and other articles of Christian fayth and I make no doubt but had Bell liued in the tyme of Constantius the Emperor the same argument should haue gone in behalf of Arrianisme for with as much probability might he haue vrged the same If he take it not in good part to haue his reputation so touched to omitte his changeable disposition let him giue some reason why this maketh more against Transubstantiation then against the consubstantialitie of the sonne of God That Transubstantiation was first hatched by Innocentius in the yeare one thowsand two hundred and fiftene he bouldly affirmeth but how truly remayneth nowe to be examined For either he meaneth only the name or the thing imported by the nametyf the first we easyly graunt it as he must also that the name consubstantiall was not heard of till the Nicene Councell for newe names may be inueÌ„ted by the Church the better more plainely to explicate an auncient mystery of fayth as Vincentius In suo Commâ—nitoriâ— Lirinensis that auncient father learnedly teacheth wherefore if he hath no other quarrell against Transubstantiation but the bare name it is very rediculous and foolishe for if the doctrine it self be found in the fathers and scriptures a poore spight it is to cauill at the name and with like grace may he descant vpon the words Consubstantiall Trinity Incarnation Deipara or Mother of God c. which if he like not to do then let him neither do it here or els giue some good reason of his so diuers a disposition But if by Transubstantiation he meaneth the very pointe of doctrine it self that is the chaunginge of the substance of bread into the body of Christ by the wordes of consecration then is it a most intolerable vntruth that Transubstantiation was first hatched by many pregnant profes being alleageable to the coÌ„trary To begin in the tyme of Leo the ninth about the yeare of Christ one thousand and fifty in a Romane Councell Berengarius was condemned whose heresy as thâ— Magdeburgians suppose came then to light vpon thâ— intercepting of his letters written to Lanfrancâ— concerning his opinion of the sacrament Berengariâ— Contur 9. col 454. 455. Andegauensis c. Berengarius say they deacon of Anioâ— perceiued that it was not truly taught that after the speakiâ— the words of the supper the supper the substance of the elemenâ— did quite vanishe and were transmutated or chaunged inâ— the very body and bloud of Christ Behould transubstanâ— tiation by the confession of our mortall enem yeâ— was taught in the Church much more then aâ— hundred years before the tyme which he assignet for the first beginning thereof The same Berengariâ— abiuring not long after his heresy in the Counceâ— of Rome vnder Nicholas the second and yet not lonâ—ge after returninge to his former vomitte and puâ—blishing a booke in defence thereof such a worth Bâ—rengarius father of the Sacramentaries a periured person Cent. 9. col 459. pillar and constant father haue the Sacramentarieâ— for their heresie Lanfrancus as the same Magdeburbians reporte opposed himself against it setting forth that booke against Berengarius which is yeâ— extant Primum autem But first of all say they he goetâ— about with many words to defend the doctrine of Transubâ—stantiation which which Berengarius did find fault with to witâ— that after consecration the bread was essentially conuerted into the body of Christ and the wine into his bloud Transubstantiation then was not first hatched at the tyme he speaketh of when as it was oppugned and defended many a faire yeare before that is about the year of Christ one thousand and three score as Bels deere brothers confesse An other brother of his one Perkins thoughâ— caste in a more precise moulde acknowledgeth Transubstantiation about fower hundred years before the time he mentioneth for speaking of the auncient fathers thus he writeth Et teneÌ„dum eos c. Rroblem verbo Realis presentia And it is to be houlden that they knewe not TransubstantiatioÌ„ at least for eight hundred yeares False it is that TraÌ„substantiation was not taught before as shall straight waies be iustified against Perkins but in the meane tyme the good reader hath to note how he giueth thely to Bell affirming Transubstantiation to haue bene about some fower hundred yeares before the time in which by Bels calculation it was first hatched The former Magdeburgians note S. Chrisostom and Centur. 5. 5. col 517. Theodoretus for teaching Transubstantiation Chrysostomus Transubstantiationem c. Chrysostom say they seemeth to confirme Transubstantiation for he writeth thus in his sermon of the Eucharist doest thou see bread doest thou see wine do they passe like other meates into the draught God forbidde doe not thinke so for euen as waxe putte into the fire is made like vnto it no substance therof remayneth nothing aboundeth euen so thinke here the mysteries to be consumed with the substance of the body and to this same effect they report straight after certayne words out of Theodoretus The same authors note how that S. Ambrose in his preparatiue praiers before the masse maketh mention of Transubstantiation and application for the liuinge and the dead True it is that they stile him only by the name of the author of the first praier preparatiue to Masse amongest S. Ambroses workes citing nothing els for prooffe but the censure of Erasmus as though the phantasticall and partiall affection of a moderne mutable man were an infallible rule to measure the fathers monuments Perkiâ— also very pertly censureth it for none of S. Ambrosâ— his workes but yet giueth a reason and that a pretty one ibi adoratio sacrameÌ„ti There quoth he is adoration of the sacrament Let such reasons as these runnâ— for sounde they are none of the fathers workeâ— because they are against vs and our doctrine and it will not be any difficulty at all to answear quickly whatsoeuer is produced out of antiquity yea or out of sacred scripture it self Did strong reason more preuaile then preconceipted fansy they would rather inferre thus adoration of the sacrament is allowed by S. Amhrose ergo it is no false superstitious or idolatrous doctrine Furthermore the same Lutheran historiographers reprehende Eusebius Emissenus who died in Contur 4. col 975. the time of Constantine as the same men report out of S. Hierom about Transubstantiation De caena Domini c. Concerning the supper of our Lord say they he spake nothing commodiously of Transubstantiation vpon the words of Christ vnlesse ye eat the fleshe of the sonne of man c. Behould a priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech hath by his vnspeakable power turned bread and wine into the substance of his body and bloud Diuers other notable authorities might haue been alleadged but I made choise of these as being so playne that the mortall enemyes of Transubstantiation can not deny but that they make cleerly for that point and beside there
quoth he to doe that which becommeth Christian and royall piety to witt that the foresayd Bishoppe would be obedieÌ„t to the fathers haue regard to peace and not to thinke that it was lawfull for him to ordaine the Bishoppe of Antioch without any example against the decrees of Canons as he presumed which thinge we would not make void for the desire we haue to restore faith preserue peace Lastly writinge to the Empresse Pulcheria about the same argument he vtterly maketh voyd whatsoeuer Anatolius had cunningly caused to be decreed coÌ„cerning the Primacye of Constantinople VVe make Epist 55. voyd quoth he the consent of the Bishopps repugning to the rules of holy Canons established at Nice by the vnited piety of your fayth with vs and by the authoritye of the blessed Apostle Peter doe with our generall definition wholy frustrate and make of no effect Now to return to Bell I say that he ouerreacheth when he enfourmeth his reader that the famous Councell of Chalcedon gaue the Bishope of Constantinople equall authoritye with the Bishop of Rome in all ecclesiastical affaires for it cannot truly be called a decree of the Councel which was not confirmed by the head Should a Parlament in England make ten seuerall acts nine very good and beneficiall to the realme but one cleane opposite to former acts and preiudiciall to the soueraigne dignitye of his Maiestie wherevppon he confirmed the nine but the tenth he did vtterly irritate and make voyde would Bell call that an act of Parlament or could he with out an vntruth so terme it in true and good meaninge most certayne he could not what followeth I leaue to Bels collecting vaine But it may be he will say that the confirmation of the Councell belonged not to the Pope It is not possible that he dare offer it will he make Pope Leo so auncient for time so renoumed for vertue so famous for learning such a simple or arrogant creature as to send his legats to be Presidents of the Councell in his place to write vnto the Empresse how he did make frustrate that decree yf his authoritye had not bene certayne in that behalfe and so made him selfe a laughing stocke to the Empire and the whole world and would the Councell haue admitted of his legates or euer haue made suite to him for the confirmation of their decrees as they did when they wrote to him in this manner And we beseech thee say they honour our iudgment Act. 3. in fine with thy decrees and as we with willinge mindes haue agreed together in good things so thy highnes also would accomplish that for thy children which is conuenient which CeÌ„tur 4. â—ol 551. petition of theirs is also formally recorded by the Lutheranes of Magdeburge The good reader hath also further to note that this pride of Anatolius was so exorbitant that at length he gaue it cleane ouer excusing him selfe to Pope Leo as we reade in the letters of the same Pope which he wrote vnto Anatolius in which after he had giuen order about certayne things in the church of Constantinople an argument of his iurisdiction in that place he cometh to that excuse which Anatolius alleadged in his owne behaulfe for hauing laboured about the primacye of his owne church and writeth thus But as touching that synne Epist. 71. which you committed as you say by the persuasion of others concerninge the encrease of authoritye your charity should more effectually and sincerely haue washed away if that which could not be attempted without your likinge you had not layd only vppon the counsell of the clergie for as offence is committed by giuing of bad counsel so likewise by giuing of badd consent But it is very gratefull to me most derely beloued brother that your charitye professeth that it doth now displease you which ought not then to haue liked you The profession of your charitye and the attestation of the Christian Prince is sufficient for your returne into common grace neyther doth that amendment seeme late which is accompanied with so venerable a witnes Let the desire of vnlawfull authoritie which made dissension be wholy cast away This wâ—â— at that tyme the end of that arrogant presumption but had Bell then liued it seemeth he would haue stoode more to his tackling and neuer haue shewed him selfe so base minded as to haue giuen ouer any title of honour or any wise submitted him selfe to the Pope who now pleadeth so earnestly in defence of that outragious ambition Here also the good reader hath to note that as the minister doth make that the decree of a Councel which as hath bene sayd was non at all so doth he make bold with truth beside a tricke of corruption for no where doe I read in the actes of that Councell that it gaue equall authoritye to the Bishop of Constantinople with the Bishop of Rome in all ecclesiasticall affaires as Bell affirmeth that worde all is foisted in by the malice of his ministership neyther haue they the word authoritye but priuiledges which consisted for as much as I can learne out of those Actes in these two pointes The first was that the Metropolitanes of the dioceses of Pontus Asia and Thrace should only be consecrated and ordained by the Bishops of Constantinople as also such Bishops as liued in the same place amongst barbarous people The second was that Constatinople might haue the second place in dignity next after Rome These I say were the priuiledges which Anatolius desired should be confirmed by the Pope for to thinke that he desired to haue euery wayes superiority and as Bell writeth equall authoritye in all ecclesiasticall affaires with Rome is contrary to all reason and not agreable to the recited words out of the Actes for though Anatolius with others decreed that Constantinople should haue equall priuiledges yea in ecclesiasticall matters yet is that straight limited to the consecration of Merropolitanes and to haue the second place in dignitye as before was sayd and is euident also out of the 15. Action can 28. and out of the 16. Action and lastly out of their relation to the Pope in which they craued his confirmation for there they mention nothinge of equall priuiledges and aduancemeÌ„t in ecclesiasticall causes causes but only speake of consecratinge the Metropolitanes of Asia Pontus and Thrace and of hauing the next place after Rome and yet they affirme that they did there signifye vnto him all the force of the Actes whereof it followeth that other priuiledges or eminencye in ecclesiasticall dignitye was not then desired and surely it were meere madnes to thinke that Anatolius would euery way haue had equall authority in all ecclesiasticall causes as the minister affirmeth seing then we must graunt that he desired iurisdiction in Italie and Rome it selfe nay what were it els but to condemne Anatolius of grosse foolerye in suyng for that superextrauagant grace of the Pope to the iniury of his owne See and dignitie
doe encounter vs euery where teaching playnely and perspicuously some synnes to be veniall To name one or two before the late tyme he for the confusion of the minister The Councell of Trent confirmed by pius the fourth and so in orderly reckoning before Pius the fift hath these words Albeit in this mort all life holy and sess 6. cap. 11. iust men doe fall somtymes at least into light and dayly synnes which are also called veniall yet they cease not for all that to be iust for that saying of iust men is humble and true forgiue vs our debts Glorious S. Augustin teacheth the same doctrine in diuers places one I will cite in which he hath the very name Aly quoth he can not therefore In Enthi rid cap. 22. be sometime commended because we do sometymely to saue others wherfore it is a synne but veniall which beneuolence doth excuse But there is no better way to coole the heate of this challenger then to cause his brother Perkins to lette him bloud How doth he like In his Problem verbo Peccatuâ—â— veniale pag. 74. these words of his A veniall sinne that is beside the lawe not against the lawe of God and that which of his owne nature bindeth only to the guilt of tempor all payne was not knowen to the fathers at least for seuene hundred yeeres after Christ after ward began openly to be taught and defended This Minister dealeth very niggardly with vs yet very bountyfully to proue Bell alyer for none I think will beleue him saying that we denyed all synnes to bemortal for a thowsand fiue hundred yeeres when as our mortall enymy confesseth that veniall synnes were taught and defended nine hundred yeares agoe This being so may not I farre more truly treading in his steppes cry out and say O sweet Iesus that any Protestantâ— should be so bewitched as to giue credit to suchâ— creature that hath Apostated from his Priesthooâ— and showen a faire paire of heeles to the congregation on giuen ouer so to shamelesse lyinge that no cloake of defence can be founde to shrowd him nay when the case is so cleere that his owne brother doth depose against him or that they shold be so inueigled by him or others as to thinck our religion to be newe which was planted in our deere Catholike religion planted in Englaud a thowsand yeaâ—â—s agoe countrey a thowsande years agoe by S. Gregory as all our Chronicles and auncient monuments testify and the ruines of many Abbies do cry out and lamentably proclaime and which that holy Pope receiued from S. Peter by the current of his blessed predecessours or so much as once dreame that Pro testantisme can be the old faith which licentious Luther not long since began neither the name being The beginninge of the ProtestaÌ„tes religiâ—n euer heard of before nor any of that profession knowne then in the whole world nor for many ages before as their silence being therein vrged maketh them to confesse and neuer indede as we most constantly defend and can easyly by ineuitable demonstrations conuince and proue and whose doctrine so litle pleaseth our English Protestants Luthera religion detested of English Protestanteâ— namely about the reall presence that drawe cutts they will one parte can not be excused from heesy and for that crime be in daunger of euerlasting damnation Bels VIII Chapter Of the Popes faithe THE XXXI VNTRVTH BEfore I come to his vntruths I will speake a litle of the entraunce of his chapter in which he that hath chaunged diuers fayths will needes dispute of the Popes faith and he beginneth in his coffing grauity after this manner VVisdome with the whole troupe of vertues were needesull for him that should dispute of the holy fathers faith or power Very well we penetrate his meaning neither wisdom nor any vertues be needefull for such a one what then it followeth I therfore post deosculationempedum humbly pray to be heard in defence of truth wherein I will desire no more of his Holynes but that only he will graunt me so much to be true as I shall proue to be true by thetestimony of the best learned Popishe writers Note good reader the profouÌ„d wisdom of the Minister because neither wisdom nor vertue is requisite for one to dispute of the Popes faith power therfore he will take the matter in haÌ„d Indeede were it graunted that none but so qualyfied as he describeth were to intreate of the Popes faith power all voices I thinke would go cleare both of his side and ours that he were the most meete to intreate of that subiect Of his gracelesse gyrninge at the kissing of the Popes feece I haue in the Fore-runner said so much that in his pamphlette called the Popes Funerall the pretended answeare of the Forerunner not knowing what reply to make he smoothly ouer slipped that point as I haue noted in the Dolefull knell and yet still he hath Pag. 247. it by the end so much the conceipt doth please his hart Agame also he is flinging at the title of his Holynes but of that I haue spoken sufficiently beforeâ— His smaller vntruths I do not meane shall here make tale as where he fathereth a certaine booke vpon the Seminary Priests and yet a fewe lines after saith that the booke was written by Watson in the name of all the rest whether Watson faith so or no I little know neuer seing my self any such booke of his but one thinge am I most sure of that most false it is that any such booke was sett out by the Seminary Priestes or that they gaue consent to any such book seing very fewe Seminary Priests or none at all as I verily thincke can be named that liked of that his proceeding as I haue handled abundantly in the Dolefull knell where the good reader Pag. 36. 37. c. may finde what little creditte is to be giuen to Watsons infamous workes which so oftern and sosolemnly this Minister alleadgeth Now to examin that which followeth Bell proceeding forward collecteth out of the said Watsons bookes in this formall manner First therefore if we meane to wringe any truth out of the Popes nose we must haue recourse to his Holines at such tyme as he is sober and not when he is furious least he becom starke mad and forget the knowledge of the truthe as though Watson had said that the Pope is some tyme sober and sometyme furious he doth much wrong him for his words reported by Bell him self in this very chapter contayne no such thinge only he saith that as the prudent Greeke appealed from Alexander furious to Alexander sober so may the seculars notwith standing any decree sette downe by his Holines by wrong information appeale euen from the Pope as Clemens vnto his Hohnes as Peter he speaketh of Alexander surious and sober and not of the Pope Bell she weth small conscience in belyinge the dead and laying more faultes vpon him
is no better boxing of Bell then with the holy fistes of his croked brethren Lastly what man of any insight not furiously transported with the passion of noucltie can persuade himself satisfy his conscience or once imagiâ—e if the Reall presence and Transubstantiation â—ad not been taught by Christ and his Apostles â—hat it could euer haue come into the Church and anished the former opinion especially that being mystery so far surpassing the reach of reason and â—he other so fittinge common conceipt and easy to â—nderstande Could I say a doctrine so newe and â—ifficult possesse the world and exterminate former fayth coming from the Apostles and so easy to â—pprehend without infinite garboiles and contradictioÌ„s or is it possible if any such thing had bene that it could haue escaped the pennes of all writers none euer either of loue to truth or hatred to falshood complayning of that great ruyne of veriâ—ie and straunge ouerflowe of superstition The ProtestaÌ„ts here can say nothing to giue true real satisfaction to any sincerely desirous of saluation On the contrary we can tell them that when the doctrine of the Real presence and Transubstantiation began to be impugned how it was straight resisted by learned men and diuers Councels as before was touched intreatinge of Berengarius which is an argument that our religion is auncient and Apostolicall and his a filthy ragge of hereticall nouelty And thus haue I abundantly proued that Transubstantiation began not vnder Innocentius in the yeare one thousand two hundred and fiue as Bell affirmeth but is far more auncient being taught by the old doctors of Christs Church yea that it cometh from our Sauiour himself and his blessed Apostles Bels XI Chapter Of Popish inuocation of Saintes THE XLII VNTRVTH OMitting Sr. Thomas his irreligious and iniurious snatching at that most constant martyr of Christ S. Thomas of Canterbury let vs consider what els he bringeth The Papists quoth he in their fond Popishe inuocation ascribe that to Saints which is only and solely proper vnto Christ himself I proue it because they make the Saints departed not only mediators of intercession but also of redemption Moste false it is that we make them mediators of redemption and saluation as he may learne out of the Councell of Trent where it is decreed that it is good and profitable to inuocate Saints Sâ—ss 25. and to flie vnto their praiers help and assistance for the obtayning of benefits by his sonne Iesus Christ our lord who is our only Redeemer and Sauiour But let vs heare what potent prooffe Bell bringeth Thomas Becket quoth he sometyme Bishop of Canterbury is inuocated of the Pope and all his Popishe crewe not barely and absolutely as an holy man but as the sonne of the liuinge God and the only Sauiour of the world Terrible wordes and fearfull speaches what will be the end of this boisterous blaste it followeth This assertion to the godly may seeme wonderfull but it is such a knowne truth as no Papist whatsoeuer he be can without blushing deny the same by that time the matter is examined I verily thinke all modest Protestants will blushe at the impudency of this lying Minister that maketh such a solemne preface to so notorious and shamelesse an vntruth Now followeth the deadly cracke and terrible threatned thunder clappe These are quoth he the expresse words of their â—hymne which they both say and singe vpon that day which they keepe holy for his praise and honour Tu per Thomae sanguinem c. By the bloud of Thomas which he for thee did spende bringe vs thither o Christ whether Thomas did ascende I vtterly deny that any of these words or all together make S. Thomas a mediator of redemption or do proue that we inuocate him as the sonne o f the liuing God and the only Sauiour of the world as the Ministers lying lippes lashe out nay I add more that as no words here import any such thing so some there be that on the contrary free vs from that imposed blssphemy for we inuocate and desire Christ that he would for the merit of his martyrdome bringe vs to heauen but did we make S. Thomas a mediatour of redemption and inuocate him as the sonne of the liuing God as Bell chargeth vs then would we not inuocate Christ as his superiour which yet we doe and so a moste outragious vntruth it is that we make s. Thomas a mediator of redemption or inuocate him as the sonne of the liuing God and the only Sauiour of the world as Saintles Sr. Thomas auoucheth I passe ouer with silence how falsely he also affirmeth that the Pope and all his Popishe crewe do vpon the feast of S. Thomas inuocate him in that manner Bels lippes are his owne he may imploy them that way which best pleaseth him for the Pope and many thousands more vse the Romane Breuiary and Missal in neither of which any such praier is contayned and as I suppose not founâ— but in those of Sarum vse which be now anâ—tiquated and out of date as both that and all otheâ— long since were with Bell howbeit the words import not any blasphemy at all for the meaning oâ— the praier is no other but that Christ would bring vs to heauen by that singular and especiall merit oâ— S. Thomas in giuing his life and sheddinge his bloud for the loue of him for if one may merit vpon earth as the Catholique Church teacheth that â— man by the grace of God and the merits of Iesus Christ may then none will deny but the act of Martyrdome and shedding of our bloud for the testimony of truth is meritorious as being the most high and soueraigne worke of charity fortitude fayth patience c. that we can possibly do in this world And if the merits of Saints do profitte vs and we may pray to God by their merits as straightwaies shall be proued then may we pray to Christe by the merits of S. Thomas and by that especiall merit of the shedding his bloud for his honour and that without any iniury to his merits or bloud S. Thomas his merits being inferiour to the merits of Christ these being the heauenly fountayne from whence both the merits of S. Thomas and the merits of all other glorious martyra and Saintes haue flowed and receiued all their force and vertue Thus we are freed from the wicked slaunder of the Minister that blusheth not to say that we make S. Thomas a mediatour of redemption and inuocate him as the sonne of the liuing God and the only Sauiour of the world and together is declared how the praier coÌ„tayneth not any blasphemy but sound good doctrine taken in the true sence though now not vsed in the Catholique Church THE XLIII VNTRVTH AFter this praier to S. Thomas he citeth a sentence out of Polanchus added in the end of Absolution to witt this The passion of our Lord Iesus Christ the merits of the blessed virgin Mary and
godlesse vntruth as himself I suppose will not deny when as he telleth vs in diuers others of Funeral lib. 1. cap. 4. pag. 4. Suruey pag. 536. pag 57. his bookes that Popishe inuocation and adoration was not knowen till the year three hundred and seauenty which though it be a loud lye as I haue proued in the Dolefull knell shewing the vse of inuocacation and adoration before the yeare three hundred and seauenty yet is it nothing comparable to this here vttered making that article a thousand yeares younger then in his former bookes and playnly contradicting here what he saith in those former places Content he was that his ignorant reader shoulde gather that sence and for that ende deliuered the wordes in such a cunning manner but let him be vrged with that which he teacheth elâ— where and then his refuge will be that he speaketh not of the inuocation of Saintes in generallâ— but of the particular manner of praying by their merites or by the bloude of Thomas such be theâ— slightes of the minister But to prosecute himâ— flyinge albeit that be his meaning yf it be so forâ— it may be that I haue construed his wordes to aâ— better sence then euer he intended yet I say thatâ— praying to God by the merits of his Saints is alsoâ— older then the yeare one thousand fower hundred and seauen and that both by his owne confession who in the precedent words saith that it was neuer knowen to the Church of Christ for the space of one thousand yeares and odde signifying that not long after it came in which is almost two hundred yeares before the tyme here assigned as also by the verdict of his brother Perkins who censureth S. Leo that liued twelue hundred yeres agoe for the same doctrine but according to truth it self it is as auncient as the Gospel and the former daies of the Patriarches and Prophetes as before was said Lastly that very particular praier to S. Thomas which he mentioneth is as I make no doubt more auncient then the tyme he noteth seing S. Thomas was martired more then fower hundred yeares agoe and canonized straight after his death and so in no sence his words can by any meanes be excused from an vntruth and in that which they represent to common vnderstanding from a monstrous ly and palpable contradiction Bels XII Chapter Of the Communion vnder one kinde THE XLVI VNTRVTH THe Minister speaking of the Communion vnder one kinde and desirous to shewe that we haue broken the institutioÌ„ of Christ like a godâ—esse Gospeller corrupteth the very text of sacred Scripture And S. Paul saith he vrging Christes instiâ—ution to the Corinthians telleth them playnely and reliâ—iously that they must receiue the holy Eucharist vnder both 1. Corint 11. v. 27. kindes which last words he printeth also in a distinct letter to shewe that they be the Apostles wordes and quoteth accordingly in the margent the particular place vz 1. Cor. 11. 27. but viewe it he that will if he finde S. Paul to haue those words we yeld him the victory if not let his fauorites consider how they venture their soules with such a minister that offereth violence to the very word of God which he would seeme so much to reuerence The words of S. Paul be these Therfore whosoeuer shall eate this bread or drinke the chalice of our Lord vnworthyly he shall be guilty of the body and of the bloud of our Lord which be far different from these That they must receiue the holy Eucharist vnder both kindes affirmed by him to be the very sentence of S. Paul The most that can be gathered out of S. Paules wordes truly cited is that in his tyme the Eucharist was ministred to lay people vnder both kindes which we deny not but they proue nâ— that it neither was nor might be giuen vndâ— one kind Mary out of the wordes as he citeâ— them the matter is made cocke-sure and tâ— text framed fitte for their purpose giue him tâ— leaue that he may coyne scripture as he pleaâ— and no question but as he hath vpon a doubâ— change of religion alwaies found the word God for his warrant so will he still chaunâ— what chaunce may neuer lacke it to back him all his actions No shelter can shrowd him from the crynâ— of corruption For to tell vs that it is the meâ—ning of S. Paul as it is most false so can it nâ— iustify his falsification for then might any ciâ— the text according to that interpretation whicâ— he thinketh agreable thereunto and as the veâ—â— wordes of the text which is most impious â—â— be saide For example The Catholiques alleadgeâ— against the Arrians to proue Christ to be of oâ— and the same nature with his father this sentence of S. Iohn I and the father are one which plaâ—â— Ioan. 10. v. 30. in truth by the circumstance of the letter anâ— exposition of venerable antiquity proueth sâ— much yet who euer haue presumed or noâ— dare to cite it after Bels manner and say thâ— Euangelist S. Iohn reporting Christes wordes affirmeth plainely and religiously that Christ anâ— his father be all of one nature and substance for allow this and the Arrians may with likâ— authority cite it to the contrary and rehearsâ— the texâ— after Bels manner thus The Euanelist S. Iohn reporting Christes words teacheth â—laynely and religiously that Christ and his faâ—her be not one in nature and substance but in â—onsent of will which licentious proceeding being once brought in nothing will be found sincere nothing true and sound but the broade gate sett open to all corrupt dealing and falsification Let vs but acknowledge any tradition of Christ or his Apostles not expressely found in the written word though neuer so much warranted by antiquity and straight in great zeale he is vpon vs with the curses and threats out of Deutronomie and the Apocalipse of them that adde or take away any thinge from the word and yet himself I knowe not vpon what dispensation corrupteth choppeth and changeth as hath bene said and would be loth for all that to be reputed for any other then a sincere preacher of the word and one that handleth the scripture with great respect and reuerence but I hope such as carry due regarde to their soules will looke better to his fingers and vpon triall of his treachery auoide him for a false teacher and detestable Doctor THE XLVII VNTRVTH PRosecuting still the same matter of communicating vnder both kindes he saith This was the practise of the auncient Church for the space of one thousande two hundred and thirty yeares after Christ aboâ—â— which tyme they began in some odde Churches to leaue the cuppe and to minister the sacrament in bread only bâ— that was done as Aquinas consesseth in some fewe places onlâ— 3. Part. quaest 80. art 12. in Cor. An vntruthe it is that the communion vnder onâ— kinde was not in vse till the yeare one thousanâ— two hundred
and thirty as more bouldly theâ— truly he affirmeth Sozomenus and Nicephorus report Lib. 8. hist cap. 5. Lib. 13. cap. 7. how a certayne woman infected with thâ— heresy of Macedonius the better to conceale her religion came to the Church and receiued the sacrament from the hand of S. Chrysostome as it werâ— with a minde straight waies to eate it but shâ— cunningly gaue it to her maide and receiued of heâ— other bread brought from home which when she went about to eate she found it straight turneâ— into a stone This fact sheweth that all then receiued not the chalice for then this woman could not haue dissembled both because the chalice was not giuen into her owne hands as the consecrated hoast then was and though it had no such euasion is imaginable An other example we haue in Pope Leo the Serm. 4. de Quaâ—irages first who saith that the Manichees to conceale their heresy vsed to receiue the consecrated hoast with Catholiques but not the chalice which argueth that it was free at that tyme to receiue the chalice or not for had they bene all bound to receiue the chalice the Manichees could not but haue bene knowen as they which neuer tooke the chalice and therfore S. Leo commaundeth not to obserue them who somtyme did receiue the chalice and somtyme did not but those which did â—uer receiue it at all for at that tyme it was a â—te of a Manichee that sect detesting the drinâ—â—ge of wine as a thinge vtterly vnlawfull and â—â—linge it the deuils gall I omitt much more â—hich might be brought out of antiquity yea out â—â— scripture it self some thing before hath bene â—â—uched and more to that purpose very strongly â—ight be vrged but breuity to which I am inforâ—â—d maketh me to passe ouer many things Only for a conclusion I can not but note how â—â—norant Sir Thomas of Rascall entreateth learâ—ed S. Thomas of Aquine whom first he maketh by â—â—nning insinuation to say that about his tyme â—hey began in some odd Churches to leaue of the â—uppe and to minister the sacrament in bread â—nly whereof he hath not one word and no â—arualle when it was of far greater continuance â—s hath been said but more plainely doth he â—aunder him when he maketh him to say that to â—inister the Sacrament in bread only was done â—n some fewe places only his words are these Therefore prouidently in some Churches it is obserued that 3. par q. 40. art 22. â—he bloud be not giuen to the people to be receiued but be â—nly taken of the Priest Where he doth not say that â—his was in some fewe places only as Bell maketh â—im to speake but that in some Churches it was â—o obserued which might be very many as well as some fewe and that this was the reall and true meaninge of S. Thomas in the same very place is gathered out of his owne discourse for hauing propounded some arguments after the manner of Scholes against the truth to witt that it was not lawfull to receaue the body of Christ without his bloud he cometh to the contrary opinion which 3. par quast 80. ar 12. he there defendeth and saith But contrary to this iâ— the vse of many Churches in which the body of Christ auâ— not his bloud is giuen to the people that communicateth In which wordes blessed S. Thomas enformeth vs that the body of Christ and not his bloud was giuen to the people in many Churches Saintlesse Sir Thomas maketh him to say that the body of Christ was giuen in some fewe places only when as he hath neither the words nor the sence but the clean opposit wordes and meaninge Halensis also more auncient then S. Thomas as who was his master testifieth that in his time it was almost a generall custome to receiue vnder one kinde Very lawfull it is saith that learned man to receau Part. 4. quast 11. memb 2. art 4. num 3. the body of Christ vnder the forme of bread only alay men do almost euery where in the Church and yet all this not witstandinge the minister blusheth not to father the direct contrary opinion vpon blessed S. Thomas Bels XIII Chapter Of priuate Masse THE XLVIII VNTRVTH THat any Prieste in the Primatiue Churche said priuate Masse that is receiued the mysteries all alone none being to communicat with him our aduersaries generally denie houlding that they euer had other participants in that sacred ction This was saith Bell the vse and practise of the hurche euery where for more then a thousand yeares together But afterward when the peoples deuotion began to be remisse the Priestes then deuoured vp all alone This minister that hath deuoured vp all conscience little areth in what manner he speaketh of those myteries which antiquity so reuerenced that they would not speake of them but in couert tearmes before infidels and S. Chrysostom calleth tremeÌ„da mysteria Hom. 69. ad Pepulum dreadsull mysteries and yet he speaketh of them as homely as though he were talking of the English coÌ„munion wich is had in such high reuerence that the coÌ„munion booke prescribeth that the fragments remaininge shall be for the ministers priuate vses and so giueth him leaue to feede with them his chickens or to soppe his pottage To the matter an vntruth it is that priuate masses were not before the tyme he mentioneth The twelft Councell of Toleto almost nine hundred yeares agoe reprehendeth those Priests which offering sacrifice did not communicate Quale illud sacrificium c. what manner of sacrifice is Can. 5. that saith the Councell of whiche neither he that sacrificeth is knowen to be partaker which words do shewe that none was present to communicate and yet the Councell requireth only that the Priest himself doth communicate S. Augustin also recordeth how a Priest offered sacrifice in Lib. 22. de ciuit cap. 8. a priuate farme for the freeing of that place from the molestation of wicked spirits In so particular and extraordinarie a place and for so particular a busines no probability that there were any other communicants But to com vpon him with the authority â— his brother Perkins who confesseth that thâ— Problem verbo Missa priuata kinde of priuate masses were not knowen to thâ— Church for the space of eight hundred yeares nâ— denying but afterward they were vsed which â— two hundred yeares more then Bell will grauntâ— In the same place he coÌ„fe sseth that priuate masseâ— began first in monasteries for proosse whereof he citeth S. Gregory which both conuinceth Beâ— of ouerreaching and seemeth not very well tâ— agree with his former assertion for how werâ— not priuate Masses knowen to the Church for thâ— space of eight hundred yeares yf S. Gregory maketh mention of them two hundred yeares before The truth is good reader that no beginning here oâ— can be showen nor any authenticall author iâ— former tyme that complayned or opposed himself against any such
Epistle and Gospell The Creed was receiued of the Nicene Councell Pope Sergius the Agnus Dei after which he concludeth both of these and others which he there mentioneth as the Introite Halleluia the commemoration of the dead Incense and the Pax in this manner This being so I can not but conclude that euery patch and peece of the Romishe Masse is but a rotten ragge of the newe religion So earnest he is to make euery peece of the Masse a rotten ragge that he hath also made many parts of their owne Communion booke patches and peeces and rotten ragges to the great exultation of all truly deuoted to the Geneua discipline in which Kyrie eleison Gloria in excelsis The Collectes Epistle and Gospell Nicene Crede and Agnus Dei be founde no lesse then in our Masse bookes I omitte here how falsely and blasphemously he concludeth euery peece of the Masse to be rotten ragges for are the words of consecratiō the most essentiall part thereof which came not from any man but from the institution of Christ himself as also the Pater noster rotten ragges who durst say it but Sr. Thomas And here by the way the attentiue reader may easily answear a common and friuolous obiection of the Protestāts that maruaile how we make the Masse the sacrifice of the new testamēt to haue bene ordayned by Christ himself when as Durandus others note at what tyme and who they were that composed the parts thereof when as neither Durandus nor any other make the essential and very substantiall part of the masse that is the wordes of consecratiō to haue come from any other then the sonne of God but they speake of the accidentall parts thereof to witt either deuoute prayers or ceremonies which we willingly graunt to proceede from the institution of Christes Church The like may be said of the Protestants communion which they pretend to deriue not from any other then Christ himself and yet many of their praiers ceremonies which accōpany that actiō they can not shewe out of Gods word but must confesse to come from later institution can not finde more auncient authors then be alleaged for ours the moste of which liued more then a thousand years since and be glorious Saints in heauen and therfore what doth Bell and such like Ministers that deride the ceremonyes and parts of the Masse but frump and flout at sacred and venerable antiquity from whom they come as Sr. Thomas here confesseth and mocke and mowe at their owne communion booke and partes thereof being borrowed frō vs or in what they differ can shewe no greater antiquity then the late daies of Edward the Sixt at what tyme diuers ministers did hammer them in the forge of their owne inuention Bels XVIII Chapter Of the profounde mysteries of Popish masse IN this chapter the minister maketh himself some pastime for that one ceremony vsed in former tymes is now giuen ouer and out of vse as though the Church hath not that authority as before out of Bell was proued The Englishe congregation allowed by act of Parlamēt in kinge Edwards time the newe communion booke for sound and agreable to Gods word yet was it in the same kings daies and not long after abrogated a newe deuised not only differēt in ceremonyes but also in points of more importance For exāple in the first cōmunion book in the supper of the Lord or newe masse for that name also they mention they pray for the dead saying VVe commend vnto thy Fol. 11◠mercy o Lord all other thy seruants which are departed hence Praier for the dead in the first Englishcommunion booke from vs with the signe of fayth and nowe do rest in the sleepe of peace Graunt vnto them we beseche the thy mercy and euerlastinge peace c. But this doctrine was straight reformed and no such thing found in the next And the minister himself in one Queenes daies chaunged his fayth twice and would I make no doubt chaunge it twice more if any newe and pleasing reuelation should blowe in the skye He and his congregation that haue made so maine mutations no waies maintainable may be silent with shame and not speake of the change of a small ceremony which both according to vs and himself is lawfull and may be done by the Church as the honour of God and edifications of others shall require the same Bels XIX Chapter Of kissinge the Popes feete THis chapter of his flingeth at the kissinge of the Popes feete which yet he confesseth here an Emperour to haue done nine hundred yeares agoe Let him answear what I wrote of that pointe in the Forerunner for in his Funerall he hath not Pag. 43. See also the Doleful knel. pag. 148. done it which yet is the pretended answear to that treatise or for shame commaunde the clapper to silence Bels XX. Chapter Of prayinge vpon Beades HEre the minister runneth vpon Rosaries and praying vpon beades making the beginning thereof some fiue hundred years agoe before that tyme he saith the people of God vsed altogether godly bookes of praier And what praiers I besech him did they vse that could not reade at all or doe now amongest them which lacke that skille of which sort the number is not fewe This inconuenience with vs is auoided by sayinge of the beades which none so ignorant but can vse and so fruitfully spend their tyme. Mary with the Protestants they must vse bookes that can neuer a letter on the booke or praye by speciall reuelation As the Church setteth forth diuers bookes of praiers for the benefitt of them that can reade so may she institute the beades for those that can not Let him shewe that the praiers vpon the beades be not good or that no manner of praier though good may be vsed which was not in the Apostles tyme neither of which he will euer be able to shewe or els all his babling against the beades is not worth a rotten beade Thomas Sternhold Robert VVisdom and such like haue inuented long since the coming vp of the beades the harmonious canticles of Geneua psalmes will he for all that say as he doth of the beades that the rehearsall of the originall is sufficient confutation and call them a rotten ragge of the newe religion Veryly I will not deny but he may do it truly were it not that their religion indeede is so newe that the ragge as yet can scarse be rotten The very same obiection which he maketh against the beades may proceede against the very communio◠book it self and that far more iustly seing it is a la◠crabstocke of their owne planting as before hat◠benesaid It were better for him to looke vnto hi◠owne fripperie and the cast canions of the congregation then to meddle with the sacred wardroa◠of the Catholique Church Bels XXI Chapter Of chaunging the Popes name IN this chapter he doth reuell at the chaunging of the Popes name which no question