÌ„ and vse of that is signified by these wordes SabbatuÌ„ Parasceue Pascha PeÌ„tecoste Sacerdos Altare SacrificiuÌ„ to be vtterly abolished and clearly expired in the newe TestameÌ„t you seme either of ignorance not to vnderstand or of malice to disseÌ„ble that the obseruation and vse of these things is of two sortes old and new Legal and Euangelical Iewish and Christian. The olde Legal or Iewish Obseruation and vse of these was clearly expired in right by the comming of Christ specially at what time hanging on the Crosse and now geuing vp the ghoste Ioan. 19. he said Consummatum est It is finished The newe Euangelical and Christian obseruatioÌ„ and vse hereof remaineth in the Church and shall remaine so long as the Church continueth The Iewish Ceremonie of these is quite abolished we grauÌ„t neither be they now in Christs Catholike Church vsed as the Iewes vsed them But the faithful ChristiaÌ„s now kepe vse and celebrate their Sabboth that is to say their restingtide their Parasceue or preparingtide coÌ„monly called Goodfriday their Pascha or Easter their Pentecost or Whitsontide their Priesthod their Aulter their Sacrifice in
he had eaten with his Apostles the flesh of the Lambe he tooke vnto him breade that strengtheneth the harte of man and passeth ouer vnto the true Sacrament of Passeouer that like as Melchisedech the Priest of the highest God had done in offering bread and wine in a foregoing figure of him so he him selfe also might represent the truth of his body and bloude Who can more plainely vtter this mater then S. Hierome hath done in these wordes expressely saying that Christ executed in deede at his last Supper that Priesthode which Melchisedech did prefigurate when hauing taken bread he represented that is to say presently exhibited not the figure or signe as Zuinglius and Oecolampadius teach nor the power and vertue as Caluine teacheth but the truth of his body and bloude Cyprian lib. 2. epistola 3. S. Cyprian speaking of that Christe did at his last Supper auoucheth the same thing with woordes of like effecte Qui magis sacerdos Dei summi quà m Dominus noster Iesus Christus qui sacrificiuÌ„ Deo patri obtulit obtulit hec idem quod Melchisedech id est paneÌ„ vinuÌ„ suuÌ„ scilicet corpus sanguinem Who is more a Priest of the highest God then our Lorde Iesus Christe who offered a Sacrifice of God the Father and offered the same that Melchisedech did that is to wit bread and wine as much to say his body and bloude Consider Reader when Saint Cyprian had said that Christe offered the same sacrifice that Melchisedech had offered which was bread and wine least any man shoulde mistake his meaning and thinke that Christe offered none other nor better thing then breade and wine and in so doing should not excel Melchisedech he addeth an interpretation of his owne woordes to wit that although Christes offering appeared to be bread and wine yet in deede it was his body and bloud Wherefore if thou wilt acknowledge Christes excelleÌ„cie aboue Melchisedech and folow the interpretation that S. Cyprian putteth vpon his owne woordes thou must beleue Christe and Melchisedech to offer one and the same thing in outward forme and in mysterie or sacrament but not one in substance and truth The premisses considered it is most certaine that Christ fulfilling the figure of Melchisedech at his Maundie offered his body and bloude that is to say him selâ—e vnto his Father Let vs go a steppe foreward That priestes haue auctoritie to offer vp Christ vnto his Father and consider one circumstance more whereby it may appeare that priestes also haue auctoritie to offer vp Christ vnto his Father How wil that appeare Forsooth bicause Christ after that he had offered his body and bloude him selfe and deliuered the same vnto his Apostles gaue them withal a coÌ„maundement to doo the same Luc. 22. saying Doo ye this in remembrance of me 1. Cor. 1â— No man be he neuer so great an enemie vnto the continual Sacrifice of the Churche wil denie but that the Apostles had a warrant geuen them by this commaundement requiring them to doo that they had sene their Lorde and Maister to haue done before them But it is proued already by sufficient authorities that Christe at his Supper did offer his body and bloud vnto his Father Ergo the Apostles had warrant to offer Christes bodie and bloude vnto God his Father Nowe let vs descende one steppe lower and we shal come vnto the very point at whiche M. Iewel vnlearnedly and wickedly maketh suche a woondering as if it were a monstrous and most dangerous presumption which is that a priest hath auctoritie to offer vp Christe vnto his Father It is therefore to be vnderstanded that Christe gaue not this commaundement and through vertue of the same a warrant to doo the thing he had him selfe done before vnto his Apostles onely but also vnto such as should succede them in office of Priesthode whereunto they were admitted by Christe at the maundie to the worldes ende Which truth S. Paule doth insinuate 1. Cor. 11. where he speaketh of this blessed Sacrament shewing that it must be celebrated in remembrance of his death vntil his last comming Where of this argument is easily gathered Continuance of Priestes necessary Our lordes Supper is to be celebrated vntil his last comming But that can not be performed onlesse some succede the Apostles in the office by vertue whereof it is done Ergo it is necessary that some succede the Apostles in that office The first proposition is proued by S. Paule The second is manifest bicause the Apostles to whom the commaundement was geuen were not to continue a liue in the Church vntil Christes second comming That commaundement therfore was geuen as wel vnto them who should succeede as vnto the Apostles them selues For that any should take vpon them to execute so high an office who haue no commaundement thereto or that the commaundement was geuen to al in general it is to absurde to thinke To whom then hath this office ben coÌ„mitted By what name haue these successours ben called Priestes by special calling succede the Apostles in degree Hieron ad Heliodorum Verely it hath ben coÌ„mitted to the Priestes of the Church and to none els Of this special calling and coÌ„dition of certaine S. Hierome geueth vs an euident witnes saying Absit vt de ijs quicquam sinist rum loquar qui Apostolico gradui succedeÌ„tes Christi corpus sacro ore conficiunt per quos nos Christiani sumus God forbid I should speake ought amisse of them who succeding into the degree of the Apostles with their sacred mouth make the body of Christ by whom also we be made Christians Thus we are taught that it is the office of Priestes to make or consecrate the precious body of Christe by vertue of his woorde by them as Ministers and substitutes of Christe pronounced for which S. Hierome acknowlegeth their mouth to be sacred and holy and for the same dignitie confesseth them to succede the Apostles in that degree To the like effecte we finde in S. Cyprian a testimonie worthy of note Cyprian lib. 2. ep 3. Si Christus summus Sacerdos Sacrificium Deo Patri ipse primus obtulit hoc fieri in sui commemorationem praecepit vtique ille sacerdos vice Christi verè fungitur Priestes substitutes of Christe qui id quod Christus fecit imitatur If Christe the highest priest him self did first offer the sacrifice vnto God his Father and coÌ„maunded the same to be done in remeÌ„brance of him then that Priest doth truely supply the stede of Christ which foloweth that which Christ did This saying of S. Cyprian goeth somwhat hygher then the former of S. Hierome There it was said that Priestes succeded in Apostolike degree Here a Priest folowing the acte of Christ in offering the Sacrifice is said to be the substitute of Christ him selfe By S. Hieromes verdit they may consecrate the body of Christ as the successours of the Apostles by S.
he sheweth his meaning clearly in an other place Which is by the terme Image in respect of the state of the Gospel not to exclude the Truth of thinges but to insinuat an obscurer manner of exhibeting the truth in comparison of the state of heauen Ambro. de interpellatione Dauid His wordes be these Ecclesia est imago coelestiū etenim postquā vmbra praeterijt imago successit Vmbra synagoga est In vmbra lex in Euangelio veritas The Church is an image of heauen or of heauenly thinges for after that the shadowe was gone away the Image succeded The shadow is the Synagogue In the shadowe was the Lawe in the Gospel is the Truth Lo wheras he said in the place by you alleged the image is in the Gospel here expounding his minde more plainely he faith in the Gospel is Truth calling that Truth here which he called Image there But sir with what face M. Ievvel falsifieth S. Ambrose I say not with what cōscience durst you so fowly in translating this place of S. Ambrose to falsifie his wordes and sense Why did you trāspose his wordes setting the former word in the second place and why did you turne and for or The later sentence truly translated is this O man go vp into heauen and thou shalt see those thinges whereof here was a shadow or an Image Which last wordes you falsified thus whereof here was an Image and a shadowe By this chopping and chaunging of woordes your euil intent was to bring your reader in beleefe that the Sacramentes of the olde Law be of equal worthines with the Sacramentes of the newe Lawe By your sclender Replie and by such false legierdemaine I doubte not but the wiser sorte wil be moued to trie your strange doctrine better then heretofore of many it hath ben tryed before they beleeue it M. Ievvel confoundeth one truthe vvith an other truth Lib. 5. Commēt in Luc. cap. 7. From this place to the ende of the Diuision this Replier doth nothing els but endeuour to confound thinges that in them selues be distinct that so at least he might cast some myste as it were before the readers eyes As for example bicause the reading of the storie of the Gospel sheweth vnto our vnderstāding and faith Christ hanging vpon the Crosse as S. Ambrose saith his syde opened with the souldiours speare his handes and feete pearced through with the nayles and the Sacrament also of Christes body and bloud doth represent and commend vnto our memories the same Hieron in Psal. 86. Againe bicause Christe being virtus Patris the vertue of his Father is borne in vs euery daye when any vertue is wrought by vs as S. Hierome saith Therefore by this mannes Logique Christe is not really but by a similitude or figure only sacrificed of Priestes euery day Furthermore bicause the myndes of holy virgins be meete Aulters for Christ daily to be offered vpon to wit by daily meditation of his Passion as S. Ambrose sticketh not to say Ambro. de Virginib lib. 2. therefore Christe is no more really present vppon the real Aulters of the Churche when the Sacrifice of his body and bloude is offered by the Priest then he is in the mynde of a pure and holy virgine deuoutly thinking of his death Seme not these reasons to procede from a profounde Diuinitie What is this but to confounde one truth with an other truth and to vndoo al proper speaches by figuratiue and metaphorical Phrases He should haue remembred that euen they of his owne side doo teache that we ought not to ronne vnto tropes for the vnderstanding of any point onlesse there felowe a great absurditie if the wordes be taken in their proper signification That this myste of M. Iewels confusion be discussed and put a waye who is so vnskilful in maters of our faith that putteth not a manifest difference betwen the setting forth of Christes death vnto our vnderstanding by reading the Scriptures and the representation and cōmemoration of the same vnto our faith by the Sacramēt of his body and bloude The difference of Christes being in the Sacrifice and in the reading of the storie of the Gospel In that a Description only by wordes is made of the order and manner of putting Christ to death whereby an Image thereof is imprinted in our vnderstanding and memorie In this the body of Christe that was put to death is present layd before vs according to his worde This is my body which is geuen for you That is a general meane to come to the knowledge of Christes death This is a special meane to remember his death Luc. 22. That is common vnto the Infidel reading the storie of the Gospel as wel as vnto the faithful This is proper to the true Christiā geuing credit to Gods worde That may be conueniently reade by euery priuate man at al times and in al places This can not duely be consecrate and ministred but by a Priest lawfully ordered and that in time and place appointed That may be read by a wicked man without increase of his sinne This can not be consecrate nor receiued of any being in deadly sinne without increase of his farther damnation This is and euer hath bene by the Churche called and taken for the very body and bloud of Christe That neither is nor euer hath ben commonly so called or taken This is a Sacrament and the Sacrifice of the new Lawe That is neither of them both Finally that feedeth the vnderstanding onely This is the foode both of soule and body to life euerlasting These differences being so apparent so greate and of such importance who can otherwise iudge but that Christes presence in the Sacrifice of the Churche must be after a more substantial and real manner then in the letter of the Gospel or in the reading thereof Moreouer if he be present in the Sacrament and Sacrifice none otherwise then he is at the reading of the Gospel then is the Sacrifice and Sacrament superfluous For to stirre vp in our myndes the remembraunce of Christes Death it should suffice to reade or to heare readen daily the storie of the Passion without any celebration of the Sacrament But Christe knowing the dulnesse of our hartes to be such M. Ievvel acknovvledgeth Christes presence in the Bless Sacrament no othervvise thē in the storie of the Gospel vvhen it is read ād heard that woordes be not sufficient to repaire our memorie and to stirre vp our affection without the presence of some thing of more Maiestie then woordes be of his tender loue leafte to his dere spouse the Churche besides his Gospel a thing of most excellent Maiestie his owne flesh and bloude that we being assured through faith of his real presence in our Mysteries should more dreadfully reuerence him more expressely remember him more affectuously loue him and by the worthy receiuing of it be made partakers of the fruit of his Passion Of this
diuers degrees that with how muche the more grateful and deuoute memorie they did it so muche the more by this Sacrifice they should obteine and againe how muche the nearer any man came vnto that dooing and action of offering the more benefite thereof he should receiue For though al they that be iuste may be said to offer this Sacrifice by a certaine generalitie August Epist. 23. which S. Augustin semeth to meane for so muche as it pleaseth them al that it be offered yet they come nearer vnto this action who doo it them selues who heare Masse deuoutely who serue and attend vpon the Priest to doo that actioÌ„ who susteine him for his ministerie who with godly desire require Masse of him Wherefore as a prayer profiteth them that pray them selues more then an other for whom it is made so this Sacrifice profiteth more them that offer it them selues then it doth them for whom only it is offered And as a Prayer profiteth more that is specially made for one then that whiche is made onely in general for al euen so it is in the Sacrifice But these thinges shal appeare more clearely by the effectes whiche we looke for to enioye by the Sacrifice of the Masse through the vertue of Christes passion if we reherse them particularly The first effecte by consent of al men is the remission of Venial sinnes The effectes that we obteine by the Sacrifice of the Masse which the very iuste doo daily commit and also of temporal paines vnto whiche they remaine thral and bounde though damnation euerlasting be forgeuen An other effecte is the increase of righteousnes and the continuance in good life These are expressely declared in the Institution of this Sacrifice by the Institutor him selfe who first offered it This is my bloude saith he of the new Testament a Luc. 22. whiche for you and b Mat. 26. for many is shed in remission of sinnes That the Apostles vnderstood the very same also in the Consecration of the Body the Masse of S. Iames doth shewe Where after the pronouncing of those wordes Liturgia Iacobi this is my body which for you is geuen and broken the Deacon forthwith addeth in remissionem peccatorum in remission of sinnes By whiche wordes for so muche as with them Christ to this effecte offered him selfe albe it peraduenture they might be more generally vnderstanded that at least may be gathered which now we haue said of the remission of Venial sinnes and temporal paines vnto whiche the Apostles them selues were thral Touching the other there is a manifest place in S. Iohn Christe speaking of the Apostles and of them that should through their preaching beleue in him Iohan. 17. saith For them I sanctifie my selfe that they also may be sanctified in truth Whiche saying is truly vnderstanded of the encrease of holynesse and of continuance in asmuche as the Apostles were now cleansed and sanctified And vnto these effectes the Sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable for al the faithful that pertaine to the body of Christe that is to say for the iuste not only by the deuotion and merite of men that offer it but by the vertue of the Sacrifice it selfe neither onely by meane of a certaine common Prayer whiche standeth vpon liberalitie but of suche prayer as satisfieth the requestes of Gods iustice with presenting vnto him the price paid for sinnes and with a gifte geuen worthy to obteine that is asked whiche is the proper nature of a Sacrifice which is to be satisfactorie and to be offered by way of satisfaction And therefore S. Paule specially considering the worthines of this true Sacrifice said in general that euery Bishop or Priest is ordeined to offer giftes and Sacrifices for sinnes Of this it is learnedly by the Diuines gathered that for so muche as Infidels and suche wicked persons as be not yet reconciled vnto the Churche or vnto God nor so disposed that for them satisfaction may effectually be made Sacrifice for them is not properly offered For whether they them selues or others for them doo offer God doth not accepte giftes for the wicked to this ende for whiche properly they be offered as it appeared in Cain Gen. 4. This is witnessed in the Scriptures and in sundry other places Prouer. 15 Eccles. 34 Therefore S. Augustine saith writing to Renatus Quis offerat Corpus Christi August de origine animae lib. 1. c. 9. nisi pro eis qui membra sunt Christi Who may offer the body of Christe but for them whiche are the members of Christe The late holy general Councel of Trent approuing this sentence of S. Augustine Masses common not priuate and wherfore Concil Trident. Sess. 22. cap. 6. and declaring that the Masses whereat no man communicateth besides the Priest be not priuate but common saith that they ought to be iudged common partely for that the people in them doth communicate spiritually partly for that they be celebrated by the publique Minister of the Churche not for him selfe onely but for al the Faithful that pertaine to the Body of Christe When therefore Petrus à Soto that learned man was demaunded in that Councel whether Chaunteries might be erected and Masses appointed to be said for Infidels he answered that it was vnlawful bicause to ordeine Masse for any is to ordeine that Sacrifice for them be offered and that to them thereby satisfaction be applied whiche ought not to be done bicause satisfaction requireth before a remission of the deadly faulte Yet wel may it be said he that Prayer in the Masse for their Conuersion be made Our Sauiour him selfe semeth to haue insinuated this propertie of the Oblation when offering vp his body and bloude at the Supper after the fourme and rite of Melchisedek not without cause he said of the one Lucae 22. whiche for you is geuen of the other whiche for you Math. 26 and for many is shed that is to say is presently offered vp and shed in Mysterie anonne with outward violence to be shed in remission of sinnes For as touching the valour of the price it was offered vpon the Crosse not for many but for al. And so the Sacrifice of Melchisedek obteined the benediction for iuste Abraham who is the example and paterne of al that folow him This iudge I to be the chiefe cauâ—e why in the Primitiue Churche as we finde in S. Dionysius the Areopagite when true discipline was exactly kepte Ecclesiast Hierarch c. 3 part 5. the learners of the faith before they receiued Baptisme then called Catechumeni they that were possessed of vncleane sprites called Energumeni Publique Sinners and they that did publique penaunce were commaunded by the Deacon to departe out of the Churche before the Oblation that they should not be present at it Yet as it is here before said and as it is cleare by S. Paul 1. Tim. 2. in a certaine general and coÌ„mon respecte we offer for
of these Sacrifices and both may wel stand together Rom. 15. Origen in Epist. ad Ro. lib. 10. Where he saith S. Paule speaketh of him self in this sense saying Sacrifico Euangelium Dei I sacrifice the Ghospel of God and Origen Sacrificale opus est annunciare Euangelium It is a worke of Sacrifice to preach the Gospel What sense meaneth he or what sense would he his Reader to conceiue sith that he spake no worde of any sense before He spake onely of a certaine delite that the olde learned Fathers had in vsing wordes which after the promulgation of the Gospel signified nothing extant nor practised I trow therefore he meant that S. Paule had also that delite which he pretendeth Now true it is that S. Paule hath nowhere these very wordes Sacrifico Euangelium Dei I sacrifice the Gospel of God Neither be the woordes Origens that he ascribeth to Origen but S. Hieromes who added vnto and tooke from Origens fifteen vnperfite bookes vpon the Epistle to the Romains and disposed that whole worke as he thought best as it appeareth by his Epistle to Heraclius The place which he meaneth Rom. 15. is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for which the common Latine bookes haue sanctificans Euangelium Dei Erasmus administrans S. Augustine consecrans which worde liketh Caluine and the same he pteferreth before Erasmus worde whiche notwithstanding the translatours of the Englishe newe Testament folowed Al which interpretations be too obscure Beza in Annot. in no. test as Beza iudgeth and therefore he liketh his owne best Operans Euangelio Dei as his Maister Caluine liked his owne better then that of Erasmus S. Hierome confesseth it to be more highly and with a more magnificēce spoken in Greke then he was hable fully to expresse in Latine Yet as being destitute of a fuller and perfiter worde he turneth the Greke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into sacrificans and saith that to preach the Gospel is a sacrificing worke and there plainely declareth how Now though it be graunted that both S. Paule alluded to the manner and condition of the Sacrifices of Moyses lawe and S. Hierome consydered the same in his exposition of that place yet thereof it wil not folowe that when so euer the olde Learned Fathers speake of the external visible and singular Sacrifice of the Churche they meane that there is no real Sacrifice in deede but onely in a figuratiue speache M Ievvel for the most part so argueth that he impugneth one truth by an other truth This Argument is naught pardy as M. Iewel knoweth him selfe S. Paule saith he consecrated the Gospel as it were a Sacrifice throughe preaching of the same offering vp the beleeuers as Hostes vnto God Item Saint Hierome for that respecte calleth preaching of the Ghospel a sacrificing worke Ergo the Fathers woordes spoken of the daily Sacrifice of the Churche are to be taken metaphorically onely and not properly Bothe manners of sayinges be true in their right sense the one in figuratiue the other in proper sense Who so euer aunswereth M. Iewel he must alwaies sing one song vnto him that his continual shift is to impugne one truth by an other truth The same answer serueth to the places by him alleged out of S. Gregorie Nazianzen and S. Chrysostome if S. Nazianzen haue any such wordes at al. For amongst al his Orations that be extant none beareth the title that is here noted in the margent Yet I acknowledge them to be such as he might wel haue spoken them by a metaphore M. Ievvel falsifieth S. Chrysostome The Testimonie of S. Chrysostome he hath fouly falsified with vntrue translation For whereas he found these wordes in S. Chrysostome Ipsum mihi Sacerdotium est praedicare Euagnelizare he hath thus translated it into English My whole priesthoode is to teach and to preach the Ghospel As though ipsum in Latine signified whole in English and as though it were true that S. Paules Priesthode consisted wholy and altogether in preaching the Ghospel whereas he confesseth him selfe to haue baptized Crispus 1. Cor. 1. and Caius and the householde of Stephana and it is not to be doubted but he consecrated and ministred also the blessed Sacrament of Christes body and bloude and where occasion so required loosed and retained synnes Which three functions be diuerse from the preaching of the Ghospel Whereby it is cleare that S. Paules whole Priesthode consisted not in preaching But these men would faine inclose al Priestly office within the limittes of preaching For so should our whole Religion consiste in prating so few Sacramentes would serue so the continual Sacrifice should ceasse so should Hostlers and Tapsters occupie the Pulpittes and what other so euer lewd Iackes could chatte and chapter their matters they should be admitted to the gouernement of soules And thus thinke they Papistrie should quit be throwen doune and their glorious Ghospel be set vp But S. Chrysostomes meaning was vpon occasion of S. Paules worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 15. whereby he signified the excellencie of his Office deducing his talke from the inferiour and common terme Latria that apperteineth to al whereof he spake in the beginning to termes of an higher and more speciall dignitie to wit Liturgia and Hierurgia which import Priestly Office his meaning I say was partely to declare that S. Paules preaching was a certaine Priesthode forasmuche as by the same he offered vp those that beleued as a sacrifice vnto God their outwarde man killed and carnal affections quite mortified for which cause he calleth the Gospel his sworde Machaera mea Euangelium est the Gospel which is the worde of preaching Chrysosto in epist. ad Romanos homil 29. is my sworde partely also to signifie that of al other offices and dueties the chiefe function of S. Paules Priesthode was to preach the Gospel according to that him selfe witnesseth Non misit me Christus baptizare sed euangelizare Christe sent me not to baptize 1. Cor. 1. but to preache Which wordes Thephylacte expounding wherein he foloweth the vaine of S. Chrysostome saith expressely that although the Apostle were not sent specially to baptize yet he was not forebidden to take that office vpon him M. Iewel not being ignorant of al this I see not what he can pretend for any colorable excuse of his false translation specially directed to so wicked an ende as of him it is which is either quit to abolish the external and true Priesthode of the newe Testament or to abridge it onely to a bare preaching of Gods wordes al other functions therevnto belonging as to baptize to loose and binde synnes to consecrate and offer vp to God the body and bloude of Christe to minister the other Sacramentes and the like clearely excluded Thus I hope thou perceiuest Reader what miserable and shameful an entrie M. Iewel hath ben driuē to make to come to his purpose whiche was to impugne the most worthy and
healthful Sacrifice of Christes body and bloude and to persuade vnlearned soules there is no such Sacrifice really offered vnto God by Priestes of the newe Testament The summe of M. Ievvels shiftes against the Sacrifice Wherevpon I haue stayd somewhat the lenger because I sawe how by guileful persuasions he went about to engraffe at the beginning in the myndes of the vnlearned First that man for cause of his miserable and mortal condition ought not to presume to offer vp the Immortal Sonne of God in a real Sacrifice vnto his Father nexte that by Scripture there appeareth no graunt af auctoritie or warrant so to doo lastly that the termes Sacrificer Sacrifice and Aulter be onely naked and empty termes void of any substance signified that is in the Churche as deriued out of the Lawe of Moyses and vsed by the olde learned Fathers for their delite Al which three pointes how farre wyde they be from truth it may partely appeare by that I haue already said and shal more fully appeare in the processe of this Reioindre Now let vs heare M. Iewel Iewel Novve to comme to M. Hardinges vvoordes Three waies saith he Christ is offered vp vnto his Father In a Figure as in the Olde Lawe In Deede and Blouddily as vpon the Crosse In a Sacrament or Mysterie as in the Newe Testament Of vvhiche three vvaies the Blouddy Oblation of Christe vpon the Crosse is the very true and onely Propitiatorie Sacrifice for the Sinnes of the vvorlde The other tvvo as in respecte and manner of Signifieing they are sundrie so in effecte and substance they are al one For like as in the Sacramentes of the olde Lavve vvas expressed the Death of Christe that vvas to comme Euen so in the Sacramentes of the nevve Lavve of the Ghospel is expressed the same Death of Christe already paste As vvee haue Mysteries so had they Mysteries As vvee Sacrifice Christe so did they Sacrifice Christe As the Lambe of God is slaiue vnto vs So vvas the same Lambe of God slaine vnto them S. Augustine saithe August De vtilitate poenitent cap. 1. Tunc Christus Venturus modò Christus Venit Venturus Venit diuersa verba sunt sed idem Christus Then was Christe shal comme Nowe is Christe Is comme Shall comme and Is comme are sundrye woordes But Christe is al one Againe in like comparison bytvveene the Lavve of Moyses and the Gospel of Christe he saith thus August in Ioannem tract 26. Videte Fide manente Signa variata In Signis diuersis eadem Fides Beholde the Faith remaininge the Sacramentes or Signes are changed The Signes or Sacramentes beinge diuers the Faith is one Harding Now then that after your Preface you come to my woordes M. Iewell what haue you to replye against them that to any learned man may seeme to be to the purpose I said Christe is offered after three manners figuratiuely truely with bloudshedding and sacramentally or in Mysterie With which parte of this threefold Diuision finde you fault As for the two first partes they be clearely proued by the Scriptures The third is that ye call in question and whiche you impugne Bicause you had nothing to say against the two first least your mater should seeme to haue a foile if you yelded to any thing that were by me saied were it neuer so true you goe from the purpose and enter into other talke M. Ievvel diuerteth from the purpose to impertinēt mater Whereof as parte is false so the whole is impertinent What nede was there to tel vs that the bloudy Oblation of Christe vpon the Crosse is the Propitiatorie Sacrifice for the sinnes of the worlde As thereof no man doubted so no man spake of it The point now treated is not whether the Sacrifice of the Crosse be Propitiatorie for it were superfluous thereof to dispute but whether Christe be now offered vp in Mysterie Graunt that first and afterward we may procede further to discusse whether the Sacrifice of the Aulter be Propitiatorie and in what sense it be Propitiatorie Of what effecte and substance so euer the Sacrifices of both Lawes be how so euer the Death of Christe to come or past be expressed in the olde and newe Sacramentes that they of the olde Testament as wel as we had Mysteries of the equalitie and likenesse of Sacrifices and of like slaiyng of the Lambe of God on their parte and ours of all these thinges so particularly to speake the Diuision by me declared ministred you no iuste occasion And al this might wel be suffred to go vnanswered as impertinent had you not by the way as it were spitten forth some poison of erroneous doctrine to the infection of the vnlearned and vnware Readers For by calling the bloudy Oblation of Christe vpon the Crosse the very true and onely Sacrifice Propitiatorie for the synnes of the worlde which no man denieth your meaning is to insinuate that the vnbloudy Sacrifice which Christe instituted at his last Supper of his body and bloude were not in dede a Sacrifice in any sense or respecte Propitiatorie Whereas if that of the Crosse was Propitiatorie the other must nedes be Propitiatorie though in a diuers degree of Propitiation bicause in substance of the thing offered it is one with the other but diuers in the manner of offering as being vnbloudy and done in a mysterie and the other bloudy and don in the forme of a visible body And the force and vertue of Propitiation of the one issueth not from the Priest but from the Propitiation of the other in whose cōmemoration it is offered Cyprianus de coe Do. Verely S. Cyprian sticketh not to cal the holy Euchariste Medicamentum ad sanandas infirmitates holocaustum ad purgandas iniquitates A medicine to heale sickenesses and a wholeburnt Sacrifice to cleanse iniquities Baesilius in Liturg. S. Basile also in his Liturgie making his supplication saith thus Da Domine vt pro nostris peccatis populi ignorantijs acceptum sit Sacrificium nostrum Graunt Lorde that our Sacrifice may be acceptable for our sinnes and for the ignorances of the people Whereas you affirme the other two waies after which Christe is offered that is to say the Sacrifices of the olde Lawe and the singular Sacrifice of the Church now to be one in effecte and substance as they are sundrye in respecte Three vntruthes vttered at once by M. Ievvel and manner of signifiyng you vtter three greate vntruthes at once For first as concerning the respecte of signifiyng in our Sacrifice the formes of Breade and Wine doo signifie the Bodie and Bloude of Christe as the Sacrifices of the olde Lawe signified Christe And although they signifie Christ present and the other absent yet in respecte of signifiyng they agree and therfore are not sundry therin The respect of signifiyng is one and the thing signified is one though the manner of signifiyng be diuers That the substāce of the
they Sacrifice Christe you vtterly take away the Real Sacrifice of the newe Testamente Wherein being a very weighty pointe you dissent from the Catholike Churche for which you and your felowes be condēned of the Churche and holden for Heretiks This haue I auouched and sufficiently proued in myne Aunswere to this 17. Article of your Chalenge What you reply against the same here in the processe of this Reioindre by Gods grace I shal confute To make your vntrue and heretical saying appeare the more tollerable to the vnlearned you ioine vnto it a saying that in a righte construction may be admitted As the Lambe of God is slaine vnto vs say you so was the same Lambe of God slaine vnto them In deede if you meane a newe actual sleying of Christ who is the true Lambe of God he is not now in the daily Sacrifice of the Church slaine no more then he was slaine in the daily sacrifices or in the yerely Passeouer of the Iewes But for asmuch as in our daily Sacrifice we haue the true Body and Bloude of the Lambe of God Ioan. 1. that taketh away the sinnes of the worlde laid vpon the holy table which is the Aulter sacrificed of Priestes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Nicen Councel saith that is to say without killinge and bloudshed In consideration hereof you should not haue saied as we sacrifice Christ so did they sacrifice Christ. For though in our Sacrifice we sley not Christ the true Lambe of God as they slewe the Lambes which prefigured Christ yet so farre as that is true which the Fathers of the Nicen Councel reporte and as by vertue of Christes almighty wordes according to his commaundement and Institution his Body and Bloud are consecrate and really present we offer vp Christe in deede vnto God in the Sacrifice of the Church For proufe of the real presence I referre the Reader who vnderstandeth not the Latine tongue to sundry learned workes written in the Englishe tongue in our time therof In which he shal finde the mater so largely so clearely and so substantially proued that he shal confesse he seeth the same onlesse he wil as some doo wilfully blindefolde him self and say in midday it is darke night Forasmuch then as we sacrifice Christ truely bicause we haue and offer vp in our sacrifice the truth of the body and Bloude of Christ in deede present by th' almighty power of his owne worde after which sorte the Iewes had not Christ present therefore it is not true that you say that as we sacrifice Christe so did they sacrifice Christe Diuersite in the Sacramentes of both Lavves Touching the comparison you make betwen the Sacramentes of both Lawes for now soudeinly you chop from the Sacrifices into the Sacramentes in expressing Christes death then to come and nowe paste whereby you go about to proue the equal valewe of both Sacramentes notwithstanding that both do expresse or signifie though in diuers degree the death of Christ yet doth our Sacrament of the Aulter farre surmount theirs bicause in ours is conteyned the very body and bloude of Christ in theirs was nothing but a figure in theirs the shadow in ours the body The place you allege out of the booke de vtilitate Poenitentiae that you attribute to S. Augustine contrary to the censure of Erasmus serueth you to no purpose We agree vnto it no lesse then your selfe In that place the authour speaketh of the spiritual meate which the Iewes did eate the same as we do And that meate he wil both to be Christ teaching how they did eate Christe Aug. de Vtilitate Poenitentiae whom we do eate The whole processe there is to be vnderstanded of the spiritual eatinge for so he saieth Quicunque in Manna Christum intellexerunt eundem quem nos cibum spiritalem manducauerunt Quicunque autem de Manna solam saturitatem quaesierunt patres infidelium manducauerunt mortui sunt Sic etiam eundem potum Petra enim Christus Eundem ergo potum sed spiritalem id est qui fide capiebatur non qui corpore hauriebatur Who so euer in the Manna vnderstoode Christe they did eate the same spiritual meate that we eate But who so euer sought onely to fil their bellies by eating Manna being the Fathers of the vnfaithful they did eate and dyed So likewise they dranke the same drinke For the Rocke was Christe And therefore the same drinke which we drinke they dranke but spiritual that is to say whiche was receiued by faith not that whiche was taken in by the body Now what though Christe whome both the Iewes and we do eate spiritually be one spiritual meate one Christe and likewise one spiritual drinke as he is eaten and dronken with spiritual eating and drinking Shal that therefore whiche we receiue in our Sacrament by sacramental eating and drinking vnder the formes of bread and wine be no better then that which they did eate and drinke in the ceremonie of their Sacramentes Christe that was to come and Christ that now is come is one Christe thereof who doubteth And though the wordes shal come and is come be sundry yet Christe is one Christe is not sundred with diuision of times And this is al that the auctour meant wherein lyeth no controuersie betwixte vs. But that you woulde proue and can not proue and we vtterly denye is this that the thing and substance of the Sacramentes of both Lawes be not sundry but one and the same and of equal worthines We receiue Christ both sacramentally to wit his true and real body and bloude in the Sacrament of the Aulter vnder the formes of bread and wine and also spiritually that is to say by faith They receiued him only spiritually bicause in Manna they vnderstode Christ. The like is to be sayd of the water that flowed out of the Rocke which they dranke in comparison of the very bloude of Christe which we drinke not onely spiritually but also sacramentally and in deede vnder the forme of wine mingled with water which bloude is the true water of life the same that issued out of our Lordes body the true Rocke after it was striken with the Rodde Exod. 15. Aug. Tractatu de vtilitate Poenitentiae that is to say after that the Crosse came vnto it For in figure thereof the olde Rocke was striken with woodde and not with Iron quia Crux ad Christum accessit vt nobis gratiam propinaret bicause the Crosse came vnto Christ that it might * Propinaret brince his grace vnto vs as saith S. Augustine or who so euer was the author of that booke The other place that you pretende to allege out of S. Augustine M. Ievv forgeth sayinges of his ovvn fathering them vpon the Doctours In Iohannem Tractat. 26. is soone answered where so euer it be it is not there Thus to forge sayinges of your owne and to beare your Reader in hande it is S. Augustines or
any other learned Fathers is a very false parte and such as must nedes much discredit you when it is detected against you And yet by such false dealing you and your felowes haue begyled many vnlearned and vnstable soules How be it if it were S. Augustines or any other auncient Doctours saying it forced nothing For true it is the signes or sacramentes of the newe Testament be diuerse from the sacramentes of the olde Testament the faith notwithstandinge is not changed bicause Christ signified by the signes or sacramentes of both being that which faith reacheth vnto remaineth one and the same Let vs see whether your other stuffe be any better Iewel But here hath M. Hardinge donne greatte and open vvronge vnto S. Augustine vvilfully suppressing and drovvning his vvoordes and vncourteousely commaunding him to silence in the middest of his tale VVherein also appeareth some suspicion of no simple dealing S. Augustines vvoordes touchinge this vvhole mater Aug. De Fide ad Petrum Diacon cap. 19. are these In illis carnalibus Victimis Figuratio fuit Carnis Christi quam pro nobis fuerat oblaturus Sanguinis quem erat effusurus in Remissionem peccatorum In isto autem Sacrificio Gratiarum actio est Commemoratio Carnis Christi quam pro nobis obtulit Sanguinis quem pro nobis idem Deus effudit In illis Sacrificijs quid nobis esset donandum Figurate significabatur In hoc autem Sacrificio quid nobis iam donatum sit euidenter oftenditur In illis Sacrificijs praenunciabatur Filius Dei pro impijs occidendus in hoc autem pro impijs annuntiatur occisus In those Fleashly Sacrifices of the Ievves there was a Figure of the Fleashe of Christ whiche he woulde afterwarde offer for vs and of the Bloude whiche he would afterwarde shead for the Remission of Sinne But in this Sacrifice of the nevve Testament there is a Thankesgeuinge and a Remembrance of the Fleashe which he hath already offered for vs and of the Bloud which he being God hath already shead for vs. In those Sacrifices it was represented vnto vs vnder a Figure what thing should be geuen vnto vs But in this Sacâ—ifice it is plainely set foorth what thing is already geuen vs. In those Sacrifices it was declared that the Sonne of God should be slaine for the wicked But in this Sacrifice it is plainely preached vnto vs that the same Sonne of God hath already benne slaine for the wicked Likevvise againe be saith Huius Sacrificij Caro Sanguis ante Aduentum Christi per Victimas Similitudinum promittebatur Aug. Contrae Faustum lib. 20. ca. 21. in Passione per ipsam Veritatem reddebatur Post Ascensum verò Christi per Sacramentum Memoriae celebratur The fleashe and Bloude of this Sacrifice before the comming of Christ was promised by Sacrifices of Resemblance The same in his Passion vpon the Crosse was geuen in Truth and in deede But after his Ascension it is solemnized by a Sacramente of Remembrance This is the Difference that S. Augustine noteth bitvvene the SacrameÌ„tes of the Olde Lavve and the Sacramentes of the Nevve Therefore the vvoordes that M. Harding hath herevnto added Christe is offered vp vnto his Father and that vnder the Formes of Bread and VVine yea and that truely and in deede are his ovvne onely vvoordes confidently and boldely presumed of him selfe neuer vsed neither by S. Augustine nor by any other Ancient godly Father Harding Ful euil doth it become you to charge me with wrong done vnto S. Augustine wheras in the very next sentence before your self did him so much wrong as to father a saying vpon him in that place where he hath none such at al. If he be to be burthened with doing wrong vnto the Doctours that in alleging their sayinges doth not with al circumstances of the place that serueth to the present purpose set them forth then is there no man so much to be reproued as your selfe M. Iewel For of al that euer wrote we finde none that so much and with like falshode and to so euil meaning cutteth pareth and nippeth their sentences as you commonly doo Truly in laying this to my charge you haue not so clearly proued me to haue donne wrong vnto S. Augustine as you haue with the scornful vtterance of your wordes declared your owne spite Concerning the thing it selfe I haue donne S. Augustine no wrong at al. For what needed me to reherse his whole processe to the ende of the Chapter M. Iewels charge discharged I recited faithfully so muche as apperteined to the proufe of the mater for which I alleged his authoritie The sentence that foloweth belongeth to an other mater whereby is declared which no catholike man euer denied that the Sacrifice of the newe Testament is a thankes geuing and a commemoration of Christes flesh and bloude which he hath offered for vs. But that member of the diuision which I went about to establish by S. Augustines authoritie speaketh onely of the Sacrifices of the olde Lawe that they prefigured the flesh of Christ which he would afterward offer and the bloude that he would shed for remission of sinnes If I had rehersed al that you blame me for leauing it out I had but made the booke bigger and wearied the reader with a long superfluous saying superfluous I say bicause the same was in effect vttered in the next sentence before taken out also of the same S. Augustine For al that you force out of the longe processe there folowing is only the coÌ„memoration of Christes flesh and bloud offred and shed which though in fewer wordes was expressed in the former sentence out of the bookes against Faustus the Manichey as the reader by conference may sone perceiue The place of S. Augustine for leauing out whereof you so much reproue me and wherein you repose the coÌ„fidence of your doctrin helpeth you nothing at al. For there he saith not what is the substance of our Sacrifice wherein lyeth the questioÌ„ but what thing is done in our Sacrifice to wit geuing of thankes and the coÌ„memoratioÌ„ of our Lordes flesh and bloude which he offred and shed for vs and likewise what thing is shewed and declared in the same that is to say his death and passion Al which we denye not But that S. Augustine ascribing vnto the Sacrifice of the Church thankes geuing and commemoration of the flesh and bloude of Christ doth exclude the real Sacrifice of his fleshe and bloude by vertue of his woorde through the holy Ghost made substantially present that we denie vtterly And that was your parte to proue els you proue nothing againste the auncient doctrine of the Church M. Ievvel citeth one truth against an other truth But seing your selfe not hable to performe so muche you thought it an easier mater after your common woonte to set one truth against an other truth to wit the commemoration or memorie of the bloudy Sacrifice of the
interpretations and heaped phrases Once leaue your bad shifte of putting away one truth by an other truth Howe oftentimes muste we tel you the formes of bread and wine do signifie the body and bloud of Christ present not absent Againe if for proufe that these wordes which reporte Christe to be present in the blessed Sacrament of the Aulter or to be offered in the Sacrifice of the Aulter vnder the formes of bread and wine be not onely my wordes I should here also allege the place of Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus which I alleged in my Answer to the tenth Article of your Chalenge what could you reasonably replye to the contrary That auncient Father saith thus vsing the verie termes of the Scholastical Doctours Cyril Hierosol Catechisi Mystagog Christe once chaunged water into wine which is nye vnto bloude in Chana of Galiley by his onely wil and shal not he be worthy to be beleued of vs that at his last supper he chaunged wine into bloude For if being bidden to a corporal wedding he wrought a woonderous miracle shal we not much more confesse that he gaue his body and bloude vnto the children of the Spouse Wherefore with al assurednesse let vs receiue the body and bloud of Christe Hitherto reason mouing credit now folow the wordes that are specially to be noted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nam sub specie panis datur tibi corpus sub specie vini datur sanguis vt sumpto corpore sanguine Christi efficiaris ei comparticeps corporis sanguinis For vnder the forme shape shew or figure of bread the body of Christe is geuen vnto thee and vnder the shape of wine his bloud is geuen that hauing receiued the body and bloud of Christe thou maist be made coÌ„partener with him of his body and bloude Here haue you the expresse wordes teaching vs the body of Christe to be present in the SacrameÌ„t vnder the forme of bread and his bloude vnder the forme of wine which you report to be wordes of myne owne only inuention neuer vsed by any auncient Father before my tyme. Where you go about to answer to this place of S. Cyrillus in the tenth Article of your Replie to thintent the body and bloud of Christ might not be beleued to be really present in the blessed SacrameÌ„t I wish that al men saw both your weakenes and also your falshod You confesse this lerned Fathers wordes touching this point of the real presence Vvordeâ— in M. Iewels iudgemeÌ„t quicke and violent to be quicke and violent Whereby vnwares as it semeth you confesse him therein to be cleare and resolute as he is in dede To say truly violent he is not but a plaine reporter of the truth But in dede he is to quicke for dul heretikes that beleue their carnal senses rather then Christes owne most plaine wordes In the tenth Article of â—he Replie page 432. Yet he him self in plainest wise say you openeth and cleareth his owne meaning Truth it is he doth so as euery one that readeth the place as the Author reporteth it not as you haue falsified him may easily iudge Now bicause euery man hath not the booke of Cyrillus nor the booke of your Replie at hande for truthes sake and that your impudent falshod may appeare it shal be to good purpose to lay here before the Reader what you make that holy and auncient Father to say and what he saith him selfe Thus then say you falsly M. Ievvel falsifieth S. Cyrillus Hiero solym Cateches Mystagogica 4. For thus he writethâ— Ne consideres tanquam panem nuduÌ„ Panis Eucharistiae non est amplius panis simplex nudus Consider not as if it were bare bread The bread of the Sacrament is no lenger bare and simple breade Which wordes are naturally resolued thus It is bread how be it not only bare bread but bread and some other thing elles beside And there after a few wordes you conclude thus Of these wordes of Cyrillus we may wel reason thus by the way The Sacrament is not onlyâ— or bare bread therefore it is bread albeit not only bare bread And thus the same Cyrillus that is brought to testiâ—ie that there remaineth no bread in the Sacrament testifieth most plainely to the contrary that there is bread remaining in the Sacrament Caâ—echo Myst. 4. On the other side S. Cyrillus truly alleged saith thus Ne consideres tanquà m panem nudum vinum nudum corpus enim est sanguis Christi secundùm ipsius Domini verba Quamuis enim sensus hoc tibi suggesserit tamen fides te confirmet ne ex gusturem iudices quin potius habeas ex fide pro certissimo ita vt nulla subeat dubitatio esse tibi donata corpus sanguinem Doo not consider it as bare breade and bare wine for it is the body and bloude of Christe according vnto the wordes of our Lorde him selfe For although thy sense make that suggestion vnto thee yet let faith strengthen thee that thou iudge not the thing by thy taste but rather that of thy faith thou hold it as a most certaintie so as thou be void of al doubt that the body and bloud are geuen to thee These wordes being truly alleged doo clearely open the meaning of Cyrillus Your false forgeries and corruptions doo vndoubtedly declare that you seeke not the truth but intende deceit False doctrine must be mainteined by false meanes If you had meant good faith and truth you would truly and faithfully haue recited that holy Fathers woordes without such mangling and chaunging Now to vse your owne Rhetorike you haue done him great and open wrong wilfully suppressing and drowning his wordes and vncourteously commaunding him to silence in the middest of his tale Why did you not consider the force of his counsel which is that a Christen man regarde not the suggestion of his senses but stay him selfe vpon his faith not iudging of this high Mysterie what the sense of sight or tast geueth but with a simple faith beleuing the wordes that Christ spake In al S. Cyrillus you find not this order of wordes Panis Eucharistiae non est amplius panis simplex nudus The bread of the Sacrament is no lenger bare and simple breade as you turne it and ascribe it vnto S. Cyrillus By occasion of which wordes you tel vs of your natural resolution and beare vs in hande it is bread how be it not only or bare bread Which is no natural resolution gathered of S. Cyrillus wordes but a crafty collusion wroong out of your owne forged woordes to enuegle the ignorant Now S. Cyrillus wordes be these not in the fourth Catechesis as you haue quoted your booke but in the third where he speaketh of the holy Oile QuemadmoduÌ„ saith he Panis Eucharistiae In cateches 3. My stigogica post sancti spiritus inuocationem non amplius est panis communis sed est corpus Christi sic
of killed hostes you turne it thus barely sine Sacrificio oblatus offered without sacrifice but vntrulyâ— as I haue said before This place serueth you to no purpose M. Ievv falsifieth S Auguâ—â—ine bicause false translation ought not to make proufe against the truth S. Augustines wordes against Faustus Contra Faustum Manich. lib. 20. cap. 21. you haue also falsified and least you should be taken with the manner you leaue out the Latine and allege them onely in your owne English Whereas he nameth the flesh and bloude of this sacrifice least they might seme to importe a real presence of Cristes body and bloude as they doo in dede you haue put in steede therof the death of Christ. Which declareth your meaning not to be simple and plaine and the same in an other your selfe would not let passe without note of vntrue dealing Chrysost. In epist. ad Heb. Hom. 17. And where S. Chrysostome saith Hoc sacrificium exemplar est illius this Sacrifice is a sampler of that Sacrifice If you had meant good faith and truth you would not so haue nipped that Father and stopped him of his tale For it foloweth in the same sentence immediatly id ipsum semper offerimus M. Ievv falsifieth S. Chrysostome by nipping we offer alwaies that one selfe Sacrifice And that we should knowe certaynely that he meant not a signe or an example of the true sacrifice onely as you doo but the same it self in substance he saith in the same place Pontifex noster ille est qui hostiam mundantem nos obtulit ipsam offerimus nunc quae tunc oblata quidem consumi non potest He is our high Bishop who hath offred vp the Sacrifice or hoste that cleanseth vs the same do we also offer nowe which then being offred can not be consumed Hereupon might a plaine man demaunde of you who is our high Bishop Is it not Christ what is that hoste or sacrifice which purgeth and cleanseth vs from the filth of our synnes Is it any other then the precious body of Christ What can you answer then to S. Chrysostom saying that we now also offer vp the same And this is that for which you make so muche a doo at me for saying that Christ is offered vp in the Sacrifice of the Churche vnder the formes of breade and wine truly and in deede not in respecte of the manner of offering but in respecte of his very body and bloude really present And thus my woordes whiche you would so faine carpe be grounded as you see vpon a truth taught by the Councel of Nice and by S. Chrysostome In the other place of S. Augustine you haue very fowly demeaned your selfe M Ievvel corrupteth S. Augustine You haue snatched a peece of a sentence out of him and hauing framed it to an other sense then he meant by your common sleight of falsifying and vntrue tanslation you set it forth so as to the vnlearned it may make some shew for your side against the Catholike doctrine that we mainteine touching the Sacrifice of the Aulter And some learned also may haply be deceiued if they looke not better to your fingers and by view and confereÌ„ce of the booke espie out your false legierdemaine August de ciuit Dei lib. 10. ca. 5. S. Augustine saith say you Quod ab omnibus appellatur sacrificium signum est veri sacrificij The thing that of al menne is called a sacrifice is a token or signe of the true Sacrifice Who reading these wordes at the first being persuaded you haue plaid a true mans parte in alleging them would not thinke they made much for your negatiue doctrine which denyeth the true and real Sacrifice of the Churche and auoucheth al that is done in the Masse to be but a signe a remembrance and a voide representation Voide I say bicause ye take away the substance of the thing it selfe to wit the body and bloud of Christe Now S. Augustine in that place S. Augustine truly expouÌ„â—ded neither speaketh as you make him speake and much lesse meaneth he as with your falsified allegation you would force vpon him In that chapter he treateth of outward sacrifices and of the inward or spiritual sacrifices And preferring the spiritual sacrifices before the other he sheweth how the outward sacrifices made by the Fathers of the olde Testament with slaughter of beastes were significations of our spiritual sacrifices that is to say of those thinges which be done by vs to this ende that we cleaue vnto God and that vnto the same ende we helpe foreward our neighbour Of these he saith that God requireth them and that he is wel pleased with them Of the other that he requireth not them nor hath great liking in them After certaine places alleged out of the Scriptures for declaration and proufe hereof at length he commeth to the woordes whereof you would take holde against this special and singular Sacrifice of the Churche and saith De ciuit lib. 10. cap. 5. Oseae 6. Per hoc vbi scriptum est misericordiam magis volo quà m Sacrificium nihil aliud quà m Sacrificium Sacrificio praelatum oportet intelligi quoniam illud quod ab homenibus appellatur sacrificium signum est veri sacrificij Porrò autem misericordia verum Sacrificium est vnde dictum est Heb. 13. quod paulò ante commemoraui Talibus enim sacrificijs placatur Deus Whereas it is written I would haue mercie rather then sacrifice hereby we must vnderstand nothing els but that sacrifice is preferred before sacrifice forasmuch as that which is called sacrifice of men is a signe of a true sacrifice And as for mercie it is a true sacrifice In consideration whereof it is said whereof I spake euen now with such sacrifices that is to saye with almose and deedes of charitie God is appeased In the ende of that discourse he concludeth thus Quaecunque igitur c. What so euer thinges therefore we reade to haue bene commaunded by God diuers waies concerning sacrifices in the ministerie of the Tabernacle or of the Temple they are referred to the loue of God and of our neighbour thereby to be signified By due conference and consideration of this whole place and of the discourse there treated thou maist euidently see good Reader how litle M. Iewel is to be trusted when he bringeth ought out of any olde Doctor that semeth not to agree with the doctrine of the Catholike Church He would thee to beleue that S. Augustine spake of the special and singular Sacrifice of the Churche whereof we treate which Sacrifice in dede is of al men called a sacrifice and worthily for so it is But that by verdite of S. Augustine it is a signe of the true Sacrifice as though thereby were meant the same not to be the true Sacrifice and therefore no true and real Sacrifice at al therein lyeth much falshoode For neither speaketh Saint Augustine there of the
the general teaching of al the Fathers Christe did institute it not onely to be receiued as a necessary foode but also to be offered as an healthful Sacrifice Cyprian de Caen. Dom. medicamentum holocaustum existens ad sanandas infirmitates purgandas iniquitates ◠being a medicine and sacrifice to heale infirmities and to purge iniquities as S. Cyprian saith Lib. 4.32 He taught the new oblation of the new Testament saith S. Irenaeus That I haue sufficiently proued the Real presence of Christes body and bloude in the Sacrament the Answer I made to the fifth Article of your Chalenge doth witnes to as many as be not lead with lewde and blind affection to your syde As for the shiftes of your Replie thereunto they are so detected and fully confuted and the Real presence otherwise so substantially proued by M. D. Saunder and M. D. Heskins that euery meane witte may easely see the weaknes of your cause The 2. Diuision The Ansvver THe two first manners of the offeringe of Christe our aduersaries acknowledge and confesse The thirde they denie vtterly And so they robbe the Churche of the greatest treasure it hath or may haue the Bodie and Bloud of our Sauiour Christe once offered vpon the Crosse with paineful suffering for our redemption and now daiely offered in the blessed Sacramente in remembrance For which we haue so many proufes as for no one pointe of our Christian religion moe And herein I am more encombred with store then straighted with lacke and doubte more what I may leaue then what I may take Wherefore thinking it shal appeare to the wise more skille to shewe discretion in the choise of places rather then learning in recital of number though we are ouer peartely thereto prouoked by M. Iuelles vauntinge and insolent chalenge I intende herein to be short verily shorter then so large a mater requireth and to bring for proufe a fewe suche auctorities I meane a fewe in respecte of the multitude that might be brought as ought in euery mannes iudgement to be of great weight and estimation Iewel Touching the Oblation of Christes Bodie vvee beleue and Confesse as much as the holy Ghost hath opened in the Scriptures VVhere as M. Harding saith Christes Bodie is offred vp by the Priest vnto God the Father in remembrance of that Bodie that Christe him selfe offered vpon the Crosse He seemeth not to consider the inconstancie and folie of his ovvne tale For it is vvel knovven to al Creatures not onely Christians but also Ievves Turckes and Saracenes that Christ vvas Crucified vpon the Crosse But that Christe should be sacrificed by a Mortal man Inuisibly and as they say vnder the Formes of Bread and vvine and that Really and in deede it is a thinge so far passinge the common sense of Christian knovvledge that the best learned and vvisest of the Ancient learned Christian Fathers coulde neuer knovv it Therefore this is not onely the proouing of a thinge knovven by a thinge vnknovven and of a thinge moste certaine by a thinge vncertaine but also the Confirmation of a manifest Trueth by an open Errour Neither do vvee robbe the Churche of God of that most Heauenly and moste comfortable Sacrifice of Christes Bodie But rather vvee open and disclose the errours vvherevvith certaine of late yeeres haue vvilfully deceiued the Churche of God Esay 53. VVee knovv That Christes Bodie was rente for our Sinnes and that by his VVounds wee are made whole 1. Pet. 2. That Christe in his Bodie caried our Sinnes vpon the Tree Heb. 9. And by the Oblation thereof once made vpon the Crosse Actor 4. bath sanctified vs for euer aud hath purchased for vs euerlastinge Redēption And That there is none other Name or Sacrifice vnder Heauen whereby wee can be saued but onely the name and Sacrifice of Iesus Christe I recken◠vvho so teacheth this Doctrine leaueth not the Churche of God vvithout a Sacrifice Touchinge the multitude of Authorities vverevvith M. Harding findeth him selfe so muche encombred the greater his stoare is the more vvil vvise men require his discretion and skil in the choise His choise vvil seeme vnskilful if he allege his Authorities biside his purpose His purpose and promise is to prooue that the Priest hath good vvarrant to offer vp Christe the Sonne of God vnto his Father VVhiche purpose if he neuer vouchesaue once to touche but range abroade as his manner is and roaue idlely at maters impertinent then muste vvee needes say He bevvraieth his vvante and bringeth his greate Stoare out of credit So shal the offer that is gently made him seeme to stande vpon good and conuenient termes of Trueth and Modestie So shal his stoareful Vaunte of al thinges perfourming nothing vnto the vvise to vse his ovvne vvordes seeme pearte and insolent Harding In your 2. Diuision though you be shorte yet you spende many moe wordes then either were nedeful or imported any direct answer M. Ievvel faineth me to say that I say not◠and therto directeth his Replie reason or learning You pretend that to be said by me which I say not and then as your manner is fighting with my shadow which you set before you by your owne fained imagination you come not to answer the point directly but speake altother inconsideratly Had that bene my tale whiche you tel for me wherein shewe you inconstancie and folie to be in it whereof you note the fame For say you not onely Christians but also Iewes Turkes Saracens you might haue added also the Deuil whose knowledge is great know that Christe was crucified vpon the Crosse. This much I graunt what conclude you But say you againe that he is sacrificed by a mortal man inuisibly vnder the formes of bread and wine the auncient Fathers could neuer know it Here I stoppe you and this I denie And what cause I haue to denie it I haue in the Diuision before shewed After this you come vnto your Conclusion wherein appeareth in deede both the inconstancie and folie of your tale Therefore say you of me in effecte I prooue a thing knowen by a thing vnknowen and a thing certaine by a thing vncertaine and confirme manifest truth by open errour Here if I would folow you and set forth the peeuishnes of your Argument by telling you how the Maior or first Prorosition is impertinent the Minor false being the Negatiue of our Question which being denied of me was very absurdly brought by you in the Premisses nor Moode nor Figure nor iust disposition of the termes duely obserued the Conclusion not folowing of the Premisses in right order of a Syllogismus I should bestowe many woordes to prooue that a foolish Argument whiche thereof without any curiouse shewing of Logique of it selfe geueth witnesse What leadeth you to thinke that by the vnbloudy Sacrifice of the Churche which you cal a thing vncertaine I go about to prooue the Sacrifice of the Crosse whiche I graunt to be certaine
and to confirme that most manifest truth by this other Sacrifice which you and they of your side denie By what one woorde can you gather that to haue bene myne intent If it were not as most certainely it was not for what neede was there to bring any proufe for the Sacrifice of Christe vpon the Crosse why bestow you so many wordes to prooue your beleefe touching that Sacrifice I said not that ye robbed the Churche of the Sacrifice done vpon the Crosse For of that being now paste how can ye robbe the Churche But of the body and bloude of Christe as it is daily offered at the Aulter in remembrance of his Death and Passion of the Presence of the body and bloud and of the Sacrifice of the same in mysterie which the Churche from the Apostles time hitherto hath euer celebrated you robbe the Churche and of that spake I expressely as my wordes be plaine and thereof your selfe could not be ignorant Whether the Sacramentaries rob the Churche of her greatest treasure But how doo you auoide the crime of spoiling the Churche of her greatest treasure Bicause forsooth ye know and teach that Christe suffered death for vs vpon the Crosse. As though the Heretikes haue not alwaies acknowledged and confessed the same Arius confessed Christe was God and the Sonne of God yet he robbed him of his equalitie of Godhed of his coeternitie and of his consubstantialitie with God his Father In like sorte although ye beleue neuer so constantly and preach neuer so ernestly that Christe shed his bloude and died for vs vpon the Crosse yet shal ye be accompted to robbe the Chruche of her chiefe treasure onlesse ye leaue vnto her the real flesh and bloude of Christe by oblation and participation whereof the effect of the Sacrifice made vpon the Crosse is transferred vnto vs. Cyprian de coena Domini Origen in Lucam Hom. 38. Concilium Nicenum Concilium Ephesin Ye shal defraude her touching foode Alimonia immortalitatis portione vitae aeternae of the foode of immortalitie and of the portion of life euerlasting as S. Cyprian saith Pane vitae epulo incorrupto of the bread of life of the banket that is incorruptible as Origen writeth Of the Pledges of our Resurrection as the Nicen Councel determineth Of the flesh verely geuing life and proper to the Worde it selfe as the Councel of Ephesus declareth to be shorte of the meate of Angels as S. Ambros testifieth Ye shal rob her touching the Sacrifice Diony Ecclesia Hiâ—rarch c. 3. Augu. lib. 9. Confess cap. 12. Concil Nicen. Hostia salutari of the healthful Hoste as S. Dionyse calleth it of the permanent and alwaies continuing burnt offering as S. Cyprian esteemeth it of the Sacrifice of our Raunsome as S. Augustine termeth it Finally of the Lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the worlde as the Councel of Nice teacheth What iudge you They that violently take from the Churche of Christe these thinges seme they not to rob her of the gratest treasure she hath though they preach that Christe died vpon the Crosse for vs neuer so busily Doo they not leaue her without a Sacrifice and therefore without a Religion according vnto S. Cyprians mynde Doo not they take the next way to abolishe that which faith and coÌ„trition presupposed is the chiefest meane to apply vnto vs the benefite of Christes death by abolishing the daily Sacrifice S. Gregorie saith Gregor Hom. 37. Dialog 4. cap. 58. Quoties ei hostiam suae passionis offerimus toties nobiâ— ad absolutionem nostram ipsius passionem reparamus As often as we offer vnto him the Sacrifice of his passion so ofte doo we repaire and renew vnto our selfe his passion to our absolution Al this notwithstanding touching the Oblation of Christes body you saye that ye beleue and confesse as much as the Holy Ghoste hath opened in the Scriptures That Christ offered vp his body at his last Supper But how vntruly this is spoken who vnderstandeth not For the holy Ghost hath opened in the Gospel that Christe made an Oblation of his body and bloude at his last Supper which you M. Iewel and your felowes wil not beleue That Christe made such a Sacrifice and that the same is reueled in the Gospel if you wil not beleue the Catholike Church that is to be beleued before any one man August in Psalm 33. Concio 1. yet may it please you to beleue S. Augustine with these woordes recording the same Erat vt nostis Sacrificium Iudaeorum anteà secundùm ordinem Aaron in victimis pecorum hoc in mysterio Nondum enim erat sacrificium corporis sanguinis quod fideles nôrunt qui Euangelium legerunt quod sacrificium nunc diffusum est toto orbe terrarum The sacrifice of the Iewes was as ye knowe before after the order of Aaron in Sacrifices of brute beastes and that in mysterie For the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe which the faithful and they that haue read the Gospel do know was not as yet The which Sacrifice is now dispersed abroade in the whole worlde The Sacrifice of Christe auouched in the Gospel in the iudgement of S. Augustine Now marke good Reader S. Augustine saith that the faithful and so many as haue perused the Gospel doo knowe the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe What shal we say then Is not that Sacrifice opened by the holy Ghoste in the Scriptures And least any man should mystake him and thinke him to speake of the Sacrifice of Christes body and bloud made vpoÌ„ the Crosse on the mounte of Caluarie without the gates of Ierusalem he declareth his meaning Sacrifice spred ouer the worlde and nameth plainely the Sacrifice which is now spred and made thorough out the whole worlde Which Sacrifice of Christes body and bloude can be none other but that which the Church hath ben accustomed to offer vp to God in the Masse vnder the visible formes of bread and wine in remembrance of Christes Passion Resurrection Ascension and other his great benefites Cauil not M. Iewel vpon wordes commonly vsed by the Churche for a more certaine explication and the better to repel the wrangling obiections of the Sacramentarie Heretikes sithens the tyme of BereÌ„garius The Sacrifice that we defende is which S. Augustine confesseth the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe which succeded the Sacrifices of the Iewes that were of brute beastes which al Christian people and the faithful that read the newe Testamente doo acknowledge and confesse which is nowe frequented and celebrated in al partes of the worlde where so euer the voice of the Gospel hath bene sounded and receiued Touching the stoare of auctorities that may be alleged for good witnesse of this Sacrifice though your sprite stirreth you to scoffe at it how great it is and of what number they are vnto the learned it is not vnknowen And suche witnesses
which is the vnbloudy Sacrifice S. Irenaeus likewise writing against Valentinus the Heretike Irene lib. 4. ca. 32. Aug. cōtra◠Aduersar leg et prophet lib. 1. cap. 20. Iustmusin Dialog ad Tryphonē S. Augustine also and S. Iustinus the martyr do expounde the prophecie for the same Sacrifice Whose sayinges here to reherse to the proufe of so certaine a doctrine it were more tedious then needeful Wherefore this being so sufficiently witnessed by the Auncient Doctours of the Churche against whose auctoritie no noueltie is to be heard as a most vndoubted truth that the sacrifice which Christe made of his body and bloude at his last supper is that pure and Vnbloudy Sacrifice whiche Malachie prophecied should be offered vp vnto God from the Easte to the west this also being no lesse true that Christe appointed and auctorized some to offer the same otherwise to what purpose was it instituted and sith that we reade of none other appointed and auctorized thereto but the Apostles and their successours Priestes of the newe Testament nor haue we heard of any that lawfully euer tooke vpon them to offer the same that were not Priestes with what impudencie is it denyed that the Apostles had and Priestes now haue auctoritie to offer vp this pure Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe vnto his Father Thus thou maist perceiue good reader the argument which M. Iewel here ascribeth vnto me and would to seeme ridiculous to conclude rightly for the truth if the due consideration of the circumstances be not omitted Withal thou vnderstandest that who so euer allegeth the figure of Melchisedech and the Prophecie of Malachie to prooue that the Priestes of the new Testament haue auctoritie and power to offer vp Christe vnto his Father he maketh no euil choise of the stoare of authorities by witnesse of which that point is prooued and confirmed As for the mater of greeuance M. Iewel where of you complaine so greeuously which is that I charge them of your syde with wresting by ouerthwart and false interpretation the wordes of the Institution of this Sacrifice the figure of Melchisedech and the Prophecie of Malachie I vttered it vpon very iust occasion as the learned do knowe The same ought to be greuous in dede vnto you not bicause ye are tolde of it by me but bicause it is true Neither thought I it good to exemplifie the mater staying the course of my briefe Answer to your Chalenge by descending vnto the particulars for that my scope and chiefe intent was not to confute the contrary Doctrine but to prooue and establish the truth of this Article by you most wickedly denied If it be pleasure vnto you to beholde paricular places and pointes of your false Legierdemaine disclosed by reading ouer my Confutatiō of your lying Apologie my Reioindre to your Replie that also which M. D. Sander D. Heskins M. Rastel M. Dorman and M. Stapleton haue written against you your luste may happely be satisfied Take your fyl of that vntil more come Iewel Perhappes he vvil say Yee expounde the Prophecie of Malachie sometimes of Praier and sometimes of the Preachinge of the Gospel This vvas neuer the Prophetes meaninge This is an horrible vvreasting of the Scriptures Thus no doubte M. Harding vvil say for othervvise he can say nothinge And yet he knovveth and beinge learned can not choose but knovv that this is the Olde learned Catholique Fathers Exposition touchinge these vvoordes of the Prophete Malachie and not ours He knovveth that the Ancient Father Tertullian saith thus Tertull. contrae Iudaeos Tertull. contra Marcion lib. 4. Hieron in 1. Caput Malach. The pure Sacrifice that Malachias speaketh of that should be offered vp in euery place Est Praedicatio Euangelij vsque ad finem Mundi Is the Preachinge of the Gospel vntil the ende of the worlde And in an other place Simplex Oratio de Conscientia pura The Sacrifice that Malachie meante is a deuoute Praier proceedinge from a pure Conscience He knovveth that S. Hierome expoundeth the same vvoordes in this vvise Dicit Orationes Sanctorum Domino offerendas esse non in vna Orbis Prouincia Iudaea sed in omni loco The Prophete Malachie meaneth hereby That the Praiers of Holy people shoulde be offered vnto God not onely in Iewrie that was one prouince of the worlde but also in al places He knovveth that Eusebius calleth the same Sacrifice of Malachie Euseb. De Demonst. li. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Sacrifice and the Incense of Praier Thus the Holie Catholique Fathers expounded these vvoordes of the Prophete Malachie and yet vvere they not therefore iuaged either ouerthvvarte vvreasters of the Scriptures or horrible deceiuers of the people Novv of the other side if it may please M. Harding to shevvfoorth but one Anciēt Doctour or Father that either by the Exāple of Melchisedech or by force of these vvordes of Malachie vvil conclude that the Priest hath Authoritie and Povver to offer vp Verelie and in dede the Sonne of God vnto his Father he may happily vvinne some credit Harding In defence of your felowes and of your selfe you say that wheras ye expound the prophecie of Malachie somtimes of Praier and sometimes of the preaching of the Ghospel therin ye vse no wreasting of the Scripture nor falshod bicause the old lerned Catholike Fathers haue so expounded the place And here you name Tertullian S. Hierome and Eusebius That the Preaching of the Gospel may be and is called a Sacrifice I denie not Mary that by th'auctoritie which here you pretend to allege out of Tertulliā it is proued and that by the same the meaning of Malachies prophecie is to be drawen quit frō the Sacrifice of th'Aulter this I deny vtterly And how farre your dealīg in these weighty maters cōcerning the faith of a Christē man is to be trusted by this to al it may appere M. Ievvel forgeth a saiyng of his ovvne ād putteth it vpon Tertullian First wheras you beare al men in hand that I know that the Ancient Father Tertullian saith as here you reporte it is very false for how can I know the thing that is not at al Tertullian saith not so These wordes The pure Sacrifice that Malachias speaketh of that should be offered vp in euery place est Praedicatio Euangelij vsque ad finē mundi be not to be found in al Tertullians booke Cōtra Iudaeos Yet you haue put them in a distinct letter in which the sayinges of the Doctors be printed that your Reader should beleue they were the wordes of Tertulliā This is a forgerie wrought in your owne shoppe fathered vpon Tertullian Phy M. Iewel can neither shame nor the feare of God withdraw you from vsing such forged sayinges of your owne with which being by you fathered vpon som Ancient Doctor of the Church your common manner is to face out an vntrue mater as crafty players at Cardes doo as they say with a Carde of ten Nexte
and putteth away al mystes and clowdes of any obiection to the contrary For hauing alleged the prophecie of Malachie to proue the New state of the new Testamēt in which prophecie God saith that in euery place Incense shal be offred vp vnto his name and Pure Sacrifice to declare what he vnderstādeth by either of them first he sheweth what is the Pure Sacrifice that we offer next what Incense we burne and what perfume we make Concerning Incense VVhat Eusebius vnderstādeth by Incense in Malachie he maketh it to be Prayer and not only Praier but also other spiritual Sacrifices namely the sweete fruit of our right opinion touching God the sacrificing of our selues vnto God the puritie of our bodies and mindes the worshipping of God with syncere affection Ad finem lib. 1. De Demonst. and with doctrines of truth For these saith he do please him more then the multitude of sacrifices made with bloud smoke and vnsweete sauours Touching the Pure Sacrifice Pure Sacrifice he saith that we sacrifice vnto God the sacrifice of praise And least he shuld seme to meane none other but the mere spiritual sacrifice that is declared by wordes he declareth with very expresse and apt termes what Sacrifice specially he meant saying Lib. 1. De Demonst. in fine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Sacrificamus Diuinum venerandum sacrosanctum Sacrificium Sacrificamus nouè secundùm Nouum Testamentum Sacrificium purum We sacrifice the Diuine and the reuerend and most holy Sacrifice We sacrifice after a new manner according to the new Testament the Pure Sacrifice In these wordes Eusebius doth as it were with pointing of his finger direct vs vnto the most blessed Sacrifice of the Aulter and withal toucheth the manner how it is offred For what other sacrifice is there in the Church which is set forth with so special and so high titles of honour but the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ For this aboue al other is Diuine as that wherein Christ God and man but as man vnto God is offred This chiefly is reuerend and honorable and most worthily to be accompted holy wherein is conteined Sanctum sanctorum the holiest of al holy As for the manner of sacrificing what is that we offer vp now in the Church of God after a new manner and according vnto the new Testament but the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ which Priestes vnder Christ after the order of Melchisedech offer vp vnto God vnder the formes of Bread and Wine This new manner of offering Christ taught his Apostles the Apostles deliuered it vnto the Church to whom after that he had taken bread into his handes geuen thankes broken and blessed saying Luke 22. this is my body and likewise the cuppe saying also this is my bloude he gaue that he professed to be his body and bloude and commaunding them and in them their successours to doo the same in remembrance of him he taught as S. Irenaeas saith the new Oblation of the new Testament Irenaeus lib. 4. capite 32. Let it be remembred now and considered how many properties are attributed vnto this Sacrifice that Malachie speaketh of partely by the other olde learned Fathers but specially by S. Hierome and Eusebius whom M. Iewel hath brought for him First that it succede al the sacrifices of the olde Lawe Hieron in Malachi Cap. 1. Secondly that it be offered in euery place Thirdly that it be pure and cleane Fourthly that it be done in the Ceremonies of the Christians Fifthly to come to Eusebius that it be Diuine Euseb. de Demonst. lib. 1. reuerend and most Holy Sixthly that it be offered after a new manner Seuenthly that it be offered according vnto the Mysteries of the new Testament Eightly that I may adde certaine properties out of Eusebius fifth booke De Demonstratione that it be done according vnto the rules rites and ordinances of the Churche Nienthly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Christe doth performe it after the forme and maner of Melchisedech yet to this day amon gest men by his ministers Tenthly that it be such as was first done by our Lord and Sauiour him selfe and afterward by Priestes that * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 procede from out of him Eleuenthly that the thinges which be offered conteined vnder the formes of bread and wine vsed in this Sacrifice Lib. 1 De Demonst. bee as Eusebius saieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say the very and true thinges and the principal paternes of the Images by which worde he meaneth the Sacrifices of Moses Law which were Images in respect of this truth Twelfthly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they be the thinges whereof being then to come Melchisech long before vsed the Images as Eusebius speaketh which Images were Breade and Wine wherewith as he saith he blessed Abraham S. Cyprian calleth this Gen. 14. Cyprian lib. 2. epistol 3. veritatem praefiguratae Imaginis the truth of the Image that went before in figure Now let M. Iewel name if he can what sacrifice is that which we offer vp after a newe manner according vnto the newe Testament and hath al these conditions and properties And if he haue none to name besides the blessed Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe whereof we speake as we are assured he hath none then I wish his conscience would ouercome shame lead him to recant and consider of the false doctrine whereby he enuegleth the people of God making them to beleue that this Sacrifice is to be vnderstanded only of Prayer as he him selfe taketh Prayer and that there is no such external Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe at al. This much I thinke to be yenough for answer vnto his .3 Diuision The .4 Diuision The Ansvvere FOr whereas the holy Euangelistes reporte that Christe at his last Supper tooke Breade gaue thankes VVordes of Oblatiō without Termes of Oblatiō brake it and said This is my body which is geuen for you Againe this is my Bloude which is sheadde for you in remission of sinnes By these wordes being wordes of Sacrificing and offering they shewe and set forth an Oblatiō in Acte and deede though the terme it selfe of Oblation or Sacrifice be not expressed Albeit to some of excellent knowledge Datur here soundeth no lesse then offertur or immolatur that is to say is offered or Sacrificed specially the addition pro vobis withal considered For if Christe said truely as he is trueth it selfe 1. Pet. 2. and guile was neuer founde in his mouthe then was his body presently geuen and for vs geuen at the tyme he spake the woordes that is at his Supper For he saide datur is geuen not dabitur shal be geuen And likewise was his Bloud sheadde in remission of sinnes at the tyme of that Supper for the text hath funditur is sheadde But the geuing of his Body for vs and the
of sacrificing and offring M. Iewel falsifieth the vvordes of the Ansvver and that the terme it selfe Oblation or Sacrifice was not expressed to make my saying seme more absurde you falsifie my saying reporting me to haue spoken of the termes of sacrificing as though I had acknowledged the wordes of sacrificing and denied the termes of sacrificing But sir what meane you Hath the long studie of Rhetorique driuen out of your head the remembrance of Logique Haue you quite forgoten the olde Distinction of implicitè and explicitè so much tossed in our Sophismes when we were yong Sophisters at Oxforde Thinges implied though not vttered red in expresse termes Remember you not that a thing may be implyed in wordes albeit the very termes signifying that thing be not expressed As for example where it is written in the Psalme Dixit Dominus Domino meo sede à dextris meis Our Lorde the Father said to my Lorde the Sonne sit at my right hand Psal. 109. is not the Omnipotencie of God the Sonne and his Equalitie with the Father in these woordes signified though the terme it selfe of imnipotencie or equalitie be not expressed It is written of kinge Saules wicked and miserable ende â— Reg. 31. Arripuit Saul galdium suum irruit super eum Saul caught his owne sworde and ranne vpon it doth not the Scripture by those woordes shewe and set forth his murthering and kylling of him selfe though the terme it selfe of murdering or killing be not expressely vttered Likewise the Scripture signifieth with very plaine woordes the Aduoutrie that Dauid committed with Bethsabee 2. Reg. 11. and his murdering of Vrias her husband and yet in what place these actes be described there is not at al expressed the terme of Aduoutrie nor of Murder In the whole storie of Christes passion written by the Euangelistes it is not with any expresse terme of killing said that the Iewes or Souldiers killed him Yet I trowe ye wil not denie but that in woordes it is implied Actor 2. If you denie it S. Peter shal control you who said to the Iewes Hunc interemistis this man ye haue killed Actor 7. S. Steuen also who said vnto them cuius vos nunc proditores homicidae fuistis ye haue now ben the traitours and murderers of Iesus But what neede we to vse so many examples in a mater that may be declared by infinite examples Right so to be shorre the wordes which the Euangelistes No coÌ„tâ—adictioÌ„â—roued by M. Ievvel to be in the Ansvver and S. Paule vse in the Description of the Institution of the blessed Sacrament at Christes last supper be wordes implying and importing a Sacrifice al be it this terme it selfe of Oblation or Sacrifice be not expressed And who so euer affirmeth him that so saith to include a Contradiction is either a wrangler hunting for termes not regarding the thing implyed or very ignorant not knowing the nature of a Contradiction But besides al this The reproche of straggling alone anâ—vvered as M. Iewel hath founde in my wordes a Contradiction where none is so doth he also with like truth and like proufe charge me with as it pleaseth him to terme it straggling alone and swaruing from al the olde Fathers by a strange construction of myne owne for that I haue so construed the wordes vsed in the Scripture to declare the Institution of the Eucharist as to include and implie a Sacrifice For verely I haue learned this construction of the olde learned Fathers and haue not bene so presumptuous as in so weighty a mater to trust the deuise of myne owne head Which Fathers doo not onely in equiualent but in expresse termes declare that Christe offered a Sacrifice at his last supper Hesychius an olde Father maketh mention of three sundry Sacrifices Three sacrifices offered by Christeâ— Hesychius in Leuit. lib. 2. cap. 8 that Christe offered two at his Maundie and the thirde vpon the Crosse. His wordes be plaine Prius figur atam Ouem coenans cum Apostolis postea suum obtulit Sacrificium deinde sicut ouem seipsum occidit That Christe sacrificed hiÌ„ selfe at his last supper Christe supping with his Apostles first offered the figuratiue Lambe afterward he offered his owne Sacrifice and then after that he killed him selfe that is to say deliuered vp him selfe to be killed like a Lambe S. Cyprian one of the most auncient Fathers of the Churche speaking of the Figure of Melchisedech geueth most iust occasion of this construction Cyprian lib. 2. epist. 3. where he saith Quam rem perficiens adimplens Dominus panem calicem mixtum vino obtulit qui est plenitudo Veritatem praefiguratae Imaginis adimpleuit Which thing our Lorde perfourming and fulfylling he meaneth the perfourmance of that which Melchisedeks Sacrifice did foresignifie offered bread and the cuppe mingled with wine and he who is the fulnesse did fulfil the Truth of the forefigured Image Theophylacte although not so olde as the others yet a schoolemaister olde yenough to teach a Christian man this construction expounding the later wordes of the Institution of the Sacrament and speaking of the Sacrifice saith Theophylactus in Matt. 26. Sicut Vetus Testamentum immolationem habebat sanguinem ita Nouum Testamentum sanguinem habet ac immolationeÌ„ Like as the Olde Testament had sacrifice and bloude euen so the Newe Testament hath bloude and Sacrifice Here is to be considered that if the wine by th' almighty power of the Worde be not coÌ„uerted into the bloud of Christe but remaine stil wine as before consecration which doctrine our Caluinistes teach and the Lutherans impugne then wil not this comparison of Theophylacte holde neither is it true at al that now the Newe Testament hath bloude Euthymius also a Father of the Greke Churche Euthym. in Matt. construed the same wordes of Christe in like sense saying Sicut Vetus Testamentum hostias sanguinem habebat ita sanè Nouum Corpus videlicet sanguineÌ„ Domini Non dixit autem haec sunt signa corporis mei sanguinis mei sed haec sunt corpus meum sanguis meus As the Olde Testament had sacrifices and bloude euen so truly hath the New Testament also to wit the Body and Bloud of our Lorde He said not these be the signes of my body and of my bloud but these be my Body and my Bloude These Fathers and sundry others whose â—ayinges here to reherse I omit that I be not tedious auouching so plainely that a Sacrifice was offered by Christe at his Maundie I maruel at the impudencie of M. Iewel It is M. Ievv that in deede straggleth alone who solacing him selfe with the terme of straggling alone reporteth me in this point to swarue from al the olde Fathers as though I had deuised a newe construction that any learned man neuer knewe before Verely in deniyng this Sacrifice he sheweth him selfe to be departed
from Christes folde the Churche and like a lost shepe to straggle alone and to wander from the saued flocke Our Lorde yet turne his harte and kepe him from the wolues and roaring Lion that neuer ceaseth going about 1. Pet. 5. and seking whom he may deuour Iewel Verify yf this Latine vvorde Dare be Sacrificare and Geuinge be Sacrificinge then vvhere as S. Paule â—aithe If thine enimie be thirstie Geue him drinke Roman 15 And vvhere as Iudas saithe VVhat wil ye Geue me Matt. 26. Matt. 25. and I wil deliuer him vnto you And vvhere as the foolish Virgins saie Geue vs parte of your Oile c. In euerie of these and suche other like places by this Nevve Diuinitie M. Harding vvil be hable to finde a Sacrifice Harding Forth you go rather ieasting and scoffing then prouing ought or disprouing If Dare be Sacrificare and geuing be sacrificing say you then where so euer in the Scriptures the worde Dare which signifieth to geue is found there must be concluded a Sacrifice And so sacrifice must be done vnto Iudas bicause he said Quid vultis mihi dare Matt. 26. What wil ye geue me and I wil deliuer him vnto you M. Ievvel fondly argueth froÌ„ the special to the general affirmatiuely The sadnesse of this mater M. Iewel beareth not wel your lightnesse Praised be God that his enemies wittes finde so litle weight of reason or learning in impugning his truth You knowe that I make not geuing to be sacrificing nor that Dare should alwaies signifie sacrificare Which if it be not presupposed your Argument is peeuish For what if Datur in the wordes of Christes Institution of the Sacrament for thereto onely my saying is restrained do founde to some learned men as much as offertur specially in that place where the addition of these two woordes pro vobis for you is withal to be considered wil it thereof folowe that euery where els Dare be sacrificare and that geuing be sacrificing in general By this your Logique it wil folow that bicause this worde calix is taken sometimes for passion and tribulation as where Christ said Matt. 26. transeat à me calix iste let this cuppe passe from me Luc. 22. and likewise in other places wher it is written of Christe being at his last supper accipiens Calicem gratias egit Iohn 18. He tooke the Cuppe and gaue thankes it must be interpreted Christ tooke his passion and gaue thankes whereby it is concluded that he suffered his passion at his supper in the euening and not on the morow onlesse it be said that he suffered his passion twise By this it is made cleare how fondly you reason How be it I iudge if you were wel examined your selfe would not denie but that Dare Dare vsed for offerre may signifie offerre where the circumstance of the place reporteth Christe to geue his body or him self for vs or for our synnes specially when being spoken of Christe it is put with this Proposition pro. This if you deny S. Paule shal conuince you writing to the Galathians Galat. 1. Gratia vobis pax a Deo Patre nostro Domino Iesu Christo qui dedit semet ipsum pro peccatis nostris vt eriperet nos de praesenti seculo nequam Grace and peace be to you from God our Father and our Lorde Iesus Christe who gaue him selfe for our sinnes to deliuer vs from this present wicked world Now if dare be offerre in this place why may it not signifie the same in the wordes of the Sacraments institution where Christ also gaue his body and bloude not only vnto vs to be a foode which no man denieth but also for vs to be a Sacrifice which our newe Gospellers denie and I now haue proued Iewel Yet saith he Certaine menne of excellent knowledge haue thus expounded it It seemeth very strange that these so notable men of excellent knovvledge should haue no names Perhappes he meaneth Tapper of Louaine or Gropper of Colaine of vvhom he hath borovved the vvhole substance vvelneare of al this Article Hovv be it the demaunde vvas of the Ancient Doctours of the Churche not of any of these or other suche petite Fathers Harding I said not as you reporte me that certaine men of excellent knowledge haue thus expounded it but that to some such men Datur here soundeth nolesse then offertur specially in coÌ„sideration of the addition pro vobis And therein I said truly And though I named them not yet was there no cause why you should make so straÌ„ge a mater of it as though worthy men had no names Bicause some of them be yet liuing I thought it better not to name them If I had meaÌ„t Tapper of Louaine Tapper Gropper as I did not or Gropper of Coulen I had meant men in dede wel knowen and coÌ„mended vnto the worlde both for excellent learning and singulâ—r vertue How so euer it please you in contempt to cal them petite Fathers These or others like them if I folow and helpe my selfe in this or any other question with their or with any other mennes knowledge what skilleth that so that I mainteine nothinge but the truth If you thought to abase myne estimation with the report of helping my selfe with other mennes labours you are deceiued the thing is lawful and commendable Neither ought that to grieue me being obiected by you who as it is wel knowen haue taken the parcels of the false wares packâ— together in your Replie out of other mennes shoppes I meane the Lutherans and Caluinistes of our age who haue impugned the Catholike Religion fithens Luther beganne to write against the Churche Iewel But Christe saieth in the Present Tense This is my Bodie That is Geuen not in the Future Tense That shal be Geuen And likevvise This is my Bloude That Presently is shead not in the Future Tense That shal be Shead Therefore Christ sacrificed his Body and shead his bloude presently at the Supper Here M. Harding is driuen to control the olde Common Translation of the nevv testament not only that beareth the name of S. Hierome and hath ben euermore generally receiued in the Churche and is allovved by the Councel of Tridente but also that is stil vsed and continued in his ovvne Masse Booke Chryso in 1. Corin. 1â— Origen in MatthaeuÌ„ tract 35. I graunte In the Greeke it is vvriten Datur Is Geuen not Dabitur shal be Geuen But here the Present Tense according to the Common Phrase of the Scriptures is vsed for the Future Chrysostome readeth it thus Dabitur shal be GeueÌ„ not Datur Is geuen Origen likevvise readeth not Effunditur Is Shead but Effundetur Shal be Shead And in this sorte Chrysostom also expoundeth it Effundetur pro multis Hoc dicens ostendit quòd Passio eius Mysterium Salutis humanae per quod etiam Discipulos consolatur Shalbe shead for many Thus saying he sheweth that his
deny the Argument For there be two kindes of signes One is significatiue onely the other exhibitiue which doth not only betoken or signifie but also exhibiteth and geueth the thing signified In the olde Lawe the vnleuened bread signified onely that the feast of Easter was to be celebrated with sinceritie of harte and life The corporal purgations signified only the cleansing of myndes But Baptisme in the newe Lawe doth not only signifie but also exhibiteth and worketh the Wasshing of synnes and is the ablution it selfe or wasshing away of sinnes Likewise the holy Euchariste doth not onely betoken or signifie the body and bloud of Christe but contineth and exhibiteth it present Signū signatum exhibitiuū and is the very body and bloude of Christ it is signū signatū exhibitiuū Thus it appeareth how the Sacramentaries Argument is naught The Sacrament is a signe ergo it is not the body For it is both a signe and the body it sefe For if any wil say it is a signe significatiue only it is to be denied as false and contrary to the manifest wordes of Scripture and the expositions of al the Fathers Now I reporte me to the iudgement of the discrete Reader what aduauntage M. Iewel hath gotten by the terme antitypon alleged out of S. Clement against the blessed Sacrifice of the Churche S. Clemēt corrupted by M. Ievvel On the other side what aduauntage may iustly be taken against him for that most falsly he hath corrupted his author For looke Reader vpon the shorte testimonie which he allegeth out of S. Clement and thou shal finde that M. Iewel hath cut of out of the middest two wordes of greatest force for the vnderstanding of that goeth there immediatly before that by falshod he might geue at least some colour vnto his Reply where in truth he had none at al. The wordes falsly cut away be these Clemen Constitut. lib. 6. cap. 30. acceptabilemque Eucharistiam So that the whole sentence is this in S. Clement Antitypum regalis corporis Christi acceptabilēque Eucharistiam offerte in Ecclesiis coemeteriis vestris Offer ye vp the sampler of the roial body of Christ and the acceptable Euchariste in your Churches and burying places These two wordes with the sleight of falsifying nipte away by M. Iewel be so requisite to the vnderstanding of the authours meaning that without them mater of cauil by reason of the terme antitypon may be ministred vnto such as be more ready to impugne then to defend the doctrine of the vniuersal Churche touching the substance of the Sacrament and Sacrifice of the Aulter Contrarywise being leaft in the sentence considered and rightly vnderstanded they exclude al occasion of doubte or cauil that might rise through the other terme of more obscuritie For the Euchariste without doubt in that age being taken for the body of Christ how can it be conceiued that the other terme antitypon in the same place ioyned by a copulatiue together with it should importe the contrary That S. Clement meant by the Eucharist the true and real body of Christe it is euident by that we finde in the learned Fathers of that age namely S. Ignatius and S. Ireneus who lyued in or sone after S. Clementes tyme. S. Irenaeus saith Irenaeus lib. 4. ca. 34. that the breade hauing receiued the calling vpon of the name of God whereby he meaneth the Consecration is no more common bread but Eucharistia ex duabus rebus constans terrena coelesti the Euchariste consisting of two thinges the one earthly whereby he vnderstandeth the forme of bread the other heauenly which is the body of our Sauiour The Euchariste maketh our bodies to be immortal And that it appeare certainely that he thought the Euchariste to be the body and bloude of Christe he proueth that our bodies shal not remaine in corruption but haue the resurrection that is hoped for bicause they receiue the Euchariste and be fed with the flesh and bloude of our Lorde Ignat. ad Smyrnen apud theo dorit li. 3. Dialog S. Ignatius likewise in an Epistle ad Smyrnenses as Theodoritus allegeth him in the third booke of his Dialogues writing against certaine Heretikes that would haue neither Euchariste nor Sacrifice auoucheth the Eucharist to be the flesh of Christe The Eutheriste is the flesh of Christ that suffered for vs. These be his wordes Eucharistias oblationes non admittunt eò quòd non confiteantur Eucharistiā esse carnēseruatoris nostri Iesu Christi quae pro peccatis nostris passa est quam Pater sua benignitate suscitauit Eucharistes and oblations they wil not admit bicause they wil not confesse the Euchariste to be the flesh of our Sauiour Iesus Christe which flesh suffered for our sinnes and which the Father of his goodnes raised vp from death Marke Reader this auncient Father and blessed Martyr saith not the Euchariste signifieth Christes flesh but is Christes flesh yea that flesh which was crucified buried and rose againe And although Theodoritus alleged this authoritie to proue that it was the humaine flesh and not the Godhed of Christe that suffered death and rose againe which he proueth by the later parte of the same yet it principally proueth our purpose that the Euchariste is the true flesh of Christe Againe onlesse the selfe same flesh of Christe be in the Euchariste which died vpon the Crosse and rose againe this authoritie auailed Theodoritus nothing to proue that Christes flesh was crucified and raised vp againe Wherefore for so much as it is cleare by the testimonies of S. Ignatius and S. Irenaeus who liued not long after S. Clements time that the beleefe of their age was the Euchariste to be the flesh and bloude of Christe how can M. Iewel kepe his credite with any man that loueth truth and not seme to haue intended crafte and deceite in that of purpose least the truth should appeare manifest he falsified his auctor by clipping away those two wordes from the middest of the sentence that make directly against him and put away al doubte of contrary sense Thus to mainteine the false doctrine of his arrogant Chalenge he feareth not to violate the Fathers to corrupte their writings to deceiue the worlde to purchase him selfe the most reprocheful name of a falsifier By such champions such quarrels are mainteined Constitut. lib. 8. As for the other place of S. Clement where he saith offerimus hunc panem hoc poculum we offer this breade and this cuppe who nowe a daies knoweth not that the Sacrament sometimes is called by the name of breade and wine not bicause the substance of breade and wine remaineth but bicause the outwarde formes taft and other qualities of breade and wine be sene felt and perceiued bicause before consecration it was breade and wine and bicause it is the true breade and wine that came downe from heauen Neither doth S. Clement which is to be noted
to doo and make the thing which he had done that is to say to take bread and wine to geue thankes to blesse to breake the bread and to say in the person of Christe this is my Body this is my Bloude c. Which he calleth offering of spiritual sacrifice bicause that body and bloud of Christe are thus offered vp spiritually and in a Mysterie without bloudshed And also that the Apostles afterward instituted Priestes Deacons Subdeacons and Readers S. Chrysostom excusing him selfe for that he presumed to minister vnto Christe at his holy table and gathering boldnesse of that Christe him selfe had commaunded it saith Chrysost. in Liturgia Sacrificiorum ritum instituisti ac solennis huius immaculati Sacrificij celebrationem nobis tradidisti tanquà m Dominus omnium Thou Christe hast instituted the rite of sacrificing and hast deliuered vnto vs the celebration of this solemne and vnspotted Sacrifice as Lord of al. And afterward he saith moreouer hauing rehearsed what Christ did and said at the Supper memoriam igitur agentes salutaris huius mandati we kepe the memorie of this healthful commaundement meaning the commandement geuen by these wordes Luc. 22. Do ye this in my Remembrance When S. Chrysostome saith Christ deliuered the celebration of this Sacrifice vnto vs it is to be considered vnto which vs and when he did deliuer it S. Chrysostome was a Bishop and therefore a Priest so then naming vs he meant Priestes The time when it was deliuered was at his last Supper For the Scripture geueth no occasion to thinke that Christ leafte to Priestes the celebratiō of this Sacrifice any where els but where he said vnto his Apostles Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11. Doo ye this in my remembrance S. Dionyse the Areopagite S. Paules scholer doth acknowledge and in most plaine wordes confesse that Christe by these woordes gaue commaundement to Priestes to offer vp this diuine Sacrifice Thus he saith Quocirca Antistes reuerenter ex Pontificali officio Dionys. in Ecclesiast Hierarch part 3. c. 3. post sacras diuinorum operum Laudes quòd hostiam salutarem quae supra ipsum est litet se excusat ad ipsum primò decenter exclamans Tu dixisti hoc facite in mei commemorationem The Bishop therfore after he hath praised the workes of God excuseth him selfe reuerently and according to his Bishoply office for that he sacrificeth the heathful hoste which is aboue his worthinesse semely first crying vnto him Thou ô Christ hast said Do ye this in my remēbrance Thus it appeareth clearely by this auncient Bishop and blessed Martyr who is to be thought to haue learned the same of S. Paule him self as also by sundry other Fathers of whome some be already alleged some hereafter shal be alleged that Christe by these woordes Doo ye this in my remembrance gaue to Priestes auctoritie and commission to offer vp the healthful Sacrifice which can be none other but that of his body and bloude and that by the same wordes they vnderstode them selues both charged so to doo and also excused of presumption in doing the doing of it being a thing that so farre passeth the worthinesse of humaine condition But M. Iewel to put away wholly the Sacrifice whereas Christe said doo ye this in my remembrance saith very strangely and boldly M. Ievvel vvold al the people to be Ministers of the Sacrifice that this doing perteineth not only vnto the Apostles and their successours but also vnto the whole people And he beareth the worlde in hande that this is the cleare meaning of Christe bicause of these wordes in my remembrance As though bicause that heauenly Sacrifice is to be offered in remembrance of Christe therefore the common people and euery one of them should haue the handling of the diuine Mysteries and be made the Ministers of them If this be true weemen haue much wrong among whom in so many hundred yeres as haue ben since Christ gaue this commaundement none was yet euer admitted vnto that administration And if it perteine vnto the whole people as M. Iewel saith why should weemen be excluded In dede it were a great ease for these holy Ministers that their good wiues ministred sometimes in the Cōgregations for them whiles they be playing with their children or keeling the potre at home He should haue done wel to haue proued this strange point more substantially sith there by he should do great pleasure to his felow Ministers to many other good felowes and specially to many good sad dames of his owne Gospel whose curiositie would be wel pleased if they were admitted to minister and to doo so much as these wordes of Christe doo importe doo ye this in my remēbrance The deuil hauing sowed hatred in M. Iewels breste against the priesthod and Sacrifice of the newe Testament hath brought him vnto this fowle absurditie Peraduenture to auoide so great an inconuenience he wil say that these wordes doo principally perteine vnto the Ministers who haue succeded the Apostles in this ministerie and secondarily vnto the faithful people If he say so let him withal consider that being so vnderstanded they may wel serue for the Apostles to claime vnto them selues the auctoritie of Priesthod to offer vp the Sacrifice and also to ordeine priestes to succede them For as touching the office of a Priest it is a cōfessed truth that the Priest in offering the body and bloud of Christ is the principal agent concerning outward ministerie and as it were the instrument of the people which by a certaine meane offereth also geuing vnto the Priestes action their assent and applying their deuotion Much like to that we say of a multitude to make a supplication when one man is the speaker and chiefe dooer and the reste only geue their consent to that is said and done And what though S. Paule say vnto the Corinthians 1. Cor. 11. As often as ye shall eate this bread and drinke this Cuppe ye shal shewe forth our Lordes death vntil he come wil it folow thereof that Christe speaking these wordes doo ye this in my remembrance woulde the whole people to doo that he at his supper did That is to say that euery lay person boye and woman for they be of the number of the people shal take bread blesse and geue thankes and vtter the wordes of consecration This is my body and likewise the cuppe saying this is my bloude c Doth he not vnderstand there is great difference betwen this commaundement of Christ and that saying of S. Paule betwen doo this in my remembrance which Christe saith and when so euer ye eate this bread and drinke this cuppe ye shew forth our Lordes death whiche S. Paule saith Seeth he not the one to belong vnto the Priest as he is the pronuncer of the Diuine wordes whereby the holy Euchariste is consecrate and made the other to be referred vnto them that receiue it after it is consecrate And though
both tende to one ende that is to celebrate the memorie of Christes death yet be not the actions diuers and may they not be done by diuers persons as it happeth when the people receiueth the body of Christe at the priestes handes This much may serue also for answer to the autoritie brought out of S. Chrysostome For the circumstance of the place declareth euidently that he spake there of the peoples receiuing of the mysteries And so in that place facere signifieth onely to receiue and not to consecrate and minister the Sacrament M. Ievv corrupteth S. Chrysostome And here M. Iewel least he should not be alwaies like vnto him selfe altereth and changeth his authours wordes and maketh S. Chrysostomes wordes to sounde to the aduantage of his owne false purpose For whereas S. Chrysostome saith thus Chrysost. hom 61. ad Pop. Antioch Quotiescunque hoc feceritis mortem Domini annunciabitis hoc est facietis commemorationem salutis vestrae beneficij mei As often as ye shal do this ye shal set forth our Lordes death that is to say ye shal make a commemoration of your saluation being my benefite M. Iewel allegeth him thus Hoc facite in memoriam beneficij mei salutis vestrae Doo ye this in remenbrance of my benefite and of your saluation Wherein he falsifieth the Doctor maketh a false translation of the place and geueth out a sense contrary to S. Chrxsostomes meaning Such aduenturing to alter Modes and Tenses to tel an other tale then the Doctor alleged telleth to leaue out to put in wordes of priuate forgerie is a most certaine argument of vntrue dealing and of guile intended of M. Iewels parte The 5. Diuision The Ansvver THat Christe offred him selfe to his Father in his last Supper and that Priestes by those woordes Doo this in my remeÌ„braunce haue not onely auctoritie but also a special commaundement to doo the same and that the Figure of Melchisedech and the Prophecie of Malachie perteineth to this Sacrifice and maketh proufe of the same let vs see by the testimonies of the Fathers what doctrine th'Apostles haue left to the Church Eusebius Caesariensis hath these woordes Euseb. li. 1 de demoÌ„strat Horrorem afferentia Mensae Christi Sacrificia Supremo Deo offerre per eminentissimum omnium ipsius Pontificem edocti sumus We are taught saith he to offer vnto our Supreme God the Sacrifices of Christes Table which cause vs to tremble and quake for feare by his Bishop highest of al. Here he calleth Christe in respect of his Sacrifice Gods Bishop highest of al Bishoppes the Sacrifices of Christes Table he calleth the Bodie and Bloude of Christe bicause at the Table in his last Supper he Sacrificed and offered the same and for that it is his very Bodie and his very Bloude imagination onely Phantasie and Figure set aparte he termeth these Sacrifices as commonly the auncient Fathers doo horrible causing trembling and feare And whereas he saithe we haue bene taught to offer these Sacrifices to God doubtlesse he meaneth by these woordes of Christe Doo this in my remembraunce This is my Bodie whiche is geuen for you This is my Bloude whiche is shedde for you Clement in his eight Booke often cited speaking of the Sacrifice offered by the Apostles commonly addeth these woordes Secundùm ipsius ordinationem or ipso ordinante whereby he confesseth it to be Christes owne ordinaunce Iewel To proue that the Priest offereth vp the Sonne of God M. Hardinge hath here brought in Euseâ—ius an Ancient Father that neuer once named any suche Oblation of the Sonne of God So much is he opprest and encombred vvith his stoare True it is The Ministration of the Holy Communion is oftentimes of the olde learned Fathers called a Sacrifice not for that they thought the Prieste had Authoritie to Sacrifice the Sonne of God but for that therein vvee offer vp vnto God Thankes and Praises for that greate Sacrifice once made vpon the Crosse. So saithe S. Augustine August ad PetruÌ„ Diaco ca. 19. In isto Sacrificio est gratiarum actio Commemoratio Carnis Christi quam pro nobis obtulit In this Sacrifice is a Thankes geuinge and a remembrance of the flesh of Christe Euseb. De demonstr li. 1. c. 10. whiche he hath offered for vs. Likevvise Eusebius saithe Christe after al other thinges donne made a marueilous Oblation and a passinge Sacrifice vnto his Father vpon his Crosse for the Saluation of vs al Nazian in Apolog. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 geuinge vnto vs to offer continually vnto God a Remembrance in steede of a Sacrifice So Nazianzenus calleth the Holy Communion A Figure of that great Mysterie of the Deathe of Christe This is it that Eusebius calleth The Sacrifice of the Lordes Table VVhiche also he calleth Sacrificium Laudis The Sacrifice of Praise Harding M. Iewels Replye in this Diuision is of smal pith and substance Least he should seme to say nothing whereas in deede he hath nothing to say whereby clearely to auoide the force of Eusebius authoritie by me alleged he darkeneth the mater with many wordes partly of his owne partly of other Doctours to litle purpose rehersed The effect of his whole tale consisteth in these .4 pointes First he denieth that Eusebius euer named any such Sacrifice of the Sonne of God vnto his Father Secondly he adknowlegeth the Ministration of the holy Communion for so he calleth it of the olde learned Fathers to be called a Sacrifice bicause of thankes and praises therein offered vnto God Thirdly he alloweth not the Argumente made out of Eusebius for proufe that Christe is offered vnto his Father Fourthly he pretendeth to shewe causes why the Sacrifice of the Communion is dredful and causeth the harte to tremble Touching the first what meane you M. Iewel by saying that Eusebius neuer once named any suche oblation of the Sonne of God Be you so addicted to the precise termes of your own Chalenge M. Ievvel is driuen from the mater vnto precise vvordes that other wordes of equal force may not be admitted Verely this declareth the weaknesse of your cause and openeth your poore shifte to the worlde which is that whereas you are conuicte by cleare truth of thinges yet you runne for succour vnto the shadowe of wordes You denye by the wordes of your Chalenge that by witnesse of any doctor within the first six hundred yeres after Christe we are hable to shewe that a Priest hath auctoritie to offer vp Christe vnto his Father Now this are we hable to proue as by diuers others so in this place by testimonie of Eusebius though expressely he name it not an oblation of the Sonne of God And for asmuch as you stand vpon your owne precise termes you shal be driuen from your holde by a precise Argument Answer it if you can What so euer we that are Priestes haue ben taught by Christe to doo to doo the same we haue auctoritie But we haue ben
many bookes and the worlde should sone drawe to a better quiet As for the two other testimonies alleged out of Eusebius and S. Gregorie Nazianzen they prooue not that for which they be alleged which is that the Ministration of the Communion is of them called a sacrifice wherby M. Iewel would exclude the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe For first as touching Nazianzen by what Logique maketh he this Argument good He calleth the holy Communion * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exemplar magnorum Mysteriorum the Figure or sampler of the great Mysteries Ergo the Ministration of the Communion is called a Sacrifice Verily in this Argument is neither reason nor good Logique What though Eusebius say thus being truly translated Christe after al the Sacrifices of Moses Lawe hauing sacrificed a maruelous sacrifice and a passing Hoste vnto his Father offred it vp for al our saluatioÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hauing deliuered vnto vs also a memorie to offer it vp continually vnto God * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a Sacrifice so it is to be translated not in stede of a Sacrifice as Maister Iewel hath turned it Wil he conclude of this that Eusebius calleth the Ministration of his Communion a Sacrifice No no his purpose was not so much to proue the ministration of their Communion to be called a sacrifice as to disproue the Sacrifice of the Aulter which Eusebius in my Answer alleged calleth in respect of Christes body and bloude offered in the same the Sacrifices of Christes table To that ende he semeth to haue alleged Eusebius A memorie of the Sacrifice of the Crosse excludeth not the Sacrifice of the Aulter bicause he nameth that which Christ deliuered vnto vs to offer vp daily vnto God a memorie As though Christes body and bloud could not be really present in these holy Mysteries if that which we doo be a memorie or coÌ„memoratioÌ„ of that which Christ did Yeas forsoth M. Iewel The Sacrifice that we offer when we doo that which Christ at his last Supper coÌ„mauÌ„ded vs to do is the memorie of the body and bloud of Christ and in respect of the thing offered and sacrificed the very and true body and bloud of Christ it self And this is accordiÌ„g to the doctrine of S. Augustin Aug. cont Faust. lib. 20. cap. â—â— who saith as is afore rehersed The Christians do celebrate the memorie of the Sacrifice of the Crosse now performed which Eusebius in respect of the thing offered calleth the maruelous Sacrifice and passing hoste with the holy Oblation and Participation of the body and bloude of Christe If they doo it with the Oblation and participation of the body and bloude of Christe then is the body and bloud of Christe present then is it offered and participated which Eusebius for that cause calleth theâ— Sacrifices of Christes Table Eusebius also saith M. Iewel calleth this a Sacrifice of praise In deee as I declared before Eusebius speaketh of diuers Sacrifices Of the Sacrifice of the Crosse of the sacrifices of the table of Christ of the Sacrifice of praise of prayers of a contrite harte And what if he speake of the Sacrifice of praise wil it thereof folow M. Iewel by your new Logique that the Sacrifices of Christes table be not taken in Eusebius for the body and bloude of Christ And I pray you may not the selfe same in one respect be a Sacrifice of Praise M. Iewels common custom to disproue one truth by an other truth and also in an other respect the Sacrifice of Christes body and bloud When wil you leaue your common woont to disproue one truth by an other truth If one should say vnto you concerning a sorte of your Ministers standing before you at a visitatioÌ„ Sir these felowes be no Ministers of Gods worde and holy SacrameÌ„tes for they be handy Craftesmen would you not answer him Sir your reason is naught for they be Ministers and honest Craftesmen both No better is your reason where you say This Sacrifice is a Sacrifice of Praise and of thankes geuing or it is a memorie and a sampler of the bloudy Sacrifice ergo it is not the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe it is not a true and a very Sacrifice For there is no inconuenience in attributing these names and termes vnto the most blessed Sacrament and Sacrifice of the Aulter diuers respectes being considered A plaine testimonie for the Sacrifice of the Aulter But M. Iewel how happed it that where you founde in Eusebius Sacrificium laudis the Sacrifice of Praise the Greeke whereof also you would needes to be noted in the margent of your booke though with addition of an article more then is in the Doctour you saw not among the manifold sacrifices there reckened this Sacrifice so expressely set foorth and coÌ„mended with these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb. lib. 1. de Demonst in fine That is to say we sacrifice the diuine and honorable and most holy Sacrifice We sacrifice the pure Sacrifice after a new manner according to the newe Testament By which description that which we cal the Sacrifice of the Aulter is plainely signified Againe how could you not see the manifest mention of the Aulter A testimonie for material Aulters whereon this Sacrifice is offred there a litle before expressed And least you might auoide the force of that cleare testimonie by expounding it of the spiritual Aulter of mans harte remember that he speaketh of such an Aulter as might not by Moses lawe be set vp but onely in Iewrie and that as there he saith in one only Citie of that Prouince As for the spiritual Aulters of mens hartes Moses Lawe did neuer forbid An Aulter saith Eusebius of vnbloudy and reasonable sacrifices 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is now erected according to the new Mysteries of the new Testament ouer al the worlde both in Egypte and in other nations c. What can be vnderstanded by this Aulter builded in witnesse of the abrogation of Moses Lawe of his Aulter at Hierusalem and of his vncleane Sacrifices as there Eusebius discourseth and that according to the new Mysteries of the newe Testament but the external Aulter of the Church whereupon the body and bloud of Christe In Apologetico in forme of bread and wine the external Sacriâ—fice as S. Gregorie Nazianzen calleth it is offered and the most holy and dreadful Mysteries are celebrated Hath Satan the enemie of this Sacrifice so blinded your harte with malice against the same that you saw the sacrifice of Praise of Praiers and other mere spiritual Sacrifices and this most Diuine most high and most special Sacrifice of the Churche could not see so euidently and with so expresse colours set forth in the same place What can be said in your excuse Either you saw this much in Eusebius your selfe or you trusted your Greeke frende of Oxford whose helpe for the fuller stuffing of your great
shal be taken for good then haue the Arians ouercomme For if the Churche shal be driuen to shewe letters syllables and termes neither can we finde the CoÌ„substantialitie of the Sonne of God with the Father nor the Procession of the holy Ghoste from the Father and the Sonne nor certaine other great pointes of our Faith which notwithstanding being reueled to the Churche by the holy Ghoste the spirite of truth and declared by the expositions of the holy Fathers we are bounde to beleue vnder paine of eternal damnation Knowing your selfe ouerborne with the force of this plaine testimonie of S. Irenaeus craftily you dissemble it and keepe your selfe a loofe of from rehersing the wordes pretending thereby that he neuer said so as I haue reported him But let the booke be vewed and it shal be founde wil you nil you that I haue truly alleged him M. Ievvel forgeth sayinges of his ovvne head and reporteth them for the sayinâ—ges of S. Ireneus You on the other side to conueigh the whole point to Malachie the Prophete where you thought rather to haue some colour of aduantage come in with a forged saying of your owne and setting it forth in the lettre that you caused the Doctours sayinges to be printed in you ascribe it vnto S. Irenaeus whereas the sentence which here you haue inserted pretending for credit your solemne warrant with these woordes Thus onely he saith is not in S. Irenaeus You should haue tolde vs M. Ievvel diuerteth from the testimonie wher vvith he is vrged and entreth into an other mater and with good authoritie haue prooued it what other thing can be vnderstanded by the newe Oblation of the newe Testament whereof S. Irenaeus speaketh but the Oblation of that which Christ said to be his body and confessed to be his bloude To this you make no directe Answer but slily carye away the reader vnto the saying of Malachie whereof I haue treated before I vrge you with S. Irenaeus and you shooting wide of the marke make answer to the place of Malachie whose saying is not in this place principally obiected but brought in by the way as it were by Saint Irenaeus interpretinge the pure Sacrifice by him mentioned of the Newe Oblation of the Newe Testament The olde learned Fathers you say neuer vnderstoode so much So much What so muche meane you That the Oblation of Christes body and Bloud is the new Oblation of the New Testament Irenaeus li. 4. cap. 23. which Christ taught his Disciples which the Church receiued of the Apostles and now offereth vp vnto God through the whole wrrlde as S. Irenaeus saith Did the Fathers neuer vnderstand this much What say you then to S. Irenaeus who vnderstoode so much as by his wordes it is cleare What is this but to set the holy Fathers at variance with S. Irenaeus Yet you wil needes seme to vnderstande the Sacrifice that Malachie spake of of Preaching of a Contrite hart of Prayer of Praise and thankesgeuing For credite hereof you allege TertulliaÌ„ S. Hierom and S. Augustin Wel what if it be so What answer is that to S. Irenaeus As for the place of Malachie as I said before it is past and answered Certainly it can not be vnderstanded of the purenes of mans hart for of lacke therof he complaineth not but of polluted sacrifices Againe the purenes of mans harte commonly is not so great as therfore the name of God should so much be magnified And the same was in many Iewes then no lesse then it is in the ChristiaÌ„s now To that you bringe out of Tertullian and S. Hierome concerning what is meante by the Pure Sacrifice in Malachie you haue myne answer before in the thirde Diuision In the .3 Diuision fol. â—0 b. deinceps What you bringe here you brought the same before Sparing my labour inke and paper I remitte the Reader vnto that place where he shal finde you to haue but a weake aide of Tertullian and shamefully to haue falsified S. Hierome as becommeth such false shifters to doo To prooue that Malachie by the pure Sacrifice meant not the Sacrifice of the Aulter you bringe in S. Martialis ad Burdegalenses whom you cal one of myne owne newe founde Doctours If you contemne him why doo you allege him Wil you shunne his auctoritie and yet craue helpe of him If I would vse your owne Rhetorique here might I say what toole is so bad that Maister Iewel wil not occupie M. Ievvel falsifieth Martialis rather then seeme to be without al weapon Of what authoritie so euer he be once this is true in your translation you haue fowly falsified him by putting in woordes of your owne forgerie For he speaketh nothing at al of Malachie nor in that place once nameth him Whose name you added of your owne vnto the sentence out of him alleged to vnderproppe your weake and ruinous building with al. In that Epistle ad Burdegalenses S. Martialis vnderstandeth by Ara Sanctificata one Special Aulter that in the Citie of Burdeaulx was consecrated in the name of GOD and S. Steuen Which Aulter being in olde time dedicated to an vnknowen God he at the ouerthrowe of Idols Aulters there caused to be reserued whole and him selfe halowed it This much is declared in the Epistle it selfe And as you haue falsified your Doctor with putting in stuffe of your owne to the beginning of the sentence so haue you corrupted him much worse with cutting away from the middest the hinder parte Martialis Epistol ad Burdegal For these be his wordes Nec solùm in ara sanctificata sed vbique offertur Deo oblatio munda sicut testatus est cuius corpus sanguinem in vitam aeternam offerimus Neither onely vpon the halowed Aulter but euery where is the cleane oblation offered vp vnto God as he hath witnessed whose body and bloude we offer vp to life euerlasting And what is that Christ hath witnessed for of him he speaketh That Priestes should offer vp his body and bloude in euery countrie Luc. 22. saying Do this in my Remembrance This serued not your purpose and therefore you hewed it away Double oblation one in spirite only the other in the Sacrament If this answer do not satisfie you may it please you to take this other S. Martialis speaketh of two kindes of Oblations The one is offered vp in spirite only the other in mysterie and in the Sacrament The spiritual oblation is offered vp not only vpon a sanctified Aulter but also euerywhere But the mystical and Sacramental oblation which is of the body and bloud of Christe is offered vp only vpon a consecrated Aulter bicause thereon is the real presence of the same And of that kinde of oblation in that very place which you haue so fowly corrupted he saith thus Christ hauing a body both vnspotted and without synne bicause he was conceiued of the Holy Ghoste and borne of the virgin Marie permitted it to be
Christe is wrought in the Mysteries Hieron in Psalm 97 So saith Beda Exaltatio Serpentis Aenei Passio Redemptoris nostri in Cruce The lifting vp of the Brasen Serpent is the Passion of our Redeemer vpon the Crosse. Ambro. dâ— Virginib So saith S. Hierome Quotidiè nobis Christus Crucifigitur August Quaest. Eâ—uaÌ„ge lib. 2. Vnto vs Christe is daily Crucified So S. Ambrose Christus quotidiè immolatur Christe is daily sacrificed So S. Augustine Tunc vnicuique Christus occiditur cùm credit occisum Then is Christe slaine to euery man Hieron ad Damas. when he beleeueth that Christe was slaine To conclude so S. Hierome â—aith Semper Christus credentibus immolatur Vnto the faithfâ—l Christe is euermore sacrificed Thus may the Sacrifice of the Holy Communion be called Christe to vvitte euen so as the ministration of the same is called the Passion or the Death of Christe Harding The first sentence of your Replie in this Diuision M. Iewel consisteth of .4 particles and eche of them is an impudent lye By the spiteful woordes you vtter against the most holy Masse you shewe vs with what stampe you are coined As for S. Cyprian neither doth he in this place condemne the Churche for ministring the Communion vnder one kinde nor for hauing the publike Churche seruice in the Latine tongue Which in these Westerne partes of Christendome is not as you cal it a strange vnknowen tongue but contrarywise a tongue among al other best knowen in general and common to al nations of the West Touching the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe so clearely by S. Cyprian here auouched that so it is you woulde neuer haue denyed had not you put the whole confidence of your cause in lying and denying most euident truthes And now therefore I must prooue against such a cauiller and wrangler as you are M. Ievvel standeth altogether vpoÌ„ certaine precise termes that there is light where the Sunne shyneth And here once againe you thinke to finde a lurking corner in your precise termes of the real sacrificing of Christe vnto his Father as though I prooued not that which in this Article you denie except the truth be affirmed in the same forme of wordes which your selfe haue deuised If you had good mater I trow you would not thus stand only vpon termes But let vs pul you out of your lurking corner An euideÌ„t place of S. CypriaÌ„ for the Sacrifice of the Aulter Cyprian lib. 2. epistol 3. as it were out of Cacus Denne and bring you abroade into the light Answer me Sir Wil it not appeare by this place of S. Cyprian that Christe offered him selfe vnto his Father at his laste Supper Be not these his very wordes Iesus Christe our Lorde and God first offered a Sacrifice to God the Father and commaunded the same to be done in his Remembraunce What Sacrifice was this It was not the Sacrifice of the Crosse pardy For that very same Sacrifice was not commaunded to be made againe it was once made for euer by Christe him selfe What can you name but the vnbloudy Sacrifice of his body and bloude For if you name vs the mere spiritual sacrifices of deuotion as Prayer Praise Thankesgeuing or any such other the like you must remember Christe did not first of al sacrifice the same For the Patriarkes and Prophetes did so long before Christe was incarnate What is it then S. Cyprian telleth it him selfe expressely saying Christe is the Sacrifice In Sacrificio quod Christus est He speaketh of such a Sacrifice in which the Priest occupieth the roome and doth the office of Christ truly and in doing whiche the Prieste by imitation doth the same thing that Christe did Then what did Christe and where did he that the Prieste is commaunded to folowe What neede I to stande vppon it Who knoweth not Cyprian ad CeciliuÌ„â— whereof S. Cyprian treateth in that Epistle to Caecilius and what Christe did at his Supper He tooke bread Math. 26 and then the Cuppe he gaue thankes blessed Luc. 22. and consecrated his body and bloud sayinge this is my Body 1. Cor. 11. Cyprian lib. 2. epistol 3. this is my Bloud and so offered vp as S. Cyprian saith the same thing which Melchisedech had offered that is to sayâ— bread and wine to wit his owne body and bloude Which Body and Bloude bicause both natures be inseparably vnited together in one person he calleth also by the name of Christe In Sacrificio quod Christus est in the Sacrifice which Christ is for here Christus is the nominatiue case to the verbe est Whereas then Christe offered Christe to his Father at his Supper and coÌ„maunded Priestes to doo the same in Remembrance of him vntil he come that being in euery respecte lawful which he commaundeth it foloweth that Priestes haue authoritie to offer vp Christe who is the Sonne of God vnto his Father which is the pointe of this Article that M. Iewel denieth And thus is the real sacrificing of Christe vnto his Father prooued by S. Cyprian real I say not in respecte of the manner of sacrificinge that was vppon the Crosse but of the Body and Bloude really present and being the real substance of this commemoratiue Sacrifice Here I needed not to procede further in this Diuision my Answer to the Chalenge being so sufficiently iustified touching the vnbloudy Sacrifice and this being prooued by S. Cyprians testimonie as it was prooued before by testimonie of S. Irenaeus that it is not onely lawful but also dutiful for Priestes to offer vp Christe vnto his Father Yet bicause M. Iewel who from the beginning neuer intended to yeelde how plaine mater so euer were prooued against him commeth now in with his Phrases hauing no plaine and directe authoritie whereby to prooue his negatiue doctrine Let vs see what pith his obscure phrases and tropical speaches do conteine Where as S. Cyprian saith plainely Christe is the Sacrifice meaning the substance of the Sacrifice celebrated at the Supper and now at the Aulter he willeth me to remember August in Ioan. tractat 26. that S. Augustine saith Petra erat Christus the Rocke was Christe For that he putteth vnto S. Augustine this worde illis interpreting it of the Iewes it is his owne addition S. Augustine hath it not But what concludeth he of this Not onely S. Augustine but S. Cyprian also in this very Epistle and first of al S. Paule saith 1. Cor. 1â— the Rocke was Christe I say to M. Iewel eftsones it may please him to remember that S. Augustine expoundeth him selfe immediatly in the next sentence saying Petra Christus in signo The Rocke vvas Christe The Rocke was Christe in a signe that is to say the Rocke was not Christe in substance and in deede but signified Christe If he intende thus to conclude as the Replie semeth to reporte As the Rocke was Christe so Christe is the Sacrifice but the
by a figuratiue speache onely as it is said the rocke was Christe For though the Fathers vse sometimes figuratine speaches yet thereof it foloweth not that S. Cyprian in this place of his Epistle to Cecilius spake figuratiuely in saying that Christe is the Sacrifice That he spake truly and meant according to the proprietie of the speach it is cleare by his owne wordes in the same Epistle For els hauing mencioned the Sacrifice of Melchisedech which consisted of bread and wine he would neuer haue said these wordes Quam rem perficiens adimplens Dominus panem calicem mixtum vino obtulit Cypria ad Cecil lib. 2. epâ—â—stola 3. qui est plenitudo veritatem praefiguratae Imaginis adimpleuit Our Lorde offered bread and cuppe mixte with wine perfiting and fulfilling the thing that Melchisedech did Christe his suppâ—â— fulfilled the figuâ—â— of Melchisedeâ—â— and he that is the fulnes fulfilled the truth of the forefigured Image Now if Christe at his Supper for thereof S. Cyprian speaketh offered not a true Sacrifice of his body and bloude in deede and therefore a true and real Sacrifice vnder the formes of bread and wine but onely a signe and figure or an Image representing his body and bloude How then was he the fulnesse How did he fulfil the truth of the forefigured Image For if al were but a signe and token Fulnes 〈◊〉 perfourmance memorie or representation that he offered then was not he the fulnesse neither fulfilled the truth For signes if they be onely signes be empty and void of the truth neither is fulnesse but where the very thinges be present And by such interpretation S. Cyprian should make the Sacrifice of Christe at his Supper no better then that of Melchisedech was and which is absurde the truth of a forefigured image should be but a figure and fulnesse should be voide of the thing fulfilled How be it to proue the Sacrifice by witnesse of S. Cyprian I stayed not my selfe vpon these wordes In Sacrificio quod Christus est M. Ievvel aÌ„svvereth as he thinketh good to a word or tvvo aÌ„d leaueth the chiefe substance vnaÌ„svvered specially but vpon the large processe of that whole Epistle Whereof I tooke what seemed to make good proufe of that I entended And I pray you Sir why answer you not to the other manifest wordes What Sacrifice is that which as S. Cyprian saith Christe first of al offered vp vnto his Father and coÌ„maunded the same to be offered in his remembrance What Sacrifice is that in doing whereof the Priest doth the office of Christe truly What Sacrifice is that in offring vp whereof the Priest doth by imitation the same thing that Christe did What is that true and perfite Sacrifice that he offreth vp to God if he beginne to offer right so as he seeth Christe him selfe to haue offered If you could haue named vs any other besides the Satrifice of the body and bloud of Christe is it to be thought you would haue conceeled it to so great hinderance of your cause That whereby your Chalenge is fully answered and the Catholique Doctrine plainely auouched you ouerhippe and dissemble and vppon a peece of a sentence by your selfe falsified and by your wrong translation wreathed from S. Cyprians meaning you bestowe many woordes and muche of your common stuffe which consisteth of your Phrases pyked out of your Notebookes and here without trueth or iudgement shuffled together Iewel And that the vveaknes of M. Hardinges gheasses may the better appeare vnderstande thou good Christian Reader that the Holy Catholique Fathers haue vsed to say that Christe is Sacrificed not only in the Holy Supper but also in the Sacrament of Baptisme S. Augustine saithe August expositioÌ„ inchoatâ— ad Rom. Holocaustum Dominicae Passionis eo tempore pro se quisque offert qno eiusdem Passionis Fide dedicatur The Sacrifice of our Lordes Passion euery man then offereth for him selfe when he is Confirmed in the Faithe of his Passion And againe Holocaustum Domini tunc pro vnoquoque offertur quodammodo In eod cùm eius nomine Baptizando signatur Then is the Sacrifice of our Lorde In a Manner offered for eche man In eod when in Baptisme he is marked with the name of Christe And againe Non relinquitur Sacrificium pro peccatis Chrysost in epist. a Hebraeos hom 16 Ambros. de poeniâ— li. 2. ca. 2 id est non potest denuo Baptizari There is leafte no Sacrifice for Sinne that is to say He can be no more Baptized And in this consideration Chrysostome saithe Baptisma Christi Sanguis Christi est Christes Baptisme is Chtistes Bloude And likevvise S. Ambrose In Baptismo Crucifigimus in nobis Filium Dei In Baptisme wee Crucifie in our selues the Sonne of God Harding Concerning the Sacrifice made in Baptisme August iâ— expositioÌ„e inchoatae in epistol ad Rom. whereof you tel vs out of the Auncient Fathers That euery one at that time for his synnes offereth vp the Burnt sacrifice of our Lordes Passion when in the faith of the same Passion he is dedicated as S. Augustine saith and that in Baptisme we crucifie in vs the Sonne of God as S. Ambrose saith Ambros. de poenit li. 2. ca. 2. by their owne woordes they teache vs to vnderstande this spiritually and not as the woordes sounde in proper speache For S. Augustine in that place qualifieth the manner of his vtterance and calleth his reader backe from absurde imagination by this woorde quodammodo Quodammodo asmuch to say in a manner And S. Ambrose likewise saith not simply that in Baptisme we crucifie Christe but that we crucifie him in vs. Crucifigimus in nobis Filium Dei We crucifie in vs the Sonne of God saith he Whereby they meane that in Baptisme we put on Christe that to sinne we die with Christe and are buried with him into death and are made conformable to the similitude of his death and that the effecte vertue and benefite of his Passion by Baptisme is applyed vnto vs. And bicause as Moyses sprinckled with bloude the booke of the Olde Testament Leuit. 4. the Tabernacle Hebr. 9. and the Vessels of Ministerie right so Christe with his owne Bloude cleanseth our myndes which be the bookes of the Newe Testament by interpretation of S. Chrysostome Chrysosto in epist. ad Hebraeos Homi. 16. and with the same bloude sprinckleth vs who are his Tabernacle for him to dwel in and to walke in as he saith him selfe and his Vessels to serue him in holy Ministeries which great benefite is chiefly deriued vnto vs in Baptisme In consideration hereof forasmuch as vpon the Crosse onely his pretious bloud ranne out of his body and then was he in him selfe sacrificed these Fathers feared not to say * Ambros. the one that in Baptisme we crucifie in vs the Sonne of God * August the other that when we are baptized we offer
your yokefellowes Queanes and your children bastardes verely al the Burgeses of your Parlamentes with the helpe of al your brethren shal neuer make them honest wiues nor these true begoten And here remember M. Iewel that as the first parte of this saying of S. Chrysostome which you allege for you maketh nothing for your Mariage of Votaries so the later parte is altogether contrarie to the procedinges of your fleshly felowes For it condemneth vtterly their filthy bigamie or second yoking Some of your companions who being Priestes and religious and vsurping the roome of a Bishop not farre from Sarisburie as you do being olde of yeres but ful of luste who for chastities sake and God wote for none other cause their former olde queanes being departed this life haue yoked vnto them yonge Strompets contrary to S. Chrysostom and also to S. Paule S. after Chrysostomes iudgement would I dare say geue you harty thankes and wel rewarde you too if you could defend their second yoking How I may terme it I knowe not For I trow it ought not to be called Bigamie sithens the first yoking was not mariage For a fuller answer to al this brought here our of S. Chrysostome I referre the Reader to my Confutation of the Apologie In the coÌ„futation Fol. 75. c. where this Replier hath set forth the matter for Priestes Mariage and furnished it with the same stuffe If the Apologie be not his workemanship I crye him mercie Verely I am persuaded and so be many mo that this ambitious Replie and that rash Apologie be egges of one hennes laying Chrysost. in epist. ad Hebraeos hom 7. Wel let vs see other your best stuffe Vse marriage with discretion saith S. Chrysostome by you alleged and thou shalt be the Chiefe in the kingdom of heauen Why sir what auaileth this to the iustifying and making good of the incestuous contracte betwen men and wemen of your sectes that haue vowed chastitie As for example what helpeth this the case of Martin Luther the Austen Fryer who yoked him selfe to Caterin Bore the Nonne of Nymick in Saxonie or of your great frend and Maister Peter Martyr yoked in Euangelical wedlocke to dame Caterin the Nonne of Metz. Peter Martyr the regular Chanon of S. Augustines order who likewise yoked him selfe vnto Dame Catherine the Nonne of Metz in Lorraine that stale out of her cloister by night and ranne away with an honest mans wife of Metz to Strasburg which honest mans wife married to Emanuel the Iewe that afterward came to Cambridge and there read an Hebrue lesson her husband being a liue Emannel the Ievv to the Regesters vvife of Metz her husband lyuing as he tolde me the tale him selfe with weeping eyes at Metz as I passed toward Italie through Lorraine Whereas ye make S. Paule to say that matrimonie is honorable in al persons I iudge ye wil say it was not very honorable in these two persons And yet forsooth it was allowed for good among your holy brethren of Strasburg bicause the true husband was a Papist Moreouer touching this saying of S. Chrysostomâ— how can they vse marriage moderately and with discretion betwen whom it was vnlawful and wicked from the beginning In the last place as an auctoritie of greatest force to knit vp the knotte of the Vowebreakers mariages S. Hieromes recorde is alleged But ô Lorde out of which worke of his is it alleged Euen out of the first booke against Iouinian the heretike defending the sacrilegious wedlocke of wiued Monkes and husbanded Nonnes as M. Iew. now doth What mayst thou good Reader more woonder at in this Superintendent His impudencie that is not a shamed to name S. Hierom as though he spake any worde for the maintenance of Votaries wedlockes who of set purpose most vehemently and learnedly wrote against them and against Iouinian the great patrone of the same or his crafty wickednesse that would so begyle the simple and vnlearned Reader with the auctoritie of so holy and so auncient a Father dissembling the argument whereof he treated which being disclosed it is easily perceiued how litle he furthereth such abominable bargaines But some wil say Be not the wordes alleged by M. Iewel to be founde in S. Hierome I graâ—nt they are founde So the wordes that Satan tempted our Sauiour withal Math. 4. are founde in the Scripture Yet were they not truly alleged Psal. 90. It is not hard to peeke a fewe wordes out of any writer which being sâ—t alone may seme to sounde against some truth yea against the writers principal intent How beit the wordes that be here alleged out of S. Hierom be neither against the writers purpose nor for M. Iewels purpose For onely they proue that the custome of promoting married men to be Priestes was not quite growen out of vse in S. Hieromes time For though he say that in his daies Priestes were made of married men yet he semeth not to meane that they vsed to company in bedde with wiues Thereof thus he writeth in the same booke Hieron aduersus Iouinian lib. 1. Si laicus quicunque fidelis orare non potest nisi careat officio coniugali Sacerdoti cui semper pro populo offerendâ— sunt sacrificia semper orandum est Si semper orandum est ergo semper carendum est matrimonio If one of the laietie or any faithful person who so euer he be can not praye that is to say can not geue him selfe wholly to prayer as when he receiueth our Lordes body for thereof he speaketh specially onlesse he cease from the dutie of wedlocke a Priest by whom Sacrifices must alwaies be offered vp for the people must alwaies praye If he must alwaies praye then must he alwaies be without matrimonie that is without the worke of matrimonie Thus thou seest good Reader how euident and strong a truth it is that he who hath ones vowed chastitie as Priestes in the West Churche Monkes Friers and Nonnes haue done can not lawfully go backe to Mariage and that M. Iewel going about to proue the contrary that is to â—ay that they may marrie is not hable to bring one example of the Primitiue Churche nor one testimonie of any auncient writer that maketh directely or by necessary sequele for that purpose But diuerting from the point of the question he allegeth places and testimonies to proue that married men were at the beginning made Priestes and Bishops as we graunt they were for lacke of others so meete as they were for that function being a truth denied by no man and can not bring one example of the olde Churche sentence or peece of sentence whereby it may clearely appeare that any man was euer first made Priest and afterward married and was allowed for so doing Iewel Epiphanius vvriteth thus of certaine of his time Repudiant nuptias at non libidinem Epiphan 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In honore enim apud illos est non sanctiâ—as â—ed
Commissioners in London vpon a complaint examined the mater that it was founde but probable And probable he meaneth in the iudgement of them who gladly finde fault with al that was done touching the punishment of heresie in Queene Maries reigne Now the thing if any such thing were done at al being so Notorious so openly executed so fewe yeres then past since it was doone so many men yet lyuing that would haue ben present at the examination in case they had bene commaunded the charges of the iourney from Garnesey where it is said to haue bene done to London being borne and could haue brought true witnesse neuerthelesse to be founde but probable I weene it wil not to any wise man appeare very probable How be it let the Fable be a Storie and the same be taken for true Of the vvoman of Garnseis childe falliÌ„g out of her bely into the fire according as Foxe doth describe it to the aduantage and as you M. Iewel report it That in Garnesey three wemen that is the mother and her twoo daughters were burnt and that one of the Daughters was with childe and the childe issued from her wombe being riued with the fier and was consumed together with the fier What of al this In whom was the faulte in the officer that tooke not the childe out of the fier or in the vnnatural mother that brought it into the fier In the Storie there is mention made of a childe and of the mother but of the childes Father there is no woorde spoken It appeareth very credible that the historiographer was a shamed to name the childes Father least so he should haue defaced the glorie of the mothers Martyrdom For I would faine know who was the husband to the daughter M. Fox doth not expresse it But you wil say how so euer the childe was begotten the mother being in that case should haue bene by no Law iustice or reason committed vnto the fier True it is a woman in that case may for once claime the benefite of her belly Mary I haue heard Lawiers say that if whiles she is in prison she play the strompet againe by Lawe the iudge may denie her the benefite of her belly and geue sentence of death vpon her But as for your pratteling parrat Paratine for so was her name as M. Fox registreth her it was not knowen to the Iudge Paratine of Garnesey that she was with childe Had it bene knowen doubtelesse her death had bene differred vntil she had ben brought on bed But the honest woman bicause she would not shame the Gospel keping it priuy from the Magistrates claimed not the benefite of the Lawe and so now not only like an harlot or Heretique but like a Murtherer went desperatly to the fier and murdered bothe her selfe and her childe conceiued within her So farre the Deuil carrieth them whom he possesseth and leadeth at his wil. This abominable facte God by his most iust iudgement reueled to the condemnation bothe of her and of the cause for which she dyed by suffering the childe to fal from her wombe in the sight of al that stoode by Iudge now discrete Reader to whom redoundeth the blame of the crime whether to the Ministers of Iustice who not knowing the thing executed the Lawe or to the woman that for auoiding a worldly shame conceeling her owne turpitude became a murtherer of her owne babe before it came to perfection So that she died gilty of three heinous crimes of heresie lecherie and murther And to these thefte may be added for the fourth For it appeareth by the tale that Foxe him selfe to her best estimation telleth of her that she was a thefe as being accessorie to the honest woman Vincent Gosser that stole a siluer gobblet If the mater were wel examined I doubte not she would be tried an honest woman and a fitte vessel to receiue the glorie of these newe inuented Martyrdomes Here I appeale vnto your owne wisedome M. Iewel Vvhat vvas to be don vvith the dead and demaunde of you what you could or would haue done for that vnperfite and dead childe in that case better then was done Carcasse of Paratines babe If they had taken it out of the fyer what should that haue auailed Life it had none and therfore was it not to be baptized Sense it had none and therfore had it not ben holpen by sauing it from burning As for burial sith it was neither Christened nor come to be perfite man it was aswel burnt and buried in earth yea in some respecte better bicause being burnt with the wicked mother besides the more detestation of the horrible crime to the example of others it was a testimonie against the mothers vnnaturalnes Neither in deede truly to speake was it a poore innocent Babe as to aggrauate the facte more rhetorically then truly you reporte For being a dead thing as it could not be riche or hurtful so neither properly ought it to be called poore or innocent This much considered you haue gotten litle honestie to your Gospel M. Iewel by rehersal of casting this poore innocent Babe into the fyer And the mother your Syster in the Lorde is fownd but a meane Martyr and witnesse of the truth Tybourn Martyrs Of the fruite of such Martyrdome the famous Tree of Tybourne bringeth forth good stoare Iewel The vvorste vvoorde that proceeded from them vvas this O Lord forgeue them They knovve not vvhat they doo O Lorde Iesu receiue my Spirite In the meane vvhile ye stoode by and delited your eies vvith the sight Ye digged vp the poore carkasses of Goddes Sainctes that had beene buried longe before ye serued them solemnely vvith processe and ascited them to appeare at your Consistories and by Publique sentence adiudged them to die the second death and so to the perpetual shame of your cruel folie ye vvreakâ—e your anger vpon the dead O M. Hardingeâ— your conscience knovveth these are no lies They are vvriten in the eies and hartes of many thousandes These be the markes of your Religion O vvhat reckeninge vvil you yeelde vvhen so muche innocent Bloud shal be required at your handes And vvhere you say VVee must pulle the Olde Martyrs out of Heauen to place our ovvne for that our Doctrine and theirs as you beare vs in hande is quite contrary al this is but a needeles ostentation of idle vvordes Yf vauntes vvere proufes then vvere this mater fully ended But vve say that in these cases that I haue mooued you are not hable to allege one sufficient Clause or Sentence of your side out of any of al the Olde learned Fathers And hitherto your muster appeareth but very simple notvvithstaÌ„ding the great promise of your Stoare Harding The pacience of your stincking Martyrs who say you vttered no worse worde then ô Lorde forgeue them ô Lorde Iesu receiue my spirite is by you hyely commended Pacience in an euil cause is no sufficient trial of a true Martyr It
Nettes neither forsake the great House that is to say the Churche for their sakes who be Vessels made to dishonour Now in case ye also by like rule wil say that they at whose handes the Catholique Churche suffereth suche thinges be not of your side then trie your owne mynde amend your errour imbrace vnitie of sprite in the band of peace Iewel Certainely the holy Fathers and Martyrs of God vvil say unto you VVee knovve not your Priuate Masses vvee knovve not your Halfe Communion vvee knovv not your Strange Vnknovven Praiers vvee knovve not your Adoration of Gorruptible Creatures vve knovve not this Sacrificing of the Sonne of God vvee knovve not your Nevve Religion vvee knovve not you God open the eyes of your Hartes that ye may see the miserable state ye stande in and recouer the place that ye haue loste and finde your Names vvritten in the Booke of Life Harding In the ende of this Diuision by a Rhetorical fiction you make the holy Fathers The holy lerned Fathers tale to M. Ievv and hi◠Cōpanion◠and Martyrs of God to say vnto vs as your blasphmous harte doth phontasie But as we feare not that any suche thing by them shal be tolde vs so were they now lyuing doubtelesse thus would they saye vnto you and them of your sectes as neuerthelesse in their bookes and learned workes they also doo now in effecte say vnto you daily We knowe not your strange state that is without external Sacrifice and Priesthod and consequently without a Lawe We knowe not your eating of common bread and drinking of common wine at your newe founde Suppers in steede of receiuing the true body and bloude of Christe We knowe not your Iustification by your special Faith onely We knowe not your perilous doctrine of Predestination We knowe not your new manner of baptizing without holy oile and other auncient rites and Ceremonies We knowe not your chaungeable new deuised Cōmunions We knouwe not your monstrous Supremacie of Princes in Ecclesiastical maters that is to say the keyes of the kingdom of heauen the supreme Cōmission to feede Christes lambes and shepe and the whole auctoritie that Christe gaue to S. Peter and his Successours so to be vnited by a forced Parlament to the Crowne of a laye Prince that it be made a mater of inheritaunce so that the Prince for the time being be head of the Churche and supreme gouernour in al thinges and causes as wel spiritual as temporal be it man or woman or childe sucking at the Nourses breste We condemne your negatiue Diuinitie which denieth mannes freewil merites of good workes done in grace Prayers made to our blessed lady the Apostles Martyrs and other Saintes to be intercessours for vs to God Prayers for the dead We deteste your wicked and incestuous mariages of Priestes Monkes Friers and Nonnes and of al such as haue made solemne vowe to liue without the vse of wedlocke We deteste your impietie in that ye refuse to adore and doo godly honour to the body and bloude of your Creator in the Sacrament of the Aulter We detest your pulling downe of Aulters your robbing of Churches your schismes and heresies and rebellion against your lawful Princes we detest your prophane contempte of al good religion and godlynes we detest your wickednes we detest you As for you M. Iewel I pray God to touche your harte so as you may be induced rather with some shame of the worlde to recant your heresies and repent to saue your soule then with desperat continuing in that you haue taken vppon you by your foolish and arrogant Chalenge to keepe the vaine estimation of deceiued men and finally to lose your foule for euer The .12 Diuision The Ansvver LEauing no smal number of places that might be recited out of diuerse other Doctours I wil bring two of two woorthy Bishops one of Chrysostom the other of S. Ambrose confirming this Trueth S. Chrysostomes woordes be these Chrysosto in epist. ad Heb. homi 17. Pontifex noster ille est qui hostiam mundantem nos obtulit ipsam offerimus nunc quae tunc oblata quidem consumi non potest Hoc autem quod nos facimus in commemorationem fit eius quod factum est Hoc enim facite inquit in mei commemorationem He is our Bishop that hath offered vp the Hoste whiche cleanseth vs. The same doo we offer also nowe whiche though it were then offered yet can not be consumed But this that we doo is done in Remembraunce of that whiche is done For doo ye this saith he in my Remembraunce S. Ambrose saith thus Ambros. In Psal. 38. Vidimus Principem Sacerdotum ad nos venientem vidimus audiuimus offerentem pro nobis sanguinem suum sequamur vt possumus sacerdotes vt offeramus pro populo sacrificium etsi infirmi merito tamen honorabiles Sacrificio Quia etsi Christus non videtur offerre tamen ipse offertur in terris quando Christi Corpus offertur We haue seene the Prince of Priestes come to vs we haue seene and hearde him offer for vs his Bloude Let vs that be Priestes folow him as we may that we may offer Sacrifice for the people being though weake in merite yet honourable for the Sacrifice Because al be it Christe be not seene to offer yet he is offered in earth when the Body of Christe is offered Of these our Lordes woordes which is geuen for you and which is shedde for you and for many here S. Ambrose exhorteth the Priestes to offer the Body and Bloud of Christe for the people and willeth them to be more regarded then cōmonly they be now a daies for this Sacrifice sake though otherwise they be of lesse desert Iewel This allegation argueth no greate abundance of stoare For Chrysostome in these vvoordes bothe openeth him selfe and shevveth in vvhat sense other Ancient Fathers vsed this vvorde Sacrifice and also vtterly ouerthrovveth M. Hardinges vvhole purpose touching the same For as he saithe wee offer vp the same Sacrifice that Christe offered so in most plaine vvise and by sundrie vvordes he remooueth al doubte and declareth in vvhat sorte and meaning vvee offer it He saithe not as M. Hardinge saithe wee offer vp the Sōne of God vnto his Father and that verily and in deede but contrary vvise thus he saithe Chrysost. in Epist. ad Hebr. Hom. 17. Offerimus quidem sed ad Recordationem facientes Mortis eius Hoc Sacrificium Exemplarillius est Hoc quod nos facimus in commemorationem fit eius quod factum est Id ipsum semper offerimus Magis autem Recordationem Sacrificij operamur VVe offer in deede but in remembrance of his Death This Sacrifice is an Examlpe of that Sacrifice This that we doo is donne in remembrannce of that that was done VVee offer vp the same that Christe offered Or rather wee worcke the Remembrance of that Sacrifice Thus vvee offer vp Christe That is to say an
Example a Commemoration a Remembrance of the Deathe of Christe This kinde of Sacrifice vvas neuer denied but M. Hardinges Real Sacrifice vvas yet neuer proued De Consecat Distin 2. CuÌ„ fraÌ„gitur So saithe S. Augustine Cùm hostia frangitur sanguis in ora Fidelium funditur quid aliud quà m Dominici Corporis in Cruce Immolatio significatur VVen the Oblation is broken and the Bloude that is to say The Sacrament of the Bloude is powred into the mouthes of the Faitheful what other thinge is there signified but the Sacrifice of Our Lordes Bodye vpon the Chrosse Harding How so euer it like you to scorne at our stoare the multitude of cleare testimonies for proufe of the Sacrifice to the learned can not be vnknowen Were it so that ye had but one making so directly against it as these two here and sundry others in this Article by me alleged make for it ye would haue made no smal stoare of it In bookes and pulpites in tauernes and alebenches your trompettes long er this should haue proclaimed it As for these two places let vs see how your sclender Replie is farre to light so to carry away the weight of them First touching S. Chrysostome with what plainer termes with what more effectual wordes could any man haue expressed the truth of our Sacrifice That Priestes haue auctoritie to offer vp Christ vnto his Father If we that be Priestes offer vp now also the selfe same hoste which our Bishop Christe hath offered vpon the Crosse euen that hoste which cleanseth vs from our sinnes as S. Chrysostome saith that being none other but the precious flesh and bloud of Christ that is to say Christe him selfe for he offered him selfe to his Father to cleanse vs how haue not Priestes auctoritie to offer vp Christ vnto his Father which is the expresse Article that you denye That euery simple man may haue in readinesse an Argument against such false teachers for the Sacrifice An Arment for the vnlearned to prooue the Sacrifice thus for their sake it may be framed Who so euer do offer vp the selfe same hoste which Christ hath offered they offer vp Christe The Priestes offer the same that Christe offered Ergo they offer vp Christe The Maior is euident in it selfe the Minor is S. Chrysostomes the Argument being good the Conclusion must needes be true That it may the better appeare of what force M. Iewels Replie is S. Chrysostomes place examined vvith the Replie of M. Ievv this much is to be considered That in this place of S. Chrysostome consisting of two partes two thinges are auouched In the first parte he geueth vs his witnesse for the substaÌ„ce of this Sacrifice which Priestes do now offer in the Churche In the second parte he declareth one ende wherein the Sacrifice offered by Priestes doth differ from the Sacrifice offered by Christ him selfe Christ our Bishop saith he offered the cleansing hoste Ad Heb. Hom. 17. But we offer that â—oste in commemoration Which is as much to say The ende of the Sacrifice that Christe offered was to cleanse vs from our synnes The ende of the Sacrifice that is done by Priestes is to renewe daily the memorie of this cleansing Sacrifice and so consequently to deriue and apply vnto the deuoute and faithful people as also vnto them selues the fruit and effecte of it In Epist. ad Heb. Hom. 17. The identitie of the substance of either Sacrifice and the diuersitie of the ende of either Sacrifice is plainely taught by S. Chrysostome in that Homilie Now let vs examine your Replie Three thinges attributed to this saying of S. Chrysostâ— by M. Ievv You attribute vnto S. Chrysostome for hauing vttered the saying that I here allege three thinges The first is that in these wordes marke Reader what this man saith He openeth him selfe The second is that he sheweth in what sense other auncient Fathers vsed this worde Sacrifice The third is that he ouerthroweth M. Hardings whole purpose touching the Sacrifice Surely this is very much and were it also true I maruel why neither your selfe nor any of your felowes euer heretofore alleged it against the Sacrifice But certaine we are ye shal wring hard before ye wring this muche out of these wordes Hovv S. ChrysostoÌ„ openeth him selfe against M. Iewel That in these wordes he openeth him selfe I may easily graunt you But that opening is openly against your open Sacramentarie heresie For whereas you denie the oblation and Sacrifice of the Church he saith that now also we offer whereas you denie that we offer Christe to the Father he saith we offer now also the selfe same hoste which our high Bishop Christe hath offered And to put it out of doubte what hoste he meaneth he openeth him selfe as you say calling it hostiam mundantem nos the hoste that cleanseth vs which can be none other but Christe him selfe And bicause the hostes that were offered in sacrifice in the olde lawe were forthwith consumed to shewe the excellencie of this hoste he saith of it that being then that is to say vpon the Crosse offered it can not be consumed And therefore in the same Homilie he saith that it is otherwise with vs now then it was with the Iewes For they on diuers daies offered diuers lambes but we saith he offer not one lambe to day and an other lambe to morowe but alwaies we offer one and the same lambe S. Chrysostom returned vpon M. Ievvel Touching the second point if in these wordes let them be consideratly perused S. Chrysostome shewe in what sense other auncient Fathers haue vsed this woorde Sacrifice then by the auncient Fathers your doctrine touching the truth of Christes body in the blessed Sacrament M. Ievv ouershot him selfe in alleging this place of S. Chrysostom is quite ouerthrowen For he calleth it most expressely the Hoste that cleanseth vs from our sinnes which Christe our high Bishop offered vp for vs vppon the Crosse. If the auncient Fathers when so euer they speake of the hoste that is offered vp by Priestes in the Sacrifice of the Churche meane thus as S. Chrysostome speaketh then are they of our side by your owne confession then is the Catholike Doctrine concerning the Sacrament and the Sacrifice by them against your heresie confirmed and mainteined God be praised by whose prouidence the Truth is confessed by the ennemies of Truth Certainely here you ouershote your selfe in telling the truth against your selfe vnwares Here then I shal aduertise the Christian Reader to beare these wordes of S. Chrysostome in memorie and to consider wel of them for so much as in them he openeth him selfe as Mayster Iewel confesseth and sheweth what meaning the auncient Fathers had when they spake of the Sacrifice of the Churche But how in these wordes he ouerthroweth my purpose touching the Sacrifice or rather the vniuersal Doctrine of the whole Churche that neither I nor M. Iewel him selfe nor any
the difference betwene this and that is this That was the Sacrifice that cleanseth our synnes with his bloude actually shed and redemed vs by vertue of it selfe This is the Commemoratiue Sacrifice which is offered in commemoration of that hauing for the substance of it the same body and bloude of Christe that was offered vpon the Crosse by vertue of Consecration made really present and applieth vnto vs the merite and effecte of the cleansing and redemption wrought and perfourmed vpon the Crosse. Then immediatly foloweth the last sentence of the Homilie a parte whereof you haue taken for your purpose Non aliud Sacrificiū sicut Pontifex sed idipsum semper offerimus caet we offer not an other Sacrifice as the Bishop of the olde lawe did but alwayes we offer the very same that Christe offered or rather we worke the remembrance of the Sacrifice In the Discourse of S Chrysostom out of whiche M. Iewel hath piked and culled out certaine peeces three thinges in effect are declared First that we offer secondly that our manner of offering is other then Christes was therefore ours is called a sampler of that and it is donne in commemoration of his Death Thirdly that the Hoste or thing offered in either Sacrifice is one and the same in substance which is the true body of Christe Graunt vs the first and the last that is to say that we offer in deede yea and that the same Hoste which Christe offered and to al men of reason and iudgement though our Sacrifice be a sampler of Christes Sacrifice vpō the Crosse and though it be done for commemoration of that shal our Real Sacrifice be sufficiently proued For what is our endeuour in this Article but to proue that we offer vnto God that which Christo our Bishop hath offered which is Christe him selfe And whereas making vp your Epiphonema you say with more brauarie then truth Thus we offer vp Christe that is to say an example a commemoration a remembrāce of the Death of Christe I neuer heard of such a that is to say before specially if the real presence by these wordes be excluded as your meaning is O what impudencie is this Differēce betvven the hoste and the commemoratiō Doth not S. Chrysostom by your selfe alleged make a plaine distinction and difference betwen the hoste offered and the remembrance saying that which we doo is done for a commemoration Doth it not therby appeare that somewhat must be done before and besides the Commemoration Who euer so confounded thinges as as by your absurde and false interpretation you doo making the body and bloude of Christe or Christe him selfe and the remembrance of Christes death one thing What is this your meaning as though the substance of the Sacrifice were nothing els but the remembrance of Christes death Let this once be graunted and why may not any man or woman make vs as good a Sacrifice at their table at home in their owne howse as your selfe can at the Communion table in our Ladies Churche at Sarisburie For at that homely table may Christes death be remembred aswel as at your Communion table This kinde of Sacrifice say you speaking of the commemoration of Christes Death was neuer denied As in a right sense it is very true and was neuer by vs denied for the deuoute remembrance of Christes Death by it selfe considered is a kinde of spiritual Sacrifice so if you meane thereby to exclude the truth of the thing offered whiche is the body and bloud of Christe M. Ievvel alvvaies cōcludeth the denial of one truth by thaffirmation of an other truth and serue vs with a shewe and a remembrance onely distinct from the true thing it selfe that is offered which seemeth to be your whole drifte this parte of your doctrine we vtterly denie and tel you that for maintenance of the same you vse a fond and vaine reason For what an Argument is it when two thinges be bothe true by the affirmation of the one to conclude the denial of the other As for example what witte wil allowe this Argument The Sunne shineth Ergo it raineth not or Ergo it is not colde whereas many times we see it raine and feele it colde when the Sunne shyneth cleare and bright Right so we tel you and neuer stint telling you which neuerthelesse ye dissemble to vnderstand that this your common Argument is naught the Sacrifice which we offer is a sampler or a commemoration of that which Christe offered Ergo it is not the same which Christe offered For in diuers respectes it is bothe as now we haue proued by S. Chrysostome It is the same in substance that is to say the substance of that was offered vpon the Crosse and of that is offered by Priestes is the Masse in one and the same but it is diuers in the manner of offering For that was offered bloudily this vnbloudily in mysterie and by way of commemoration So it is the body and Bloud of Christe offered and also a commemoration of the bloudy offering The testimonie of S. Augustine I maruel what you meant to allege it maketh quite against you For both it reporteth the real presence which you denie and sheweth a difference betwixt the thing which is offered and Christes Death by the same signified which you cōfounde We graunt with S. Augustin when the hoste is broken De Consec Dict. 2. Cum frangitur and the bloude is powred into the mouthes of the faithful the Sacrificing of our Lordes body is signified It is not your false translation of the Oblation for the hoste nor your Sacramentarie exposition of the Sacrament of the bloude for the bloude that can racke S. Augustine to the defence of your doctrine If you grate vpon the worde Significatur and therefore wil needes haue it to be a signification of Christes Sacrifice as we denie not the signification so we require you to acknowlege the real body and bloude of Christe by breaking whereof vnder the forme of bread and powring whereof into the mowthes of the faithful vnder the forme of wine the same signification and commemoration of Christes Death is made You handle this place of S. Augustine as it semeth as you handled the place of S. Chrysostome before Sweeping cleane away the hoste and wyping away the bloude you leaue remaining onely a signification or token And thus you feede your people with signes and tokens in steede of the most holesome and substantial meate and drinke Thus haue you not weakened the strength of S. Chrysostomes testimonie by your feeble answer thus it remaineth stil in good force against your Chalenge thus by your sclender Replie you haue geuen al men occasion to thinke how good and sufficient our Stoare is for the proufe of the external Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe in scoffing whereat you take so muche pleasure It remaineth that we trie of what substance and pith your Replie is to the place by me alleged
before offered in figure But that performance of truth is by the learned Fathers commonly acknowleged in the Sacrifice of the Supper In which Christe offered his body and bloude vnder the formes of bread and wine after the order of Melchisedek for thankesgeuing which he offered vpon the Crosse for redemption August in Ioan. Tract 26. Your common figuratiue saying taken out of S. Augustine Illis Petra Christus vnto them the Rocke was Christe though it be not altogether so reported of S. Augustin in the place by you coted is abruptely brought in to what purpose I see not but to beguile the vnlerned as I suppose who therby may be moued to thinke that our Sacrifice is as mere a figure as the figures of the olde lawe were To this I haue answered once or twise before In al the frayes ye make against the most holy Mysteries this bad toole is euer at hand with you to strik withal Iewel Sometimes they compare it vvith the Sacrifice of Thankesgeuinge and vvith the Ministration of the holy Communion and make it equal vvith the same S. Augustine saithe August in quaest Noui Veter Testamēt quaest 109. Melchisedek Abrahae primum quasi Patri fidelium tradidit Eucharistiam Corporis Sanguinis Domini Melchisedek gaue first vnto Abraham as vnto the Father of the Faithful the Sacramente of the Bodie and Bloud of Christe So S. Hierome saithe Melchisedek in typo Christi Panem Vinum obtulit Mysterium Christianorum in Saluatoris Corpore Hierō ad Marcellā Sanguine dedicauit Melchisedek in the Figure of Christe offered Breade and VVine and dedicated the Mysterie of Christians in the Bodie and Bloude of Christe These Authorities might serue to make some shevv that Melchisedeck saide Masse and Consecrated the Sacrament of the Bodie and Bloude of Christe and offered vp Christe in Sacrifice vnto his Father But of M. Hardinge or any other suche Prieste they touche nothinge Harding You shal neuer shewe vs where either the Present that Melchisedek gaue to Abraham by which terme you would abolish the Sacrifice or the Sacrifice which he made in bread and wine was cōpared with the Sacrifice of thankesgeuing onlesse it be the Euchariste which also beareth that name wherein the real body and bloud of Christe is present As for the ministration of the holy Communion it is false to say It is compared with the ministration that is to say with the acte of the ministring the Communion But I graunt it is compared to the thing it selfe that is to say to the body and bloud of Christe consecrated offered and receiued in the holy Communion Prouided alwaies that by the holy Communion we meane not your newe toye now practized in England by your Ministers that be no Priestes where there is no holy thing consecrated to make it holy Dionys. in Ecclesiast Hierarchia but the holy Communion of the Catholike Churche which S. Dionyse calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The authoritie you allege vnder the name of S. Augustine is not S. Augustines If I had alleged it against you a great deale of your scoffing Rhetorike should haue ben bestowed both to reproue the booke and also me for alleging the same I am sure if you haue read either the worke it selfe with any iudgement or the Censure of Erasmus vpon it you are persuaded it is an vnworthy peece of worke to be fathered vpō so worthy a Doctor As for the very Question it selfe out of which you bring your authoritie I maruel you considered not what Erasmus saith of it Quaestione CIX multa garrit vt ostendat Melchisedek non fuisse hominem In the CIX question saith he this author maketh a great bible bable to shewe that Melchisedeck was not a man In the same line there he speaketh of him as it were of your selfe saying Quaest. 125. scurram agit But who soeuer and what so euer the author of that worke be the place is alleged without any dependence or coherence as though you cared not in what order you allege testimonies so you make vp a heape Either for haste or which is more likely for guile you leafte out both the beginning and the ende of it whereby the meaning is clearely declared Melchisedek saith the author gaue vnto Abraham Quaest. Veteris noui testament q. 109. as vnto the Father of the faithful the Eucharist or Sacrament of the body and bloud of Christ. But what was it that he gaue It foloweth in the same sentence Vt praefiguraretur in Patre quae in filijs futura erat veritas That the truth which was to come in the children might be foreshewed by a figure in the Father Doo not these later wordes most euidently declare that Melchisedek gaue onely the figure of the Sacrament of Christes body and bloude to Abraham the Father of the faithful and that the truth of that figure which is the body and bloude of Christe is amongst vs that are in respecte of faith his children That he calleth the thinge which Melchisedek gaue to Abraham by the name of the Eucharist it is no great maruel Whether S. Augustine him selfe would so haue spoken it may be doubted Verely it is no straunge thing in the olde learned Fathers to geue the name of the thing signified vnto the figure that signifieth and contrariwise This nipping of sentences M. Iewels Nipping of sentences specially of such as wordes as open the truth and ouerthrow your doctrine doth euerywhere bewray your guileful intent The whole sentence considered as it is vttered by the author doth so clearely serue for confirmation of the real Sacrifices of Christes body and bloude in the newe Testament as a more clearer any faithful man would not desire The saying you take out of S. Hierome I maruel what you meant to allege it It maketh fully for our parte that is to say for establishing of the Catholike beleefe There is mention made bothe of the Figure bread and wine offered by Melchisedek and of the veritie the body and bloude of Christe offered by the Christians in their Mysteries God be praised through whose power his truth is vttered by the mouthes of his enemies As for your pleasant collection and scorneful ieasting howe much it pleaseth you or becommeth the person you haue taken vpon you I knowe not Sure I am the holy mysteries of Christian religiō should with more feare of God be treated of The roome you occupie is to reuerent the mater we handle too holy the daies ye ruffle in too lamentable the stage you play this parte on too sad M. Iewel for you thus to play Hick scorner I should haue said Iacke scorner But what may we say Kinde wil shewe it selfe The English cōmunion cōpared vvith Melchisedeks Sacrifice vvhiche M. Ievv calleth Melchisedeks Masse If Melchisedek said any Masse it was like vnto the English Communion that offereth nothing els but bare bread and wine
of his owne body Which can not be otherwise vnderstanded then of the Oblation made at the Supper as onely being vnbloudy for the Oblation made vpon the Crosse was bloudy as you konwe Againe he saith that Christes Priesthod after the order of Melchisedek endureth for euer for that euen to this day he sacrificeth and is sacrificed by the meane of Priestes now being Furthermore that Christe in his last Supper deliuered to them the manner of such a Sacrifice These be pointes conteined in this testimonie of Oecumenius besides those which you haue noted and be such as you and your felowes can not wel brooke and therfore your policie was to dissemble them To the whole place you answer by comparing it as your manner is to doo vnto certaine phrases M. Iew. roÌ„neth to his phrases and figuratiue speaches for aÌ„swer to that vvhich is spoken in ê“per speache and literally and figuratiue speaches of the Fathers in which they say one thing in sounde of worde and meane an other or at least in which their meaning is to be vnderstanded Mystically and not exactly to be construed after the rigour of the precise termes Six sentences or rather peeces of sentences you pretend to allege which you wil nedes haue to be like vnto this testimonie of Oecumenius Of which six the first is your owne and not S. Hieromes at al Shiftes not to be borne vvith in a preacher as you vtter it As for the second there is no such thing in his Commentaries vpon the Psalme 97. as your cotation directeth the fourth is not to be founde in the .38 Sermon of S. Augustine De verbis Domini secuÌ„dum LucaÌ„ as you note bicause he neuer made of that mater but .37 Sermons The fifth is falsified S. Chrysostom vttereth it otherwise The third and the sixth if you had alleged them whole Ansvver to the first autoritie alleged out of S. Hierom. as they lye in the authours would seme to make nothing for you as here it shal be declared If humanitie required me not to deale rigorously with you but gentilly to beare with you not to reuele your false sleightes to your discredite but for your honesties sake to winke at them then thus should you be answered 1. Where S. Hierome saith Si volumus quotidie nascitur Christus Hieron in Psal. 86. If we wil Christ is borne euery day the worde Christe is not taken in proper signification for the second person but for any vertue that man may worke 1. Cor. 1. bicause it is said of him that he is the vertue and wisedom of his Father as I haue before declared Now where Oecumenius saith Christe hath offered an vnbloudy Sacrifice for he hath offered his owne body Christe hath vouchesaued to be our Bishop Christe sacrificeth and is sacrificed by meanes of the Priestes that now be Christe deliuered vnto them the way and manner of such Sacrifice in his mystical Supper in al these speaches Christ is the name not of vertue and power indefinitely but of the only begoten Sonne of God the second Person in Trinitie that was conceiued by the holy Ghoste and borne of the virgin Marie Therfore there is no similitude or likenesse betwen the Phrase of S. Hierome which in truth is as here I allege and not as you forge it and this saying of Oecumenius Whereas then your Argument is this As Christ is borne euery day so is he offered by Priestes euery day But he is not really and in deede borne euery day Ergo neither is he offered by Priestes euery day If this be your Argument your Maior or first proposition is false bicause as I haue shewed the similitude holdeth not and the case is not like And so S. Hierome doth nothing helpe your cause Crucifying of Christe considered tvvo vvaies Touching your other places one Answer in manner may serue for them al. 2. Christe vnto vs is daily crucified saith S. Hierome perhaps some where or some other Father for your cotation is false This much is to be considered The crucifying of Christe is of two sortes The one external and bloudy The other mystical and vnbloudy In that Christes bloude was shed to be the general redemption In this the bloude of Christe already shed is applyed vnto vs that is to say the effecte of his bloude to particuler remission of synnes and paines dew to sinnes as if he were now hanging vpon the Crosse. This application of Christes death vnto vs is sometimes of the Fathers called his Crucifying sacrificing Death and killing After the first way he was neuer crucified but once After the second way he is crucified daily and so often as the Death of him that was crucified is the sacrament of Reconciliation presupposed applied vnto vs to effecte Neither is the doctrine of Application of Christes Death strange Application The substance of it hath ben taught in diuers respectes by the learned Fathers of the Churche bothe olde and newe Albeit the terme of Application be more common in the Scholastical Doctours Tertul. lib. 1. aduersus Marcion Hierony in Matth. cap. 26. who haue treated most exactly of these pointes then in the most Auncient writers Tertullian writing against Marcion and S. Hierom vpon S. Mathew to signifie the real presence vse the terme of Representation whereby is signified in Latin the exhibiting of a thing present Representation S. Gregorie expresseth the same meaning that Application conteneth Gregorius Homi. 37. by the terme of Repairing or renuing So often as we offer vp vnto him saith he the hoste of his Passion Reparation or repairing so often we renue and repaire his Passion vnto vs for absolution Dialog 4. cap. 58. Againe in an other place This hoste or Sacrifice saith he doth singularly saue the soule from damnation which by Mysterie renueth vnto vs the Death of the only begoten Sonne of God S. Augustine signifieth this muche by the worde of Insinuation Insinuation Now who so euer doth insinuate a thing to an other that is to say putteth it in his bosome for so muche the worde signifieth the same doth also applie it vnto him For declaration hereof S. Augustines testimonie by your selfe here alleged serueth very aptly Which if you had with more sinceritie and truth alleged you had dealt more like a true man but then had you hindered your euil cause His wordes be these where he expoundeth the Parable of the Riotous Sonne written by S. Luke Lucae 15. August Quaestion Euangel lib. 2.33 making Vitulum saginatum the fatted calfe to be Christe Our Lorde saith he was this fatted Calfe who according to flesh was filled with reproches Quòd autem imperat vt adducant eum quid aliud est nisi vt praedicent eum annunciando venire faciant in exhausta fame viscera filij esurientis S. Augustine vnderstandeth by the killing of Christe novv the insinuatioÌ„ of his death Nam etiam vt occidant
external Sacrifice of the Churche For the spiritual Sacrifices of our hartes exclude not the real Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe and the pure Aulters of our hartes may wel and do wel stande with the material Aulters of Christian Churches whereon the vnbloudy Sacrifice of Christes body and bloude are offered Hereof then and of that is before in this Diuision by you said the sclendernesse of your Argumentes doth soone appeare For thus you reason The Sacrifices of Prayers The best Argumēts that M. Ievv maketh against the Sacrifice Praises thankes geuing and other the like deuotions are of the Fathers called vnbloudy Ergo the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe now offered by Priestes of the newe Testament is not called the vnbloudy Sacrifice Item By reporte of the auncient Bishop Leontius alleged in the seconde Nicen Councel Christen people in manner knowe not what an Aulter of Idolatrous Paynimes and what their Sacrifice is Ergo they knowe not what the Aulters of our Churches now nor what the dreadful Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe is Item The Fathers speake muche of the spiritual Aulters of our harte and of mere spiritual sacrifices Ergo they denie that there be any material Aulters and that thereon the real and external Sacrifice of Christes body and bloude is offered Logique is good cheape where these Argumentes be allowed But he that lacketh a Recorder may yet pype with an oten reede If Logique can not handsomly be applyed to mainteine M. Iewels glorious Chalenge yet Rhetorique wil do good seruice And yet in Rhetorique it selfe these Argumentes be but childish As wel might one proue there is none other heauen besides our hartes bicause S. Augustine saith August de Tempore Serm. 44 in a Sermon Corda fide lium coelum sunt The hartes of the faithful be heauen Ergo heauen that is said to be out of this worlde is but a tale As wel one might say Christe is not the Sonne of God bicause he is the sonne of man And in a mater of lesse weight as wel and by like Logique one shrewde boy might say to an other Iacke I wil proue thou hast no nose Thou hast great lolling eares Ergo thou hast no nose Of such Argumentes we haue great stoare in M. Iewels writinges and in manner none other For which cause to any graue and learned man he semeth rather worthy of contempte then of Answer Who so euer cōsidereth not the number of his wordes but the weight of his sentences not the multitude of his patched and peeced allegations but the force of the mater by the same auouched shal iudge no lesse God be thanked that heresie hath so weake a defence The .15 Diuision The Ansvver S. Augustin hath many euidēt sayinges touching this matter in his workes One shal suffice for al which is in a litle treatise he made contra Iudaeos vttered in these wordes Cap. ◠Aperite oculos tandem aliquando videte ab Oriente sole vsque ad Occidentem non in vno loco vt vobis fuit constitutum sed in omni loco offerri Sacrificium Christianorum non cuilibet Deo sed ei qui ista praedixit Deo Israël Open your eies at last you Iewes and see that from the rising of the Sunne to the setting not in one place as it was appoincted to you but in euery place the Sacrifice of the Christian people is offered not to euery God but to him Malach. 1. that prophecied of these thinges before the God of Israel And euen so with that protestation which S. Augustine made to the Iewes I ende this tedious matter consistinge in manner altogeather in allegations to M. Iewel Open your eies at last M. Iewel and see how al the holy and learned Fathers that haue preached the Faithe of Christe from the rising of the Sunne to the setting haue taught this Doctrine by worde and writing lefte to the posteritie that they which vnder Christe doo vse the office of a Priest after the order of Melchisedek haue not only Authoritie but also expresse commaundement to offer vp Christe vnto his Father The proufe of which Doctrine although it depende of the weight of one place yet I haue thought good to fortifie it with some number that it may the better appeare to be a moste vndoubted Truthe not moued greatly with the blame of tediousnes where no thankes are sought but onely the defence of the Catholike Religion is intended Iewel S. Augustine as in these vvordes he neither toucheth nor signifieth this nevv manner of offeringe vp Christe vnto his Father so in sundrie other places he openeth his ovvne meaninge plainely and fully touchinge the same In his Treatie against the Ievves he vvriteth thus Sacerdotium Aaron iam nullum est in aliquo templo August ad uersus Iudaeos c. 1 At Christi Sacerdotium aeternum perseuerat in coelo The Blouddy Priesthode of Aaron is nowe in no Temple to be founde But the Priesthoode of Christe Continueth stil not vpon any Earthely Aultar But in Heauen Cont. Aduers legis proph lib. 1. ca. 1. Againe The Priest offereth vp the Sacrifice of Praise not after the Order of Aaron but after the order of Melchisedek Eius Sacrificij similitudinem celebrandam in suae Passionis Memoriam commendauit illud quod Melchisedek obtulit Deo iam per totum orbem terrarum videmus offerri Christ hath leafte vnto vs a likenes or Token of that Sacrifice in Remēbrancè of his Passion August in lib. 80. quast qu. 61. And the same that Melchisedek offered vnto God wee see is nowe offered throughout the whole VVorlde Holocausti eius Imaginem ad Memoriam Passionis suae in Ecclesia celebrandam dedit Christ hath geuen vs to celebrate in his Churche In eadem quaestione an Image or Token of that Sacrifice for the Remembrance of his Passion Huius Sacrificij Caro Sanguis ante Aduentum Christi per victimas similitudinum promittebatur Augustin cōt Faust li. 20. c. 21 De Cons. dis 2. Sacrificium August de Ciuit. Dei li. 10. c. 5. In Passione Christi per ipsam veritatem reddebatur Post Ascensionem Christi per Sacramentum Memoriae celebratur The Fleashe and Bloude of this Sacrifice before the Cumminge of Christe was promifed by Sacrifices of Resemblance The same was perfourmed in deede in the time of Christes Passion But after Christes Ascension it is frequented by a Sacramente of Remembrance Sacrificium hoc Visibile Inuisibilis Sacrificij Sacramentum id est Sacrum Signum est This Visible Sacrifice is a Sacramente Naziā in Apologet. that is to saie a Token or Signe of the Sacrifice Inuisible Quod Appellamus Sacrificium Signum est Repraesentatio Sacrificij The thinge that wee calle a Sacrifice is a Signe and Representation of a Sacrifice Thus many vvaies S. Augustine him selfe teacheth vs vvhat he meante by this vvorde Sacrifice An Oblation
the people Your selfe also now doutlesse do see it Yet for your worldly estimations sake hauing made suche an Arrogant Chalenge you may not seeme to see it At least what so euer you see you wil not confesse your errrour Thus in ouersight to boast of sight in darkenes to crake of light VVho playeth Thraso his parte the Chalenger or Defender in weakenesse to speake of strength in maters for whiche of your side no learning can be shewed to chalenge al men aliue this is the parte of Thraso But in this Article of the Sacrifice for which we haue so manifest Scripture so many Doctours so many Councels so common and so long continued custome and faith of the Churche for proufe thereof to auouche stoare of testimonies it is not the parte of Thraso it is the confidence of him that knowethâ— how sufficiently the Catholike Religion may be defended against heretiks This serueth not to fray the simple as you say it serueth to cal backe the presumptuous rashnes of a newe Gospeller to animate right beleeuers and to stay the simple As for the wise whether they wil more condemne of folie me for shewing iust confidence in defence of the truthe or you for making suche a proude Chalenge against the truth I leaue it to their secrete iudgementes Bring vs but one plaine sentence of any Scripture auncient Doctor or Councel making clearely for you that a Priest hath not auctoritie and therefore may not offer vp Christe in the Euchariste as I haue brought many for proufe of the contrary and I wil be contente the name of Thraso be not returned vpon you If ye haue none to bring as sure I am ye haue not for your Thrafonical Chalenge that name wil become you better then me that how so euer you wrangle promise no more then I performe That the Reader go not farre for one suche sentence among many of our parte let the very laste alleged out of S. Chrysostome be considered In whiche he saith plainely Châ—ysost in 1. Cor. Hâ—st 24. that Christe commaunded him selfe to be offered Whiche can not be referred to the Sacrifice of the Crosse. For if he had commaunded the Iewes to Crucifie him they had not bene gilty of his Death Neither permitteth the circumstance of the place any other to be vnderstanded then the Sacrifice of the Aulter in whiche Christe him selfe according to his commaundement Doo ye this in my remembrance is as I haue now proued really offered If in defence of your side you can not shew vs so muche as one sentence of like clearenes you must beare with wise men if they thinke the great sturre you haue made with your Chalenge to be great folie And likewise must you beare with your Aduersaries if they reporte you haue more shew of wordes then substance of mater To conclude go plainely to worke M. Iewel The handling of these maters requireth honestie sinceritie fidelitie truth conscience and the feare of God Set vs forth the light of true thinges if ye haue any leaue the darke clowdes of youy Phrases and Figures Conclude your Doctrine with some firme Argumentes confirme it with good and sufficient authorities Be ashamed of your loose and childish Argumentes by whiche in manner alwaies you inferre the denial of one truth by the affirmation of an other truth Let the world see that you allege your testimonies truly iointly and wholly that you falsifie them not by your diuisions taking one peece here and an other peece there by nipping of by adding vnto by hewing mangling and when you doo least by wrong and wrested vnderstanding Otherwise if you shal continue to set maters of Faith vpon vncertaine Phrases and Figures and Tropical speaches to confounde one truth with an other to corrupte to patche together to mangle and by other waies to falsifie as hitherto you haue done be the cotations of your Bookes Margent neuer so thicke be the number of your vnlearned and partial Fauourers neuer so great the wise the godly the learned shal iudge you as they finde you to be but a Maister of Phrases a confounder of Truthes a patcher a mangler a shifter a Falsifier THE TABLE A ABra by M. Iewel reported to be S. Hilaries daughter 172. b This worde Al in Scripture oft-times admitteth exception of many 168. a. b. Amalricus his carkasse digged vp and burnt in Paris 187. a. Anathema pronounced against the dead 186. b. Antitypon excludeth not the veritie of the Mysteries 80. b. Antitypon howe it is taken in S. Clement 81. a. The terme Antitypon maketh not for the Sacramentaries 81. b. Antitypon what it signifieth properly 82. b Apostles made Priestes by Christ at the last Supper 87. a. b. in sequent The Apostles made vowe to forsake al thinges 171. b. The Apostles forsoke the companie of their wiues Ibidem Application of Christes Death no strange Doctrine 219. a. Application of this Sacrifice prooued 114. b. 121. a. 162. a. b. 219. a. Aulters vsed of the Christians 9. a. b. 99. a. Aulter 61. a. 130. a. 225. b. 230. a. Aulter visible and external 60. b. 130. a. 143. a. 229. a. b. Aulters material 99. a. 229. a. sequent External Aulter argueth external Sacrifice 229. a. Authoritie geuen to Priests to offer vp the dreadful Sacrifice 88. a. 128. a. B. Baptisme 9. b. Baptisme doth not only signifie but also exhibit wasshing of sinnes 83. b. Beza 17. a. Beza defendeth it to be lawful to put Heretiques to death 179. a. The Bible corrupted by the Protestantes 167. a. b. Bishoply duetie 246. a. Blouddy and vnbloudy referred to one subiecte 226. a Burning of Heretiques Dead carcasses no newe thing .186 b. sequent C. CAluine defendeth it lawful to put Heretiques to Death 197. a The Canon of the Masse defended against M. Iewels scoffes 123. b. 254. b. 257. a. The prayer of the holy CanoÌ„ found in S. Ambrose 258. a. Ceremonies of the Iewes changed 9. a. sequent Ceremonies of the Christians 59. a. The Chalenger playeth Thraso his parte 261. b. How we see Christe suffering by Charitie 200. b. Christe truly and in in deede offered 35. a. Christ offered vp his body at his last Supper 45. a. 48. a. Christ sacrificed him selfe at his Supper 67. b. 79. b. sequent Christe gaue his body and shed his bloud at the Supper affirmed by certaine Fathers 73. a. Christe sacrificeth and is sacrificed by the meanes or mediation of Priestes 86. a. 127. a. Christe dieth againe in this Mysterie and how 161. b. 162. a. Christ at the Supper both Priest and Lambe 73. b. Christ commaunded him selfe to be offered 79. b. 106. b. 259. b. Christe appeareth before the Father in heauen with his wounded body 117. a. 118. a. The Rocke was Christe and how 1â—7 a. Christes being in the Sacrifice and in reading of the Storie of the Gospel is different 199. a. Christe offred the true bread and the true wine at his Supper 48. a. 204. a.
Crosse against the vnbloudy and mystical Sacrifice of the Aulter By the worde mystical I exclude not the truth of our Lordes body and bloude the substance of this Sacrifice but I signifie the couert manner of their being in the same If S. Augustine had in that place affirmed in the Sacrifice of the Church a thankes geuing and remembrance of Christes death only wherein he should haue said vntruly in some respect then had he serued your turne Now that he saith not so by the vncourteous reproufe of me for leauing the wordes vnrehersed which perteined not to my purpose and helpe your doctrine nothing at al it appeareth how feeble the parte is that with the trompet of your vaine Challenge you woulde needes to be proclaimed and that nowe with your colourable Replie you haue taken in hande to mainteyne S. Augustine contrarywise declaring with what kinde of Sacrifices the Iewes gaue a signification of Christes Sacrifice that was to come and with what kinde of Sacrifice the Christians do kepe the remembrance of Christes Sacrifice now past saith expressely that the substāce of the Iewes sacrifices were brute beasts and that of the Christians Sacrifice is the body and bloude of Christ◠his woordes be these Augu. cōt Faust. lib. 20. ca. 18. Hebraei in victimis pecorum prophetiam celebrabant futurae victimae quam Christus obtulit Vnde iam Christiani per acti eiusdem sacrificij memoriam celebrant oblatione participatione corporis Sanguinis Christi The Hebrewes celebrated a prophecie of the Sacrifice to come which Christe offered Wherevpon the Christians doe now celebrate the memorie of the same Sacrifice already performed by the offering and receiuing of the body and bloud of Christe This Sacrifice was in al times to be recommended vnto the mynde of man bicause thereof onely dependeth the saluation of man Before the Lawe and during the tyme of the Lawe it was prefigured and fore-signified by many and sundry thinges but specially by the sacrifices of beastes In the time of grace wherein we now liue the Christians do preserue kepe celebrate and solemnize the memorie of it by a more liuely and effectual representatiō as to whom more abundāce of grace through Christes Incarnation is dispensed that is as Saint Augustine teacheth by the Oblation and participation of the same body and bloude that was offered and shed for vs. Nowe if it be not the true body and bloude of Christe that we offer and receiue then neither can S. Augustines wordes be duly iustified and the Sacrifice of the Christians shal be lesse liuely lesse euident lesse representatiue as I may so say and of lesse valewe then were the Sacrifices of the Iewes For what comparison is there betwene a Lambe and a piece of bread with a suppe of wine And who iudgeth not the death of Christe to be more expressely represented by a lambe slaine then by bare bread and wine Neither bicause our Sacrifice is done in commemoration or remembrance thereof foloweth it that the presence of Christes body and bloud is not requisite But forasmuch as this is the commemoration which alone maketh God merciful vnto vs Origen in Leuit. Hom. 13. as Origen saith therefore to the working of so great an effecte it is necessary that Christes true body and bloude be really present in our Sacrifice M. Ievvel excludeth one truth by an other And whereas you bring Testimonies of the Fathers to proue that our Sacrifice is a remēbrance an exāple a token or signe of the true Sacrifice that was made vpon the Crosse you tooke more paines then neede required For that no Catholike man denieth But the conclusion which guilefully your endeuour is to inferre thereof which is that therefore Christe is not really present and offered by the Priest we deny vtterly For both be true that Christe is present substantially and in deede and is so offred by the Priest and also that the same is donne in a remembrance And this much is witnessed by S. Chrysostome Chrysost. in epist. ad Heb. Homil 17. where he saith Pontifex noster ille est qui hostiam mundantem nos obtulit Ipsam offerimus nunc quae tunc oblata quidem consumi non potest Hoc autem quod facimus in commemorationē quidem fit eius quod factum est Christ is our Bishop who offered a Sacrifice cleasing vs. We do offer the selfe same now also Which being then offered can not be consumed That which we doo is done in commemoration of that which was done Here we be taught by S. Chrysostom that we offer now the selfe same hoste or Sacrifice that Christe our high Bisshop offered wherewith to cleanse vs from the filth of our sinnes which was none other but his owne body and bloude And neuerthelesse that which we doo is done for a remembraunce of that which Christe did Commemoratiō example ād signe do not exclude the real presence and real oblation So that by Chrysostoms iudgement neither the commemoration nor example nor signe doth exclude the real presence and real oblation of Christes body and bloude But you M. Iewel after your common manner go about to put away one truth by an other truth Which your accustomed shifte is now very stale and moueth fewe that reade your bookes with any meane iudgement For the foolishnes of your argument is laughed at by euery Baker who hauing set forth a loafe of breade vpon his stal can tel you that that loafe signifieth and putteth folke in mynde there is bread to be solde in his house and that the same notwithstanding is breade as other his loaues be and perhaps of the same batche Right so the body of Christe in the Sacrament is both a signe of Christes body and also his very true body in dede And likewise his very flesh and bloude is offered in our dredful mysteries in signe commeration and remembrance of his fleshe and bloude offred and shed vpon the Crosse. YOu finde great fault with that I said Christe is offred vp vnto his Father vnder the formes of breade and wine truly and in dede and to make it seme more odious you affirme these to be myne own only words confidently and boldely presumed of my selfe neuer vsed before by any auncient Father Whiles you take delite in such Rhetorical amplifications you do but increase the number of your vntruthes and make the worlde witnesse of your shamelesse vanitie Though the auncient Fathers that wrote within in the first six hundred yeres after Christe haue not these precise termes yet they haue the self same doctrin and that is ynough Your Sacramētarie heresie is not so auncient the Churche was as it were in quiet possession of the Catholike faith touching this Article for the space of a thousand yeres If the flames of your heresie had flashed abroad out of Hel in their daies there is no doubte they would haue quenched it with streames of holesom doctrine vttered in the