A DIDVCTION OF THE TRVE AND CATHOLIK meaning of our Sauiour his words this is my bcdie in the institution of his laste Supper through the ages of the Church from Christ to our owne dayes Whereunto is annexed a reply to M. William Reynolds in defence of M. Robert Bruce his arguments in this subiect and displaying of M. Iohn Hammiltons ignorance and contradictions with sundry absurdities following vpon the Romane interpretation of these words Compiled by ALEXANDER HVME Maister of the high Schoole of Edinburgh EDINBVRGH Printed by Robert Waldegraue Printer to the Kings Maiestie 1602 Cum Privilegio Regiâ— TO THE RIGHT Honorable the L. Prouest Bayless and counsel of Edinburgh ALEXANDER HVMâ— wisheth true wisdome and felicitie THE Spouse of Christ right Honorable who lyeth in his bosome heareth his voice that is his word keepeth his sacraments in the integritie which she receaued This glorious title of his wel-beloued the Church of Rome doeth falslie arrogat For she hath preferred her owne decrees to his word to the one sacrament she hath â—dded oile spittle salt and creame From the other she hath taken away the blessed cup of his precious blood she hath set vp in his chaire the man of sinne she hath giuen his office of intercession to Saints and Angels She hath made his house a denne of theeues and a market of merites masses pardones and other pelfe selling heauen and hell for siluer and golde Whereby it is cleare to all men that hath not drunke of the wine of her fornication that she is not the spouse of Christ but the skarlet whore that sitteth on the beaste with seauen heades and hath poysoned the nationes of the earth with her abhominationes It is the guise of a whore to disgrace the lawful spouse to whose bedde shee presumeth what lyeth in her To this end this strumpet hath per secuâ—ed the welbeloued of our Sauiour euer since she gote vppe her heade And nowe in our dayes slandereth her with the opprobrie of a whore neuer harde of before the dayes of Luther To meete with this contumelie I haue contriued this little treatise the laste winter at such houres as I coulde borrowe of my bed because my calling holdes me occupied at other times In it I haue taken for one of the surest notes of the true spouse the sacrament wherein he communicateth him self and all his graces with her Firste I gather be seauen argumentes drawen out of the well of truth the true meaning of the wordes of the institution this is my bodie containing the right maner howe Christ feedeth vs with his precious body and bloode Secondly I proue be their owne testimonies that the fathers of the primitiue Church receaued that sense from Christ and his Apostles and kept it as they receaued it 500 yeares after the firste institution Thirdlye I proue the occasion of the corruption and how it sprang and grew with the truth like darnell amongst wheate without offence for the space of 300 yeares Fourthly I shewe howe in the yeare 800. it beganne to â—appe the truth and that some grewe either so impudent or ignorant as to denye a figure and maintaine a literall sense in the wordes of the institution Fifthly that aboute that same time Ioannes Scotus in the time of Charles the greate Bertrame at the commandement of Carolus Calvus opossed them selues refuted that erroure whereby it maye seeme that that noble Prince was of the same mind Sixthly that the better sid coÌ„tinued long a partie that these books were not coÌ„demned â—il the counsel of Lateran 250. yeares after they were published Seuenthlye that this counsell condemned Berengarius vnhard for an hereticke and the truth which hee mentained of heresie Lastly I followe the storie that the Church of Rome euer since persecuting the truth with fire and fagot could neuer get it extinguished That it had alwayes assertoures and many that sealed it with their bloode In which discourse my intent is to proue that the church was planted in the truth be Christ his Apost not be Caluin or Zuinglius as our aduersaries beareth the ignorante in hand That there hath beene alwayes since a Church professing it That the Church of Rome euer since the Counsell of Lateran aboute 550 yeares hath persecuted her That this little barke howbeit driuen into manye obscure harboures yet all the stormes which the deuill and antichriste coulde raise hath not sunke her This little treatise I haue thought good to dedicate to your Wisdomes because I and al my trauelles am consecrated to your common wealth Accept my good will and protect the truthe with your authoritie The Lorde giue you wisdome to discerne and heartes to maintaine his cause Fare-well in him who is the well of well-fare Edinburgh the 18. of Febr. Anno. 1602. TO M. IOHN Hammilton his olde Regent grace and right iudgment HEaring great report of a booke which you had set out I met with your treatise intituled of the Lordes Supper printed anno 1581. supposing that your comming home had stirred the mindes of men to read and praise the thing which had lyen long dispised I red also with hope to find the arguments that induced you to turne your coate But finding no thing which you might not and in all appearance did not knowe before your peruersion I pitied your miserable case who hath a hearte at one time capable of contrarie persuasions of your saluation and was woe how be it it be worthie no answere that our men had let it lye 19. yeares without an answere because it seemed that that silence had made you confident and your sectaries hope that it was vnanswerable Wherefore thinking it to be the worke so much spoken of I resolued to doe it the honoure that no man thought it worthie and set my selfe to answere it because you were some time my Regent After that I had answered the firste cap. and a good parte of the seconde there came to my handes your seconde worke Then I perceaued my erroure stayed my hande to read it also Hauing red it I rewed al For argumeÌ„ts in both I founde none indeede and few in show To flite which is the greatest parte of both these bookes I thought it meeter for a scoulde then a scholar And the last I founde contrarie to the firste not onely confuting but condemning of heresie the verie inscription thereof Your greatest gift for anye thing that I can see is in nik-naming and beleing the Saints of God That gift we can wel be contented to leaue to papistes because such graces are more acceptable to your pope then our God Some of you hath purchased Bishoprickes and some Cardinalshipes be that kind of eloquÌ„ece But wee are assured that he whome wee serue neuer rewardeth that arte with better hyre then hell Yet I wonder at your impudencie or rather stupiditie to hope that naked lies can win credite euen where the men of whom you speake are most hated Can any man
his word we beleeue with the Centurion that he can doe what he will But that hee will doe al that he can was the faith of the deuill who persuaded him to make breade of stones because he coulde As for this question when Maister Iohn Hammilton can proue to vs that Christ his will was to create him selfe a newâ— bodie of breade bee the eternall worde of truthe we shall addresse our heartes to beleeue it Secondlye he argues It is blasphemy to saye that Christes blessing worketh no thing in the breade and if it worke anyething it is no thing but transubstantiation To this it maye be replyed that Christ hath not left vs in the worde that powerfull forme of blessing and that no other not the Pope him selfe can supplye that want with wordes 〈◊〉 As for the words 〈…〉 thanks or to giue him that blessing the bread it containeth onely an assertion that he blessed it not the forme how he blessed it Which thing it may seeme the Lorde left out foreseeing that these men woulde haue misconstrued it if they had gotten it Further they are not yet agreed on it whether the wordes of the institution or the blessing if they had them worketh this miraculous change When they are all agreed let M. Iohn Hammilton if hee like not this answere sende vs word and wee shall shape him an other Thirdely he saith we giue Christ the lyâ—â— â—enying the breade to be turned into Christes bodie Be that rule as is saide alredie hee giueth Christe the lye that saith he is not a vine nor a doore Alace that M. Iohn Hammilton should set his faith vpon such grounds as these Fourthlye he woulde proue bee the institution that Christ saide masse in his owne person sitting at the table with his disciples Masse at a table â—ye man â—oulde he not get an altar twentie to one that Masse was not Catholike that wâ—nted an alter hallowed hee some pope For seeing it is a necessarie instrument to that action it was no harder for him to haue raised vp a 〈◊〉 to that ende then to turne the bread into his bodie nether hauing two bodies nor changing the formes of the â—reade This doubtlesse was a great ouer-sight Bâ—t heare I woulde aske an other question also whether he saide masse sec imdum ordinem sarum vel Romanum And what was the forme of his masse â—loths whether in the consecration hee keeped the iust number of Crosses beckes binges Ioukes and turnes prescribed in that action whether in his memento he prayed for his father and his mother and in the oblation offered sacrifice for them And to omitt the rest for I can noâ— stand on all whether hee repeted the fiue wordes hoc est enim corpus meum with out taking his breath For if hee omitted these murgines or anye of many moe then these he was not so catholike a preste I meane so Romane catholike and for all my correction pardon my comparison as for M. Iohn Hammilton and ten thousand moe that isâ— and was farre more formal to mummill 〈◊〉 Romane Masse then hee Heere also might be asked whether the Masse which Christ saide was perfect or imperfect And if it was perfect as perhaps they may grant whether all the crosses and kisses in the rubrick of the canon of the Masse and the rest of the ceremonies prescribed there be vnnecessary additions and if they be what they were that durste presume to ad to that which the eternall wisdome of God had praescribed such trashe and make their inuentiones as necessarie as his instituâ—ion For now it is growen to that heade that if M. Iohn Ham. for as catholike as he is or the highest headed Bishope within the Popes precincts woulde acknowledge no other Masse then Christ ordained he woulde soone be as odious an heritike as either Martine Luther or Iohn Caluin But to his syllogisme That Christ said Masse thus he reasons The Masse is no other thing hut the giuing and offering of Christes precious bodie and bloode contained vnder the externall formes of breade and wine after the order and riâ—e of melchisadeâ— to theliuing God for the people But Christ Iesus after that he had consecrated the breade and wine in his precious bodie and bloode gaue the same to God the father for his Apostles sitting with them at the institution of this holy Sacrament Ergo Christe saide Masse at the institution of the Sacrament To the 〈◊〉 of this syllogisme I haue answered that if M. Iohn Hammilton would saye no other Masse then that he woulde be condemned of heresie for imitation of Christe The minor I vtterly denye The text saieth not that Christe gaue thâ— breade and wine consecrated to his father for his disciples But to his disciples for a remembrance of his blessed passion That which hee gaue to his disciples for a remembrance of him selfe it will passe M. I. his intandement to proue it giuen to God for them But to finde the Masse in these wordes beholde how many leapes he takes Firste that Christ gaue this Sacrament to his father Secondly that he gaue is that hee offered Thirdely that hee offered it euen then when he gaue it Fourthly that hâ— offerâ—â— a sacrifice foâ— his disciples Fistly that â—ee oâ—fered it for them that is not for their redemption for that woulde bee derogatorie to his bloodie sacrifice buâ— to adore GOD for their redemptioni And therefore as if their were noe morâ— doubt of these wordes then the wordeâ— of the Masse booke Iube 〈◊〉 perserri per â—ianusâ— sancti angelâ— tâ—â— c. Hee runneth out vpou vs as blasphemâ—ers of this holy sacrifice pernerters of this holy textâ— To conclude with him in a place heâ— proueth that the wicked eateth not noâ— driâ—keth the bodie and blood of Christ His argument is the foundest syllogisme in all that worke But that men may seâ— how loâ—h hâ— is to speake truth or reason for it 〈◊〉 â—â—teth vp that assertion argument and all at once and calleth it an impious heâ—e sie and proueth it bee the inâ—tance of â—udas who with the reste of the twelue Apostles receâ—â—â—â—â— the Saâ—rament In which reason the ingeniouâ— reader maye take vp an incâ—anted and besotted head with the sotâ—sh poyson of the Romane dregges The question is whether the wicked in the Sacramente â—eceaueth the reall bodie of Christ And for proofe hee alleges the euangâ—listes Mathew Marke and I uke to proue that Iâ—das receaued the Sacramente That Iudas receaued the Sacrament it is a thing that might haue beene and some affirmeth and some denyeth But that Iudas did eate the flesh and drinke the bloode of Christe it will passe all the schooles of Rome to proue bee the â—racles of truth Of that Augustine saith dominuâ—â—â—das â—â—das did eate not the breade the Lorde but the breade of the Lorde This much to giue the reader a taste of M. Iohn his doctourall learning For anye thing that appeareth in his
grace in shamelesse lyes But heere I would beseech the diligent reader to iudge betweene vs and them indifferentlie Bellarmine the great Rabbi of the seminarie at Rome and the goâ—â—ah of that vncircumcised congregation gathereth what euer hee couldâ— find with his owne trauels or the trauels of the whole seminary which bee report serued him what euer had anye shew for his purpose Hee hath gathered together aboue a hundreth and nine places of all which I dare promise the diligent reader that hee hath not two which speaketh the thing which hee woulde haue In them all hee hath neither founde transubstantiation of the elements nor accidents without subiects nor subiects without accidentes nor the bodie of Christ rent with teeth nor that the accidentes are the outward signes in the sacrament nor that â—he bodie of Christ is at one time both in heauen and all other places where the sacrament is ministred nor any other of these new theoremes of the Romaine faith without a glose and that sometimes impertinent sometimes obscurer then the text sometimes repugnant to the text and alwayes peruerting the true sense of the author I hope that no man will count these allegationes equiualent except they proue all the theoremes and appendices of transubstantiation as cleerelye as wee haue done Notwithstanding whate uer they or we can doe in this kinde is no proofe of the truthe but a witnes of the consent of tymes Nowe in this place followeth next to be considered howe this monstrouse opinion of transubstantiation began to insinuate it self into the heartes of men in the ages following for from this time forth it beganne dailye to grow and to gather strength In the mysterie of the sacrament there is such a secrete sacred coniunction of Christs blessed flesh with the seales as we can not well vnderstaÌ„d nor is lawful for vs curiously to enquire but reuerentlye to beleeue that his bodie is the bread which came downe from heauen and giueth life vnto the worlde On Christs parte by the secret and vnseene efficacie of his diuinitie hee conuaieth him selfe into our soules to feede them vnto eternall life On our parts there is an action iointly of the soule and bodie the one receauing the elementes with the mouth of the bodie the other receauing the body and bloode of Christe bee the moâ—th of fâ—ith In this action the whole powers of the soule and body are occupied at one instant applying all the comforts of the senses to the soule The mouth tasting sweetnes presents sweetnes to the soule the stomach receauing refreshment mindeth the soule of refreshment The vitales receauing strength comfort life offers to the soule the strength comfort life that floweth from the bread of which who-so-euer eateth shall neuer hunger nor thirst againe To printe this analogie into our heartes and to lift our senses from the sensuall consideration of these present obiects to the spirituall contemplation of his absente flesh it pleased the wisdome of our Sauiour to name the figures of breade and wine his bodie and blood broken and shed for the faithfull partakers of these mysteries And that he doth not changing the substance as these men woulde haue vs weene but turning the vse of bodilie meate to present to our deepe speculation the meate that feedeth the soule to eternall life This besides the places alredie cited Theodoret about foure hundreth yeares after Christ teacheth as resolutelie as euer did either Zuinglius or Caluin his wordes ar these faithfullie translated because they are ouer long to set downe in his owne language Our Sauiour changed the names to the bodie giuing the name of the signe and to the signe giuing the name of the bodie His purpose is mantfest for he would haue them who did participate his diuine mysterie to haue no eye to the thing which they sawe but bee changing the names to appreheÌ„d the change made be grace For calling his naturall bodie bread meate and calling him self a vine hee honoured the signes with the names of his bodie and blood not changing their natures but adding grace to nature This example of our Sauiour all true preachers in all ages who laboured to instruct the heartes of men in these mysteries followed when they sawe the mindes baselye contented with the externall action manie tymes they amplifyed the presence of Christe with hyperbolicall argumentes of his diuine power to lift the heart from the elements to the thing presented be the elements For as mariners betweene two dangers in the seas beareth of that which they moste feare towardes that which they leaste suspect euen so these teachers drew the people froÌ„ the elements subiect to the sense towards a bodely presence contrarie to sense neuer surmizing that men woulde bee so credulouse as to take such hyperbolical amplificationes for simple suthes The deuill who hath alwaies beene reddie of good to take occasions of ill watered this weede with all helpes Firste hee bred in the heartes of men such a colde regarde of these holye mysteries that few resorted to them as it appeareth be the grieuous complaintes of the fathers of that age and lawes made be sundrie emperours to mende that fault Be this meanes he so incensed the harts of them who had the haÌ„dling of them yâ— no man thoght his eloqueÌ„ce sufâ—icieÌ„t to amplify the preseÌ„ce of Christ in the sacrament with high speeches to imprint a reverent estimatioÌ„ of these sacred mysteries in the dull heartes of the people This continued well nye three hundreth yeares without suspition of ill With the opinion of a corporall presence the deuil drew in be little and little that the verie bodie of Christ offered to the father in the masse was a sacrifice propitiatorie for the quick dead and the people as wee are all borne to superstition and idolatrie imbraced that more gredelie then any truth The Clargie spying the masses to become good marchandise and hopeing for greate cheates to the kitcâ—in bee that market put to their shoulders lifted the sacrifice aboue the sacrament So this weede grewe dailie as weedes commonly growes fastest till few could find the truth that onely such as diligently sifted the Scripturs and fathers of former times It was long before men grew so brasen faced as to denye the figure in the words of the institution The first that wee reade to haue commed so farre was Damascene about the yeare eight hundreth After him followed Pas casius and Theophylact wel nye a hundreth yeares These men broke the yce to them that followed but pearsed not into the depth of this diuinitie Transubstantiation of the elements accidents without subiects and subiects without accideÌ„tâ— the monstruous brude of the Romane Church were not yet clecked She had not yet sit vpon that egge neither was these men yet so well resolued as vpon all occasions to sing one song They disseÌ„ted in many things from them that followed and in sundry thinges from themselues At
writtinges he might haue beene vndoctored this dozen yearâ—â— and if hee profite no more then he hath done hee might haue wanted a Doctour hoode so long as he liueth Of all the vnleaâ—ned books 〈…〉 I red of all the vnconstante and wand ring stiles running aâ— the â—â—ubiect on euerie â—ighte occasion I giue it the first place Hetherto I â—aue laide downe what little reason they haue to denye the wordes of the institution to bee â—iguratiue Now beside the seauen argumente in the beginning And the sounde arguments mightely laide in bee M. Robert Bruce and weakely warded be M. William Rainoldes I will open what mater of inconuenience what forcing of textes what coyning of figures what monsters in nature sense and reason might haue chocked this monster in the cradle if a drifte of heresie raised bee the enemie of truthe had not dazaled the eyes of men and driuen them into the wildernesse of erroure To beginne at the lightest to maintaine that there is no figure in the institution they are driuen to force a stranger figure on the wordes of Paull Hâ—â— that cateth of this breade and drinketh of this cup c. Compelling the spirite of God in which the Apostle wrote with rashe and inconsiderate â—duise bee the names of breade and cup for wine to feede the erroure of the sense againste the truthe of faith if it were as they sâ—y not bread and wyne but the very body and blood of Christ. As is saide alredie page 13. in my seuent reason Secondlye in the wordes of our Sauiour I will drinke no more of the fruite of the vine they shape two monstruous figures leauing it indifferent to take which a man liketh best Either that bee the wine is vnderstoode the bloode of Christ vnder the shew of wine or else that the kingdome of God is the time of the gospell in the which we drinke the verie blood of Christ in the Sacrament Thirdelye the wordes of our Sauiour He that easteth my flesh and drinketh my bloode dwelleth in me and 〈◊〉 him They ar compelled either to mangle miserably or else to denye them and make the incredilous to eate the bodie of Christe which neither dwelleth in Christe nor Christ in them Fourthly the Article of our beleefe and the place of the Actes That the heauens must containe him vntil the 〈◊〉 that all thinges be restored They are driuen to seeke some defense bee hooke and crooke how Christ maye not onely bee in heauen at the righte hande of his father but also in the Sacramente betweene the handes of a gredie preiste reddie to eate him vp stoup and roupe These foure textes they are compelled to mangle to maintaine a literall sense in one But behoulde more absurditie Firste they will compell vs vnder paine of damnation to beleeue that the bodie of Christ hauing all properties of a humane bodie sinne onely excepted is handled and not felt eaten and not tasted looked on and not seene in the Sacrament Secondlye that the accidentes of bread that is sauour colour taste hardnesse moistnosse c are in the Sacrament without the substance of breade where to they are inseparablye anneâ—ed Thirdely that these same accidentes hauing no nature nor power to feede are ordained be Christ to bee the signe of the spirituall breade that feedeth our soules to life euerlasting Fourtlye that the substance of the breade is changed into the verie reall and naturall substance of Christs bodie that was borne of the Virgine Marye and suffered on the crosse for the sinnes of man Fistly that accidentes doth nonrish and feede the bodie because the substance doth nourish bee meanes of accidentes Sixtly that the bodie of Christe being finite and locall as it was when hee walked on the waters taught in the shipe and died vpon the Crosse is now in heauen at the righte hande of his father and also on all the altares in the worlde in the handes of all the prestes in the bellies of all that eateth him and in the coffers of al that will keepe him in store for an euill daye Seuently that in this mater of transubstantiation vnder paine of bothe deathes that is temporall and eternall we are bound to beleeue nether nature sense nor reason And that eightly heerefore how-be-it we see it to mould rott and consume we must bee persuaded in faith that it is the immortall bodie of our Lorde and Sauiour Iesus Christ. Nynthly when Aug. or anye other of the fathers calleth it a figure wee muste beleeue that it is bothe the figure of Christs bodye and Christes bodye it selfe Tenthly that the partes of Christes bodie are not distinguished as eie from eie hand from hande heade from foote or with reuerence bee it spoken taile from tongue but all confused together in the compasse of the rounde waâ—er Eleuenthly that the preist is the creatore of his owne creatore and eateth him when he hath created him Twelfthlye that Christe hauing but one bodie the people consumeth him as many bodies in one daye as communicantes receaueth the Sacramente in all the worlde Thirtenthlie that the substance of Christs naturall bodie maye be made of other substance then the substance of his mother the virgine Marie My wit can not comprehende the absurdities of this absurditie On manye they are not yet agreed among themselues Firste if an oulde wife or anye other superstitious bodie keepe that sacred breade for a neede and chance to lose it which may well fall out Thomas Aquinas Alexander de Hales and Gerson holdeth that a mouse hog or doge if they finde it and eate it findeth and eateth the verie body of Christ Bonauentura and sundry others counteth it more honest and reasonable that they eate it not But Peter Lumbard the grand maister of catholicke conclusiones leaueth it to God what they eate and with all thinkes that it may be saide that brute beastes eate not the body of Christ. Some will haue the mouse if shee can be gotten burnt aâ—d buried aboute the altar Others will haue her opened and some well stomached preist to eate that which is founde in her mawe or else to reserue it in the tabernacle till it naturallie â—nsume In this kinde one highlie commendeth one Goderanus a preist for lapping vp the vomet of a leper man who had not long before receaued the Sacrament Secondly in the wordes of the institution This is my bodye Gerson saith that the demonstratiue pronoune this demonstrateth the substance of the bread Occam saith that it demonstrateth the bodie of Christ. Thomas Aquinas saieth that it demonstrateth the thing contained vnder the forme of the breade Hokot saith that it signifieth a thing betweene the bodie of Christ and the bread which is nether this nor that but common to both Durand saith that it signifieth nothing but is set materialiter After all commeth Steuen Gardinar Bishope of Winchester and turning his iudgment for once hee thought it