man much extolled by the aduersaries THE FIRST CHAPITER BEFORE I come to examine the particular points of error false doctrine contayned in these sermons I thinke it convenient first in a chapter or two to declare the true Catholike faith concerning this sacrament as it hath alwaies bene receaued and acknowledged in the church of Christ and withal historically to note when an in what sort the Zuinglian heresie that I 〈…〉 which at this present beaâ—eth greatest sway among the Protestants of England Scotland for the Protestant coÌ„gregations preachers of Germanie from the beginning of this schisme in Martin Luthers time vntil this present day condemne it for heresie no lesse then do the Catholiks at some tymes endeuored to put forth it self but hath evermore bene repressed by the pastors of Christs church vntil this present age wherein faith decayng Christian beleefe being in many men for many points measured by carnal reason vpon such ground ether of prophane infidelitie or great decrease of faith the true beleef of this sacrament hath amongst many other necessarie articles fayled in the harts of a number ¶ Our sauiour Christ therefore when at the tyme of his passion he was to finish consummate the worke for which he was incarnate that is to redeeme mankynd abrogate the old law begin the new into this to transfer the sacrifices and priesthod of that former as the Apostle Paule teacheth vs in his last supper for a perpetual memorie of that high and infinite sacrifice offered on the crosse which was the persite absolute redemptioÌ„ and consummation of al the ful price and raunsom for al sinnes done or to be done from the first creation of the world vntil the last ending of the same to continue I say a perpetual memorie of that bluddy sacrifice to ordeine the true vvorship of god in the nevv lavv or testament which worship in euerie law consisteth principally of sacrifice to leaue his people a peculier meane whereby that infinite vertue grace procured by the sacrifice on the crosse might be in particular diuided applied to them in his last supper instituted this sacrifice sacrament of the altar as comonly among Catholique Christians it is called the sacrifice sacrament of his owne most pretious body blud a sacrifice for that it is offered to the honor of god for the benefite of christian people in coÌ„memoration of Christ his sacrifice once done and now past as al the old sacrifices of the law of nature Moses were offered for the benefite of that people in prefiguration of the same sacrifice of Christ then to come a sacrament for that it was also ordeyned to be receiued of Christians in particular to feed our bodies to resurrection immortalitie to geue grace vertue sanctification to oursewles This to be the true sense meaning of our Sauiour in this institution and that principally especially concerning the sacrifice for the sacrament is more euident confessed by the more learned of our aduersaries it shal be proued plainly hereafter is sufficiently expressed in the wordes of our Sauiour vvhich according to the recital of al the Evangelists S. Paul yeld plainly this sense For when Christ nameth his body broken or geuen for vs which is al one as if he termed it sacrificed for vs his blud of the new testament shed there in the supper mystically for vs for remission of synnes these words as truly import a sacrifice as any words which the holie scripture vseth to expresse the sacrifice of Christ on the crosse especially those words of S. Paul Corpus quod frangitur the body which is broken most properly directly are to be referred to the body of Christ as in the sacrament vnder the forme of bread in which it novv is then was truly brokeÌ„ so it was not on the crosse as S. IhoÌ„ specially recordeth VVhe â—of S. Chrysostom writeth very liuinelâ— expounding this same word Hoc in Eucharistia vi lere liceâ— in cruce autem minime c. This we see done in the sacrament but not on the crosse For there ye shal not breake anâ— bone of him saith the Euangelist Iohn â—â— But that which on the crosse he suffered not that he suffereth in the sacrifice for thy sake o man is content to be broken And so this word being by S. Paâ—le incuitably verified of Christs body in the sacrameÌ„t draweth by like necessitie al the rest both touching the body and blud therevnto although al the rest are also most truly spokeÌ„ of the same body of Christ as geuen for vs on the crosse which no ways impayreth but rather much streÌ„gtheneth the veritie real presence of the same body in the sacrament VVhich sense is yet more clearly necessarely confirmed if we coÌ„ferre these words of Christ vsed in delyuering the chalice of the new law with the vvords of Moses vsed in sprinkling the blud of gotes calues which was appointed by gods ordinance to ratifie establish the covenant betwene god and his people the synagoge of the Iewes in the old lavv For as then Moses gathering that blud in to some standing peece or cup sprinkled the people therevvith saying This is the blud of this old testament which god hath made with you euen to our Saâ—iour ordayning this new testament most euidently making relation to those former vvords of Moses and transferring them to his new ordinance vvhen he deliuered the chalice to his Apostles in them to the vniuersal Catholike church said This is the blud of the new testament as that vvas of the old this here conteyned in the chalice is the selfe same which is to be shed for yow as that was sprinkled vpon the Iewes VVhere S. Luke referring these later vvords shed for yow to that vvhich vvas conteyned in the chalice meâ—utably convinceth that vvhich was in the chalice to haue bene the very real blud of Christ as truly as that vvas his real blud which the next day vvas shed on the crosse as truly as that was real blud with vvhich the people vvere sprinkled in the old testameÌ„t in steed of vvhich blud this is succeded the truth in place of the figure as witnesseth S. Leo S. Austin S. Chrysostom other most auncient fathers All vvhich proue not only the real presence of Christs most pretious body blud but also that it is present by way of a sacrifice as in order to be sacrificed ¶ My intent is not to make any long discourses of this matter vvhich hath bene so learnedly treated dy diuers excellent men of our Iland within our memorie that I gladly confesse my selfe vnable to adde any thing to their labours Yet because this point of Christs testament is the ground of al and for denying the real presence of Christs blud in the sacrameÌ„t the Lutheran Protestants theÌ„ selues charge the
Christ These fevv instances and exceptions for example sake I geue to the Christian reader vvho may find a number of this sort if he please advisedly to consider that vvhich bath bene said of this matter heretofore And if novv according to M. B. his resolution a man leaving out the least ceremonie vsed by Christ in his supper perverteth the whole institution and marreth the sacrament so as it becommeth no sacrament vvhat horrible prophaners perverters and destroyers of gods sacraments are these vvho leaue out so many and those not the least but the greatest vveightiest ceremonies And if they haue no sacrament vvho lacke in the administratioÌ„ any signe elemental or ceremonial any material part because they be al substaÌ„tial how far are these men from having any shew colour pretence or similitude of Christs Sacrament who lack so many signes ceremonial substantial besides vvhich is the head top leaue out cleane al the vvords of Christ vvhich in deed is the formal therefore the chief soveraine and principal part of the sacrament hovv soever it please these proud ministers to take that honour froÌ„ the vvord of Christ attribute it to their owne vvord Truly as the Catholike for sundry other reasons hath iust cause to abhorre their bread and vvine as polluted as schismatical as heretical as leading the high vvay to Gods vvrath and indignation to hel damnation so these arguments and reasons geven published by them selues suffise to proue as much to proue their communion a schismatical communion cleane divided from Christs communion a perverting a corrupting and destroying of his holy sacrament vvith vvhich it hath no more resemblance by this their ovvne confession then hath an ape vvith a man copper vvith gold heresie vvith religion and an angel of darknes vvith an angel of light Yea many times spiritually sprites of hel doubtles counterfeit Saints and Angels and many apes or munkeys sensibly counterfeit the actions of men vvith more likelihood colour and probabilitie then these mens apish and spritish communion resembleth the Divine Sacrament ordayned by our blessed Saviour Of names attributed to the Sacrament The Argument Of names by which the blessed Sacrament is called in the scripture It is not there called the Lords supper as M. B. falsely supposeth nor yet the Communion Toat it is called mensa domini our Lords table maketh nothing against the sacrifice but rather for it Of names by which the B. Sacrament according to M. B. opinion is called in the auncient fathers It is not called a publique action as by any proper name nor yet a banquet of loue VVhy it is called the Eucharist It was also called the Masse in the Primitiue church when that church generally and especially the church of Rome was most pure and therefore that name savoureth nothing of Idolatry as M. B. ignorantly concludeth But most commonly it was named the sacrifice of Christs body and as a true and real sacrifice was offered vnto God in the church euer since Christs time and first institution of it M. B. argument made to the contrarie answered CHAP. 12 Many of the things which M. B. handleth in these later Sermons or as he calleth them lessons and exercises are by him particularly vttered and entreated of so far furth as concerneth the Sacrament in the first sermon or lesson likewise so much hath bene said of them by me as I thinke convenient ether for proofe of the truth or confutation of error For which cause I shal when they occurre hereafter passe them over in silence or touch them more sleightly The first nevv matter mentioned in this lesson is about names geven to the SacrameÌ„t in holy scripture auncient fathers wherein he speaketh some truth which therefore I gladly embrace as that it is called in the booke of god The body and blud of Christ and never the figure trope signe or seale of that body and blud and therefore belike that being the proper name conteyneth also in proprietie of speech what it is Also it is called the coÌ„munion and participation of Christs body and blud vvhich implieth the former truth It is also called saith M. B. the supper of the lord not a prophane supper not a supper appointed for the belly for Christ had ended the supper that was appointed for the belly or ever he began this supper which was appointed for the sowle In this M. B. is somewhat deceiued as likewise in his explication of the next vz that it is called also in the bible The table of the Lord. It is not called the altar of the lord but the Apostle calâ— it a table to sit at and not an altar to stand at a table to take and receiue and not an altar to offer and propine That M. B. supposeth S. Paule to name the sacrament dominicâ—â— caenam our lords supper it is his error and not S. Paules meaning For albeit at the same time and in the same place whereof S. Paule speaketh Christs sacrament was also communicated vnto the faithful for which cause and also in regard of the time when Christ first instituted it some auncient fathers sometimes inscribe their treatises of the Sacrament De caena domini yet that the booke of god that is the bible and scriptures of god geue not this appellation to it it is plain inough by that place of S. Paule where only in al the scriptures of god that word is vsed For S. Paule mentioning that at these suppers of our lord some devoured al and had to much some could get nothing and rose a hungred some were drunke c. declareth thereby that this place can not directly be vnderstood of Christs sacrament except M. B. be of the opinion with some Puritans whom my self haue heard vpon this place to argue that at their Lords supper there should be not only bread and drinke but also varietie of other meate flesh fish rost and baked wine and beere according as it is in other suppers and feasts Vnto vvhich conceit M. B. by his discourse after ensuing seemeth somewhat to incline But the common opinion of learned men is otherwise that this place meaneth the church-feasts of old time termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which were called dominicae caenâ— our lords feasts or suppers because they were kept at night in churches which were in the primitive church and also after called Dominicae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our lords howses whence I suppose our name kirke cometh to vvhich feasts the rich sort contributed liberally for the benefite and relief of the poore Before vvhich as S. Chrysostom supposeth though others thinke after the Sacrament vvas also received But that the vvords of S. Paule meane not the sacrament S. Chrysostom is very plaine the circumstance of the place proueth sufficiently This supper saith S. Chrysostom might rather be called humaine then divine potius humana quam dominica rather
of his blud the bread there broken is the participation of his body should also be partakers of the table sacrifice of deuils In which argument albeit the Apostle being brief and writing to Christians whom he accounteth skilful wei instructed in this thing by mentioning litle signifieth more setting downe one part willeth them to vnderstand the whole as Calvin also truly noteth and therefore vseth not in everie part of his comparison the terme of altar and sacrifice yet as otherwhere he acknowledgeth the Christians to haue a true altar to sacrifice on and consequently a sacrifice from which the Iewes were debatredâ— so here the very drift of his reason exact correspondence of ech part to other require that as the Iewes had an altar a sacrifice so had the Gentils so had the Christians As the Iewes offered to their god so did the Gentils to their false god so did the Christians As the Iewes by that seruice were partakers of the worship of the true god so were the Gentils by the like seruice concluded conuinced to worship a false god that is the deuil therefore could not haue any part or coÌ„munion in the worship of the true god which was performed by the dreadful sacritice of Christs body blud among Christians VVhich triple sacrifice that of the Gentils to the deuil these two of the Iewes Christians to the true god S. Chrysostom veâ—v we observeth writing vpon the same place His words are In the old testament Pagans idolaters offered the blud of beasts to their idols This blud god tooke to him selfe that so he might turne away his people from committing idolatrie which was a great signe of infinite loue But here in the new testament he provided a sacrifice far more wonderful excellent both in that he changed the sacrifice withal in place of beasts killed in sacrifice he coÌ„maunded him selfe to be offered And this to be the true sense of the place Vib. Regius ioynt-Apostle with M. Luther in preaching this new gospel whom the Protestants of Germanie acknowlege cal a perfite absolute Diuine of infinite learning the Evangelist cheef Superintendent of the churthes of Christ in the Duchie of Luneburge as Luther was in the Duchie of Saxonie plainely graunteth Many there are saith he which thinke a sacrifice to be proued by the Apostle 1. Cor. 10. where he dehorteth from the societie of such as sacrifice to idols by arguments taken from the faith of the sacrifice vsed by the Iewes Gentils For he seemeth to compare sacrifice to sacrifice as Chrysostome teacheth his comparison so to stand that by it is gathered Christians in the Lords supper to haue a certaine peculiar sacrifice whereby they are made partakers of our lord as the idolaters by their abominable sacrifice are made partakers of deuils VVhich if it be so me seemeth it may be answered that in the supper of Christians are the body blud of Christ which are a holy sacrifice but coÌ„memoratiue sacrosanctum sunt sacrificium sed memoriale By which later word albeit he thinketh to haue answered the Catholiks excluded the truth of the sacritice yet is he much deceiued therein For so far are Catholiks from denying the sacrifice to be commemoratiue that of al other sacrifices which euer were or can be imagined we graunt this to be moste coÌ„memoratiue as which most neerely liuely truly expresseth the verie condition efficacie nature of that sacrifice offered on the crosse with which being one in substance it differeth only in maner of offering generalitie of redemption And as Christs transfiguration on the holy mount before his passion vvas the best most persite sigure examplar representation of that eternal glorie which the same person of Christ vvas to enioye in heauen after his resurrection ascension in like maner vve are to iudge of this mistical coÌ„memoratiue sacrifice in respect of his sacrifice on the crosse yet not excluding the veritie of Christs presence in one place more then the other Nether is there any reason vvhy Vrbanus Regius a Lutheran should imagine the sacrifice to be disproued for that it is a memorial or done in coÌ„memoration of Christ more then the real presence is disproued reiected because that also in the Lutheran religion must needs be done in coÌ„memoration Christs vvords being most plaine do this in coÌ„memoration of me VVhich vvords doubtles haue no more strength to overthrovv remoue a sacrifice of Christs body as al Catholikes vrge then a true presence of the same body vvhich al LutheraÌ„s graunt So that out of these vvords of the Apostle is confirmed the mistical sacrifice that it vvas vsually frequented in the first Apostolical church vvhich rec aâ—ed directly from Christ and his Apostles the order administration thereof ¶ This sincere sound beleefe concerning both sacrifice sacrament continued in the catholike church for the first thousand yeres almost vvithout contradiction of any man or sect vvorth the naming Only as our Sauiour him self in the veâ—ie beginning vvhen he first promâ—seâ— that the bread which he would geue should be the same flesh which he was to geue for the life of the world signified obscurely that Iudas the traytour certaine other for want of faith vvere scandalized at his vvords repâ—neâ— at them so a fevv veres after it may be gathered that some there vvere of Iudas folovvers vvho likevvise denyed the truth of this heauenly mistery vvhereof S. Ignatius scholer to the postles vvriteth thus as his vvords are recorded by Theodoretus Some sectaries there are who like not nor approue the oblâ—â—ions sacrifiâ—e◠〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 for that they acknowledge not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Sauiour Christ Iesu the selfe same flesh that suffred for our sinneâ— which the father of his merciful goodnes raised from death But vvhat these men vvere vvhat svvay they bare vvhat scholers they had appeareth not by any ecclesiastical record therefore belike vvere sone put to silence in that happie time of our primitiue first faith vvhen the Apostles them selues and many by them instructed had the governement of the church VVherefore the beleefe first taught by Christ and his Apostles proceded on from hand to hand from age to age vvithout any notable resistance VVhereof being a thing at large treated proued in sundry bookes both latin and english set forth of late I vvil bring only thre or fovver testimonies but the same most auncient S. Ireneus bishop of Lyons in Fraunce martyr S. Cyprian bishop of Carthage in Africa a martyr likevvise and the first general Councels of Nice Ephesus in Asia S. Ireneus vvriteth thus Christ taking bread gaue thankes said This is my body and that which was in the chalice he confessed to be his blud and
his forefathers vvas lead by the same spirite by vvhich they vvere Philip Melancthon vvho liued in VVittemberg vvith him in his epistles vvriteth of him thus Carolostadius primum excitauit hunc tumultum c. Carolostadiut first of al in our memory made this sturre about the sacrament a rude sauage man without wit without learning without common sense who for ought we could perceiue neuer so much as vnderstood any office of ciuil humanitie so far of is it that euer any token or signe of the spirite of god appeared in him Thus Melancthon Luthet in the second part of his booke contra caelestes prophetas against the heauenly prophetes Martinus Kemnitius in his booke de caens Domini vvith diuets others testifie of him that he vvas instructed by the deuil and that him self vvas vvont to bost among his frends scholers that there came to him a straunge man vvho taught him hovv to interprete the vvords of the supper This is my body especially that first syllable This. This master Carolostadius supposed to be a prophete sent from heauen but saith Luther it vvas certainly the deuil or the deuils dame VVhich deuil aftervvards fully perfectly as they vvrite possessed Carolostadiê° So that Alberus a great doctor among the Protestants in his booke against the CarolostadiaÌ„s vvriteth expresly that the deuil dwelt in him corporally yea that he vvas possessed with many legions of deuils In like sort Luther verely beleeued that the deuil spake out of him For vvhich cause he calleth him a deuil incarnate diabolum incorporatuÌ„ and vsually vvriting against him so frameth his vvords and vvriting as though he dealt vvith a deuil in the forme of a man That I cal him Deuil saith Luther let no man marueil thereat For I make no rekning of Carolostadius I regard not him but that other deuil of whom he is possessed who also speaketh by him or thorough him To be short three dayes before his death the same deuil came to him in forme of a man cited him to appeare in fine tooke him avvay out of the vvorld as vvitnesseth the sorenamed Lrasmus Alberus and other Protestant vvriters This vvas that Carolostadius vvho among many other singularities vvherevvith he adoâ—ned the Protestant-gospel especially brake the ise before them and vvas then first Apostle and guide in tvvo chief points in incestuous marriage and denying Christs presence in the sacrament For he being a vovved priest first of al euen before Luther ioyned him self in pretended vvedlocke to a sister and vvithal vvith helpe of his familiar deuised that interpretation of Christs vvords vvhich before is noted After vvhom came diuers others vvho though differing from him in particular circumstance and maner of expounding that short text yet al buylt vpon his foundation and thereof raised one the self same conclusion that the sacrament vvas only a signe Christs true body blud remoued as far from it as the highest heaueÌ„ is from the lovvest earth as Beza spake in the assembly of Poissye is commonly found in al the sacramentarie vvriters ¶ The first that folovved Carolostadius vvas Hulderike Zuinglius made from a parish-priest a Minister and an Apostata vvho not condemning the exposition of Carolostadius liked yet better of his ovvne conceite as al heretiks do vvhich vvas to applie Christs words to the sacrament but to expound the second particle Est is by the vvord significat doth signifie so that the meaning of Christs vvords according to him is This is my body that is to say this being mere bread doth signifie my body And this Zuinglius supposed to be the true sense and meaning of the holy ghost vsually arresteth him selfe vpon that significatiue exposition of the second vvord is as Carolostadius preferred the turning avvay of the first vvord This and therefore in diuers vvorks treatises heapeth vp together a number of places vvhere the vvorde est must needs stand for significat and finally this interpretation he accompteth so sure and sound as that he boldly pronounceth it can neuer be refelled by any scripture Hovvbeit these tvvo Commentaries thus made vpon Christs vvords that of Carolostadius and this of Zuinglius Luther vvho wrote many books against them both comparing together If quoth he I should geue sentence in the question betwene Carolostadius and Zuinglius I wold boldly pronounce that Carolostadius exposition were the more probable for their heresie then this other of Zuinglius For in this there is no colour of truth Next folovved Oecolampadius first a frier after an Apostata like those other vvho inuented a third shift vvhich vvas to leaue the first vvord This and the second vvord is in their proper and vsual signification but to alter the vvord body in to a figure and so to yelde the sense as though Christ shold say This is a figure of my body And yet vvhich stil is to be marked thus did OecolaÌ„padius not disprouing that of Carolostadius no more then did Zuinglius but preferring his owne marie with free libertie licence to his gospelling reader to take vvhich he listed because both suffised vtterly to destroy Christs real presence VVhereof thus vvriteth Balthasar PacimoÌ„tanus head of the Anabaptists in his letters to Oecolampadius I am very glad to vnderstand that yow dislike not Carolostadius bookes of the sacrament This your iudgement wold I ful fayne haue wrong out before For I knew right wel or at least I supposed that your opinion and ours disagreed nothing at al. But yow alwaies answered me in obscuritie and surely it was wisdom so to do and the time required it But now the time is to preach on the howse top that which before was whispered in corners So that albeit Zuinglius and Oecolampadius made choise better esteemed as hath bene sayd ech his ovvne imagination yet they approued ful wel that of their first founder Carolostadiê° for that these three opinions vvere in substance al one and al tended to one scope and marke ¶ This licence of turning and tossing the sacred vvords of our Sauiour being once geuen forthvvith by like right taken and practised of euerie sectarie that had any colour of learning and vvit many more ensued about the same time one vpon an other vvho al building vpon the foundation of Carolostadius and tending to one end that is to remoue the presence of Christ from the holy mysterie yet by diuers sundry vvaies vvrought the same eâ—h after his ovvne peculiar fansie perverting vvresting the vvords of the Institution vvhose seueral corruptions manglings Luther in one place reciteth refuteth to the number of six one vvhereof to vse Luthers vvords set as it were on the racke cleane inuerted turned vpside downe the whole text transposing the first word This from his first place to the last thus expounding the sentence Take and eate my body That
can not comprehend vet let our faith beleeue For true it is though most miraculous in these sacramental earings of the Ievves who so perceiueâ—h not many miracles to be coÌ„teyned is more then a doâ—t vvere he not if not in vvit a very dolt asse yet surely in diuinitie a very simple one vvho vvould attribute such miraculous excellencie to the ceremonies of Moses lavv vvhich them selues notvvithstanding al their hyperbol cal lâ—ing florishes meane not to be true no not in the gospel And vvhat so euer they meane the vniuersal scope and drift of scripture denieth refuteth it in the old lavv most effectually For although the good men vnder the law which vnderstood their ceremonies and sacraments to be shadowes and darke presignifications of a Messias and by vsing them were kept in an obedience and orderly subiection and expectation of a Sauiour to come by such obedience faith pleased god and were therefore rewarded at his hands yet that those ceremonies and sacraments velded them any such grace as is here declared much lesse the participation of Christs true flesh blud which is the supreme soueraine grace of al that euer was or euer shal be in this world the old testameÌ„t it self and also the new in many places denyeth especially the Apostle S. Paule in whole chapirers of his epistle to the Hebrewes where he most expresly treateth discourseth of their sacraments and state of the old testament in comparison of ours and state of the gospel For to omit sundry textes apperteyning to this purpose in the Prophets Euangelists to rest only vpon S. Paule when he saith that circumcision the principal sacrament of the law was nothing of no effect to conferre grace and that Abraham him self vnto whom singularly circumcision was a sâ—â—â—e of the iustice of faith was not yet iustified in circumcision nor by circumcision but otherwise when he disputeth that no worke no ceremonie no sacrament of the lâ—â— was 〈◊〉 to iustification but only the faith and grace exhibited in the new testament when he calleth al those Iudaical sacraments infirma et egena elementa weake and poore elements or as the English bibles translate it weake and beggerly ordinances when he teacheth the vvhole lavv and al the ceremonies sacraments thereof to haue bene reiected and altered because of their weakenes and vnprofitablenes that those sacrifices baptismes and meates drinkes blud of oxen and goates were only iustices of the flesh sanctified those that vsed them no otherwise then in taking away legal pollutions and so purified men only according to the flesh and therefore were instituted by god not to remayne for euer but only vntil the time of correction or new testament and then other maner sacrifice and Sacrament should succede in their place briefly when he teacheth the law to haue had a shadow of good things to come not the very image of them much lesse the body which is geuen by Christ in the nevv testament that it vvas impossible for the blud of those sacrifices to take away sinne and purifie the comscience for vvhich cause also god foretold by his prophets that he vvold reiect those hostes and oblations sacrifices and that they pleased him not vvhen the Apostle thus vvriteth thus teacheth thus disputeth against those legal sacraments vvhat Christian man vvil say that vvith them vvas exhibited and conioyned the true flesh and diuine blud of our god and Sauiour as before according to Caluins first preaching the same is conioyned vvith the sacraments of the nevv lavv If vnder those elements of bread and wine as novv in the supper the body and blud of Christ were not only figured but also truly deliuered if vvhen they vvere eaten of the Ievves by the omnipotencie of god and miraculous operation of his holy spirite Christ Iesus I meane as Calvin teacheth me the flesh blud of Christ yea the very substance thereof as Beza also with the consent of a whole Caluinian Synode speaketh were receiued vvithal then truly S. Paul in calling such a Sacrament a weake and beggerly ordinance had bene a very vveake Apostle an vnfit instrument to publish Christs name before nations and Princes of the vvorld vvho of Christs diuine person of his pretious flesh and blud the price raâ—â—â—om of the world reconciliation of al things in heauen and earth had had so meane and beggerly aâ— opinion But because most sure it is that b. Paule was â—â—â—nom any such beggerly or rather beastly ethnical â—og 〈◊〉 the Calumâ—â— who in this deteâ—â—able â— aâ— pâ—â—mous conâ—cite â—oloweth Calâ—in know that tâ— hâ—m S. Paule speaketh and he shal once to his eterna payne vnlesse â—e in time repent â—â—ele true that which S. Paule threatneth in eueÌ„ for this particular blasphe â—â—â—s heresie of matching the base Iewish ceremonies with Christs most heauenly and diuine Sacraments A man making frustrate the law of Moyses is adiudged to death therefore by the verdite of 2 or â— witnesseâ— How much more deserueth he more extreme punishmentâ— which thus treadeth the sonne of god vnder foote and esteemeth the blud of the new testament polluted by making it nothing superior to the blud of beasts and so hath done contumelâ—e to the sp rite of grace beyond al measure abased most vily and contemptuously the diuine state and maiestie of the new testament Let the discreete reader know that against this Iudaisme the Christians euer from the begâ—nning of Christianitie haue had touching their sacraments a more excellent faith and diuine perswasion as who vpon warrant of Christs words haue euer beleeued that in the one sacrament was deliuered the body and blud of Christ the same in veritie and truth of substance that was sacrificed on the crosâ—e as before more largely hath bene deduced And for the other sacrament for I mention no more because thâ—se men acknowledge no more the holy scriptures and writings of the Apostles and the church ensuing haue yelded vnto it as to an instrumental cause higher grace vertue then to any sacrament of the Iewes law or al their sacraments and sacrifices ioyned in one For proofe whereof when Christ was baptized the heauens opened and the holy ghost descended to signifie that by baptisme the way to heauen shut before is made open to is the holy ghost powred in to vs as Christ him self by word and deed taught most manifestly except a man be borne of water the spirite he can not enter into the kingdome of god And to testifie that aâ—â—uâ—â—dly and that in baptisme Christians are made partakers of the holy ghost in the begin â—â—â—g of the church the holy ghost â—â—sibly deseended rested on them that were baptized by the Apostles and first preachers of our faith And the gospel Apostolical writings euery where teach that â—â—bert the baptisme of Iohn
Caluinists with quit disanulling making voyd the testament of our Sauiour I thinke it good to make some more stay herein better examine the circumstance of this testament yet as nigh as I can euâ—ing no new questions but resting on such certayn verities as are confessed by the aduersaries them selues cleare by plaine scripture out of vvhich I meane to deduce such reasons as may iustifie our catholike cause disproue the contrary VVolf Musculus in his common places entreating hereof writeth thus S. Luke S. Paule attribute to the cuppe that it is the new testament VVhereby they signifie this to be the sacrament of the new testament in respect of the old the Paschal sacrament which Christ finished in this his last supper in place thereof substituted this new In the same supper being then nigh to his death he made his testament Thus Musculê° In vvhich fevv vvords he noteth tvvo things very important concerning the truth whereof I here entreate both deliuered in the scriptures both vrged by the Catholikes both coÌ„fessed not onely by the Lutherans but also by the SacrameÌ„taries as here we see The first that Christ in his last supper made his new testameÌ„t the second that Christ in the same his last supper ended the sacrameÌ„t of the Paschal lamb ordeyned in place therof the sacrament of his body Concerning the fâ—â—â—t vvhat a Testament is how Christ made his the same vvriter expresseth truly in this sort A testament is the last wil of one that is to dye wherein he bestoweth his goods freely geueth to whom he pleaseth To the making of a testameÌ„t that it be auayleable is required first the free libertie power of the testator that he be as his owne commaundement For a slaue a seruant a sonne vnder the power regiment of an other can not make a testament So Christ when he made his testament was free had power libertie to do it God his father gaue al in to his hands made him heyre of al in heauen earth God his father willed him to make a testament sent him in to the world to that end that by his death he should confirme this new testament which he had promised Next it is required in a testament that the testator bequeath his owne goods not other mens so did Christ 3. A thing can not be geuen in a testameÌ„t which is due of right So that which Christ gaue in his testament was geuen only of grace fauour 4. In a testameÌ„t it is required that certain executors of the testament be assigned Those Christ made his Apostles to whom he coÌ„mitted that office that they by evangelizing should ministerially dispense the grace of this testament 5. Finally to the confirmation ratification of a testament is required the death of the testator So Christ the next day after this testament was made died on the crosse there by his death blud ratified confirmed eternally established it Thus far Musculê° adding withal Christ saith this cup is the new testament in my blud or according to Matthew Marc this is my blud which is of the new testament The old testament consisted in the tropical figuratiue blud of beasts the truth whereof was to be fulfilled in the blud of Christ. The new testament consisted not in the blud of any beast but of Christ the true immaculate lamb For declaration whereof he said This cup is the new testament in my blud or This cup is my blud which is of the new testament Thus much being manifest confessed and graunted it must also be graunted of necessitie that this blud was delyuered in the supper not only shed on the crosse as Musculus the Zuinglians suppose First because our Sauiour Christ according to the report of al the Euangelists in precise termes so avoucheth This in the cup or chalice is my blud of the new testament Secondly because to the making of the new testament fulfilling the figure of the old true real blud of the sacrifice was required as appeareth in the figure which here the aduersaries coÌ„fesse to haue bene fulfilled For in that figure first of al was the sacrifice offered the blud thereof taken in the cuppes then the people sprinkled with the blud of the sacrifice these words vsed This is the blud of the testament c. Nether is it possible that the blud of the sacrifice should be deliuered or taken or any waies imployed by man or to man before the sacrifice were offered to god Therefore whereas Christ assureth this to be the blud of the new testament as that was of the old it is as certain sure that the sacrifice whereof this was the blud was before offered as vve are sure of the same in the old testameÌ„t Briefly vvhereas in that figuratiue sacrifice whereof this is the accomplishmeÌ„t perfect on 3. things are specified by the holy ghost 1. the publication of the law or testament to the people 2. the offering of the sacrifice whereof the blud vvas taken 3. the eating of the sacrifice sprinkling of the people vvith the blud and vsing of those words This is the blud of the testament vvhereas for exact correspondence of the first Christ at his last supper publisheth his lavv and testament A new commaundement geue I to yow that yow loue one an other as I haue loued yow promiseth the holy ghost to remayne vvith them and his church for euer iterateth that commaundement of mutual loue charitie as the summe of his new law perfection thereof which was to be wrought in the hartes of his ChristiaÌ„s by the holy ghost then promised vvho also vvas euer to assist them to teach them to leade them the vvhole Church for euer in to al truth so fuâ—th vvhereas thus in 5. vvhole chapiters having expressed his new wil testament such graces as apperteyne therevnto he in fine for correspondence of the third biddeth the executors of his testament to eate his body and drinke his blud vvith those same so pregnant so vrgent vvords This is my body which is and shal be deliuered for you This is my blud of the new testament which is and shal be shed for yow hovv can it othervvise be chosen but for ansvvering of the second part as that body and blud of beastes there vvas first offered to god in sacrifice so this body and blud here must be offered in like sort to fulfill and accomplish that figure So that it suffiseth not to say the blud of Christ vvas shed on the crosse vvhere he dyed though that also vvere necessarie for the confirmation and ratification of the testament as vve also graunt and common reason teacheth and the Apostle proueth for testamentum in mortuis confirmatur a testament taketh his absolute and ful perfection strength and
so taught the new sacrifice of the new testament which the church receiuing from the Apostles doth offer to god through the whole world Of which sacrifice the prophete Malachie foreprophecied thus I haue no liking in yow saith our lord almightie nether wil I take sacrifice of your hand o ye Iewes because from the rising of the Sunne to the going doune of the same my name is glorified among the Gentils incense is offered to my name in euerie place and a pure sacrifice The same argument and dedustion I haue noted before out of S. Cyprianâ— First that Christ our lord and god him selfe was high priest of god the father and he first of al offered him selfe a sacrifice to his father â—â—â—â—s last supper and commaunded the same to be done in commemoration of him Next that such priests occupie the place of Chist truly who do that which Christ did and then in the church offer they to god the father true ful sacrifice if they so offer as they see Christ him selfe to haue offered About some 100. yeres after S. Cyprian vvas gathered the first general Councel of Nice and about a hundreth yeres after that of Nice vvas the first general Councel of Ephesus in vvhich the bishops there assembled thus vtter their faith that is the faith of the vniuersal catholike church in this matter The vvoids of that most auncient Apostolical Councel of Nice are On the diuine table let vs not basely regard the bread and cup set there but lifting vp our myndeâ— let vs by faith vnderstand that on that holy table is placed the lamb of god which taketh away the sinnes of the world who there is without effusion of blud sacrificed by the priests and that we truly receiue his preticus body and blud beleeuing these to be the pledges of our resurrection The vvords of the other general Councel of Ephesus are to the same effect thus VVe confessing the death of Christ according to his flesh his resurrection and ascension into heauen confesse withal and celebrate in the church the holy liâ—eâ—â—uing and vnbluddy sacrifice beleeuing that which is set before vs not to be the body of a common man like to vs as nether is that pretious blud but rather we receiue that as the proper body blud of the word which geueth life For common flesh can not geue life as him selfe witnesseth saying flesh profiteth nothing it is the spirite that geueth life For because it is made the proper flesh of the word for this reason it is lifegeuing according to that our Sauiour him selfe â—aith As my liuing father hath sent me I liue by the father he that eateth me he shal liue by me This faith I say of Sacrament sacrifice in al sinceritie simplicitie thus passed on so vniuersally knovven beleeued that as vvriteth S. Leo in Italie S. Augustin in Africa very children vvere taught to acknovvledge the true flesh and blud of Christ to be offered in the sacrifice of the masse Tovvards 800. yeres after Christ one Bertram a litle before him one Scot â—s vvrote darkly of the truth of this sacrament Of the vvritings of the one of these nothing I thinke remayneth of the other a litle doth but the same vttered so doubtfully that as the Zuinglians vse his authoritie against the Catholikes so the Lutherans vse him to the contrarie yea they in maner reproue him as fauoring to much the faith of the Catholikes For of him Illyricus vvith his bretherne say that he hath in that his litle booke semina transubstantiationis the seedes original ground of transubstantiation But vvhat soeuer his priuate opinion vvere his publike speaches and vvriting â—ounded soâ—il in the eares of the Catholiks of that age that Paschasius an Abbat in France made a verie learned booke in refutation of him And al vvriters vvho about that age vvrote of this mysterie vsed more expresly to denâ—e the sacrament to be a signe trope figure image symbole c. in such sort as vvhereby the veritie of the real presence might be excluded as appeareth in the seuenth general Councel in Alcuinus scholemaister to Charles the great in Rabaâ—â—â— archbishop of Ments lib. de diuinis officijs Theophilact in Matth. 26. Marc. 14. Ioan. 6. Aâ—alarius Arch-bishop of â—reuirs lib. de mysterijs missae cap. 24. 25. Haymo bishop of Halberstat in 1. ad Corinth ca. 10. Remigâ—ê° bishop of Antissiodorum in Canonem missae Fulbertus bisshop of Chartres in epistola ad Adelman episcopum in lib. Paschasij Stephanus bishop in high Buâ—gundie Tom. 4. bibliothâ—cae Sanctorum patrâ—m and briefely al other that vvrote betvvene the time of Bertram Berengarius ¶ For after Bertram the next that appeared in fauour of this heresie vvas Berengarius vvho put forth him self a little after the yere of our lord 1000. vvhen as S. Ihon vvriteth in his Apocalyps the deuil was let lose to trouble the church This man as vvitnesseth our martyr-maker M. Fox like to those first heretiks in the Apostles tymes toke away the veritie of the body blud of Christ from the sacrament For vvhich cause he coÌ„mendeth him as a singular instrument whom the holy ghost raised vp in the church to ouerthrow great errors VVhat instrument he vvas vvhom he serued shal best appeare by his ovvne behauiour confession In the meane season this old heresie he published vvith greater industrie shevv of learning then his predecessors countenanced it with more credit assistance of many vnstable sowles and sinful persons as is noted by the godly and learned writerâ— of that tyme vvhich only kind of men ioyned them selues to him and that because his doctrine seemed to yeld them some quietnes securitie in their sinne from vvhich they vvere much withdravven by a reuerend feare and dread vvhich they had of Christs presence in the sacrament to the receauing vvhereof they vvere by order of the church at certaine times induced But as the heresie of this man spread farther then any of that kind in any age before so the church vsed more diligence in repressing the same by sundry publike disputations had vvith the same Berengarius by a number of most excellent vvriters against him among vvhom Lanfâ—ancus archbishop of Canterbury in England Guitmundus bisshop of Auersa in the kingdom of Naples Algerus a monke in Fraunce in that verie time excelled the supreme pastors of the church assembled sundry great synodes meetings of byshops and other doctors to discusse that opinion instruct those that erred after him first at Tours in Fraunce next at Vercellis in Italie then againe at Tours vvhere Berengariê° him selfe being manifestly conuicted 〈…〉 a solemne oth neuer to maintaine his former heresie VVhich oth vvhen as yet he performed not but returned to his former filth an other Councel vvas gathered in Rome of 113.
est Christianum hominem non esse qui non eadem fidei certitudine credit Dominum Iesum esse filium Dei se per eum esse percepturum vitam aeternam VVe professe â—aith Bucer Brentius Georgius Maior vvith other Lutheran Divines disputers against the Catholikes in that conference that he is not to be taken for a Christian man who beleeveth not with the same certitude or assurance of faith both that Christ our lord is the sonne of God and that him self in particular by Christ shal possesse life eternal This is that vvhich M. B. meaneth vvhen he saith that the applying of Christ eating of Christ by faith is to beleeue that he hath shed his blud for me that he hath purchased remission of sinnes to me VVhich iustification and remission of sinnes being in particular beleeved of the Protestant in such sort as is any article of his â—aith thereby geveth a spiritual manducation to him vvhich the Catholike hath not Thus writeth M. B. afterwardes vvhere he spendeth many pages in magnifying this â—aith This faith â—aith he workes a wonderful assurance and persuasion that God loves me that he wil saue me that meâ—â—â— life saluation at perteynes to me This works the seeling of mercy in our hart a particular application whereby we claime Christ and God as proper to vs as if no man bâ—â— title to him and his promises but we Again This particular application is 〈…〉 difference the chief marke and note whereby our â—â—ith who are iustified in the blud of Christ is discerned 〈…〉 faith of the Papists c. For the Papist 〈…〉 promise of mercy to his ownesowle He countes it preâ—â—â—tion as in truth it is and for presumption counted and coâ—demned by the Apostle Rom. 11. 20. 21. â—â— Corint 9. â—7 Philip. 3. 11. 12. Hebr. 4. 1. 2. c. to say I am an elect I â—â— saueâ— iustified This is the vvonderful faith of the Protestants vvhich to them is al in al. This M. B. calleth their iustifying faith By this thy eate Christ so as no man doth 〈…〉 theâ—â— By this they are sure of heaven in heaueÌ„ to be felowes equal vvith S. Peter S. Paule yea vvith the blessed virgin mother of God For so Luther foundeâ— and first inventor of this faith writeth expressely Quâ—â— hac side renati sumus pares sumus in dignitate honore D. Paulo Petro S. Deiparae virgini ac divis omnibus VVâ—â— now that at last vvâ— know exactly vvhat faith it is vvhich geveth the Protestants so deep holdfast in their spiritual maÌ„â—ucatioÌ„ let vs retouâ—â—â— to our principal purpose And as by this vvhich hath bene said of this special Protestant faith I confesse M. B. hath a sufficient ground to chalenge such kind of eating by this faith I meane to him self and his companions Protestants and to exclude out al Catholikes be they as holy as S. Peâ—er or S. Paule vvho never had such a special faith and therefore could never thus â—aâ—e Christ so yet the blocke lyeth stil in M. B. vvay and the rest of his consâ—aternitie that by this saith evil Protestants receive Christ no lesse then good For among the Protestants the most detestable and most blasphemous heretikes have this assurance of their iustification and remission of sinnes no lesse then M. B. or Iohn Calvin or Luther him self vvho by the helpe of an old man whose name Luther expresseth not saith M. Fox but belike it vvas the same man vvho in an other forme frequeÌ„ted Carolostadâ—ê° instructed him first of al inveÌ„ted this special iustifying faith For as after Luther al Lutherans have it most assuredly and after Zuinglius al Zuinglians and after Calâ—in al Calvinists so the Anabaptists more then any of those former sects and Libertines Familie of love by vvord and deed by life and death most confidently chalenge to them selves this assurance that they in Christ have remission of their sinnes that Christ died for them that he shed his blud for them that they are spiritually vnited to Christ they are inwardly so fed by him and outwardly so clothed vvith him that as it is testified by sundry stories many such Protestants both men vvemen and maydens long sithence in Bohemia and of late in Holland at none dayes in the sight of thousands vvould vvalke naked thorough the streetes preaching the vvord of the Lord and could not be vvithdrawen from that furious vnnatural madnes by the terror of present death continually even to death and in death some crying Praise the Lord others Open your eyes ye blind Papists others Revenge O Lord the blud of thy servants and thus not by vvords as M. B. doth but by deeds and facts by patient suffering of death approved they their confidence and assurance of such special faith as M. B. teacheth and Luther the Calvinists describe If then the Anabaptists to make stay and exeÌ„plifie this matter by them vvhom Calvin condemneth for heretikes and vvhose martyrs though in shew marvelous holy and in number never so many he accounteth and calleth martyres diaboli the devils martyrs by vvhich name likewise the Lutherans cal the martyrs of Calvins sect have this sure faith that Christ dyed for them in special and that Christ shed his blud for them in particular and they in this sort spiritually eate Christ how vvith vvhat prohabilitie can M. B. deny such eating to al Protestants of his owne sect though evil livers vvho much more certainly have this faith and therefore much more spiritually eate Christ If an heretike can have a constant persuasion in the death of Christ and then al goes wel and he therefore truly receives Christ by faith according to M. B. definition how much more may a vvicked Calvinist vvhom M. B. accounteth no heretike reteyne this constant persuasion Hath an Anabaptist a â—â—â—th of the sowle apt for such receiving hath not a Calvinist Is evil life a greater bar to such receiving then naughty faith vvhereas this receiving is vvrought only by faith not by life And vvhat need I to rest exemplifie this by Libertines or Anabaptists vvhereas the best surest ground to refute M. B. in this point is the general doctrine of Calvin and Calvinists and the same preached at large by M. B. him self in these Sermons For as M. B. is sure that he is iustified he is elect he is saved he hath this special faith vvhich applieth Christ to him so properly and peculiarly as though no man had interest in Christ but him self alone so this faith vvhich is the right perfit iustifying faith and proper to the elect being once obteyned is never after lost nor never can possibly depart from them commit thy sinnes never so greavous and horible Thus teacheth Beza in the Confession of his Christian Geneva faith most plainly This Calvin in his Institutions