Sacrament Which is proper to those who as the Apostle teacheth are to Examine themselves to Remember thereby the death of Christ and Sacramentally to Discerne the Lords Body âšœ CHALLENGE VVHereunto wee oppose the Authority of the Å¿ Conc Carthag 3. Eucharistiam Catechumenis mortuis dari prohibet et consequenter pueris qui utrique sunt divini illius cibi incapaces ut quidam ratiocinantur quià tales non possint accipere nec comedere Et Lateranens Conc. sub Innoc. 3. praecipit ut tantùm cùm ad annos discretionis pervenerint Eucharistiam accipiant Quià verò spiritualis manducatio et bibitio est sine qua Sacramentalis non prodest frustrà pueris Sacramentum et cùm periculo porrigeretur Non igitur satis est quòd puer possit naturaliter edere quia hoc possit trinus et quatrimus praestare sed opus est ut possit Sacramentaliter edere 1. cognoscere ibi esse Christum et discernere ab aliis cibis Salmeron Ies Tom. 9. Tract 11. in illa verba Dedit Discipulis pag. 78. Councell of Carthage and of that which you call the Councell of Laterane which denyed as you know that the Eucharist should be delivered unto Infants accounting them uncapable of divine and spirituall feeding without which say they the corporall profiteth nothing But wee also summon against the former assertion eight of your ancient t And of this opinion were Mayor Petrus Soto Paludanus Alensis Gubriel Catharinus Dom. Soto Ration eorum saith the same Ies quiâ hoc Sacramentum est cibus spiritualis Ergò accommodatum eis solummodò qui possint actus spiritualis vitae exercere quod parvuli non possunt Suarez Ies quo sup And to the former Schoole-men to make them even wee may adde also Summa Angel Tit. Eucharistia Schoolemen who upon the same Reasons made the like Conclusion with us And wee further as it were â—resting you in the Kings name produce against you Christ his Writ the Sacred Scripture whereby he requireth in all persons about to Communicate three principall Acts of Reason one is before and two are at the time of receiving The first is * 1. Cor. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let a man examine himselfe and so come c. The second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To discerne the Lords body The third is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To remember the Lords death untill his coming againe All which Three being Acts of Iudgement how they may agree unto Infants being persons void of Iudgement judge you And remember wee pray you that wee speake of Sacramentall Eating and not of that use * See above Sect. 10 before spoken of touching Eating it after the Celebration of the Sacrament which was for Consuming it and not for Communicating thereof CHAP. III. The Tenth Transgression of the Canon of Christ his Masse by the now Church of Rome is in contradicting the Sense of the next words following concerning the second part of this Sacrament of receiving the Cup HE LIKEVVISE TOOKE THE CVP AND GAVE IT TO THEM SAYING DRINKE YEE ALL OF THIS And adding 1. Cor. 11. DO THIS AS OFTEN AS YOV DO IT IN REMEMBRANCE OF MEE SECT I. BY which words Like maner of Taking and Giving and Saying Drinke yee All of this wee say that Christ ordained for his Guests as well the Sacramentall Rite of Drinking as of Eating and hath tied his Church Catholike in an equall obligation for performance of both in the administring of this Sacrament This Cause will require a just Treatise yet so that our Discourse insist only upon necessary points to the end that the extreme Insolencie Noveltie Folly and Obstinacie of the Romane Church in contradicting of this part of Christ his Canon may be plainely displayed that every conscience of man which is not strangely preoccupated with prejudice or transported with malice must needs see and detest it Wee have heard of the Canon of Christ his Masse The contrary Canon of the Romish Church in her Masse Shee in her Councel of Constance decreed that a Christus sub utraque â—pecie Discipulis administravit Licet in primitivâ Ecclesiâ sub utraque specie hoc Sacramentum reciperetur tamen haec consuerudo ut à Laicis sub specie pâ—nis tantùm reciperetur habenda est pro lege quam non licet reprobare Conc. Constant Sess 13. Although Christ indeed and the Primitive Church did administer the Eucharist in both kindes notwithstanding say they this Custome of but one kinde is held for a law irreproveable Which Decree she afterwards confirmed in her b Ipsa Synodus à Spiritu Sancto edocta ipsius Ecclesiae judicium consuetudinem secuta declarat docet nullo divino jure Laicos Clericos non consecrantes obligari ad Eucharistiae Sacramentum sub utraque specie sumendum Etsi Christus venerabile hoc Sacramentum sub utraque instituit Apostolis tradidit Concil Trident. Sess 〈◊〉 1. cap. 1. Councel of Trent requiring that the former Custome and Law of receiving it but under one kind be observed both by Laicks yea and also by all those Priests who being present at Masse do not the office of Consecrating Contrarily our Church of England in her thirtieth Article thus Both parts of the Lords Sacrament by Christs Ordinance and Commandement ought to be ministred to all Christian men alike CHALLENGE BVtwee demand what Conscience should moove your late Church of Rome to be guided by the authority of that former Councell of Constance which notwithstanding maketh no scruple to reject the authority of the same c Respondeo Fuit reprobatum Conc. CoÌ„â—antiens Martino Pont. quantum ad eam partem quâ statuit Concilium fuisse suprà Papam Bellar. lib. 1. de Conc. cap. 7. §. Quintum Councell of Constance in another Decree thereof wherein it gain-sayeth the Antichristian usurpation of the Pope by Denying the authority of the Pope to be above a Councell and that as the d Dixit Petro Christus Cum frater in te pâ—ccaverit si te non audiat Dic Ecclesiae Ergo Ecclesiam Papae Iudicem constitut Conc. Basil apud AEneanâ—i Sylvium de gest ejusdem Concilij Councell of Basil doth prove from the authority of Christ his direction unto Peter to whom he said Tell the Church We returne to the State of the Question The full State of the Question All Protestants whether you call them Calvinists or Lutherans hold that in the publike and set celebration of the Eucharist the Communion in both kinds ought to be given to all sorts of Communicants that are capable of both The question thus stated will cut off a number of Impertinences which your Objectors busie themselves withall as will appeare in due places Wee repeate it againe In publike Assemblies of all prepared and capable of the Communion The best Method that I could choose for the expedite and perspicuous handling of this great
all the other Touches Your Objected Testimonies are either our of Cyrill talking of bringing our Earthly Bodies by participation of this Sacrament to a 1 Cyril Alex. lib. 4. in Ioh. cap. 14. Vnde ut hoc corpus 〈◊〉 cibo sibi cognato gustu tactu ad immortalitatem reducetur Objected by Bell. lib. 2. de Euchar c. 25. Kin-like Touch of Christ's Bodie or from Saint Chrysostome where speaking of this Sacrament 2 Chrysostome Multi desiderant Videre formam Christi Ipsum vides 〈◊〉 Objected by Doctor Heskins in his Parliament of Christ booke 3. c. 54. out of Chrysostomes Hom. 3 in Ephâ—â— tous Imputâ—s manibus ausus es ipsius Corpus attinge â— Many saith hee desire to see the forme of Christ and here Christ yeeldeth himselfe in this Sacrament not onely to be seene but also to be felt and Touched And this will your Doctors needs inforce upon us for proofe of a Corporall Touch and Consequently a Corporall presence of Christs Body in the Eucharist But do you not see in this Testimony the word See as well as the word Touch and are you now to learne that which you all teach that Christs Body as it is in this Sacrament is altogether Invisible beyond mans Imagination and not to be seene of men no nor yet to be discernd by the very Devills Besides that All mens eyes by Contemplation can avouch it to be nothing lesse than Seene So that the word Seene being so Vnproperly and Figuratively spoken might have given you reason to discerne that hee used the same Impropriety of Phrase in the other word Touch. Yea and Chrysostome himselfe will tell you that hath Rhetoricated as fully in the word Touch when in an Homily hee willed the People 3 Chrysost in Mart. 14 To people that were to be baptized Tenete pedes Salvatoâ—s To hold Christ our Saviour by the feet But what need many words your owne Doctor and Dictator of Romish Profession Aquinas affirmeth also 4 Aquinas part 3. quaest 76. Art 7. Corpus Christi à nullo in hoc Sacramento videri potest corporali oculo quia ibi est per modum substantiae neque accidentia Corporis Christi habent immediatam habitudinem ad hoc Sacramentum neque corpora quae circumstant eum ad modum substantiae quae non subjacet alicui sen sui sed nec etiam imagin itioni sed soli intellectus Imo nec Daemones possunt videre Christum per intellectum ut est in hoc Sacramento That the Body of Christ as it is in this Sacrament is not subject to any sense at all And more particularly for the sense of Touching your Vasquez speaking with Assurance 5 Vasquez Ies in 3. Tho quaest 76. Ant. 7 Disp 191. c. 3. Christus ut est in hoc Sacramento neque alium tangere neque ab allo tangi protest non incerta ratione dicimus Christ saith hee as hee is in this Sacrament can neither touch nor be touched of any thing And your* Schoole againe giveth reasons hereof Therefore can it be no lesse than a blind Boldnesse to urge the word Touch as Properly spoken by these Ancient Fathers which you have learned by your Fathers of the Romish Profession cannot properly agree with the Body of Christ What evasion have you now Forsooth 6 Idem Ibid. quaest 75. Art 2. Disp 180. cap. 9. Tangi dicitur sub pa nis speciebus remote sicut Christus Luc. 8. Quis me tetigit cum tamen nullus ipsum proxime sed tetigit vestem ejus The Cause saith the same Vasquez is as it was with Christ when he sayd Who Toucheth me when men touched him but not immediatly but by Touching his garment So he But soft Sir you your selfe have already affirmed That Christ cannot possibly either Touch or be Touched of any thing in this Sacrament according to the Doctrine of Aquinas who giveth this reason for * See the Testimonie of Aquinas here above cited at 4 That the sense of Touch hath no habitude at all to Christs Body herein not so much as by the Accidents or formes of Bread and Wine neither mediatly nor immediatly which sheweth the Dissimilitude of the Comparison taken from Touching Christs Vestment and thereby his sacred Body which was touched by the same Vestment immediatly and here Touching Christs Body by the Accidents of Bread which you grant do neither Touch Christs Body nor are Touched by it because Christs Body is therein Simply as a Substance without Accidents From the Manuall Touch by Handling wee proceed to the Orall by Eating âšœ CHAP. V. Of the Second Romish Bodily maner of Vnion with Christs Body by Eating That the Second Romish Bodily maner of Vnion with the Body of Christ which is by Orall Eating once professed in the Church of Rome was both Capernaitically-Hereticall and is also still no lesse in the Profession of divers in the same Church SECT I. THe first member wil appeare by the Faith of the Church of Rome in the Dayes of Pope Nicholas whose Faith about the yeare 1509. may be best known by the Oath which was prescribed by him unto Berengarius concerning the Eating of the Body of Christ in this Sacrament Which Oath as your a Baron An. 1059. num 11. Eodem Anno Concilium celebratum est sub Nicolao secundo Generale Romae in Laterano ad quod reus dicturus causam Berengarius Archidiaconus Andegavens praesente Nicolao coram centum tredecim Episcopis Confessionem jurejurando firmavit Quibus verbis conceptum fuit ejusmodi Berengarij jusjurandum cum in pleno CoÌ„cillo detestatus est errorem fidemque Catholicam professus Ego Berengarius ore corde profiteor me eam fidem tenere quam venerabilis Papa Nicolaus haec sancta Synodus tenendam tradidit Panem vinum post consecrationem non solùm Sacramentum sed etiam verum corpus sanguinem Domini nostri Iesu Christi esse sensualiter non solùm Sacramento sed in veritate manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri Hoc jusjurandum ab Humbreto Episcopo â—aâ—d scriptum ab ipso Papa universoque Concilio recognitum atque approbatum antea fuerat Haec ex Lanfranco Nicolaus Papa scriptum Iusâ—irandum inisit per omnes urbes Italiae Galliae Germaniae ad quaecunque loca quo fama Berengariâ— pervenire potuit Hactenus Baronius Cardinall Baronius doth certifie you from the Stories of those times Pope Nicholas and a Generall Councel held at Rome revised approved and prescribed to Berengarius to take for the abjuration of his Errour concerning the maner of Eating the Body of Christ and the same Oath was after published by the Popes authority throughout all the Cities of Italy France and Germany and wheresoever the Report of Berengarius should come So hee You cannot now but expect such a forme of an Oath which must be as truly Romish as either Romane Pope or
judged by the different Dispositions of Professors then may this former Confession witnes for us that there is as much difference betweene the Primitive and the now Romish Custome as there is betweene lively Fervencie and senselesse Numnes and Coldnes that is to say Godly zeale and Godlesse Indevotion and Negligence yet a Negligence not only approved which is impious but that which is the height of Impiety even applauded also by your Priests among whom the m Vt nobis Iocupletissiâ—i testes atque omni exceptione majores retulerunt in Germania qui eò loci per omnia obediunt Romanis Pontificibus non solùm Reverendi Patres Calicem vitae non cupiunt aut petere audent c. Gasp Card Villalp apud Act. Concil Trident. pag. 222. §. Accedit above-said Gasper Cardillo in the Councell of Trent with exultation told their Father-hoods as being a matter of great joy that they who are under the Iurisdiction of the Church of Rome in Germany dare not so much as desire the Cup of life So hee A GENERALL CHALLENGE Concerning this last Transgression of Christ his Massè SECT XIII IN this wee are to make an open discovery of the odious Vncharitablenesse the intolerable Arrogancie the vile Perjury the extreame Madnesse and Folly together with a note of plaine Blasphemie of your Romish Disputers in Defence of this one Romane Custome of forbidding the Cup to faithfull Communicants For what Vnâ—â—aritablenesse can be more odious than when they cannot but confesse that there is more spirituall grace in the receiving of the Communion in Both kindes do notwithstanding boast even in the open Councel of Trent of some of their Professors who in obedience to the Church of Rome do not onely * See the last testimonie above their owne words not desire the Cup of life but also dare not so much as desire it Which Vaunt wee thinke besides the Impietie thereof inferreth a note of prophane Tyranny Secondly when wee compare these Fathers of Trent with the Fathers of most primitive Antiquity they answer n Tertio loco objiciunt Ecclesiae sapientiam antiquitatem atque potestatem atque potestatem aiunt enim Ecclesiam primitivam quae antiquior scientiâ atque vitae sanctitate praestantior erat utraque specie usam fuisse nostra igitur illam imitari debet praesertim eum eandem atque illa habet potestatem in ejusmodi legibus positivis sive abrogandis sive dispensandis Respondemus non esse dubium quin Ecclesia primitiva nostrae majore charitate ac proindè uberiori sapientia praecelluerit nihilominus tamen interdum contingit minùs sapientem in aliquo maliùs sapere quâm alium absolute sapientiorem Saepe etiam accidit minùs perfectum hominem vitare aliquem errorem quem melior non vitat Salmcron Ies Tom. 9. Tractat. 38. §. Tertio loco pag. 320. Although the primitive Church say they did exceed our's in Zeale Wisdome and Charity neverthelesse it falleth out sometimes that the wiser may in some things be lessè wise than another Which answer if wee consider the many Reasons which you have heard the Fathers give for the use of Both kinds and their consonant practice thereof what is it but a vilifying of the authority of all ancient Fathers and indeed as the saying is To put upon them the Foole. The like answer two of their Iesuites made to the Practice of the Apostles saying that your Church having the same spirit hath the same power to alter the Custome whereas we have proved that the ground which the Apostles lay for their Custome was the Institution of Christ But that which the Romane Church allegeth is meerely a Pretence of Plenitude of her owne Authority It is impossible therefore that in so great a Contradiction there should be the same Spirit And can there be a more intollerable Arrogancie than is this which this Romane spirit bewrayeth in both these Thirdly upon the Consideration of this their Contempt of Apostolicall and primitive Antiquity in this Cause wee finde that your Romish Priests are to be condemned of manifest perjurie also for in the Forme of Oath for the profession of the Romish Faith every Priest and Ecclesiasticke is sworn o Forma Iuramenti per Bullam Pij quarti Apostolicas Ecclesiasticas Traditiones admitto Ego spondeo juro c. To admit of all Apostolicall and Ecclesiasticall Traditions as also to hold what the p Caetera omnia à Concilio Tridentino declarata confirmata firmissimè teneo Ibid. Romanam Ecclesiam Magistram esse Ecclesiarum credo c. Councel of Trent hath decreed But this Custome of administration of Both kindes as hath been acknowledged was an Apostolicall Custome and from them also remained in an Ecclesiasticall profession and practice thorow-out a thousand yeares space which your Church of Rome notwithstanding in her Councel of Trent whereunto likewise you are sworne hath altered and perverted which doth evidently involve your Priests and Iesuites in a notorious and unavoydable Perjurie Fourthly As for the note of Foolishnesse what more mad folly can there be seene in any than to take upon them a serious Defence of a Custome for satisfaction of all others and yet to be so unsatisfied among themselves so that both the Objections urged by Protestants against that Abuse are fortified and also all your Reasons for it are refuted either by the direct Testimonies of your owne Doctors or by the common Principles and Tenents of your Church or else by the Absurdities of your Consequences issuing from your Reasons and Answers divers of them being no lesse grosse than was your objecting the Antiquity and Generality of the particular Romane Church for lesse than three hundred yeeres and to preferre it before the confessed Vniversall primitive Custome of above the Compasse of a Thousand yeares continuance before the other Fiftly the last is the note of Blasphemy for this name the contempt of Christ his last Will and Testament must needs deserve and what greater contempt can there be than contrary to Christ his Do this concerning Both kinds to professe that Sacrilegious dismembring of the holy Sacrament which Gelasius the Pope himselfe had anciently condemned or if this be not Blasphemous enough then supposing that Christ indeed had commanded Consecration in Both kindes upon divine right yet notwithstanding to hold it very probable as saith your Iesuit q Licet Gabriel quidam alij sentiunt divini juris esse ut Sacerdos in utraque specie sacrificet nihilominùs tamen opinantur authoritate Romani Pontificis fieri posse ut in una tantum specie sacrificet viz. in consecratione panis sine vino quià putant multa esse juris divini quae remittere relaxare queat Pontifex ob publicam aliquam gravem necessitatem ut videmus votum jus-jâ—randum Matrimonium ratum non consummatum authoritate Pontificis relaxari dissolvi Et ità in hac questione prima
they be repugnant to our senses which last words Although they be repugnant to our senses said I No man of sense can find in Epiphanius This saith the Proctor is a false Taxation And I for my Iustification shall desire no other Advocate than Bellarmines owne words Hic locus Epiphanij omninò convincit quia addit etiam nimirum Epiphanius Hoc esse credendum licet sensus repugnent And now when you shal summ up the Premises you will easily judge how the Testimonie of Epiphanius will be held to be Convincent That the same Greeke Fathers have expresly unfolded their Meanings touching a Figurative Sense SECT VIII THe Iudgement of a whole Councel of Greek Fathers may well suffice for the manifestation of the Iudgement of that Church They in their Councel at Trullo alluding to these words of Christ This is my Body saying Let nothing be offered but the Body and Blood of Christ that is say n In sanctis nihil plus quà m corpus sanguis Christi offeratur ut ipse Dominus tradidit hoc est panis vinuÌ„ aquâ mixtum Concil ConstaÌ„t apud Binium which Canon was made against the Aquaâ—ij those who would use no Wine Can. 32. called Synodus quinisexta They Bread and Wine c. If we had not told you that this had been the speech of Greek Fathers in a Councel you would have conceived they had bin uttered by some Heretike as your Charity useth to call us Protestants Neither may the Authority of this Councel be rejected by you as unlawfull in the point of the Sacrament because your Binius in opposing against some things in this Councel yet never tooke any Exception against this Canon We may not let passe another Testimony used by the ancient Father o See above §. 6. at the Let. x Theodoret namely That Christ called the Bread his Body as he called his Body Bread Matth. 12. saying therof Except the grane of wheat die c. insomuch that interchangably in the one place He gave to the Signe the name of his Body and in the other He gave to his Body the name of the Signe So he As Protestantly as either Calvin or Beza could speak And you cannot deny but that when Christ called his Body Bread it was an improper and Figurative speech And therfore if you will believe Theodoret you are compellable to confesse that Christ in calling Bread his Body ment it not in a proper literal sense âšœ Wee were about to proceed but that your Doctor Heskins will needs crosse us in our way by objecting the Current of Oecumenius in his Exposition of those words of the Apostle Wee are all one Body inasmuch as wee are partakers of one Bread saying 11 Dr. Heskins in his Parliam of Christ Booke 3. C. 28. OecuÌ„ in 1. Cor. 11. Quid est panis Corpus Christi Quid efficiunturij qui participant Corpus sanè Christi quia ait Apostolus unus panis unum corpus sumus quia de uno pane participamus ex multis namque granis ut exempli gratia loquamur unus panis factus est nos multi ex uno pane participantes efficimur unum corpus Christi What is one Bread the Body of Christ and what are they made that partake of this one Bread The Body of Christ for this one Bread is made of many granes and we being many partakers of one Bread are made one Body Hence your Doctor In my judgement this needeth no explanation for asking a question what is Bread he answereth The Body of Christ Note then Reader he saith not it is a Signe of Christs Body but the Body of Christ VERILY where he speaketh both of the Bread partaken which he saith is Verily Christs Body and also of the Partakers who be made the mysticall Body of Christ wherein the Reader may see how rightly he confirmeth the Catholike faith So he And so wee thinke he doth but then must not your Popish be this Catholike faith because Oecumenmus calleth so Bread the Body of Christ Sacramentally as hee calleth the Partakers of the same Bread or Loafe the mysticall Body of Christ. But the Partakers and Communicants are Christs mysticall Body only Figuratively and by Analogy therfore the Bread is named the Naturall Body of Christ Figuratively and as the Symboll thereof as Christ himselfe calleth it by the Iudgement of Antiquitie throughout the Second Booke Which therfore the Apostle here calleth Bread after Consecration and as Oecumenius noteth such Bread as consisteth of many granes of Corne which must needs be Substantially Bread thereby to represent the people consisting of many Persons in one Communion â—o but Oecumenius saith your Doctor speaking of Bread called Christs Body nameth it VERILY Christs Body which is if it be lawfull to speake rudely a very-Lye For the words Verè Corpus Christi Verily Christs Body are attributed to the Partakers of the Bread which are the mysticall Body of Christ and not either to the Bread or Naturall Body of Christ Hitherto of the Greeke Fathers That the same Figurative Sense of Christs words is avouched by the Testimonies of the Latine Fathers more largely now insisted on SECT IX SOme of the Latine Fathers we confesse seeme in some places to deny all Figurative sense but this they doe even by a Figure called * As is afterwards many wheres discovered Hyperbole that is only in the excesse of Speech thereby to abstract the minds of sensuall men from fixing their thoughts upon externall Rites and to raise them up to a Sacramentall and Spirituall Contemplation of the Body and Blood of Christ But as for the direct and perspicuous Sentences of these Fathers they clearely and exactly teach a Figurative sense in the words of Christ to wit p Tertull. contra Marcion lib. 4. pag. 233. Edit Paris Profellus est Christus se concupivisle edere Pascha ut suum indignum enim ut aliquid alienum concupisceret Deus acceptum panem distributum Discipulis corpus suum fecit Hoc est corpus meum dicendo id est Figura corporis mei figura enim non fuisset nisi veritatis esset corpus Caeterum vacua res quod est phantasma figuram capere non potest Tertullian whose words are as plaine as any glasse can be saying of Christ Hee distributed his Body that is a Signe of his Body âšœ The Fantastike Marcionites held that Christ had no essentiall Body but onely a figurative and Fantasticall These Heretikes Tertullian confuteth by Christ his Institution of the Sacrament of his Body and Blood as the * At the let p. Margin will shew you thus Nothing that is fantasticall is capable of a figure because this were to make a signe of a Signe or figure But Christ in this Sacrament gave a Signe of his Body Therefore Christ had namely in himselfe a Reall and Substantiall Body and not fantasticall That he gave a Figure of his
Divine work without which the Element cannot be changed into a Sacrament either to signifie or yet to seale much lesse to convey any grace of God unto man And that wee may take you along with us It is the Doctrine of your Church with common consent saith your Romane g Solus Deus communi Consensu instituere Sacramenta ex authoritate potest quae gratiam efficiunt aut etiam infallibiliter significant Bellar. l. 1. de Sacram. in Gen. cap. 23. Cardinall that God onely can by his Authority institute a Sacrament because hee onely can give them power of conferring grace and of Infallible signification thereof So hee Well then aswell infallible Signification of Grace as the efficacious conveyance of Grace is the worke of the same Omnipocencie To this purpose more plainly your English Cardinall Alan speaking as hee saith from the judgement of Divines h Card. Alan de Sacram. in Gen. c. 17. 18. Sacramenti Institutionem neque ad Pontificem neque ad ullam Creaturam pertinere nec hoc solum sed etiam c propter solam significationem Gratiae quam Sacramentis omnibus Communem diximus dâ—bebant etiam vetera Sacramenta determinari per applicationem mortis Christi quia licet quidem in Creaturis ad signationem effectuum spiritualium aptitudo quaedam sit tamen ista aptitudo non nisi a divinâ institutione determinaâ—ur ad peculiarem effectum Habet enim Aqua ex natura sua ut munditiem significet at ut determinatè purgationem animae à peccato originali significet hominis sanctificationem repraesentet divinae tantùm institutionis est per quam elevatur Creatura haec supra naturae consuetudinem non solùm quoad vim operandi sed etiam significandi Non potest Sacramentum nisi à solo Deo Ordinari quià habent Sacramenta Supernaturalem Effectum ut in veteri lege quae debant munditiem legalem These hee saith that he speaketh Ex Theologorum Sententia telleth you that Although there be an aptnesse in every Creature to beare a signification of some spirituall effect yet cannot the aptnesse be determinatly applyed unto any peculiar effect no not so much as to signifie the outward Cleannesse of mans Body Sacramentally without a Divine Institution much lesse to represent mans sanctification but being so determinated and ordained of God the Creature saith hee is elevated above the Custome of nature not only in respect of the worke of sanctification but even of signification also So hee and that as well as wee could wish for this Omnipotent Change of a Creature into a Sacrament and this Iustrumentall Cause of conferring Sanctifying Grace to the Faithfull Communicant is the Generall Doctrine of all Protestants But what Change shall we thinke Of the Substance of Bread into the Substance of Christs Body as you teach No but as * Booke 2. Chap. 3. §. 6. before Isidore sayd The Change of visible things by the spirit of God into a Sacrament of Christs Body So hee This being a Change from a Property naturall into a Property Supernaturall which Change is Divine albeit but Accidentall whereunto accordeth that objected place of * See above at the letter c Augustine that This is sanctified by the Spirit of God to bee a Sacrament Seeing then that both Divine power and authority is required in every Sacrament to make it either infallibly significant or else efficaciously profitable to man and that it is by the same Divine power that the Element is Changed by being Elevated from a common unto a spirituall and divine property of a Sacramentall Signification as one of your Cardinalls hath sayd What an unconscionablenesse is it then in your Disputers from the termes of Omnipotencie and Divine working which is necessarily in all Sacraments to conclude a Change of the Element of Bread by Transubstantiation as you have heard But much more transparent will their Vnconscionablenesse bee if we consult with the Objected Fathers themselves For first Ambrose who observeth an Omnipotencie in the Change of this Sacrament explaineth himselfe what kind of Efficacy hee meant viz. such that i Ambros lib. 4 de Sac. am c. 4. Si tanta vis est in sermone Domini ut incipianâ— ess quae non erant quantò magis Operatorius est ut sint quae erant â—t in alâ—d convertantur Tu ipse eras verâ—â—s homo postquà m consecratus eras no vus homo esse coepisti The things changed into a divine Sacrament are still the same which they were before namely according to their natural property Which one Clause doth so strangle all conceit of Transubstantiation that it may seeme you have some reason to wipe this Testimony of S. Ambrose out of your new k These words ut sint quae erant are wanting in the Roman and Paris Editions Anno 1603 as Bishop Vsher 〈◊〉 nesseth in his Answer to the Tesuit Editions notwithstanding by Gods providence so much of Ambrose his tongue is preserved even in the same place as will convince your Objectors of wilfull Falshood telling you by a Similitude that the Change of Bread in this Sacrament is like to the Change whereby a Christian Regenerate l See above at 1 of an old Creature is made a new Creature which is as every Christian knoweth not a change in the substantiall nature of man but in the Accidentall properties So this Bread of a common bodily Food is made Sacramentall And the same Father who said of a man that by Baptisme hee is made a new Creature saith also of this Sacrament that m Per 〈…〉 â—or Explicatiâ—e Corpus significatur By Benediction Bread is made another nature namely of an Elementall become Sacramentall as you have heard and as his owne words import After Consecration the Body of Christ is Signified and that which was Wine Is called Blood In the Testimony of Cyprian you applaud your selves for to your Lindan n Lâ—ndan Aâ—ea 〈…〉 Cypriâ—ni vâ—â—o â—ie 〈…〉 advâ—gilate Evangâ—â—â— Dâ—vum Cypâ—anum orbâ—s totius Doctorem imòâ—n râ—culum judicem incorruptâ—â—lâ—m 〈◊〉 lib. 4 cap 6. The words of Cyprian appeare Goldenâ— and hee must needs provoke forsooth all Gospellers to hearken unto them which also seemeth to your o Hoâ— Testimonâ—um nullam admitâ—◠〈…〉 lib 2 〈…〉 c. 9. § 〈…〉 Cardinall To admit no solution Our Answer first unto the Author is to deny it to bee the Testimony of Cyprian may we noâ— This Sermon of the Supper of the Lord is by us saith your Master p Mr. 〈◊〉 Litâ—rg Praef. §. 14. pag 51. Brerely attributed to Cyprian Whom of your Side he mean by Vs you may bee pleased to aske him sure wee are your Cardinall doth tell us that q Author illius de Coena Domiâ—â—t non est Cyprianus â—ed aliquis post cum Bellar. â—â— 2. de Eâ—ch cap 9. §. Extet The Author of this Booke is not Cyprian but some other
Propitiatory in respect of any Act of Oblation of the Priest or accommodation of the Communicants or yet of the Church but onely of the Oblation once made by Christ himselfe on the Crosse Which oblation how absent it is who seeth not that is present with himselfe Thus were those Divines driven to an Objective Act of Oblation IV. Confutation from the Romish Disvaluation of that which they call Christ's Sacrifice SECT IV. THe last is in respect of the value for Christ's Sacrifice on the Crosse you do Christianly esteeme to have beene of a Miâ—um non est si cum Christus infinitus extitit ejus hostia suit infiniti meriti satisfactionis Salmeron Ies Tom. 9. Tract 33. pag. 265 266. Infinite merit and satisfaction because it was offered by himselfe God and man and that otherwise b Erat infiniti valoris nec enim aliter potuiâ— compensari injuria Deo facta Ribera Ies in Heb. 10. num 19. Hee could not have made satisfaction to an Infinite and Divine Majestie So you But of the Sacrifice of the Masse what The common opinion of our Church saith your c Valor Sacrificij Missae est â—initus Haec est communis sententia Theologorum in quo distinguitur à Sacrificio Crucis quod infinitae virtutis erat nunquam repâ—titur Bellarm. Lib. 2. de Missa cap. 4. §. Quarta Prop. And yet it is knowne that Cardinall Câ—â—jetane Canus and Scotus were of a contrarie opinion To this last Testimony of Bellarmâ—â—e adde also Salmeron Ies Tom. 9. Tract 33. §. Tertiò Cardinall is that it is but of finite value So hee Notwithstanding it be impossible for any thing of finite virtue to have power in it selfe of remission of an infinite guilt against an infinite Majesty CHALLENGE A More palpable betraying therefore of a Cause there cannot be than as you have hitherto done by defending Positions repugnant to your owne Definition and by obtruding things as proper which are voyd of all due Properties This being all one as if you in the Case of Miracles would deliver unto us a Iannes and Iambres in stead of Moses in Art Sophistry for Logike in Commerce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is adulterate Coine for current and in warlike stratagems instead of a naturall a Trojane Horse Oh what a misery it is to reason with such unreasonable to speake mildly men Thus much of your Romish Sacrifice according to your owne Explanations thereof CHAP. XI Of the Romish Application of their Sacrifice The State of the Question THat the Eucharist was ordained of Christ for the Application of remission of sinnes Sacramentally to all Communicants is the profession of all Protestants That the Sacrifice of Christs Crosse is therein offered up Objectively by Commemoration and Supplication for all Conditions of men hath an universall Consent among them without Exception But that any substantiall Body as Subjectively contained in the Masse can be the Sacrifice of applying the merits of Christ for remission of sinnes which is your a Conc. Trid. Vt visibile Sacrificium quo crâ—enti Sacrificij virtus in remissionem peccatorum applicaretur Sess 22. cap. 1. Tridentine faith hath beene hitherto impugned and infringed thorowout our whole former Dispute Furthermore our present Opposition is three-fold First concerning the sinnes that are said to be remitted Secondly touching the parties who have Remission Thirdly in regard of your Priests by whom Application of Remission of sinne is made I. That the Church of Rome is not yet resolved of the Extent of the Virtue of her Sacrifice of the Masse for remission of sinnes or Punishment SECT I. NEver can there be any true Application of the Passion of Christ for remission of sinnes say wee which is not absolute but onely partiall Your Iesuit b Ribera Ies Quoniam quotidiè peccamus quotidiè virtutem passionis Christi participamus quod Conc. Trid. docuit quo cruentum illud semel in cruce peragendum repraesentaretur atque salutaâ—is ejus virtus in remissionem peccatorum â—orum quae quotidrè à nobis committuntur applicaâ—etur Et hâ—c Catholicis quidem hominibus manifestissimum est Haeretici negare non possunt quoniam Scripturae vâ—rbis apertissimè comptobatur de virtute passionis ad omnia peccata tollenda Rom. 3. 5. Apoc. 1 1. Ioh. 2. Com. in Heb. 1. 10. num 16. Ribera seemeth to come on roundly towards us and friendly to joyne hands with us in this point of Application of an absolute Remissâ—on of sinnes pretending that this was decreed in the Councell of Trent as indeed it seemeth to have beene and that from the Authority of Scripture and hee addeth that Protestantâ— whom hee is pleased to grace with the name of * See the last Testimony Heretikes do not deny this manifest Truth So hee Do you marke a Truth a manifest Truth a Truth said to be confirmed by your last Councel and a Truth consented unto by the Heretikes as being a manifest Truth Who would not now looke for a Truth universally professed in your Church without all exception But behold even since that Councell of Trent your greatly approved Melchior Canus steppeth forth with a peremptory Contradiction saying that to hold c Opinio prima Omnes culpas mortales omnia peccata post Baptismum commissa per Sacrificium Altaris sic vult Catharinus Haec opinio non vera nisi omnes Theologi fallantur Canus loc Theol. lib. 12. pag. 432. 433. All mortall sinnes to be remitted by the Application of the Sacrifice in the Masse is false except all Divines be deceived So hee speaking of the Divines of the Romish Church And so may every Papist receive as much remission of his sinnes by holy Water sprinckled at the Church doore as hee can by the Sacrifice at your Masse Your Iesuit Valentia noteth among you another sort of Doctors maintaining that your Masse-Application serveth onely for d Valent. Ies Itaque sunt qui censeant hoc Sacrificium valere tantùm ad relaxationem poenarum quarum culpa prius condonata â—uit Lib. 1. de Missa cap. 5. §. Itaque sunt pag. 542. Remittuntur veâ—alia Costerus Christian Institut lib. 1. cap. 8. Remission of such temporall punishment the guilt whereof was formerly pardoned So hee CHALLENGE IF any shall but recollect the Contradictions of your owne Doctors thorowout all these former points of Controversie already handled hee will thinke himselfe to be among the Fencers called Andabatae who first blind-folding themselves fell a slashing one another not knowing whom they hitt therfore wee leave them in their broiles and our selves will consult with Antiquity That the Ancient Fathers never taught any Application of Christs Passion but that which is for a Plenary Remission of sinnes SECT II. CArdinall a Alan Card. Proâ—ijs peccatis pro quibê° Christus mortuus est Lib. 2. de Eucharist cap. 35. Wherein he bringeth the Testimonies of Chrysost Cyprian Theoph. and Origen