SECT V. FOr the necessitie of the Priests due Intention in consecrating your Cardinall alleageth the Authority addeth the consent of your Doctors except Catharinu◠produceth the opinion of Luther and Calvin condemning this Romis◠Doctrine and condemneth their Censure as Hereticall But wee permit it to vour discreet Iudgements whether to yeeld to this ostentative flourish of your Cardinall or to the exact and accurate discourse of your Iesuite Salmeron to the contrarie grounded upon sound Reasons among others this that this Perplexity and doubt whether the Priest hath a Due intention in consecrating worketh to the tormenting of mens Consciences injurie to Gods exceeding bountie and goodnesse contrary to the Iudgement of Antiquity and in speciall against that of S. Augustine Saepèmihi ignotaest Conscientia aliena sed semper certus sum de divina misericordia And lastly because of the Affinity which it hath with the heresie of the Donatists So hee All which turneth to the condemnation of your Doctrine teaching a necessary Priestly Intention of Novelty Impiety and relish of Heresie We adde to this that saying of the Apostle If the word be preached whether of envie and vaine glory or of good will I rejoyce and will rejoyce which proveth that the evill Intention of the Messenger cannot impeach the Benefit of the message of Salvation and embassage of God Now there is the like Reason of the word visible which is the Sacrament as there is of the Audible Take unto you a Similitude in the marginall Testimony of your Iesuite Salmeron of a Notary publique making a true Instrument according to the forme of Court in the time when hee was distracted in his wits neverthelesse the same Instrument is of use and for the benefit of the partie who hath it not through the Intention of the Scribe but by the will of the Ordainer and willingnesse and consent of the Receiver Our fifth Security from your Romish Perplexity touching Ordination SECT VI. TO passe over matters not controverted betweene us whether the Minister that consecrateth this Sacrament ought to be consecrated by Ecclesiasticall Ordination to this Function a matter agreed upon on both sides the only question is if hee that ministreth happen to be an Intruder and no consecrated Minister whether this his Defect doe so nullifie his Consecration of the Eucharist that it becommeth altogether unprofitable to the devout Communicant Your Church in this case sendeth you to inquire after the Godfathers Godmothers Priest or Midwife that baptizeth to know whether he have beene rightly baptized and this not satisfying she will have you seeke forth the Bishop by whom he was ordained and so to the Ordainer of that Bishop and so to spurre further and further untill you come to S. Peter to see whether each of these were rightly consecrated a Priest and then to search into so many Church-bookes to know the Baptisme of each one without which the Act of this Priest now consecrating is frustrate and your Adoration Idolatrous Contrari-wise we in such an indeprehensible Case wherein the Actor or Act hath no apparent Defect are no way scrupulous knowing that things doe worke Ad modum Recipientis as you have heard in the Example of preaching the word of God were it by Iudas or if you will a transformed Devill yet the seed being Gods it may be fruitfull whatsoever the Seed-man be if the ground that receiveth it be capable Therefore here might wee take occasion to compare the Ordination Romish and English and to shew ours so farre as it consenteth with yours to be the same and wherein it differeth to be farre more justifiable than yours can be if it were lawfull upon so long travelling to transgresse by wandring into by-paths Our Securitie from the Romish Perplexity of Habituall Condition SECT VII HAbituall or virtuall Condition as it is conceived by your Professours standeth thus I adore this which is in the hands of the Priest as Christ if it be Christ being otherwise not willing so to doe if it be not Christ What my Masters Iffs and And 's in divine worship These can be no better in your Church than leakes in a ship threatning a certaine perishing if they be not stopped which hitherto none of your best Artificers were ever able to doe For as touching your profane Lecturer Suarez labouring to perswade you to Adore Christ in the Eucharist simply without all scrupulizing saying It is not fit to feare where no feare is when as hee himselfe as you have heard hath told us that there are possibly incident Almost Infinite Defects and consequently as many Causes of Doubting which may disannull the whole Act of Consecration there needeth no other Confutation than this of his owne shamelesse Contradiction which as you may see is palpably grosse So impossible it is for any of you to allay the detestable stench of plaine Idolatry Certainly if S. Augustine had heard that a Worship of Latria which he every-where teacheth to be proper to God were performed to Bread and Wine as the matter of Divine Adoration he neither would nor could have said in defence thereof as he did of the Celebation of the Eucharist in his owne time viz. We are farre from your Paganish worshipping of Ceres and Bacchus But as for us Protestants we professe no Divine Worship of God but with a Divine that is an Infallible Faith that it is God whom we worship who will not be worshipped but in spirit and truth What furthermore we have to say against your Romish Masse will be discovered in the Booke following THE EIGHTH BOOKE Of the Additionalls by a Summary Discovery of the many-fold Abhominations of the Romish Masse and of the Iniquities of the Defenders thereof THese may be distinguished into Principals which are Three the Romish Superstitiousnesse Sacrilegiousnesse and Idolatrousnesse of your Masse and Accessaries which are These Obstinacies manifold Overtures of Perjuries Mixture of many ancient Heresies in the Defenders thereof CHAP. I. Of the peremptory Superstitiousnesse of the Romish Masse in a Synopsis SECT I. MAny words shall not need for this first point Superstition is described by the Apostle in this one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Man's will-worship as it is opposite to the worship revealed by the will of God What the will of Christ is concerning the Celebration of the Sacrament of his Body and Blood wee have learned by his last will and Testament expressely charging his Church and saying DOE THIS pointing out thereby such proper Acts which concerned either the Administring or the Participating of the same holy Sacrament But now commeth in Mans's will-worship ordained in the Church of Rome as flatly contradictory to the same Command of Christ by Ten notorious Transgressions as if it had beene in direct Termes countermanded thus Doe not This as hath beene proved notwithstanding the former direct Injunction of Christ or conformable Observation of the holy Apostles or Consent
possibility of the other Six Defects neither man nor woman can deny every one concluding a Materiall Idolatry That there are manifold confessed possible Defects disabling the person of the Priest to consecrate in respect of his no-due Ordination whereby is occasioned a Materiall Idolatry SECT V. YOV have furthermore confessed that for want of due Ordination of the Priest the Sacrament remaineth in his former nature only of Bread and Wine as if he be an Incruder and not ordained at all or else of the forme of Ordination viz. Accipe potestatem offerendi Sacrificium Et Accipe Spiritum Sanctum quorum peccata remiseris remissa c. As if it hath beene corrupted by missing so much as one Syllable or letter by Addition Detraction or any of the six Errors before rehearsed as Accipe Spiritu Sancto for Spiritum Sanctum or Accipe potestatem ferendi Sacrificium for Offerendi or the like That there are many hundred confessed Defects which may nullisic the Consecration to make the Romish Adoration Idolatrous in respect of Insufficiencies which might be incident unto the Prae-ordainers of that Priest whosoever he be that now consecrateth for causing a Materiall Idolatry SECT VI. IF the Bishop that ordained this Priest which now consecrateth were not a true Priest himselfe truly ordained or duly baptized or else the next Bishop before him or yet any one in the same line of Ordainers untill you come to Saint Peter for the space now of a thousand six hundred yeares whereof your Iesuit saith The Defect of Ordination is seene in many Cases wherein Progredi possumus fere in Infinition that is we may proceed almost infinitely So he Thinking belike that if we should in this number of yeares allow unto every Bishop ordaining the continuance of twenty yeares Bishop upward to Saint Peter the number of them all would amount to fourescore Bishops among whom if any one were an Intruder or Vnordained then this Priest faileth in his Priest-hood Now of these kinds your Historians afford us Examples of your Popes some dissolving the Ordinations of their Predecessors even to the cutting off of one Popes fingers wherewith he had used to consecrate Yet is not this all for unto these are to be added the other Defects to wit want of Baptisme whether for want of due Intention being three or undue Pronunciation being six or the Errors either of Intention or Pronunciation in Ordination all which make eighteene and these being multiplied by fourescore which is the number of Bishop-ordainers from this Bishop to Saint Peter the totall we suppose will amount unto a Thousand possible Defects each one whereof if it happen doth quite frustrate and annull the Consecration of this Priest whosoever he be that now saith Masse and leaveth to the people nothing but the substance of the Creatures of Bread and Wine to be Adored in stead of Christ Iesus the Sonne of God And yet in this Summe are not reckoned the foresaid Defects concerning the Matter or Forme of Consecration or of the Priests Intention therein or else of his possible Intrusion into this Function of Consecrating of this one Priest now supposed to be ordained every Defect being of force in it selfe to infer necessarily a Materiall Idolatry in your Romish Masse Now rather than you shall call these our Instances odious or malicious you must accuse your owne Romish Church because we have alleaged no Testimony but out of your owne publike Romish Missall Cardinal's Iesuites and other Authors privileged in your Church We are now in the high point of Christian Religion even the principall part of God's Royalty Divine Adoration not to be trifled withall Therefore now if ever shew your selves conscionable Divines by freeing your Romish Masse from a Formall Idolatry in these forenam'd Respects concerning your confessed Materiall Idolatry and doe it by some grounds of Truth or else abandon your Profession as most damnably Idolatrous CHAP. VI. That the Romish Masse-worship is a Formall Idolatry notwithstanding any Pretence that by your Romish Doctors hath beene made to the Contrary The State of the Question SECT I. VPon this occasion ôh how your Summists Theologues and Casuists doe bestirre themselves for the vindicating of your Church from the guilt of formall Idolatry The Briefe of your Defence is this Although say they in the Margent there be no true Consecration by reason of divers Defects yet in him who upon a Morall certainty with a sincere minde and good intention doth adore Bread it is but Materiall and no Formall Idolatry so that he have an habituall condition as being so disposed in his minde not to give a divine honour unto it if he knew it to be but Bread As for Example He that giveth an Almes to a Rich man being probably perswaded that he is not rich the Act proceedeth from a pious Intention And As it was no sinne in Iacob to lie with Leah because he thought her to be his wife so in this case it is no formall Idolatry to worship Bread being morally perswaded that it is Christ Thus they Your Pretences then are three Morall Certainty Good Intent and at least Habituall Condition But alas all this is but sowing Fig-leaves together which will never be able to cover your foule shame of grosse Idolatry To begin first with that which you call Morall Certainty That the Pretence of Morall Certainty of worshipping of Bread instead of Christ cannot free the Romish Church from Formall Idolatry SECT II. OVR Confutation is grounded upon divers impregnable Reasons one whereof is taken from the Iealouzie of God in his worship the second from the Faith required in a true worshipper the third from the nature of an Oath and the last from the Vncertainty of that which you call Morall Certainty First then although Morall and Conjecturall perswasions might excuse men's Actions in divers Cases yet in an Object of Divine Worship it is utterly condemnable even because of the Iealousie of the Almighty who expresseth himselfe to be a Iealous God Exod. 20. signifying as you know that He will not indure any confort in his worship his Motto being this I am and there is no Other even as in the Case of mortall Majesty when as a subject building upon a morall Certainty onely shall question the Title and Right of his Soveraigne established in his Throne he becommeth guilty of High Treason Secondly all Divine Worship must be performed with a Divine Faith which is an Infallible perswasion of the God-head of that which we honour as God as it is written He that commeth to God must beleeve that God is Heb. 11. 6. and againe You must aske in faith nothing doubting Iac. 1. because this is the nature of Faith as the Apostle describeth it Faith is the Hypostaâ—is of things not seene Heb. 11. That is to take your owne Comment Faith maketh those things which are beleeved no lesse certaine than if they did subsist whereby we
are taught both the nature and necessity of Faith in Divine Worship But Morall and Conjecturall Certainty is not Hypostasis which impliâ—th an Infallibility of Truth but an Hypothesis and supposition of that which may be otherwise and hath in it nothing but Vncertainty at all of which more hereafter Thirdly God himselfe commandeth his people by his Prophet saving Thou shalt worship me and in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shalt sweare by my Name Swearing then is an Adoration by Invocating of God and his owne peculiar Prerogative Hearken now By this Law of God none may sweare by any thing as God which he dare not sweare is God But your Romish Professors in your Masse Invocate this Sacrament thus O Lambe of God which takest away the sinnes of the world have mercy upon us And what Romish Professor is there who sweareth not by the Masse meaning the Consecrated Host as by Christ himselfe Notwithstanding no one of your Romish Priests by reason of the manifold Defects incident thereunto as you have heard durst eversweare that this which is now Consecrated by him on the Altar is not substantially Bread or that it is the Body of Christ It must therefore follow that your Adoration having no better Certainty than as you have confessed to adore it with an if it be Christ is a faithlesse profanation of the name of the Sonne of God and of his worship This point concerning Faith in every Worshipper will be confessed afterwards In the last place that we may ruinate the very foundation of your Excuse your Pretence of Morall Certainty commeth to be examined which you have exemplified by one giving an Almes to a poore man who peradventure hath no need and of Iacobs lying ignorantly with her that was not his wife These say we are Cases farre different from this which we have in hand because God's Almoner you know is not bound to enquire of a man whom he seeth to appeare to be miserable and poore whether he be a Counterfeit or no for Charity is not suspicious saith the Apostle Saint Paul Iacob indeed was bound to know onely his owne wife but if he had had any probable or Morall Cause of doubt would that holy Patriarke thinke you have beene so deluded or over-reached a second and a third time to defile his Body by an unchaste Bed But the Causes of your Doubtings are set forth and numbred by Threes Sixes Twenties Hundreds untill you come to a Thousand and as your Iesuite hath said Almost infinite Defects For indeed if there be as appeareth a Thousand hazards in every Masse of any one Priest then in two Priests as many more and so forward so that if one should heare in his time the Masses of Ten and Twenty Priests what multitudes of thousands of Defects would the reckoning make But we need say no more than hath already beene confessed of Almost infinite and consequently as many Doubts of an Idolatrous worship wherein there cannot be so much Morall Certainty as that in any one generation of men from Christ's time each one of that off-spring hath beene chastly borne whereunto what Christian is there that dare be sworne CHALLENGE COnsider we beseech you for God's Cause for we are now in the Cause of God whether our God who will be knowne to be transcendently Iealous of his owne Honour would ever ordaine such a worship of a Sacrament whereby men must needs be still more obnoxious to that which you call a Materiall Idolatry by many hundred-fold than possibly any can be to any materiall Parricide or materiall Murther or materiall Adultery or any other hainous and materiall Transgression that can be named under the Sunne Thus much of your first Pretence for this present untill we come to receive the Confessions of your owne Doctors in this very point That the Second Romish Pretence which is of a Good Intent cannot free your Adoration of the Host from Formall Idolatry SECT III. LET us heare your Cardinall Honour saith he dependeth upon the Intention so that as he who should contemptuously abuse the unconsecrated Bread thinking it to be Conserated should grievously offend Christ contrariwise he who certainly beleeving the Bread to be Christ's Body shall Adore the same doth principally and formally Adore Christ and not the Bread So he even with the same Sophistry from only such a seeming Contrariety wherewith you use to plead for Merits to wit if evill works deserve damnation then good workes deserve eternall life But will you be pleased to heare the same Cardinall speake in earnest from the Principles of true Logicke Although an evill Intention doth vitiate and corrupt an Act otherwise good yet it followeth not that a good intent should justifie an evill Act because no Act is good except all the Causes thereof be good but any Act is evill upon any one Defect So he which his Conclusion is held as universally true in all Schooles whether Christian or Heathen as any point of Morality can be Wherefore it followeth not that because a man doth something to the Contempt of Christ in abusing that which he thinketh to be Christ that therefore the honour which he doth to that which he falsely beleeveth to be Christ should be an Adoration of Christ as all Heathenish Idolatry in worshipping stocks and stones in an opinion of adoring the true God doe witnesse to the world as your owne Confessions will confirme CHALLENGE DOE you not perceive what a patched Cloake of Sophistry your Cardinall cast upon your Good Intent in your Adoration to cover the filthinesse thereof if it might be and how by another Position he rent the same in peeces when he had done Againe you stand thus farre furthermore condemnable in your selves in this point whilest as you seeke to free your Adoration from Idolatry by Pretence of a Good Intent and notwithstanding hold a Good Intention not to be sufficient thereunto except it be qualified and formed with an habituall Condition which is your Third and last Pretence as fond and false as either of the former That the Third Romish Pretence of an Habituall Condition in the Worshipper excuseth him not from formall Idolatry proved first by Scripture SECT IV. HAbituall Condition you have interpreted to stand thus If he that chanceth to worship onely Bread be in that Act so disposed in himselfe that he would not worship the same Bread as Christ if he knew it were but Bread and not Christ and by this you teach that the Act which you call a materiall Idolatry is made not onely excusable but your owne words honest and commendable also So you What execrable Doctrine is this that we heare which cannot be justifiable except you will justifie the Murtherers of the members of Christ and of Christ himselfe First of the members of Christ we reade of one Saul afterwards Paul breathing out threatnings and slanders against them Act. 9. 1. and persecuting the
not but as the first hath verified the Title of that Booke to prove your Doctrine of the Necessity of salvation in your Romish Church to be a GRAND IMPOSTVRE So this second which I now according to my promise present vnto you will make good by many Demonstrations that your Romish MASSE is a very Masse or rather a Gulfe of many Superstitious Sacrilegious and Idolatrous Positions and Practises And because the very name of Romane Church is commonly used as in it selfe a powerfull enchantment to stupifie every Romish Disciple and to strike him deafe and dumbe at once that he may may neither heare nor utter any thing in Conference concerning the Masse or any other Controversie in Religion be the Protestants Defence never so Divine for trueth or ancient for time or universall for Consent or necessary for beleefe I therefore held it requisite in the first place to discover the falshood of the former Article of your Church before I would publish the Abominations of the Masse to the end that for Idolatrie in Scripture is often termed spirituall Adulterie the Romish Church which playeth the Bawd in patronizing Idolatry being once outted your Romish Masse as the Strumpet might the more easily either be reformed or wholly abandoned This may satisfie you for the necessity of this Tractate The next must be to set before you your owne delusorie tricks in answering or not answering Bookes written against you especially such as have beene observed from mine owne experience One is to stangle a Booke in the very birth so dealt Mr. Breereley long since by a letter writ unto mee to prevent the publishing of my Answere against the first Edition of his Apologie when he sent me a second Edition thereof to be answered which both might and ought to have beene sent a twelve-month sooner but was purposely reserved to be delivered not untill the very day after my Answere called and Appeale was published Of which his prevention I have therefore complained as of a most unconscionable Circumvention Another device you have to give out that the Booke whatsoever written against your Romish Tenents is in answering and that an Answere will come out shortly So dealt Mr. Parsons with me Certifying me and all his credulous Readers of an Epistle which hee had received from a Scottish Doctor censuring my Latine Apologies to be both fond and false and promising that his Answere to them Printed at Gratz in Austria should be published before the Michaelmas following whereas there have beene above twenty Michaelmasses sithence every one giving Mr. Parsons his promise the flatt lie A third Art is a voluntarie Concealement and thus Maister Brereley who hauing had knowledge of the fore-mentioned Booke of Appeale manifesting his manifold Aberrations and Absurdities in doctrine his ignorances and fraudes in the abuse of his Authors as in other passages through-out that booke so more especially the parts concerning the Romish Masse yet since hath written a large Booke in defence of the Romish Liturgy or Masse vrging all the same proofes and Authorities of Fathers but wisely concealing that they had beene confuted and his fashoods discouered Only he and Master Fisher singling out of my Appeale an explanation which I gaue of the testimonie of Gelasius in condemning the Manichees concerning their opinion of not administring the Eucharist in both kindes did both of them divulge it in their Bookes and reports also in many parts of this kingdome as making for the iustification of their sacrilegious dismembring the holy Sacrament and fora foule Contradiction vnto my selfe notwithstanding that this their scurrilous iusultation as is here proued serueth for nothing rather than to make themselues ridiculous The last but most base and deuellish Gullerie is a false imputation of Falshoods in the alleaging of Authors which was the fine sleight of Master Parsons a man as subtileâ— for inuention as elegant for expression for obseruation as dextrous and acute and as politike and perswasiue for application as any of his time He in an answere to some Treatises written against your Romish blacke art of Aequiuocation by mentall Reseruation and other Positions fomenting Rebellion to wit in his bookes of Mitigation and Sober Reckoning doth commonly leaue the principall Obiections Reasons and falleth to his verball skirmishes concerning false Allegations and as turning that Ironicall counsaile into earnest Audacter fortiter calumniare c. he chargeth mee with no lesse than fiftie Falsifications All which I spunged out in a Booke entituled an Encounter and retorted all the same Imputations of falshood upon himselfe with the interest of above forty more Which may seeme to verifie that Cognizance which your owne Brother-hood of Romish Priests in their Quodlibets have fastened on his sleeue calling him The Quintessence of Coggerie As for mine owne integritie I have that which may iustifie mee for howsoever any one or other Error may happen in mis-alleaging any one Author yet that I have not erred much or if at all yet never against my Conscience Heereof I have many witnesses One within me a witnesse most Domesticall yet least partiall and as good as Thousands mine owne Conscience a second is above me God who is Greater than the Conscience A third sort of Witnesses are such as stand by mee even all they who have beene conversant with mee in the perusall and examination of Authors Testimonies by mee alleaged men of singular learning and iudgement who can testifie how much they endeared them-selves vnto mee when any of them happened to shew mee the least errour in any thing Hee that shall say Non possum errare must be no man and hee that will not say Nolo errare as hating to erre can be no Christian man The last witnesse for my integritie may be the Bookes of my greatest Adversaries Mr. Parsons and Mr. Brereley whose many scores of falshoods have beene laid so open and published for above sixteene yeares past in two Bookes one called an Encounter against the fore-man the other an Appeale against the second yet hath not any one appeared out of your Romish Seminaries for the vindicating of them heerein By these Advertisements you may easily conceive with what confidence I may proceede in this worke wherein is displayed and layd open in the discussing of these Eight Words of Christ his Institution of the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist HEE BLESSED BRAKE GAVE TO THEM SAYING TAKE EATE DRINKE your Ten Romish Prevarications and Transgressions Afterwards in the following Bookes are reveiled the stupendious Paradoxes Sacrilegiousnes and Idolatrie of your MASSE together with the notorious Obstinacies some fewe Overtures of Periuries out of that great Summe which may afterwards be manifested in your swearing to the other Articles of your new Romane Faith and the manifold Heresies in the Defenders thereof as also their indirect and sinister Obiecting and Answering of the Testimonies of ancient Fathers thorow-out as if they contended neither from Conscience nor for Conscience-sake
Reason which might not likewise haue moued the ancient Church of Christ both Greeke and Romane to the same manner of Pronunciation Whereas the Catholike Church notwithstanding for many hundred yeares together precisely observed the ordinance of Christ THE SECOND CHALLENGE In respect of the necessitie of a Lowde voice especially by the Romish Priest in uttering the words of Consecration THe greatest silence which is vsed by the Romane worshippers is still in the Priests vttering or rather muttering the words of Institution Hoc est corpus meum and Hic est sanguis meus albeit here is the greatest and most necessarie Cause of expressing them for the satisfaction of euery vnderstanding Hearer among you For those you call the Words of Consecration the iust pronunciation whereof you hold to be most necessarie because if the Priest in vttering of them faile but in one syllable so farre as to alter the sence of Christs words which as you say may happen by six manner of Defects then the whole Consecration is void and the thing which you adore is in substance meerely Bread still If therefore the People shall stand perplexed in themselves whether the words which are concealed be duely vttered by the Priest to himselfe how shall it not concerne them to heare the same expresly pronounced lest that according to your owne Doctrine they be deluded in a point of faith and with divine worship adore Bread instead of the person of the Sonne of God Whereof we are to entreate at large in due place if God permit Your fift Romish Transgression of the Canon of Christ his Masse is a second Contradiction against the Sence of the former words of Christ SAID VNTO THEM SECT VII AGaine that former Clause of the Canon of Christ to wit He said unto them teacheth that as his voice Saying unto them was necessarily audible to reach their eares so was it also Intelligible to instruct their vnderstanding and therefore not vttered in a Tongue vnknowne Which is evident by that hee giveth a Reason for the taking of the Cup Enim For this is the bloud c. which particle For saith your Cardinall is implyed in the first part also Now whosoeuer reasoneth with another would bee vnderstood what he saith The contrarie Canon of the now Romane Masse The Councel of Trent saith your Iesuite decreed that it is not expedient that the Diuine seruice should be celebrated in a knowne tongue Whereupon you doubt not to censure the contrarie Doctrine of Protestants to be Hereticall and Schismaticall and no wayes to be admitted But why Lest say you the Church may seeme a long time to haue beene asleepe and to haue erred in her contrarie Custome So you Our Church of England contrarily thus It is a thing repugnant to the Word of God and Custome of the Primitiue Church to haue publike prayer and ministring of the Sacraments in a tongue not knowne of the people This occasioneth a double Plea against your Church of Rome first in defence of the Antiquitie and Vniversalitie next for the Equitie of Prayers in a knowne tongue in the publike service of God I. CHALLENGE Against the Romish Alteration of the Catholike and vniversall practiceâ— of the Church and the Antiquity thereof IN the examination of this point Consider in the first place your owne Confessions given by your Iesuits and others acknowledging that In the dayes of the Apostles and a long time after euen for a thousand yeares and more the whole Church and in it the People of Rome had knowledge of this part of service concerning the Sacrament and vsed to say AMEN So you And this is as much as we need to require concerning the judgement and practice of the true Antiquitie of this Custome You will rather doubt we suppose of the Vniversalitie thereof because you vsually goe no farther then your Dictates which teach that because there were generally but three generall and knowne tongues Hebrew Greeke and Latine therefore the divine seruice was celebrated thorow-out the Church in one of these three And because these could not be the vulgar language of euery Christian Nation it must follow say they that the People of most Nations vnderstood not the publike Prayers vsed in their severall Churches And with this Perswasion doe your Doctors locke vp your consciences in a false beleefe of an vniversall Custome of an vnknowne service of God Which you may as easily vnlocke againe if you shall but vse as a key this one Observation viz. That the three common tongues namely Hebrew Greeke and Latine although they were not alwayes the vulgar Languages yet were they knowne Languages commonly to those people that vsed them in Divine Service Which one only Animadversion will fully demonstrate vnto vs the truth of our Cause It is not denyed but that the three Languages Hebrew Greeke and Latine were in primitiue ages most vniuersall insomuch that the Hebrew was spoken albeit corruptly thorowout almost the whole Easterne Church The Greeke was currant thorow the whole Greeke Church also and in the lesser Asia And the Latine was dispersed ouer a great part of Europe It will now be fully sufficient to know that the most of these languages were certainly knowne in publike worship vnto all them of whom they were vsed in publike Sermons and preachings For your owne Church howsoever she decreed of Praying yet doth she forbid Preaching in an vnknowne tongue Now therefore ioyne we beseech you the eyes of your bodies and mind together in beholding and pondering our Marginals and you shall finde first if we speake of the Greeke Language that there was a generall knowledge thereof even among the vulgar people of the Churches of Antioch Caesarea Alexandria and thorowout Asia Secondly if of the Latine you may behold anciently the familiar knowledge thereof in the Church of Rome whereof St. Hierome hath testified that The people were heard in the Churches of Rome resounding and thundring out their Amen! This in Churches vnmixt Thirdly in mixt Congregations of Greeke and Latine that the Seruice was said both in Greeke and Latine Fourthly your owne generall Confession yeelding a common knowledge of the Latine tongue to the people of a great part of Europe and wee say also of Africke insomuch that Augustine doth openly teach that the Latine tongue was better knowne to his Africanes than was the Punicke although this were their natiue Language And also of France Spaine Italie Germanie Pannonia Dalmatia and many other Nations in the North and West particularly manifested by the Latine Homelies and writings made to the people of Africke by Tertullian Cyprian and Augustine and in France and Germanie by the people praying and ioyntly saying AMEN Not to tell you of the now-Custome of the remote Christian Churches such as are the Egyptians Russians Ethiopians Armenians and others All which exercise their publike Service in the vulgar and mother-tongues
by Protestants which is Sacramentall And by the Papists defined to be Trans-substantiall SECT I. First of the Sacramentall THere lieth a Charge upon every Soule that shall communicate and participate of this Sacrament that herein he Discerne the Lord's Body which Office of Discerning according to the iudgement of Protestants is not onely in the use but also in the Nature to distinguish the Obiect of Faith from the Obiect of Sense The First Obiect of Christian Faith is the Divine Alteration and Change of naturall Bread into a Sacrament of Christ's body This we call a Divine Change because none but the same Omnipotent power that made the Creature and Element of Bread can Change it into a Sacrament The Second Obiect of Faith is the Body of Christ it selfe Sacramentally represented and verily exhibited to the Faithfull Communicants There are then three Obiects in all to be distinguished The First is before Consecration the Bread meerely Naturall Secondly After Consecration Bread Sacramentall Thirdly Christ's owne Body which is the Spirituall and Super-substantiall Bread truly exhibited by this Sacramentall to the nourishment of the soules of the Faithfull Secondly of the Romish Change which you call Transubstantiation SECT II. BVt your Change in the Councell of Trent is thus defined Transubstantiation is a Change of the whole Substance of Bread into the whole Substance of the Body of Christ and of Wine into his Blood Which by the Bull of Pius the Fourth then Pope is made an Article of Faith without which a man cannot be saved Which Article of your Faith Protestans beleeve to be a new and impious Figment and Heresie The Case thus standing it will concerne every Christian to build his Resolution upon a sound Foundation As for the Church of England she professeth in her 28. Article saying of this Transubstantiation that It cannot be proved by holy Writ but is repugnant to the plaine words of Scripture overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament and hath given occasion unto MANY SVPERSTIONS CHAP. II. The Question is to be examined by these ground viz. I. Scripture II. Antiquity III. Divine Reason IN all which wee shall make bold to borrow your owne Assertions and Confessions for the Confirmation of Truth The Romish Depravation of the Sence of Christ his words This is my Body for proofe of Transubstantiation SECT I. YOu pretend and that with no small Confidence as a Truth avouched by the Councell of Trent that Transubstantiation is collected from the sole true and proper Signification of these words This is my Body So you CHALLENGE VVHerein you shew your selves to be men of great Faith or rather Credulity but of little Conscience teaching that to be undoubtedly True whereof notwithstanding you your-selves render many Causes of Doubting For first you grant that besides Cardinall Cajetane and some other Ancient Schoolemen Scotus and Cameracensis men most Learned and Acute held that There is no one place of Scripture so expresse which without the Declaration of the Church can evidently compell any man to admit of Transubstantiation So they Which your Cardinall and our greatest Adversary saith Is not altogether improbable and whereunto your Bishop Roffensis giveth his consent Secondly which is also confessed some other Doctors of your Church because they could not find so full Evidence for proofe of your Transubstantiation out of the words of Christ were driven to so hard shifts as to Change the Verbe Substantive Est into a Verbe Passive or Transitive Fit or Transit that is in stead of Is to say It 's Made or It passeth into the Body of Christ A Sence which your Iesuite Suarez cannot allow because as hee truly saith It is a Corrupting of the Text. Albeit indeed this word Transubstantiation importeth no more than the Fieri seu Transire of Making or Passing of one Substance into another So that still you see Transubstantiation cannot be extracted out of the Text without violence to the words of Christ Wee might in the third place adde hereunto that the true Sence of the words of Christ is Figurative as by Scriptures Fathers and by your owne confessed Grounds hath beene already plentifully * proved as an Infallible Truth So groundlesse is this chiefe Article of your Romish Faith whereof more will be said in the sixt Section following But yet by the way wee take leave to prevent your Obiection You have told us that the words of Christ are Operative and worke that which they signifie so that upon the pronuntiation of the words This is my Body it must infallibly follow that Bread is changed into Christs Body which wee shall believe assoone as you shall be able to prove that upon the pronuntiation of the other words of Christ This Cup is the new Testament in my Blood Luc. 22. 20. the Cup is changed into the Testament of Christ's Blood or else into his Blood it selfe The Novelty of Transubstantiation examined as well for the Name as for the Nature thereof SECT II. The Title and Name of Transubstantiation proved to be of a latter date YOu have imposed the very Title of Transubstantiation upon the Faith of Christians albeit the word Transubstantiation as you grant was not used of any Ancient Fathers and that your Romish Change had not it's Christendome or name among Christians to be called Transubstantiation as your Cardinall Alan witnesseth before the Councell of Laterane which was 1215. yeares after Christ nor can you produce One Father Greeke or Latine for a Thousand yeares attributing any word equivalent in strict Sence unto the same word Transubstantiation untill the yeare 1100. which is beyond the Compasse of due Antiquitie At what time you finde note and â—rge Theophylact who saith of the Bread that It is Trans-elementated into the Body of Christ Which Phrase in what Sence hee vsed it you might best have learned from himselfe who in the very same place saith that Christ in a manner is Trans-elementated into the Communicant which how unchristian a Paradoxe it were being taken in strict and proper Sence we permit to your owne iudgements to determine Neither yet may you for the countenancing of the Noveltie of this word obiect the like use of this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as though it had beene in use before the Arian Controversie began because the Fathers of the Councell of Nice iudged the Obiection of the Novelty of that word Calumnious for that the use of it had beene Antient before their times as your Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe witnesseth You furthermore to prevent our Obiection demanding why the Antient Fathers never called your fancied Romish Change Transubstantiation if they had beene of your Romish Faith concerning the Substantiall Change of Bread into the Body of Christ haue shaped us this Answere namely that Although they used not the very word Transubstantiation yet have they words of the same signification to wit Conversion Transmutation Transition
ceased to be Water And so must Bread cease to be Bread This being the State of the Question we undertake to give Good Proofes of the Existence and Continuance of Bread in the Eucharist the same in Substance after Consecration Our First Proofe is from Scripture 1. Cor. 10. Saint Paul calling it Bread SECT IV. IN the Apostle his Comment that I may so call his two Chapters to the Corinthians upon the Institution of Christ we reade of Eating the Bread and Drinking the Cup thrice all which by the consent of all sides are spoken of Eating Drinking after Consecration and yet hath he called the outward Element Bread You will say with some It was so called onely because it was made of Bread as Aarons Rod turned into a Serpent was notwithstanding called a Rod. But this Answere is not answerable unto the Similitude For first of the Bread the Apostle saith demonstratively This Bread and of the other This Cup But of Aaron's Rod turned into Serpent none could say This Rod. And secondly it is contrary to Christian Faith which will abhorre to say in a proper sence that Christ's Body was ever Bread Or else you will answere with others It is yet called Bread because it hath the Similitude of Bread as the Brazen Serpent was called a Serpent But neither this nor any other of your Imaginations can satisfie for we shall prove that the Apostle would never have called it Bread after Consecration but because it was Substantially still Bread Our Reason is He had now to deale against the Prophaners of this Sacrament in reproving such as used it as Common Bread Not discerning therein Sacramentally exhibited the Lord's Body It had therefore concerned him to have honoured the Sacrament with Divine Titles agreeable to the Body of Christ hypostatically united to his God-head and to have denied it absolutely to have beene Bread considering that by the name of Bread the glory of the same Body might seeme to be abased and Ecclipsed if in Truth and Veritie hee had not beleeved it to have beene then Bread This Reason we guesse you are bound to approve off who in your opinion of the Corporall Presence of Christ his Body and Absence of Bread would never suffer any of your Professors to call it after Consecration by the name of Bread Whereupon it was that the Greeke Archbishop Cabasila complained of the Romish Professors for reprehending the Greeke Liturgies why Because saith he after the words of Christ This is my Body wee call the Symbols and Signes Bread and Wine So hee Which bewrayeth that the very naming of the Sacrament Bread and Wine is in the iudgement of the Church of Rome preiudiciall to their Transubstantiation and that if Saint Paul himselfe should deliuer the same words he did at this day hee should by your Romish Inquisitors be taught to use his Termes in another stile What need many words except in the words of Christ the word Body be properly predicated and affirmed of Bread farewell Transubstantiation of Bread into Christ's Body But that it is Impossible the Body of Christ should be properly predicated upon Bread hath beene the Generall Confession of your owne Doctours and the Conclusion of our second Booke Our Second Proofe of the Continuance of the Substance of Bread is from the speech of Christ touching the Continuance of Wine after Consecration Matth. 26. 29. by the Interpretation of Antiquity SECT V. THe same is as fully verified by our Lord and Master Christ himselfe in thesecond Element of Wine calling it This fruit of the Vine that is Wine after Consecration where the Pronoune This hath relation to the Wine in the Cup. For the proof of this our Exposition of the words of Christ we have the Consent of these and thus many holy Fathers Origen Cyprian Chrysostome Augustine Hierome Epiphanius Euthymius Theophylact and Bede as witnesseth your Iesuite Maldonate no one Father produced by him to the contrary Then answering But I saith hee cannot be thus perswaded So he Marke this you great Boasters of Accordance with Antiquity and yet this manner of answering the Fathers is most familiar with this Iesuite But he proceedeth telling you that The Fathers notwithstanding did not call it Wine as thinking it to be Wine but even as Christ did when hee called his flesh Bread Iohn 6. Then he addeth They that will follow the Exposition of These Fathers are thus to interpret them And gives his Reason of this his Aduertisement Lest the other Exposition saith he may seeme to agree with the opinion of the Calvinists So he For which his Answere Calvinists are as much beholding to him as are the Ancient Fathers with whom he hath made bold not only to reiect their Authority but also to pervert the plaine and evident meaning of their Testimonies who declare that they understood Naturall and Substantiall Wine as the Marginals doe manifest so plainly as to affirme that It was Wine which then Christ dranke and that hereby the practices of the Heretiques Aquarij are confuted who would drinke nothing but Water in the Eucharist It was the Wine saith Augustine which was used in the mysteries of our Redemption Even that Wine which was blessed saith Clemens Alexandrinus and your owne Bishop Iansenius doth confesse that these words of Christ had reference to the Cup in the Eucharist and not as some say to the Cup of the Passeover Marke you furthermore the Errour of the Aquarij and the Confutation thereof they used only Water in the Eucharist in pretence of Sobriety which Cyprian confuted only upon this ground viz. that this Practice was not warranted by the Institution of Christ wherein Christ ordained Wine and not Onely Water and now tell us if that your Doctrine of Transubstantiation had beene an Article of Faith in those dayes whether it had not concerned Cyprian to have stood exactly upon it for the more just condemnation of those Aquarij to let them know that if they would needs use only Water than according to your Doctrine their Consecration should be void and consequently their Adoration if it had beene then in use should have beene like wise Idolatrous The former Proofe confirmed by Analogie betweene Bread and Christ's Body both Naturall and Mysticall SECT VI. IN 1. Cor. 10. 16 17. The Bread which we breake saith the Apostle is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ for we being many are one Bread and one Body in as much as wee all partake of one Bread In this Sentence the word Bread hath a double Relation the First to Christ his Body Naturall Thus the joynt Participation of the Bread is called the Communion of the Body of Christ. The Analogie in this respect is excellently expressed by Isidore Bread saith hee because it strengtheneth the Body is therefore called Christ's Body and Wine because it turneth into Blood is therefore called Christ's Blood These two are
are the Rites of the old Law called Shadowes in respect of the Sacraments of the Gospell according to the which difference Saint Iohn the Baptist was called by Christ a Prophet in that hee foretold Christ as now to come but he was called more then a Prophet as demonstrating and pointing him out to be now come Which Contemplation occasioned divers Fathers to speake so Hyperbolically of the Sacrament of the Eucharist in comparison of the Sacraments of the old Testament as if the Truth were in these and not in them as Origen did Besides the former two there is Veritas Obsignationis a Truth sealed which maketh this Sacrament more than a Signe even a Seale of Gods promises in Christ for so the Apostle called Circumcision albeit a Sacrament of the old Law the Seale of Faith But yet the print of that Seale was but dimme in comparison of the Evangelicall Sacraments which because they confirme unto the faithfull the Truth which they present are called by other ancient Fathers as well as by Saint Augustine visible Seales of divine things So that now we have in this Sacrament the Body of Christ not only under a Signe or signification but under a Seale of Confirmation also which inferreth a greater degree of reall Truth thereby represented unto us This might have beene the reason why Saint Augustine taught Christ to be Present both in Baptisme and at receiving the Lord's Supper A fourth Reason to be observed herein as more speciall is Veritas Exhibitionis a Truth Exhibiting and delivering to the faithfull Communicants the thing signified and sealed which Christ expressed when he delivered it to his Disciples saying Take eate this is my Body given for you and this is my Blood shed for you Thus Christ by himselfe and so doth he to other faithfull Communicants wheresoever to the ends of the World by his Ministers as by his hands through virtue of that Royall Command DOE THIS Vaine therefore is the Obiection made by your Cardinall in urging us with the testimony of Athanasius to prove that Christ his Body is exhibited to the Receivers As though there were not a Truth in a mysticall and sacramentall deliverance of Christ his Body except it were by a corporall and materiall presence thereof which is a transparent falsity as any may perceive by any Deed of Gift which by writing seale and delivery conveyeth any Land or Possession from man to man yet this farre more effectually as afterwards will appeare But first we are to manifest That the Romish Disputers doe odiously slanderously and unconscionably vilifie the Sacrament of the Eucharist as it is celebrated by PROTESTANTS SECT III. BEllarmine with others obiect against Protestants saying that Their Sacrament is nothing else but a crust of Bread and pittance of Wine And againe A morsell of Bread ill baked by which the Protestants represent unto their memories the death of Christ and the benefits thereof A goodly matter so doth a Crucifix and to make the Sacrament only a Signe is an ancient Heresie So they But have you not heard the Doctrine of the Protestants teaching the Eucharisticall Bread to be more than bare Bread a Sacramentall signe more an Evangelicall signe more a sacred Seale yet more an exhibiting Instrument of the Body of Christ therein to the devout Receiver And have not these outragious Spirits read your owne Cardinall witnessing that the Protestants teach that Although the Body of Christ be still in Heaven yet is it received in this Sacrament first Sacramentally by Bodily mouthes in receiuing the Bread the signe of Christ his Body and by which God doth truly albeit Sacramentally deliver unto the faithfull the reall body of Christ and secondly spiritually to the mouth of the soule by faith and so they truly and really participate of the substance of the Body and Blood of Christ So Bellarmine concerning Protestants which is so plainly professed by Calvin himselfe as would make any Romish Adversary blush at your former Calumnies who hath not abandoned shamefastnesse it selfe CHALLENGE THus may you see that we have not hitherto so pleaded for the Existence of the Substance of Bread in this Sacrament after Consecration as thereby to exclude all Presence of Christ his body nor so maintained the proprietie of a Signe or Figure as not to beleeve the thing signified to be exhibited unto us as you have heard With what blacke spot of malignity and falshood then were the Consciences of those your Doctors defiled thinke you who have imputed to Protestants a Profession of using onely bare Bread which they notwithstanding teach and beleeve to be a Sacred Signe of the true Body of Christ in opposition to Heretikes an Evangelicall Signe of the Body of the Messias crucified against all Iewish conceit yea a Seale of Ratification yea and also a Sacramentall Instrument of conveying of the same precious Body of Christ to the soules of the faithfull by an happy and ineffable Coniunction whereof more hereafter in the Booke following where the consonant Doctrine of the Church of England will likewise appeare And as your Disputers are convinced of a malitious Detraction by the confessed positions of Protestants so are they much more by your owne instance of a Crucifix for which of you would not hold it a great derogation from Christ that any one seeing a Crucifix of wood now waxen old should in disdaine thereof call it a wooden or rotten Blocke and not account them irreligious in so calling it but why onely because it is a signe of Christ crucified Notwithstanding were the Crucifix as glorious as either Art could fashion or Devotion affect or Superstition adore yet is it but a signe invented by man And therefore how infinitely more honourable in all Christian estimation must a Sacramentall Signe be which onely the God of Heaven and Earth could institute and Christ hath ordained to his Church farre exceeding the property of a bare signe as you have heard A Father deliuering by politique assurances under hand and seale a portion of Land although an hundred miles distant and convaying it to his sonne by Deed if the sonne in scorne should terme the same Deed or writing blacke Inke the Seale greasie Waxe and the whole Act but a bare signe were he not worthy not onely to loose this fatherly benefit but also to be deprived of all other the temporall Blessings of a Father which hee might otherwise hope to enioy yet such like have beene your Calumnies and opprobrious Reproaches against our celebration of the Sacrament of Christ The Lord lay not them to your Charge Now you who so oppose against the Truth of the mysticall Presence will not conceale from us that Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ which your Church doth so extremely dote on CHAP. II. The Romish professed manner of Presence of Christ's Body in this Sacrament SECT I. OVr Methode requireth to consult in the first
place in all questions with the wordes of Christ his Institution but seeing that you can alleage nothing for proofe of a Corporall Presence of Christ in this Sacrament but onely a literall Exposition of Christ's words This is my Body which by Scriptures Fathers your owne Principles and by unanswerable Reasons hath beene proved to be most grosly false wee shall not need to insist further upon that only we shall but put you in minde of Saint Paul's words in teaching the use and end of Christ his Institution of this Sacrament to wit The shewing of Christ's death untill his comming againe meaning corporally at the last day Which word VNTILL being spoken of a last day doth exclude your comming againe of Christ in his Corporall Presence every day for the Apostles word is absolutely spoken of his Bodily Comming and not of the manner thereof albeit other Scripture teacheth that his Comming must be in all glorious Visibility We goe on In the Eucharist saith your Councell of Trent is contained truly really and substantially the Body and blood of Christ and they account him Accursed whosoever shall not beleeve this By all which is signified a Corporall manner of presence excepting onely Relation to place which we say is in many respects impossible as we shall prove but first we are to remove a Mil-stone for so you esteeme an Obiection which you cast in our way of Demonstration of a Corporall Presence de facto from as you say Miracles manifesting the same The pretended principall Romish Demonstration of a Corporall Presence of Christ's Body and Blood in this Sacrament taken from pretended Miraculous Apparitions of visible Flesh and Blood revealed to the World SECT II. TRue Miracles we shall hold as God's Seales of Divine Truth if therefore you shall alleage any such for proofe of a Corporall Presence see they be true else shall wee iudge them not to be God's Seales but the Deuils Counterfaits Your Bozius one of the number of the Congregation of the Oratory in Rome professedly studied in historicall learning and appointed to extract out of all Authors whatsoever may make for defence of all Romish Causes after his diligent search into all ancient Records as it were into the Ware-houses of all â—orts of stuffes having collected a packet of Apparances useth his best Eloquence to set forth his merchandize to sale telling us by the way of Preface that he will report onely such Stories whereby it is made Evident by God himselfe that the Body of Christ is in the Eucharist even by the Testimony of mens eyes that have seene it A thing saith hee most miraculous which every one that hath eyes may yet see So he even as Coccius before him in every particular and after both Master Brereley thus prefacing Miracles sent by God confirme the same wherin at the breaking of the Hoast sundry times great copie of blood issued out as is testified by many Writers We are now attentive to the Relation of your Oratour and Others and afterwards as you shall perceive to give that credit unto them which the cause it selfe shall require We will take their Relations according to the order of Times 1. Anno CCCC Simon Metaphrastes saith Bozius telleth in the dayes of Honorius the Emperour for the confirmation of the faith of an Eremite that the Sacrament being propounded presently Infans visus est a living Infant was seene by three old men on the Altar and whilst the Priest divided the Bread an Angell was seene and seemed to divide and cut in peeces the flesh of the Child and so Senex carnis cruentae apertè particeps factus est resipiscit The old Heremite being made partaker evidently of the Bloody flesh repented 2. Anno 600. A woman as Bozius reporteth and with him Coccius had laughed to heare the Bread called the Body of Christ which she her selfe had made with her owne hands and was observed to laugh by Pope Gregory who thereupon fell to prayer with the people and by and by looking aside upon the Hoast behold the formes of Bread were vanished and he saw Veram carnem true flesh Then the people wondred the woman repented and the Hoast at the prayer of the Priest in pristinam formam reversa est Returned into its owne shape againe 3. Anno 800. A certaine Priest called Phlegis being desirous to see Christ in the Eucharist not that hee doubted thereof but that hee might receive some heavenly comfort Divinitùs from God after prayers for this purpose he saw after Consecration Puerum Iesum The Child Iesus in the Hoast amplexatus est eum post multam deosculationem c. he embraced him and after much kissing of him he desired to receive the Sacrament and the Vision vanished and he received it So he These two last are also alleaged by your Cardinall Bellarmine 4. Not many yeares after a fourth in Italy A Priest saying Masse and finding Veram carnem super Altare verumque sanguinem in Calice True flesh upon the Altar and true Blood in the Câ—p fearing to receive it forthwith reported it to the Bishop demanding what he should doe The Bishop consulteth with the other Bishops his Brethren by whose common consent the Priest taking the Cup and the flesh shut them up in the middest of the Altar Haec pro divinissimis miraculis summa cum reverentia servanda decrevit The Bishop decreed that these should be perpetually reserved and kept as most divine Reliques 5. Anno 1050. Cardinall Baronius will needs have you know that Berengarius was confirmed by a like miracle from God as the Bishop of Amalphi saith he witnesseth to Pope Stephen upon his oath That when hee was doubting of the truth of the Body of Christ in the Sacrament at the breaking of the Hoast Rubra perfecta caro inter eius manus apparuit it a ut digitos eius â—râ—entaret Red and perfect flesh appeared betwixt his hands insomuch that his hands were bloodied therewith 6. Anno 1192. Behold an History saith your Cardinall Baronius most worthy of beliefe you must beleeve it At Thuring after that the Priest had given the Sacrament to a yong Girle then sicke and had washed his fingers in a pot of water she observing it very diligently willed them that were by to vncover the water for I saw said shee a piece of the Eucharist fall out of the hands of the Priest into it which being brought unto her to drinke all the water was turned into Blood and the piece of the Hoast albeit no bigger than a mans finger was turned In sanguineam carnem into a bloody flesh All that see it are in horrour the Priest himselfe suspecting his owne negligence feareth and wisheth that it may be burned After was this made knowne and divulged to the Bishop of Mentz This Archbishop commandeth his Clergy to attend upon this whilst it should be carried in publike
thereby they might have seemed to have abhorred the proper Characters of our Christian Profession We descend to the Fathers It is not unknowne unto you how the Fathers delighted themselves in all their Treatises with Iewish Ceremoniall Termes onely by Allegoricall allusions as they did with the word Synagogue applying it to any Christian assembly as Arke to the Church Holocaust to Mortification Levite to Deacons Incense to Prayers and Praises and the word Pascha to the day of the Resurrection of Christ But if any should say that these Fathers used any of these words in a proper signification he should wrong both the common sense of these Fathers and his owne Conscience It were superfluous to urge many Instances where one will serve The word Altar applyed to the Table of the Lord which anciently stood in the Middest of the Chancell so that they might compasse it round was farre more rarely called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Greekes or Altare of the Latines than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Mensa that is Table which they would not have done if Altar had carried in it the true and absolute property of an Altar no but they used therein the like liberty as they used to doe in applying the name Altar to Gods people and to a Christian man's Faith and Heart Will you suffer us to come home to you The Father Gregory Nazianzen for his soundnesse of Iudgement surnamed the Divine comparing this Inferiour Altar and Sacrifice on earth with the Body of Christ seated in Heaven saith that the Sacrifices which he offereth in his Contemplation at the Altar in Heaven are More acceptable than the Sacrifices which are offered at the Altar below as much as Truth is more excellent than the Shadow So he Therefore say we the Sacrifice of Christ his Body and Blood are subjectively in Heaven but objectively here in the Eucharist here Representative only as in a shadow but in Heaven presentatively in his bodily presence So vainly your Disputers hitherto whilst that we required Materials have objected against us bare words phrases and very shadowes Lastly Cyril of Alexandria made an Answer to the Objections then published by Iulian the Apostate against the Truth of Christian Religion By this conflict betweene these two wits as it were by the clashing of a Stone and Steele together such a flash of lightning will appeare as may sufficiently illuminate every Reader for the understanding of the judgement of Antiquity thorowout the whole Clause concerning Bodily Sacrifice The Apostate objecteth See the Margent as an exception against Christians that they are not Circumcised that they use no Azymes nor keepe the Passeover of the Iewes albeit Gain Abel and Abraham before the Law and the Israelites under the Law and Heathenish Grecians alwaies without that Law offered Sacrifices unto God But they saith Iulian writing of Christians erect no Altars unto God offer no such Sacrifices as were of old nor invent any new but say that Christ was once offered for them This Objection you see is pertinent to our Cause in hand and as consonant will the Answer of the holy Patriarch Cyril be who to the other points held it Satisfaction enough to say see againe the Marginals That we Christians have the spirituall Circumcision of the heart That we observe the Spirituall Azymes of Syncerity and Truth And as for the Passeover Christ our Passeover was offered up namely upon the Crosse for so is it answerable to the words objected by Iulian. And to the Objection of not erecting Altars Cyril saith not a word But what for the point of Sacrifice Hearken we pray you Although saith he the Iewes Sacrificed to fulfill God's precepts in shadowes yet we doing that which is right meaning the Truth opposite to Shadowes performe a spirituall and mentall worship as namely Honesty and an holy Conversation And againe The Iewes offered in Sacrifice Bulls and Sheepe first fruits of the Earth Cakes and Frankincense but wee offer that which is spirituall to wit Faith Hope Charity and Praises because an unbodily Sacrifice is fit for God And yet againe We Sacrifice to God spiritually and mentally the perfumes of vertues This is the Summe of Saint Cyril his Answer void of all mention of any Offering of the Body of Christ as either Corporally present in the Eucharist to be Sacrificed by the Priest or yet of any Corporall Touch thereof by eating with the Bodies of Communicants no nor any intimation of any Proper Sacrifice professed by Christians Here will be no place for your Answer to tell us that the Question was of Bloody and not of Vnbloody Sacrifices No for Cyril in his Answer handleth as well the unbloody Sacrifice of Cain as the bloody Oblation of Abel and expresseth as fully the unbloody Sacrifice of Cakes and Frankincense as he doth the Bloody of Sheepe and Oxen. Neverthelesse we should confute our selves by objecting this Testimony seeing that the Custome of the Primitive Church being then professedly not to reveale the Mystery of the Sacrament of Baptisme or of the Eucharist either to Infidels or Catechumenists and therefore this silence of Cyril in not so much as mentioning the Sacrifice of the Masse might seeme to have beene purposely done to conceale it from both Iulian the Patron of Heathenish worship and all Infidels So indeed we should have thought but that then Iulian and Cyril both would as readily confute us Iulian because he himselfe had beene more than a Catechumenist in the Church of Christ even as namely Gregory Nazienzene witnesseth once A Reader of Scriptures to the people not thinking it any Derogation unto him so to doe therefore was he not ignorant of the then Christian Doctrine concerning the Eucharist And which is a point as observable when he objecteth against Christians want of Sacrifices by and by as if Christians had nothing to say for themselves but that Christ gave up himselfe once he expresseth this their Answer as that which hee held not to be sufficient And Cyril also would controll us who in his whole Answer opposing Spirituall to Corporall defendeth no Sacrifice at all among Christians but that which he calleth Spirituall and mentall as for example Godly Conversation Faith Hope Charity Praises c. All which are excluded out of your Definition of Proper Sacrifice The Case then is plaine If that the now Romish Doctrine of a Proper Bodily Sacrifice of Christ's Body offered up in the hands of the Priest by an Elevation and after in Consummating the same by eating it with his mouth which you call a Sacrificing Act had beene Catholike learning in that Age then assuredly could neither Iulian have challenged Christians for no Sacrifice nor Cyril have defended them by confessing indeed no Sacrifice among Christians but only Spirituall and Mentall CHAP. VI. Our third Examination which concerneth your Profession of the Romish Masse by your Romish Principles The State of the Question WELL have you
Consecration And that Then as we see now done among us it was Invocated upon even plainly after Consecration saith your Durantus also and indeed almost who not But doe you first if you please admire the wit of your Cardinall in so framing his Consequence and after abhor his will to decive you when you have done for he applyeth the words spoken by Basil of an Invocation before Consecration when as yet by your owne Doctrine Christ is not present as spoken of an Invocation of the Eucharist after Consecration for proofe of a Corporall Presence of Christ therein and the Divine Adoration thereof as will most evidently appeare For first it is not unknowne to you that the Greeke Church differeth from your Roman in the forme of Consecration at this day they consecrating in words of prayer and Invocation and you in the repetition of Christs words This is my Body wherein there is no Invocation at all And Basil was of the Greeke Church Secondly your Archbishop of Cesarea for proofe that Invocation by prayers was a forme of Consecration used primitively in the Greeke Church citeth the two most ancient Fathers Tertullian and Irenaeus and of the Greeke he alleageth Iustine Cyril Damascen Theophilus Alex. yea and by your leave Basil himselfe too and that Basil was an Orthodox Greeke Father you will not deny Thirdly therefore to come home unto you we shall be directed by the objected words of Basil himselfe appealing herein to your owne consciences For your Lindanus was in the estimation of your Church the strongest Champion in his time for your Roman Cause he to prove that the forme of Consecration of the Eucharist standeth not in any prescribed words in the Gospell but in words of Invocation by prayer as hath beene confirmed by a Torrent of Ancient Fathers saith That the same is illustrated by these words of Basil saying What Father hath left unto us in writing the words of Invocation when the Bread is shewne unto us adding That no man of sound Braines can require any more for the clearing of the point concerning the forme of Consecration So then Invocation was an Invocation by Prayer unto God for the Consecration of the Bread set before them and not an Invocation of Adoration unto the Eucharist as already consecrated which your Cardinall unconscionably we will not say unlearnedly hath enforced Looke upon the Text againe for your better satisfaction It speaketh expresly of an Invocation when Bread is shewne but you deny that Bread is Invocated upon untill after Consecration And Basil demanding What Father before us hath left in writing the words of Invocation is in true and genuine sence as if he had expresly said what Father before us hath left in writing the words of Invocating God by Prayer of Consecration of Bread to make it a Sacrament as both the Testimonies of Fathers above confessed manifest and your objected Greeke Missals doe ratifie unto us For in the Liturgie ascribed to Saint Iames the Apostle the Consecration is by Invocating and praying thus Holy Lord who dwellest in holiest c. The Liturgie of Chrysostome invocateth by praying We beseech thee O Lord to send thy Spirit upon these Gifts prepared before us c. The Liturgie under the name of Basil consecrateth by this Invocation when the Priest lifteth up the Bread Looke downe O Lord Iesu our God from thy holy habitation and vouchsafe c. All these therefore were according to the Example of Christ Invocations that is Prayers of Consecrating the Sacrament and therefore could not be Invocations and Adorations of the same Sacrament And as for any expresse or prescribed forme or prayer to be used of All well might Basil say Who hath set it downe in writing that is It was never delivered either in Scripture or in the Bookes of any Author of former Antiquity and this is that which is testified in your owne Bookes of Augustine out of Basil saying that No writing hath delivered in what words the forme of Consecration was made Now then guesse you what was in the braines of your Disputers in objecting this Testimony of Basil contrary to the evident Sence and accordingly judge of the weaknesse of your Cause which hath no better supports than such fond false and ridiculous Objections to relye upon Such as is also that your Cardinall his objecting the words of Origen concerning the receiving of this Sacrament saying Lord I am not worthy thou shouldest come under the roofe of my mouth which hath beene confuted as unworthy the mention in this case If you would have some Examples of Adoring Christ with divine worship in the Mystery of the Eucharist by celebrating the manner of his death as Hierom may be said to have adored at Ierusalem Christ in his Crach or as every Christian doth in the Mystery of Baptisme we could store you with multitudes but of Adoring the Eucharist with a proper Invocation of Christ himselfe therein we have not as yet received from you any one CHAP. IV. That the Divine Adoration of the Sacrament is thrice Repugnant to the Iudgement of Antiquity First by their Silence SECT I. YOV are not to require of us that we produce the expresse Sentences of ancient Fathers condemning the Ascribing of Divine honour to the Sacrament seeing that this Romish Doctrine was neither in Opinion nor Practice in their times It ought to satisfie you that your owne most zealous indefatigable subtill and skilfull Miners digging and searching into all the Volumes of Antiquity which have beene extant in the Christian world for the space of six or seven hundred yeares after Christ yet have not beene able to extract from them any proofe of a Divine honour as due to this Sacrament either in expresse words or practice insomuch that you are enforced to obtrude onely such Sentences and Acts which equally extend to the honouring of the Sacrament of Baptisme and other sacred things whereunto even according to your owne Romish Profession Divine honour cannot be attributed without grosse Idolatry and never ther the lesse have your Disputers not spared to call such their Objections Cleare Arguments piercing and unsoluble We therefore make bold hereupon to knocke at the Consistory dore of the conscience of every man indued with any small glimpse of Reason and to entreat him for Christ's sake whose Cause it is to judge betweene Rome and Vs after he hath heard the case which standeth thus Divine Adoration of the Host is held to be in the Romish Profession the principall practique part of Christian Religion Next the ancient Fathers of the Church were the faithfull Registers of Catholike Truth in all necessary points of Christian Faith and Divine Worship They in their writings manifoldly instructed their Readers by Exhortations Admonitions Perswasions Precepts how they are to demeane themselves in the receiving of this Sacrament not omitting any Act whereby to set forth the true Dignity and Reverence