altereth the Catholickes question and is farre from our first meaning For we hold with Christs trueth Ioh. 20.31 that vnlesse the written word of God first warrant it we are not bound in conscience to beleeue it though all the Doctors and Prelates in the world should sweare it And this was demaunded of you not as the demaunders doubted that the canonicall Scriptures were insufficient to prooue any article of faith but onelie that all men might see and so be resolved whether the Protestants or the now Romane Catholicques ioyne neerest to Christs trueth and the faith of the first primitiue Fathers For that faith which can bee prooved to bee taught in Christs time and so receiued and continued in the primitiue Church for the first fiue hundred yeares after Christs ascention must needs be the true auncient Apostolicall and Catholicque faith And that other faith that cannot be so proved is but base bastardly and counterfeit and I trust in Christ that the Reader easily shall perceiue before the ende of this small Treatise that this your opinion touching Christs carnall presence in the Sacrament and so in the rest of the other Positions was never taught by Christ nor once dreamed on by the auncient Fathers but invented and deviled a thousand yeares after Christ by the late Church of Rome grounding their proofes onelie of an emptie sound of syllables without Apostolicall or Catholicque sence enforcing both Scriptures and Fathers to speake what they and you pleased not what the holie Ghost and the Fathers purposed But first heere you wrong your selfe much your cause more but the simple people most of all in altering the state of the question for our controversie is of the manner of Christs presence in the Sacrament whether he be there corporallie or spirituallie The Catholicque Priests subtilly alter the state of the question And you no doubt in your conscience knowing it vnpossible to prooue your carnall presence alter the question verie deceiptfully from the manner to the matter That Christ is really in the blessed Sacrament A thing never denied by vs nor ever in question betwixt Protestant and Papist for both you and we hold Christs reall presence in the Sacrament but you carnallie and locallie we misticallie and spiritually you by Transubstantiation we in the commanded and lawfull administration But here you forget your grounds of divinitie and rules of Logicke in making an opposition betwixt spirituall receiving and reall receiving opposing them as contraries whereas the opposition is not betwixt spirituall and reall but betwixt corporall and spirituall for spirituall receiving by faith is reall receiving and corporall receiving by the mouth is also reall receiving So that the Scriptures and Fathers that here you alleadge bee altogither impertinent to prooue your carnall presence of Christ and his new conception of bread not of the blessed Virgin by a sinfull Priest not by the holy Ghost For Christ willing I will make it plaine vnto you that you haue shewed little divinitie and concealed much learning in this onely hudled vp a number of texts of Scriptures and Testimonies of Fathers out of Eckius Common-places and other like Enchiridions and neuer read the fathers themselues which at first was requested And thus trusting other mens reports and not your owne eyes you haue wrongd your self weakned your cause and abused the simple For if you had diligently read throughly weighed these Scriptures and Fathers you might haue seene and knowne that these confute your erronious opinions and confirme them not But this you should haue here prooved for the Catholicques satisfaction in which you haue altogither failed That after the Priest hath spoken over and to the Bread and Wine Rhem. test 1. Cor. 11. Sect. 9. Hoc est corpus meum and vsed powrefull words over it and theÌ„ which you call your consecration that presentlie the substances of Bread and Wine are gon not one crumme or drop remaining but wholly transubstantiated transnatured and chaunged into the verie reall naturall and substantiall bodie and bloud of Christ which was borne of the Virgin Marie Rhe. Test â—â—th 26. Sect. 4. and nailed on the crosse is now in heaven and yet in the Sacrament whole aliue and immortall and that this bodie of Christ must bee received with our corporall mouth and locally descend into our corporall stomackes Which bodie so made by the Priest is offered by the Priest to God the father as a propitiatorie mercifull and redeeming sacrifice by which the Priest applieth as hee saith the generall vertues of Christs passion to every particular mans necessitie either quicke or dead for mâ—tters temporall or graces spirituall for whom and when he listeth and for what hee pleaseth Your carnall presence shall bee first handled The second point which is your propitiatorie sacrifice shall bee handled in the title of the Masse This is your Romane â—â—e learning which you should haue prooved but how your owne proofes being duely examined disprooue you let the learned iudge But now to your first proofe out of the sixth of Iohn to prooue your opinion touching the first position Ioh. 6. vers 51. The bread vvhich I vvill giue is my flesh c. Catho Priests Ioh. 6. vers 53. Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the Son of man and drinke his bloud you shal haue no life in you Ioh. 6. vers 55. My flesh is meat truly my bloudes c. GEntlemeÌ„ you mistake vtterly Christs meaning Rider wresting Christs wordes from the spirituall sence in which he spake to the litterall sence which he never meant ancient Fathers never taught Primitiue Church of Christ for one thousand yeares at least after Christs ascentioÌ„ never knew or received For the words and phrases be figuratiue and allegorical therefore the sence must be spirituall not carnal For this is a generall rule in Gods booke ancient Fathers yea and in your Popes Canons and glosses that everie figuratiue speech or phrase of Scripture must be expounded spirituallie not carnally or litterallie as anone more plainlie you shall heare But that the simple be no longer seduced by your Romane doctrine expounding this 6. of Iohn grammaticallie and carnally contrarie to Christs meaning constraining these places to prooue your carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament when there was no Sacrament then ordained J will set downe GOD willing Christs meaning truelie and plainlie which you shall nor be able either by Scriptures or auncient Fathers to contradict 1 First I will plainelie deliver the occasion why Christ vsed the Metaphor of Bread calling himselfe Bread 2 Secondlie according to which of Christs nature he is our living bread whether as hee is man onely or God onely or as he is compleate God and man 3 Thirdly how this bread must be taken and eaten whether by the mouth of the bodie or the mouth of the soule 4 Fourthly the fruit that comes to the true eaters thereof 5 Lastly the reasons shall bee alleadged out of
one hath drawn them to ydolatrie the other inciteth whom he can to treacherie And if Spaine might haue his will of this kingdome but he is liker to loose Spaine then conquer Ireland the subiects should be vsed as the Dukedome of Millain the kingdome of Naples are by the Spaniards hādled Poperie seeketh to bring Ireland to Spanish slaverie from English libertie al the Nobilitie Gentlemē vpō pain of death are forbidden to dwel in Castles the cittizens in high streets but back-laines no man to wear a weapō but a knife of three inches lōg yet tipt with a French posie No poynt This should be the miserable state of the Irish vnder bloudie Spaines government Now for conclusion let me intreat you as August did his Readers Noli meas literas ex tua opinione vel contentione In his Preface before the third booke de Trinitate c. neither reprooue nor correct these labors according to your own private opinion or contentions humors but correct confute thē lectione divina by Gods word then you shal haue my good leaue loue my best furtherance to the State that after you haue replied to this it may be printed as also your persons for further conference protected the like I desire of you that whē you find the text truth against you you seek not any lying glosse or Romish shift to help you rather contending for victory then veritie The Lord open your eies that you may see the truth that you we ioyntlie ioyfully may preach onely Christ crucified without mans inventions c Your louing friend so far at you are Christs the Queene Iob. Rider A FRIENDLY CAVEAT TO IRELANDS CATHOLICQVES CONCERning the Daungerous Dreame of Christs corporal◠presence in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper grounded vpon a letter sent from the Catholicques c. To the reverend Fathers the holy Iesuits Seminaries and all other Priests that fauour the holy Romane religion within the kingdome of Ireland HVmbly praieth your Fatherly charities F. W. and P. D. with many other professed Catholicques of the holie Romane religion that whereas of late they haue heard some Protestant Preachers confidently affirme and as it seems vnto our shallow capacities plainly do prooue that these positions here vnder-written cannot be proued by anie of you to be either Apostolicall or Catholicque by canonicall Scripture or the auncient Fathers of the Church which liued and writ within the compasse of the first fiue hundred yeares after Christs ascention which assertion of theirs hath bred in your suppliants great doubts touching the trueth of the same vnlesse your fatherly accustomed charities be extended presently to satisfie our consciences in the same by the holy vvritten word of God such Fathers of the Church as aforesaid which being so directly and plainely prooued by you as aforesaid may be a speedie meanes to convert many Protestants to our profession Otherwise if these points cannot be so proued by you vpon whose learned resolutions we greatly relie then not onely we but many thousands more in this kingdome of Ireland can hold these points to be neither Apostolicall or Catholicque And thus hauing shewed some of our doubts wee desire your fatherly resolutions as you tender the credit of our religion the convincing of the Protestants and the satisfying of our poore consciences And thus craving your speedie learned and fatherly answeres in writing at or before the first of Februarie next with a perfect quotation of both Scripture and Fathers themselues not recited or repeated by others for our better instruction and the aduersaries speedier stronger confutation we cōmend your persons and studies to Gods blessed direction and protection Positions 1 That Transubstantiation or the corporall presence of Christ◠bodie and bloud in the Sacrament was neuer taught by the auncient fathers that euer writ in the first fiue hundred years after Christs ascention but a spirituall presence onely to the faithfull beleeuers 2 That the Church of God had not their service in an vnknowne tongue but in such language as euery perticuler Church vnderstood 3 Thirdly that Purgatorie and praiers for the dead were not then knowne in Gods Church 4 Fourthly that images praying to Saints vvere then neither taught by those Fathers nor receiued of the Catholicque Church 5 Fiftly that the Masse vvhich novv the Church of Rome vseth vvas not then knovvne to the Church 6 Sixtly that there ought not to bee one supreame Bishop ouer all the vvorld and that Bishop to be the Pope of Rome and that the said Pope hath not vniversall iurisdiction ouer all Princes and their subiects in all causes Temporall and Ecclesiasticall The Protestant Preachers affirme vnles you prooue the premisses by canonicall Scripture they cannot be Apostolicall and therefore bind not the conscience of anie And if they cannot bee proued by the said Fathers then they be neither auncient nor Catholike And therefore to be reiected as mens inventions PRouoked to prooue either by Scriptures or Fathers Catho Priests vvhich liued vvithin the compasse of fiue hundred yeares after Christs ascention that the Primitiue Church and Catholicques of this time are of consent touching these Articles 1 That Christ is really in the blessed Sacrament 2 That Scriptures should not be perused by the vulgar 3 That praier for the dead Purgatorie vvas beleeved 4 That images vvere vvorshipped and praiers made to Saints 5 That Masse vvas allovved 6 That the supremacie of the Pope vvas acknovvledged GEntlemen Rider the cause of this your provokement was a quiet and milde conference vpon these positions maister W. N. with an honorable Gentlemā and a speciall good friend of yours concerning religion wherein he confidently assumed that the Iesuits and Romane Priests of this kingdome were able to prooue by Scriptures and Fathers these Positions to be Apostolicall Catholicque And that the Church of Rome and the Romane Catholicques in Ireland now hold nothing touching the same but what the holy Scriptures and primitiue Fathers held within the first fiue hundred yeares after Christs ascention Now if you in this conference for your part haue made such proofe by the holy canonicall Scriptures and such Doctors of the Church as aforesaid I haue promised to become a Roman Catholicque if you haue failed in your proofe which I am assured you haue done he likewise before worshipfull witnesses hath giuen his hand to renounce this your new doctrine of the church of Rome become a professor of the gospel of Christ This was the occasion and maner of your prouokement which J hope the best minded will not mistake not you misconster being onelie prouoked by your friend 1. Pet. 3.15 yea faith if you refuse not Saint Peters counsell to be readie alwaes to giue an answere to anie man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you In your first line you chaunge a woord and for or which greatly
Gods Priests blessings with praier of the heart and mouth even as well is trueth and falsehood light and darknesse superstition and religion Christ Belial And if the Catholiques will but diligently read this commandement of GOD given to the High-Priest and Priests in this place touching the manner how they should blesse Gods people I am resolved that few Catholiques in this kingdome heereafter will kneele at your feet or begat your hand any finger benediction or crossing because it hath no warrant from Gods word and therefore ten thousand of them not worth a farthing How the Priests blesse the sacrament You crosse the cup or Challice with a set number of crosses and gestures sometimes blowing over the Chalice sometimes crossing it sometimes hiding it that none must see it sometimes lifting it vp that all must see it then ioyning and disioyning of your thumbe and two fingers with manie moe such Apish toies childish trickes and charming prokes which haue neither foundation nor relation to Christs actions and institution But we in administring this holy Sacrament Hovv the Preachers of the gospell blesse the bread the cup. confesse the greatnesse and grievousnesse of our sinnes that can no otherwise bee pardoned but in Christe bloudâ—â— and bitter passion and wee giue thankes to God for Christs blessed obedience to the shamefull death of the cursed crosse by which he hath satisfied Gods wrath and wrought our reconciliation in the bloud of the same and continue this Sacrament as be instituted and commaunded in reverence and rememberance thereof without addition alteration or subtraction And pray that our vnworthinesse and want of faith hinder nor our spirituall vnion reall presence with Christ which is offered in the word of institution and sealed in the right receiving of the Sacrament This is the force and effect of this word Blesse the true vse wherof Christ by his practize delivered the Primitiue Church Fathers and we imitate Now whether your blessing in the Sacrament and your blessing by crossing the people or ours come neerer to Gods word and Christs practize let the best minded to Gods truth iudge and then with GODS trueth ioyne Thus much for your Addition misvnderstanding and misapplication Now to your Omission or Subtraction of a whole verse You bring for proofe of your carnall presence Omission or Subtraction You couer two errors in concealing one ver which is a wicked pollicie the 26. verse and the 28. verse of the 26. chap. of math But you over skip the 27. verse betwixt them both which if you had added it had expounded Christes meaning of this word Blesse overthrown your own crossing and discovered and discomfited other errors of yours which are the receiving of the communion in one kinde of bread onely and onelie the Priest must drinke of the cuppe and not all the communicants which are contrarie to Christs institution and the auncient practize of the ancient Popes church of Rome as shall be shewed hereafter Christ willing The verse that you omit of purpose is this And when he had taken the cup and given thankes he gaue it to them saying drinke yee all of this Now Christ in this verse expoundeth his owne meaning of blessing in the verse before shewing what hee meane by blessing after he tooke the bread by the word of giving of thankes after hee tooke the cuppe So by Christs own exposition blessing giving of thankes are all one or else Christ did rightlie consecrate the bread by vsing the word blessing but not the cup by vsing the word of giving of thankes Nay if blessing and giving of thankes were not all one then neither Luke not Paul haue rightlie penned Christes institution nor Mathevv nor Marke of the cuppe because neither Luke nor Paul ever vsed the word blesse either in taking the bread or cup but the word of giving of thankes nor Mathevv nor Marke ever vsed the word Blesse in receiuing of the cup. I pray you read the three Evangelists and Paul in Greeke and you shall see as in a glasse your errors anâ— shall finde Mathevv and Marke expound Christs meaning in your overslipt verse in giving of thankes in taking the cup what he meant by blessing when he tooke the bread and read also Luke and Paul in Greeke and you shall find that they never vsed the word Blesse as abouesaid So then Luke and Paul expoundeth Mathevv and Marke nay Mathevv and Marke in your concealed verse expound themselues â—ar 8.6.7 If you will read the eighth of Marke in Greeke you shall finde these two words vsed by Christ befoâ—e his miracle of seaven loaues a few fishes and you shall see there the word of thankesgiving put downe first Blessing and giuing of thankes are all one when he tooke the bread and then the word Blesse put downe when hee tooke the fishes there was aâ— great a miracle wrought in the multiplication of the loaues after his thanksgiving as of the fishes after his blessing And mathew speaking of this miracle as Marke did math 1â— 36 did onelie vse the worde of thanksgiving and not the word to blesse at all Wherby you may see by Christs practise that blessing and thanksgiving are all one and they signifie to pray and praiese with voice and not to crosse with the fingers Peruse your owne latten Bible Benedixit by your latten translation is expounded by sanctificante Gen. 2.3 and you shall see that â—â—red is it must be taken in no other sence then sancti scauit is Thus the simple may see how greatly you haue erred in these three points abouesaid And I wonder that maister Henry Fâ—â—rsimon a Gentleman so well learned as the Catholickes account durst put his hand to these grosse errors which most safelie I keepe with me allowing them to bee both Apostolicall and Catholicke whereas they are most antichristian and hereticall And me thinks that all the Priests are greatlie in this to be blamed that will persw de others to follow them and they will neither follow Christs trueth the Apostles writings the Greeke not latten text nor the auncient practise of the P imitiue Church of Rome But now to the test of the bodie of the text and controversie Wherein first let vs examine whether your two propositions this is my bodie this is my bloud of the new Testâ—ment c. be proper or figuratiue litterall or Sacramentall For if they be improper borrowed figuratiue and Sacramentall they prooue neither your Transubstantiation not your carnall reall presence but even plainly disprooue them Augustin de doctr christiâ—nâ— lib. â— cap. 16 pag. 23 Parisâ—â— 1â—80 Saint Augustines â—ulâ— before recited if you would be ruled by it but neither Scriptures nor Fathers can rule you but you will over rule them would presently satisfie you that these two propositions must be figuratiue the latter you coÌ„fesse but the former as yee you wil not His words again for the
Readers good I wil repeat they be these If the scripture seem to coÌ„mand any vile or ill fact the speech is figuratiue as Except yee eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall haue no life in you Facinus vel flagitium videtur tubere â—â—ther can use S. â—â—â—â—d or confess your erroâ— the â—â—â—st â—â—possâ—le the second were commendable Christ seemeth to commaund a wicked act that is carnallie and grosly to eate Christs flesh c. it is therefore a figuratiue speech So that Augustine thus reasons against you To eate Christs flesh and drinke Christs bloud corporallie is a hainous thing therefore Christs wordes be figuratiue so that if to eate Christes flesh with our mouths and teare his flesh with our teeth as also actually drinking of his bloud bee hainous and wicked why doe you so eagerly presse the litterall sence of theâ—e your two propositions against trueth against faith and the auncient Father â—ead it it coâ—taines but 6. or 7 lineâ— The marginall note there coâ—demes your litterall sence Agustine in that short 19. chap. of the same booke immediatly going before wisheth alwaies the interpretation of these and all other figuratiue speeches to be brought ad regnum charitatie to the kingdome of charitie to haue their true exposition Now if you expounde this litterallie and properlie you forsake Agustines rule charities kingdome and the Apostolicall and Catholike exposition It is but small charitie to devoure the food of a friend but to eate and devoure corporallie and gutâ—urallie the precious bodie and bloud of our Christ and Saviour Augustine would haue you catholicks but you wil bee Capernatis and Canibals it is no charitie Nay saith Augustine it is plaine impietie and a wicked and a most damnable fact And so to prooue the action lawfull the kingdome of charitie hath ever taken these and the like propositions to bee figuratiue and the sence to be spirituall Therefore if you will bee loyall subiects of charities kingdome shewe your subiection to her charitable and Catholicke exposition otherwise you will stand indited of spirituall and vncharitable rebellion Ambr. lib. 4 de Sacramentis cap. 5. Ambrose is of the same opinion with vs against you saying Fac nobit inquit oblationem ascriptam nationabilem acceptabilem quod est figura corporis sangaâ—â—is Domine nostri Iesu Christi make vnto vs saith the Priest this oblation that it may bee allowable reasonable and acceptable which is a figure of the bodie bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ And Ambrose presentlie after saith the new Testament is confirmed by bloud in a figure of which bloud wee receiue the misticall bloud By these words the Reader may see that Ambrose and the Church in his daies tooke it not for the naturall bodie of Christ but for a figure of his bodie and therefore cease to bragge heereafter to the simple of Ambrose and Augustine set they are not of your opinion (a) â—â—noâ— Papae lib. tartius cap 12. Fol 148 there shal you see the foolish and phantasticall reasons the Pope giues for those said crosses Aug. in enarratione Psal â— pag. 7. col 1. Printed at Paris anno 1586 And in the Canon of the Masse you haue these â—â—â—ds of Ambrose in that part which begins Quam oblationem but you deale deceitfully with Gods people for you leaue out these words quod est figura corporis and there dash in fine red crosses and still teach the people it is Catholicke doctrine and the old religion but these iuglings with the Fathers must be left or else good men that follow those Fathers will doubt that Gods spirit hath left you And Augustine elsewhere saith Christ commended â—â—d delivered to his disciples the figure of his body â—â—d bloud And Origin saith not the matter of bread but the words recited over it doth profit the worthy receiver this I speake saith he of the typicall figuratiue bodie which is in deede the Sacramentall bread Vpon the 15. of mathew Augustine confuting Adimautus the Hereticke that hold that the bloud in man was the onelie soule of man aunswered it was so figuratiuely August tom 6 contra Adâ—â— cap. 12. not otherwise and to prooue it he vseth this proposition of Christ Hoc est corpus meum this is my bodie saying Possum etiam interpretari illud praeceptum in signo posiâ—â—â— esse non enim dubitauit Dominus dicere hoc est corpuâ— meum cum singnum daret corporis sui I maye 〈◊〉 Augustine expound the precept of Christ figuratiuelie â—or the Lord doubted not to say this is my â—oâ—â—e when he gaâ—e the figure of his bodie Augustine saith Hoâ—â—â—st corpus meum is a phrase figuratiue you say no but it is litterall Now let the Catholicks take this Friendlie Caueat to heâ—â—â— for they haue no reason to follow you that forsake the Fathers and heâ—re may you see that our expositiâ—n is auncient Catholicke and Apostolicall yours new private and 〈◊〉 all Tertaâ—â— lib 4. contraâ— Mâ—recon pag. â—23 line 26. Tertullâ—â— an ancient Father saith Acceptum panem dâ—stributum discipâ—lis c. The bread which was taken and given to his disciples Christ made his bodie by saying this is my bodie that is the figure of my bodie what could be more spoken of them for vs against you And Hierome calls it a representation of the truth of Christs bodie bloud Hierome super 26. math Ambrose on Cor. 11. not the body and bloud And Ambrose seconds his former sayings in these words In edâ—â—do c. in eating drinking the bread wine we doe signifie the flesh bloud which was offered for vs so that they doe but signifie the flesh and bloud they are not the flesh and bloud And Chrisostome saith Chrisâ— in hâ—â—a vpâ—n Hebr. sâ—per Cor. 11. Offermus quidâ—â— sed ad recerdaâ—â—â—nem and afterwards Hoc autem sacrificium exemplâ—â— est ellius c. We offer in deed but in rememberance of his death this sacrifice is a token or figure of that sacrifice the thing that we do is done in ten emberance of the thing that was done by Christ before c. Here is a manifest â—â—ace against you which you shall never aunswere Chris in hâ—n 11 â—â—rk â—â—â—ent Alâ—â— on paâ—â—go lib. 1. cap. 6 pag 18. line vlt. pag 19. lâ—ne 1. And elsewhere be saith in the soâ—e sanctified vessels there is not the bodie of Christ in deed bâ—â— a masterie of the bodie is contained And Clemens Alexandrinus who lived 1300. yeares agoe saith Comedite cornes meas bibite sanguinem â—eum c. Eâ—t ye my flesh and drinke my bloud meaning hereby vnder an allegorie or figure the meat drinke that is of faith and promise And the same reverend Father in his second booke and second chapter of his Pedagogs and 51. pag and line 21 22 23. hath these words Ipse quoque vine vsus
confirme them in true religion and revoke them from your grosse superstition Thus much concerning the vncertaintie absurditie and blasphemie of your consecration Now the true Apostolicall consecration is this when the elements of bread and wine are set apart from their common vse and applied to a holie vse according to Gods word And when the lawful minister hath taught the prepared coÌ„municants the grievousnes of their sinnes What true consecration is which the Gospellers teach the â—â—â—nes of Gods wrath the sufficiencie of Christs ments fully to appease the same the nature of the Sacrament which is a commemoration of that passion the office of faith to appprehend and applie Christâ— meâ—â—s promised in the word and tendred in the due administration of the Sacraments then is there I say a right consecration of the Sacrament Now whether this consecration of yours is warranted by Christ his words let the indifferent Reader iudge and with the trueâ—h aâ—â—cionâ— opinion ioyne Transubstansiation Yet we contend with you not for names and words live for 〈…〉 Thus much concerning youâ— imagined new stamped consecration Now to your second piller which iâ— transubstansiation First I must tel you in this as in the former that the term is new lately invented coÌ„pounded by your selues as your consecration was never found in the new Testament so transubstansiation was never found in the â—â—â—â—us old No I do not remember that in al my Grammatical travels studies that ever â—ead it I can sâ—â—w you Dictionaries many Grammers â—â—â—e of divers priâ—â—â— and in diverse ages printed in severall Vniversities of Christendome but none of them makes mention of this word transubstantiure much lesse of the sence which is to chaunge substances of severall kinds one substance into another But brieflie as the word cannot be found in Gods booke nor auncient Doctor so the sence hath neither warrant from holie scriptures noâ— Catholicke writers For this is your opinion that after consecration which yet you know not what it is the substance of bread and wine should be converted into the naturall bodie and bloud of Christ the accidents of bread and wine as whitnesse foundnesse breadth weight faâ—or and taste of them onely remaining You may assoone and to as good a purpose prooue a transaccidentation as a transubstantiation But as there is no change of the former so not of the latter but a meere Friers fable and therefore frivolous And whereas the Fathers vse these words change conversion mutation transelementation they alwaies expound themselues in their severall workes that it is a changing of the vse not of the substance neither can you shew anie one father that euer ment such a change of one substance into another for everie change of one thing into another carrieth not with it at all transubstantiation of one substance into another for there may be a change without conversion of substances but conversion of substances cannot bee without a change for there is as much difference betwixt change and transubstantiation as betwixt the generall the speciall for change is the generall and containes vnder 〈◊〉 transubstansiation but not contrariwise And as there is a change of substances so there is a change of accidents to wit of qualities of times of places of habits and such other like things according to their natures and to the predicaments vnder the which they are comprehended These Logicall ruâ—â—nuats I hope you haue not forgotten Our regeneration is a change not substantiall We confes a change of name of vse but onelie during the action not after to be a sacrament no more then water in the fond after that baptisme is finished by the minister but accidentall that is it is not a change of the substance of our bodies and soules into anie other substance but the change iâ— in qualitie which is from vice to vertue from sinne to righteousnesse c. and this our change now in question is sacramentall not substantiall of the vse of the creatures not of the substance But if you will needes haue a change of substances speake like schollers and tell me for my learning in what predicament I shall seeke it and yet I thinke I shall never finde it But I will not bee tedious in transubstansiation seeing the great Rabbynes of Rome can no more agree vpon this then they could about consecration as also because we haue confuted it in such places where we prooue bread to remaine after consecration for so manie fathers as prooue bread to remaine after consecration confute transubstansiation I will oneâ—iâ— giue the best minded Catholickes iuste of the rest of your late School-doctors by alleadging one Grand-captain in stead of the rest whose words be these magister Sent. lib. â— dist 11. pag. 58. Si tandem queritur qualis sic illa conversio an formalis an substantialis vel alterius generis di finire van sufficiâ— But if it be asked mee saith this your great Moderator what kinde of change is made in the Sacrament whether it be formall or substantiall or of anie other kinde I am not able to define it vnto you Will you heare your owne friend Cuthb Tâ—nustall Bishop of Dirrhâ—m deliver his opinion de mode de Eucharistia lib. 1 pag. 46. quo id fieret fortasie satius erat curiosum quemquâ— suae nelinquere coniectutae sicut liberum fuâ—t ante concilium Lateranum Of the maner of this change or conversion how it might be done perhaps it had been better to leaue every man that would be curious to his own opinion or coniecture as it was before the Councell of Laterane left at libertie Is this your antiquitie vniversalitie and consent you see it is a jarring noveltie voide of veritie Why then will you take vpon you to teach that which you never learned and perswade the Catholickes to beleeue that which the chiefest on your side maketh a doubt of nay all of your side cannot prooue nay which is in deed but a fable without trueth for one thousand two hundred yeares after Christ never heard of And therefore seeing it is neither Apostolicall not Catholicke Absurdities follow the granting of Transubstatiation no mans conscience is bounde to beleeue it Now J will onelie shewe some grosse absurdities that followe the graunting of it and so proceed to the rest This fable of transubstansiation overthroweth sundrie articles of our faith and therefore it is abhominable It teacheth a new conception of Christ to bee made of bread by a sinfull priest and every day in everie place where it pleaseth the priest contrarie to the Article of our faith which is that Christ was conceaved by the holie Ghost and borne of the blessed viâ—gin and but once for such a Christ as you tender to the poore ignorant Catholickes is not a true Christ neither can be for manie respects which are before in the beginning alleadged Secondlie if Christ be in the Sacrament he is
I tell you plainelie yet in charitie that you doe belie the Texte falsifie the tongue and seeke to keepe the people in blinde ignorance and superstitious palpable darkenes to their everlasting condemnation vnlesse the Lord recall them and they repent them Paule wordes are these in Greeke and so your owne Ieromes translation hath them The bread which vve breake But you are so besotted with the crossing of your fingers which you tell the simple people is the true Catholicke blessing that you forget and forgoe the true blessing of the cup which is the Apostolicall thanksgiving to God for ouâ— redemption purchased in Christs bloud whereof the cup iâ— the true signe Againe we say as the holy Ghost indited it and Paul writ it The communion of the bodie of Christ you say as no learned man or the Greeke text ever said the participation of his flesh Thus much I haue shewed how vntrulie you deale First in abusing the words of the Apostle secondlie in seducing and deceiving the Catholickes Let heere the charitable Catholickes iudge how you will abuse their eares with fables that dare thus falsifie the plaine text Error in the sence of the Texte Now I come to shâ—w how you mistake the sence of the words in the text seeking by indirect wresting to make the text prooue your errour which it denieth in flat termes and trueth For I assure the Catholickes that not one word silâ—able letter or title of this text once souâ—dâ— of your carnall presence Rhem. Testament 1. cor 10. sect 4. You follow the Rhemist who in this place thus expounds the words of the Apostle The cup which vviâ— blâ—sse that is to say the challice of consecration vvhich we Apostleâ— priest by Christs commisâ—ion do consecrate c. and afterwards it followeth the Apostle expresly referreth hâ— benediction to the Challice and not to God making the holie bodie and the communicating thereof the effect of the benediction Now let mee intreate you to aunswere â—e and the Catholickes but these necessarie qvestions drawne out of this your owne opiâ—ion 1. First by what scripture do you prooue that you â—ee Apostles 2 Secondlie by whaâ— scripture doe you prooue that you are Priests 3 Thirdlie by what scripture doe you prooue your commission to consecrate Challices 4 Fou thly by what scripture doe you prooue that the holie bloud of Christ is an effect of your benediction of the cup 5 Last ie by what scripture prooue you that this blessing or thanksgiving is reâ—eâ—â—ed to the Challice and not to God Vâ—l sse you prooue these points by canonicall scriptures to be true Apostles ye are not Gall 1.1 1. Cor. 9.1 2. Acts 9.15 Rom. 1.1 which you shall never doe they bind no â—anâ— conscience to beleeue them or you Against the fi st I thus obiect that you are no Apostles thus I prooue it A true Apostle mvst be called by Christ immediatlie and that you are not He must see the Lord Iesus in the flesh wh ch you haue not Hee must haue his immediat commission from Christ to preach everie where which neither Priest Semynarie Iesuit Cardinall noâ— Pope can haue as your owne consciences full well doth know Gall 2. Ephes. â— and therefore you are not Christs Apostles The true Apostles were equall in authorit e you disdaine iâ— nay more you have made against this a new article of the Popes supremacie and whole volâ—â—es of Cardinals Primacies Iesuits Excellencies Priests Soveraignties But I will say to you Ter tuiaâ— contra Marcion as Tertullian saide to Marcion the hereticke If you bee Prophets foretell vs some things to come if that you be Apostles preach every where and agree with the Apostles in doctrine For whosoever preach not the same doctrine the Apâ—stles did haue not the same commission the Apostles had But you late Priests and Iesuits preach not the saâ—â— doctrine the Apostles did Iesuits Priests be no Apostles therefore you haue not the same commission the Apostles had The maior hath no difficultie the minor is so plaine it needs no proofe the conclusion is inevitable Priests ye are not We read of foure kinds of Priests in Gods Bookeâ— three of them in the old Testament and one in thâ— new First Because yee will not offer the flesh of beasts The first after the order of Aaron and one other after the order of Melchisedechs and the third afâ—ther the order of Baall After Aaroaâ— order you wil noâ— be And after Melchised ch you cannot be And concerning the third order I would you were as freâ— from the ydolatrie of that salte order as you would be free of the imputation of their heresies Secondly none after Melchisedechs order but Christ onely Now (a) 1. Pet. 2 9. Exod. 19.6 Saint Peter in the new Testament seueth downe a fourth order of Priests which is a kinglie oâ— royall Priesthood but that is spirituall not carnalâ— inward not outward common to all beleevers noâ— proper as you imagine to anie naturall order or ecclesiasticall function For this is sound divinitie whiâ—â— you shall never disprooue that the office of â—acuâ—cers and sacrificing is either singular to Christ in respect of his sacrifice propitiatorie onelie vppon thâ— crosse or else common to all true Christianâ— in respect of their spirituall sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving The name office of Priests abused by Priests neither shall you ever finde this word Sacerdoâ— ever applied in the new Testament to any Ecclesiasticall order and function of men And therefore you deceiue the people by this name of Priest which is no more proper to you then to everie beleâ—ving Christian But it is likely you will giue me occasion to speake of this in the controversie oâ— your M ssâ— and therefore J will heere be the briefe in this place Thirdlie in what place of scripture did Christ groâ— you commission to consecrate challices or to maâ—â— â—â—ie challice more holie by your charmed consecratiâ—n then Christs cup was in his blessed institution which did none of your consecration for this the Catholicks must know by the premisses formerly haÌ„dled that your consecration is not like to Christs consecration for either Christs blessing or thanksgiving with the whole action of Christ in the institution was sufficient to consecrate or insufficient if you will affoord Christ that favor that it was sufficient then yours is frivolous And whereas we vse the same sanctification Christ did how dare you say ours is defectiue without blasphemie to Christes institution But this your vsurped title of sanctitie which yee attribute to your selues in making the people beleeue that you can make one cup water sâ—lte or season more holie then an other by your fingred blessing is vntrue and a pharisaicall brag This maintaineth your Priesthoode in glorie pompe and worldlie estimation but hath brought many of sâ—elie Catholickes to beggerie ignorance and grosse superstition Fourthlie by what scripture
Thirdlie and lastlie if the Priest could giue life in the cup wine or bread then it were cleare that the substance of bread wine remained And that would knocke out the braines of your miraculous transubstansiation Now maisters in alleadging Martiall you are brought into a labyrinth get out as you can For if you ever had read Martiall you would never haue alleadged him in this case for in the end of the same chapter hee sheweth to Sigeborâ— and to others newly conveited from ydolatrie ad sâ—nceram fidem to true religion that Christ is sacrificed three maner of waies First by himselâ— on the crosse once for all Secondlie by the cruell Iewes who cried Crucifie him crucifie him Thirdlie per nos in sui commemorationem by vs in rememberance of him Thus Martiall telleth you that in rememberance of Christ is not Christ Now if you will needs sacrifice Christ after Martials opinion you must chuse one of these three after the first if you would you cannot after the second I am sure yee will not and after the third you ought but do not Thus your proofes mend as sower Ale doth in Sommer woorse and woorse even like a conie in a net or a bird amongst limetwigs the more they stirre the faster they sticke But you cannot helpe it seeing the cause is bad how can your proofes bee good But in Gods name leaue wresting of Fathers deceiving of Catholickes and come to the confession of your faults and recantation of your errors and you shall glorifie God edifie his people and saue your soules which God graunt for Christs sake Aaclete For Anaclete I haue not seen him and therfore cannot censure him but if he be auncient he will speake with vs if he be a late writer hee is a weake witnesse and at first excepted against and vnlesse he lived within the first fiue hundred yeares after Christ he must neither helpe you nor hurt vs. And for Dionisius Arcop because he speaketh not the word for you Dionisius Arcop therfore I haue no reason to speake are word against him And wheras you say theâ—e fathers you haue brought as a scantling or taste I tell you â—â—inlie scant a taste of anie truth And the fathers you haue not brought with you but left them behind you because yee know they would witnesse what they should noâ— what you would Then you say you will leaue the Surplus to the curious Reader by your leaue it is better to be curious then carelesse For if the Reader had not been more carefull then you were it had been informâ— Chaos and as Ovid hee said Ovid. Metam lib. 1. page 1. â—udis indigestaque miles nec quiâ— quam nisi pendus mâ—â—â— But now to the rest The third proofe That the chiefe Protestants did beleeue the reall presence Catho Priests and alleadged all the Fathers for the maintenance thereof THis trulie is vvorthie admiration Luther 〈◊〉 7. D fens verb. cana fol. 391. that none of the fathers vvhereof there is an infinite number but did speake cleane contrarie to Sacramentaries And though the fathers all vvith one mouth affirme yet the Sacramentaries harden themselues to denie them And they vvould never vtter this that Christ his bodie is not in the blessed Sacrament if they had anie regard of the Scripture Idem fol. 390. and vvere not their hearts full of infidelitie I trulie vvould giue the franticke Sacramentaries this advise Idem â—bâ— fol. 41â— that seeing they vvill needes bee mad they should thâ—y their parts rather vvhollie then in part therefore let them make short vvorke and rase out of the scripture these vvords This is my bodie which is givâ—n for you For touching their faith it is allone if thâ—â— they kepe it Christ tooke bread and gaue thankes brake it and gaue it to his Disciples saying take eate doe this in rememberance of mee For this prooveth sufficientlie that bread is to be eaten in rememberance of Christ This is the vvhole and entire Supper of the Sacramentaries Luther Tom. 2. fol. 263. In vaine doe the Sacramentaries beleeue in God the father God the Sonne and God the holie Ghost seeing they denie this one article as false of the reall presence vvheras Christ doth say This is my bodie Luther in 〈◊〉 ad Ioh. HarnagiuÌ„ Typograph Argent The whole opinion of the sacrament the Sacramentaries began vvith lies and vvith lies they defend the same GEntlemen you knowe Luther was a Munke and though he recanted Poperie and vtterlie condemned your Transubstansiation as a fable Rider having neither scripture nor Father to warrant it yet he stuck fast in another error De Cons dist 2. canon prem en glossa tertia tenet page 429. fitlie named (a) Luthers heresie vvas on â—ome before Luther vvas borne Consubstansiation which errour hee also suckt from the Popeâ— owne brest as you may see in his distinctions For you in your Transubstansiation teach that of the substance of bread and wine is made by the Priest the verie naturall bodie and bloud of Christ no substance of either remaining but onelie the outward formes Luther by his Consubstansiation saith that Christs bodie and bloud bee received togither in the bread vnder or with the bread both substance accidents of bread and wine remaining Now I pray you how fitteth this your purpose you will say in this that Luther held a reall presence True but Luther denied your reall presence as a fable And yet his opinion was farre wide from the trueth Wee regard not Luthers censure against vs for Chrâ—st his spirituall presence no more then you doe for his condemning of your Transubstansiation And Luther is more to bee commended then all the Popes Cardinals Priests and Iesuits in Christendome who with Augustine though he did erre yet would not persever in errors as you and they doe least he should be an hereticke Ad â—â—ctorem Tom. 1 page 1. and therefore in his Epistle to the Christian Reader saith in this manner Ante omnia â—ro 〈◊〉 â—â—cteram ore propter Dominum nostrum Jesuits Christum vt ista legat cum iudicio imo cum multa miseraluus sciat me fuisse aliquando Monachum Before all things or first of all I beseech the godlie Reader Quid aquâ—â—â— petipotuit and I beseech him for our Lord Iesus Christ his sake that he will read these my workes iudiciallie with great compassion and pittie and let him knowe and vnderstand that I was sometimes a Monke As if he should say if I haue erred or doe erre impute that to my Monkerie Poperie which in deed is but a sorge of bles and a legend of lies Bâ—t because you say Luther helde a reall presence therefore you conclude agaiâ—st vs with his testimonie because you call him a chiefe Protestant The Priests thinke euerie real presence to be their Transubstansiated reall presence perswading the Catholickes that either some chiefe