offred bread and wyne in figure of Christ and did dedicate the mistery of Christians consisting in the body and blood of our saviour Thus sayth S. Hierome who reacheth also the same expressely in his epistle to Euagrius confirming it with the testimony and autority of Hipolitus the ancient martyr Ireneus Eusebius Caesariensis Eusebius Emissenus Apollinarius and Eustathius Byshops of Antioch Theodoret â—â— declareth euidently that Melchisedech brought fourth bread and wyne both to God for sacrifice and also to Abraham for that he fore saw in Abrahams seede that is to say in Christ a true paterne or example of his priesthood and furder he sayth that Christ fulfilling the figure began to exercise the function of the priesthood of Melchisedech in his last supper and if I should alleadge all the places of the Fathers that confirme the same I should be too taedious and therfore I 〈◊〉 those that desyre to see more to these that follow vz. Eusebius S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Aug. S. Chrisostome Primasius S. Athanasius Photius Oecumenius S. Iohn Damascen Arnobius and Cassiodorus and to the most of those that haue written vpon the 109 Psalme THAT OVR SAVIOVR Christ instituted and offred at his last super the sacrifice of his blessed body and blood proued by his owne woords by the expositions of the Fathers with a declaration how he is sacrificed in the masse and lastly that he gave commission and power to his disciples to offer his body and blood in sacrifice that is to say to say masse CHAP. XVI IT appeareth by the premisses that the sacrifice of the Churche that is to say the masse was prophesied and foretold by the Prophet Malachias and prefigured not only by the sacrifice of Melchisedech coÌ„sisting in bread and wyne but also by all the sacrifices of the old law yea that our sauiour at his last super did exercise his Priestly function according to the order of Melchisedech in instituting and offering the same when he sacrifised his blessed body and blood in formes of bread and wyne which I wil confirme in this chapter by the words of our sauiour himselfe which he vsed in the institution and oblation therof saying this is my body which is geuen for you and this is my blood which is or shal be shed for you c. Wherein it is to be noted that not only the liturgies of the Apostles and of saynt Basil saynt Chrisostome saynt Ambrose which last is stil vsed in Milan euer since S. Ambrose his tyme but also saynt Paule and all the 3. euangelists that report the words of our sauiour doe as wel in the Greeke text as in the Siriac Caldie speak all in the present teÌ„se saying datur fraÌ„gitur traditur fuÌ„ditur pro vâ—bis in remissioneÌ„ peccatoruÌ„ that is to say is geueÌ„ broken deliuered shed for you and for the remission of sinnes signifiing that the same was then presently doone in that vnbloody sacrifice not that it should be doÌ„ne only afterwards in the sacrifice vpon the crosse though if wee haue also respect therto yea and to the sacrifice of the masse dayly to be offred in the Churche it might truly be spoken in the future tense as our Latin translation of saynt Luke hath of the chalice effundetur it shal be shed though before speaking of the body it hath datur it is geuen where it is also further to be noted that in the Greeke text of saynt Luke this woord effunditur or or rather effusum est is shed hath playne relation to the blood in the chalice and not to the blood that was to be shed on the crosse for that the woord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which sinifieth effusum is spoken of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say the cup therfore the text is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say this is the cup the new testament in my blood which cup is shed for you wherby the figure of metonomia the cup is vsed for the blood in the cup wherto S. Augustin alludeth speaking of the effusion of our sauiours blood vpon the altar the body of our Lord saith he is offred vpon the altar and therefore the innocents that were killed do woorthely demand reuenge of their blood vnder the altar vbi sanguis Christi effunditur pro peccatoribus where the blood of Christ is shed for sinners The lyke may also be noted of our sauiours woords concerning his body as S. Paule reporteth them in the Greek in which tongue he wrote where in steede of this is my body which shal be geuen for you as we haue it in the Latin we read this is my body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is broken for you which saynt Chrisostome expounding of our sauiours body in the Sacrament sayth he is broken for all a lyke and is made a body for all a lyke and furder declareth playnly in an other place that this cannot be vnderstood of his body on the crosse for expounding these woords of S. Paule in the chapter beforeâ— vz. panis quem fâ—anginius the bread which wee breakâ— he sayth this wee may see fulfilled in the eucharist not on the crosse but the contrary for it was said a bone of him shal not bee broken but that which he suffred not vpon the crosse he suffreth for thee in the oblation and is content to be broken that he may fil all men Thus farre saynt Chrisostome who is not so grosly to be vnderstood as though he should meane that our sauiours bones which were not broken on the crosse are broken in the eucharist with the hurt and greefe of his person but that his exceeding bounty towards man is such that he is content not only to take vpon him a sacramental forme of bread but also to be handled broken and eaten to the end he may be distributed made meate to feede and fil all men yet so neuertheles that though it may be said as S. Chrisostome sayth that he suffreth fraction or breaking in the Sacrament when it is broken by reason of his real true presence therein yet he suffreth it without hurt or diuision of his person by reason of his impassibilitie and omnipotency being whole perfect in euery part therof though it be deuided and broken into neuer so many This is the meaning of this learned Father who notably confirmeth therby our doctrin not only concerning the verity of Christs body in the sacrament but also concerning our sauiours sacrifice therof at his last super seeing his exposition of our sauiours woords admitteth no relation to his sacrifice vpon the crosse whervpon it followeth that his body which as he sayd him selfe was geuen broken for his Disciples and his blood which he sayd was shed for many aud for remission of sinnes was then presently geuen and shed by him that is to say offred by him in sacrifice This
eucharist whereof I haue spoken already but also before when he promised it for that wheÌ„ soeuer he spoke therof he represented the same to the vnderstanding of the hearers as a body sacrificed dead not speaking of his whole person or of himselfe as liuing but of his flesh of his body of his blood as my flesh is truly meate and my blood is truly drink and the bread which I will geue is my flesh this is my body this is my blood or if he spoke of himselfe or of his person it was with an addition to shew that he was to be eaten as when he sayd he which eateth me liueth for me which kynd of speech made some of his disciples forsake him sayâ—ng it was durus sermo ae hard speeche conceauing therby that they were to eate him dead as other flesh bought in the shambles wheras he spoke in that manner to signify that he shuld be sacrificed before he should be eateÌ„ and therefore he euer spoke of himselfe as already killed and dead for that no creature whyles he is liuing is in case to be eaten as S. Gregory Nissen doth note very wel in the place before alledged in which respect Paschasius also sayth that our Lord is killed to the end wee may eate him and Isichius that Christ killed himselfe when he supped with his disciples not because he is truly killed or doth truly dy but because he dyeth mistically that is to say for that his death is mistically and truly represented by the separation of his blood from his body vnder seueral and dyuers formes of bread and wyne for although by reason of his immortality and impassibilytie he cannot dy neyther yet be so deuided but that he remayneth whole vnder both kynds yet for as much as the forme of wyne rather representeth his blood then his body and the forme of bread rather his body theÌ„ his blood according to the very woords of our sauiour saying of the one kynd this is my body and of the other this is my blood it followeth I say that by reason of this separation wrought by the force of the woordes of consecration he is exhibited in the Sacrament as dead and so dyeth in mistery as wel to represent his death vpon the crosse as also to offer himselfe in sacrifice to his father for the which it is not of necessity that he truly and realy dy but it suffiseth that he dy in some sort that is to say mistically for although all liuing creatures that are sacrificed are offred to God with the losse of their lyues and so are made true sacrifices yet in such other creatures as are not subiect to death it sufficeth that they be offred to almighty God and receiue withall some notable mutation or change to make the action to be sacrifical and different from a simple oblation for when any thing is offred to God and remayneth stil in his owne kynd forme and nature it is called an oblation so the first fruits the tythes the first begotten or borne of liuing creatures yea and religious persons as leuits and others in the old law were only offred to God for that they were no way changed wheras al things sacrifysed were eyther wholy destroyed or consumed by swoord or fyre or els at least receiued by the actioÌ„ of the priest some notable mutation Therfore seeing our sauiour being now eternal immortal and impassible is not subiect to death nor to any destruction or mutation by losse of his lyfe it sufficeth to make him a true sacrifice that he be offred to God with such mutation or change as may stand with his present state and condition as wee see he is offred in this sacrifice wherein the selfe same body that was borne of the blessed virgin Mary and is now in heauen glorified with the proper forme and lineaments of a natural body is by the omnipotency of our sauiours woords pronounced by the priest represented vpon the altar as dead and in formes of bread and wyne his body to be handled broken eaten and his blood to be dronke or shed as the body or blood of any other liuing creature that is killed in sacrifice wherby he is also in some sort coÌ„sumed for that his body being eaten and his blood dronke he looseth the forme and peculiar maÌ„ner of beeing that he hath in the sacrament which beeing deuynes caul Sacramental in respect of all which admirable mutations S. Augustin doth notably and truly apply to our sauiour in this sacrifice the history of King Dauid when he changed his countenance as the scripture sayth before Abimelech or king Achis for they are both one which he sayth was verifyed in our sauiour Christ when he changed his countenance in the priesthood and sacrifice of Melchisedech geuing his body and blood to be eaten and dronk There was sayth he a sacrifice of the Iewes in beasts according to the order of Aaron and that in mistery and there was not then the sacrifice of the body and blood of our Lord which the faythful know and is dispersed throughout the world and a litle after shewing how Melchisedech brought forth bread and wyne when he blessed Abraham he teacheth that it was a figure of this sacrifice then prosecuting the history how Dauid being taken for a mad man went from Abimelech which signifieth regnum Patris that is to say as he expoundeth it the people of the Iewes he applyeth also the same to our Sauiour saying that wheÌ„ he told the Iewes that his flesh was meat his blood drinke they took him for a mad man and abandoned him wherevpon he also forsook them changing his countenance in the sacrifice of Melchisedech that is to say leauing all the sacrifices of the order of AaroÌ„ and as it were disguysing him-selfe vnder the formes of bread and wyne which was the sacrifice of Melchisedech he passed from the Iewes to the Gentils This is the effect of S. Augustinus discours in that place concerning the mutation or change incident to our Sauiours person in the sacrament of the Eucharist and requisit to the sacrifice whereof I treat wherby it hath the nature of a true sacrifice as I haue declared before which being considered with the circumstances of our sauiours owne woords as wel in the promise as in the institution thereof all signifying that his flesh his body aud his blood was to be eaten dronk as of a creature killed in sacrifice yea that the same was then presently geuen or offred by him to his Father for his disciples who represented the whole Churche and for remission of sinnes besyds his manifest allusion to the promulgation of the old Testament dedicated with the blood of a present sacrifice and lastly the consent of the learned Fathers of the Churche confirming our Gatholyke doctrin in this behalfe no reasonable man can dout but that our Sauiour at his last super did ordeyn the Sacrament
that the sonne of one Irenaus was restored to lyfe being anoynted only with the oyle of a lamp that did hang before the tomb of a martyr in lyke manner Theodoret Venantius Fortunatus Paulus Diaconus recount wonderful miracles donne by the oyle of lamps that burned by martyrs tombs yea S. Gregory Nazianzen sayth of his owne knowledge that not only a litle dust or bone of the martyrs but also the very remembrance of them supplyeth sometymes the want of their whole bodyes and concludeth with this exclamation O rem predigiosam salutem assort sola recordatio o prodigious thing the only remembrance of them giueth health and in his oration in prayse of S. Ciprian he calleth to witnesse many that knew by their owne tryal and experience what great vertue power was in this very dust ashes to expel diuels to cure diseases and for the foreknowing of things to come S. Ambrose asketh why faythful men should not honour relickes of saynts which the very diuels reuerence and feare who also signifieth that he had a reuelation from almighty God of the place where the bodyes of S. Ceruas and Protase were buryed in Millan wher-vpon he took them vp with great solemnity as S. Augstin also witnesseth who was present and reporteth a great miracle of a blynd man that recouered his sight at the same tyme and diuels expeld by the merits of those blessed martyrs S. Chrisostome proueth against the Painims by the honour donne to saynts relicks that Christ is God to whose power and omnipotency he sayth it is to be ascrybed that his disciples and seruants who whyles they were liuing did seeme most contemtible became after they were dead more venerable then Kings in so much that at Rome and Constantinople Kings and praesidents sayth he runne to the tombe of a fisher and take it for a great fauour that their bodyes may be buried not hard by the Apostles bodyes but without the circuit of their tombs and be made as it were porters of Fishermen Furthermore in his book against the gentils where he discourseth at large of the lyfe death of S. Babilas the martyr he signifieth that his body being placed in the suburbs of Antioch neare to a temple where there was an Oracle of Apollo it put the diuel to silence and when Iulian the Apostata thought by the remoue of it to remedy the same the Temple and Idole were presently after destroyed with fire from heauen wherwith as saynt Chrisostome testifieth Iulian and all the gentils were wounderfully confounded and so may our heretykes be in lyke manner seing that they not only impugne with them this euident argument of the diuinity of Christ but also hold that for Idolatry which maistreth the diuel ouerthroweth Idols and confoundeth Idolaters I omit infinit others for breuities sake conclude with saynt Hierome who declareth the custome of the whole Churche of God both in his tyme and longe before therby to confute Vigilantius the heretyke that taught the same doctrine in this behalfe that our heretykes teach at this day whosoeuer sayth he adored martyrs who euer taught men to be God yt greueth vigilantius to see the relickes of martyrs couered with costly and precious veyles belyke Constantin the Emperour committed sacrilege when he translated to Constantinople the holly relyckes of saynt Andrew S. Luke S. Timothe wheraâ— the diuels roare and now also Arcadius the Emperour belyke committeth sacriledge who after so long tyme hath translated the bones of Samuel the Prophet into Thratia and all the Bishops that caryed the ashes laye in silk and in a vessel of gold are to be condemned for fooles and sacrilegious persons yea then the faythful people of all Churches are fooles also for going to receiue the same with no lesse Ioy then if they had serue the Prophet aliue in so much that froÌ„ Palestina to Calcedon ther was all the way 〈◊〉 of people that with one voyce sounded forth the praise of Christ lastly so shal wee say that the Bishop of Rome doth il when he offreth sacrifice to our Lord ouer S. Peter and saynt Paules venerable bones as wee tearme them though thou caulest them vâ—le dust and when he taketh their tombs for the altars of Christ lo here good reader the vse of Images and relykes and the honor due to them approued by the Fathers of all ages confirmed by the custome of all Christian nations ratyfied by miracles acknowledged by infidels and Paynims confessed by diuels and yet denied and deryded by the heretyks of this tyme are they not then more obstinat and malicious then heathens yea then diuels themselues THAT OVR DOCTRIN concerning the sacrifice of the Masse was generally receiued and beleued in the tyme of king Lucius first that it was foretold prophecyed by Malachias CHAP. XIIII BVT I wil passe to an other importaÌ„t poynt I mean the sacrifice of the Masse to see whether our doctrin concerning the same or theirs was deliuered by our sauiour to the Apostles and taught in king Lucius tyme or no. The sacrifice of the Masse consisting in the oblation of the blessed body and blood of our sauiour Iesus Christ was prophesyed by Malachias praefigured by the sacrifice of Melchifedeth instituted and offred by our sauiour at his last supper deliuered by him to his Apostles practysed by them and by the Churche of God euer since Malachias the Prophet foretelling the reiection of the Iewes and the election of the gentils signifieth withall the translation of the Iewes law and priesthood into a new law and a new priesthood and compareth or rather opposeth the priests of the one to the priests of the other sacrifice to sacrifice place to place altar to altar and a poluted bread which they were woÌ„t to offer only in Hierusalem to a cleane oblatioÌ„ which should be offred to God amongst the Gentils euery where throughout the whole world saying to the priests of the Iewes in the person of God that seing they dispysed his name and offred vpon his altars a polluted bread and blynd and lame sacrifices non est mihi voluntas in vobis c. sayth hee my wil is no longer to be serued of you neyther wil I accept any more sacrifice at your hands for my name is great amongst the Gentils euen from the east to the west there is a cleane oblation offred to my name in euery place c. Thus farre the Prophet who cannot be vnderstood to speake of any other sacrifice then of the Masse which being nothing els but the oblation of the blessed body and blood of our sauiour Iesus Christ in forme of bread and wyne is a most pure and cleane oblation and cannot be polluted by the wickednes of the priests as the bread offred in the old law was wont to be to which purpose it may be noted that the Prophet speaking of dyuers kinds of sacrifices some consisting
it is also to be noted that the most ancient and learned fathers do teach that the sacrifices of the old lawe as wel bloody as vnbloody were figures of this sacrifice the which they affirme not only of the bread of proposition and the flowre which was offreâ— for them that were cleansed from leprosy but also of the sacrifice of the Paschal lambe and saynt Augustin teacheth expressely that all the sacrifices of the old law were no lesse figures of this sacrifice of the Churche then of the sacrifice of of the crosse â—aying that singulare sacriflâ—sum c. the singuler or most excolleÌ„t sacrifice which spiritual Israel that is to say the Churche doth offer euery where according to the order of Melchisedech was signified by the shadowes of sacrifices wherein the people of the Iewes did serue and agayne in the same place he sayth that omnia genera priorant sacrificiorum all kinds of former sacrifices were shadowes of the sacrifice of the Churche Whereof the reason may be gathered out of him selfe to wit because this sacrifice of the Churche is the selfe same that was offred vpon the crosse that is to say our sauiour him selfe whome all the sacrifices of the old law did properly prefigure the which reason S. August seemeth himself to yeild saying that our sauiour sent those whome he healed of their leprosy to the Priests of the old law to offer sacrifice because the sacrifice which was to be celebrated in the Churche in steede of all the sacrifices of the old law was not then instituted and geuing as it were a further reason therof he sayth qiâ—a illis-omnibus ipse praenunsciabatur because he him selfe was fore shewed or signified by them all as though he should say that for as much as our sauiour who was prefigured by all the sacrifices of the old law was to bee offred in the sacrifice of the Churche or new law therfore the sayd sacrifice of the Churche was also prefigured by all those former sacrifices to be offred in steede of them which other where he teacheth expressely in these woords the table sayth he which the priest of the new testament that is to say our sauiour Christ doth exhibit is of his owne body and bloodâ— for that is the sacrifice which succeedeth all the sacrifices of the old law that were offred in shadow or figure of that which was to come and a litle after in steede of all those sacrifices his 〈◊〉 is offred and ministred to the commâ—â—nants thus farre saynt Augustin to whome I wil ad twoo or threâ— other of the most famous fathers of the churche S. Leo surnamed the great sayth now that the varietyes of carnal fleshly sacrifices dâ— ceasse thy body aud blood o Lord doth supply for all the differences of hosts and sacrifices in the old law And S. Chrisostome hauing mentioned particulerly the many and diuers sacrifices of the old law addeth all which the grace of the new testament doth comprehend in one sacrifice ordeyning one the same a true host in which woords saynt Chrisostome meaneth the sacrifice of the Eucharist which he cauleth a litle before the mistical table a pure and vnbloody host a heauenly most reuerend sacrifice which also he confirmeth other where saying that Christ did change the sacrifices of the old law and in steede therof commanded himselfe to be offred in the eucharist Lastly S. Cyprian speaking of the flesh of our sauiour left to his Churche for a sacrifice sayth that it was so to be prepared that it might continually be offred least yf it were consumed as other flesh is that is bought in the market and eaten it could not suffice for all the christian world to serue them for an host or sacrifice of christian religion in so much that he affirmeth that yf it were consumed it semed ther could be no more religion signifying therby not only the necessary concurrence of religion and sacrifice whereof I haue spoken before but also that the sacrifice of the masse is the proper sacrifice of the new testament and that the eternity of the said testament dependeth vpon the eternity of this sacrifice which is the first point that as I vndertook to proue doth necessarily follow of the eternal priesthood of Christ according to the order of Melchisedech The secoÌ„d poynt which I gather of Christs Priest-hood is that seeing he fulfilled the figures of all the bloody sacrifices offred by the Priests of the order of Aaron of which order he himselfe was not it were absurd to say that he fulfilled not the special proper sacrifice of Melchisedech of whose order he was The proper sacrifice of Melchisedech consisted in bread and wyne as it appeareth in genesis where it is sayd that when Melchisedech went to meete Abraham protulit or as saynt Cyprian also readeth it obtulit paneÌ„ vinum he brought forth or offred bread and wyne and to shew that reason therof it followeth immediatly â—rat cum saâ—erdot Dei altissimi for he was the Priest of the highest God wherby it is signified that bread and wyne were the proper obiects wherein he exercised his priestly function and the only matter of his sacrifice But for as much as the vnderstanding of this scripture is much controuersed betwyxt vs and our aduersaries who deny that Melchisedechs sacrifice consisted of bread and wyne which they say he brought forth only to releeue Abraham and his company and not to offer to God in sacrifice I remit me to the opinion or rather to the vniforme coÌ„sent of the most ancieÌ„t learned fathers of the Churche who do not only vnderstand this scripture as wee do but also teach that Christ fulfilled this figure of Malchisedechs sacrifice at his last super Clemens Alexandrinus doth signify that Melchisedech did with some particuler ceremonies consecrat or dedicat the bread and wyne whiche he gaue to Abraham for he sayth that he gaue him panem vinum sanctificatum nutrimentu in typum euchaâ—istis a sâ—â—ctified or consecrated meate in figurâ— of the eucharist S. Cyprian sayth we see the Sacrament or mistery of our Lords sacrifice praefigured in the priesthood of Melchisedech as the deâ—â—â—â— scripture testifieth saying Melchisedech King of Salem brought foorth bread and wyne for he was the Priest of the highest God and blessed Abraham a litle after he sayth that our sauiours order of Priesthood was deriued of Melchisedechs sacrifice for that our sauiour offred sacrifice to God his Father and offred the same that Melchisedech offred to wit bread and wyne that is to say his body and blood S. Augustin speaking of the oblation of Melchisedech when he went to meet Abraham There appeared first sayth he the sacrifice that now is offred to God by Christians throughout the world S. Hierome to Marcella sayth thou shalt fynd in genesis Melchisedeth King of Salem who euen then
is notably confirmed by an other circumstance that is to be considered in the woords of our Sauiour concerning the promulgatioÌ„ of his new law or manifestation of his new testament in the institution of the Sacrament of the Eucharist for as the old testament was dedicated by the blood of a sacrifice not to come but then offred to God when it was promulgat with the which blood Moyses sprinkled the people saying this is the blood of the testament that God hath sent vnto you so the new Testament was also dedicated by the blood of a sacrifice not to be offred only after-wards vpon the crosse but then also presently offred by our sauiour who therefore alluded euidently to the dedication of the old law and to the very woords of Moyses saying this is my blood of the new Testament sanctifying his Churche farre more inwardly and effectually with the blood of his owne sacrifised body when he gaue it to his Apostoles to drink then Moyses sanctified the people of the Iewes when he sprinkled them exteriorly with the blood of a sacrificed beast and therfore saynt Ireneus calleth the Sacrament of the Eucharist nouam oblationem noui Testamentiâ— the new oblation of the new Testament and S. Augustin cauleth it Sacrificium noui Testamenti the sacrifice of the new Testament and in an other place defyneth it to be a ryte or ceremony commanded by almighty God in the manifestation of the new Testament pertayning to the wourship which is due to God alone and called latria quo sibi sacrificari precepit with which ryte or ceremony he commanded sacrifice to be donne to him self and S. Chrisostome expounding these woords of our sauiour in saynt Paul Hic calix nouum Testamentum est in sanguine meo this cup is the new Testament in my blood compareth euidently the cup of the old Testament with the cup of the new blood with blood and sacrifice with sacrifice saying the cup of the old Testament was certayne licors and the blood of brute beasts for after they had sacrificed in the old law they took the blood in a cup and offred it and therfore because Christ in steede of the blood of brute beasts introduced or brought in his owne blood hee renewed the memory of the old sacrifice c. Thus far S. Chrisostome of the woords of our sauiour and then prosecuting the interpretatioÌ„ of S. Pauls discours therevpon he addeth that Saynt Paule represented to the Corinthians our sauiours actioÌ„ at his super to the end they might be so affected as though they where sitting at the same table with him ab ipso Christâ— acâ—â—pientes hoe sacrificium and as though they receiued this sacrifice of Christ himselfe declaring euidently that the sacrifice where with our sauiour did dedicat his testament according to the figure in the old law was not only offred one the crosse but also at his super whereof the reason is euident for at his supper he was a publik person a maister of a family free and at his owne liberty to make and publish his lawes to assemble his friends and witnesses of his wil and those whome he meant to make his heyres his vicars and substituts all which he did whereas vpon the crosse he represented no publik person no maister of a family no law maker nor so much as a free man but seemed the most abiect and miserable man in the world forsaken of all men and therefore S. Paule teacheth not that he did make institut or publish his Testament vpon the crosse but that he confirmed it there by his death and that from thens forward it tooke effect as men ar wont before they dye to make their Testaments which when they are dead beginne to be of force And for the furder explication of this question it is to bee considered that although the sacrifice of the Crosse was a most absolute and perfect coÌ„summation of all sacrifices whatsoeuer and a ful redemption and satisfaction for the sinnes of the world yet neuerthelesse it cannot be sayd properly to haue distinguished the old testament from the new for that it was as I may tearme it a certayne common and transcendent good indifferent to both states and testaments whereto all sacrifices as wel of the law of nature and the law of Moyses had a relation as now also the sacrifice of the Churche hath in the law of grace yet with this difference as S. Augustin noteth that the sacrifice of the crosse was prefigured and promised to come by the many and sundry sacrifices of the old law and now is represented as past by our one and only sacrifice of the new law which sacrifice though it be the same that our sauiour offred at his last supper yet it hath a different respect to the sacrifice of the crosse for that ours representeth the same as already past and our sauiours sacrifice in his last supper going before the other vpon the crosse did not only represent the same to come but also was as it were a preamble thereto where in as venerable Bede our cuntryman sayth he began by passion for that as Rupertus affirmeth in angustia passionis agonizans being already in the Agony and anguish of his passion he offred himselfe with his owne hands to God his father and as Isichius testifieth preuenting his enemies first sacrifised himselfe in his mististical supper and after on the Crosse wherof S. Leo also sayth that he preuented his death by a voluntary oblation of himselfe in the Sacrament and S. Gregorius Nissenus explicating this matter diuinly sayth thus Remember sayth he the woords of our Lord to wit no man shal take my lyfe from me but I my selfe will geue it c. For he which doth geue al things of his owne power and authority doth not expect necessity by treason nor the violent fury of the Iewes nor the vniust iudgement of Pilat that their wickednes malice shuld be the beginning of our saluation but by a secret ineffable manner of sacrifice he doth preoccupat or preuent the violence of men by his owne disposition offring himselfe an oblation or sacrifice for vs being both the priest the lambe which taketh away the sinnes of the world But perhaps thou wilt say vnto me when chanced this euen then when he gaue to his familiar friends his body to be eaten his blood to be dronke for a man cannot eat the sheep but the slaughter must go before Therefore when he gaue his body to his disciples to be eaten he did playnly demonstrat and shew that the lamb was already immolated sacrificed for the body of the host whyles it is liuing is not fit to be eaten Thus farre this famous Graecian brother to saynt Basil whose doctrin coÌ„cerning the sacrifice of our sauiours body before it be eaten is most consonant to our sauiours owne woords not only when he instituted the holy
offertur â—ome sayth saynt Ambros 〈◊〉 recipiens passionem offers se ipse quasi sacerdos he is offred as maâ— and as receiuing or 〈◊〉 his passionâ— and he offreth him-selfe as Priest in which respect he is both Priest and sacrifice as wel now on the altar as he was in his passion vpon the crosse though for our greater comfort he vseth also therein the interuention and ministery of Priests who being nothing els but his instruments and exercysing all one Priestly function vnder him their head do all pertayne to that one aeternal Priest-hood of Christ according to the order of Melchisedech which as Lactantius sayth must of necessity be in the Churche Iesus Christ sayth he being a Priest did make for him-selfe a great aeternal temple that is to say the Churche in quo templo aeternum sacerdotium habeat necesse est sâ—cundum ordinem Melchisedech in which temple he must needs haue an aeternal Priest-hood according to the order of Melchisedech so that the vnity of Christs priest-hood is not impeached by the multitude of his ministers no more then the vnity of a Kings monarchy by the multitude of his inferiour officers by whome he gouerneth And as for the multitude of masses which our aduersaries carp at as reiected by S. Paule the Fathers of the Churche shal answer for vs S. Chrisostome expouÌ„ding this epistle of S. Paule answereth this very same obiection that our aduersaries make agaynst vs This sacrifice sayth he is an example of that sacrifice vpon the crosse for wee alwayes offer the very self same thing not now one lambe and another to morrow but the very same therefore this is one sacrifice for otherwyse because it is offred in many places there should be many Christs thus farre saynt Chrysostome The very same argument and reason and the very lyke woords vseth saynt Ambrose to proue the vnity of this sacrifice and concludeth non enim aliud sacrificium sicut pontifex veteris legis sed idipsum semper offerimus we offer not an other or different sacrifice as did the Bishop of the old law but wee alwayes offer the self same Also Primasius the diuinity sayth he of the sonne of God which is euery where doth cause that they be not many sacrifices but one though they be offred by many it causeth in lyke manner that it is that body which was conceaued in the virgins wombe and not many bodyes as also that it is but one sacrifice and not dyuers as were the sacrifices of the Iewes Thus sayth he We read the very same in substance in Theopilaâ—â—us Oâ—cumenius Sedulius Haymo and others that haue written vpon saynt Paules epistle to the Hebrewes of whome the meanest may in any indifferent mannes iudgement counteruayl all the sectaryes of this tyme who framing new fantasies of their owne braynes or reuiuing old heresyes are forced for the mayntenance therof to wring and wrest the holy scriptures from the meaning of the holy ghost to their priuat sence and to coÌ„demne the iudgement of all the ancieÌ„t â—athers of the Churche who liuing in such tymes as these matters were not in controuersy can not be suspected of parciality and much lesse of ignorance of the scriptures seing their learned commentaries and expositions thereof geue sufficient testimony of their continual trauails labours therin besydes that their most vertuous lyues led in continual prayer pance and religious discipline for the which the Christian world admireth and honoreth them as great seruants of God and saynts is a sufficient argumeÌ„t that God rather assisted them with his spirit in the vnderstaÌ„ding of the scripture then Martin Luther Zwinglius Beza Caluin and such other flagitious and wicked apostatats whose vicious and leud lyues whereof the world is yet a witnes do manifestly declare with what kynd of spirit they were possessed Therefore he that would leaue the general consent of al the ancient fathers to follow the phantastical or rather phrenetical opinions of these new fangled fellowes deserueth to be deceiued and can haue no excuse of wilful blyndnes eyther before God or the world But now to conclude this question concerning the sacrifice of the Masse I draw out of all the premisses 4. conclusions The first is that which at the first I vndertook to proue to wit that the oblation of the blessed body and blood of our Sauiour Iesus Christ which wee caul the Masse ys the proper sacrifice of the new testament prophesied by Malachias prefigured by the sacrifice of Melchisedech promised instituted and offred by our Sauiour practised by his Apostles and by the Churche euer since The second is that it is propitiatory not only for the liuing but also for the dead The third that the heretykes of this tyme that contradict abolish the same hold not the law of the new Testament instituted by Christ seing they haue not the proper priesthood and sacrifice therof without the which the sayd law and Testament cannot be S. Paule teaching such a necessary concurrence of the one with the other that he affirmeth that the priesthood being translated the law must also of necessity be translated as I haue shewed before therfore seeing they haue not this priesthood and sacrifice it followith they haue not the law and Testament of Christ which can not be without the same The fourth poynt that followeth of the premisses is that they are most pernicious enemies of humainkind seing they labour to depriue vs of the most souerain remedy that God of his infinit goodnes hath left vs for the reparation of our dayly wracks by sinne and for the consolation both of the quick and the dead for which cause the old Christians in the persecutions vnder Dioclesian being persecuted for hearing masse as wee are now as I haue shewed in the beginning of this treatise answered the tyrants that the masse was spes salus que Christiantum the hope and health or saluation of Christians and that therfore they could not forgo it the reason whereof I haue declared before to wit for that therby are aplyed vnto vs the fruits of our Sauiours passion which is not only represented but also dayly renewed in the sacrifice of the masse as witnesseth saynt Gregory so often sayth he as wee offer the host of his passion so often wee renew his passion and as saynt Cyprian sayth passio Domini est sacrificium quod offerimus the sacrifice which wee offer is the passion of our Lord Lastly Martialis the most ancient martir and Disciple of Christ sayth that which the Iewes did sacrifice vpon the Altar of the crosse wee do propose on the sanctified altar for our saluation knowing that by that only remedy lyfe is to be geuen vs and death to be eschewed thus far the blessed martyr This remedy I say the heretykes of these our dayes doe seek by their pestilent doctrin to take from vs yea and do in deed
depryue vs of it in our country not only by their doctrine but also by rigorous and violent lawes resembling therin as wel the old persecutors of Gods Churche that did the lyke as also Antichrist that is to come who as Daniel the Prophet fortelleth shal take a way iuge sacrificium the cōtinual sacrifice of the Churche which is the sacrifice of the masse and the ancient Byshop and martyr Hypolitus doth testify in his book of the consummation of the world that in the tyme of Antichrist Churches shal be lyke cottages and that the precious body and blood of Christ shal not be in those dayes the liturgy shal be taken a way the singing of the Psalmes shal ceasse and the reading of the scripture shal not be heard thus farre saynt Hipolitus that wrote within 250. yeares after Christ. Seing then the Caluinists and Lutherans abolish the sacrifice of the masse yea and bring christian religion to a very desolation and ruine ouerthrowing altars churches monasteries images relickes of saynts the signe of the crosse sacraments ceremonies and all external memories and monuments of christianity and in steed of the blessed body and blood of our sauiour bring into the churche nothing but a bare signe therof what els are they but true figures or the forerunners of Antichrist that shal set vp the abomination of desolation in the temple of God as sayth the Prophet that is to say shal bring an abominable desolation vpon the Churche and true religion of Christ OVR DOCTRIN OF THE merits of woorkes and Iustification is proued and cleared from the slanders of our aduersaries commonly publyshed in their Sermons and lately insinuated in a book set forth concerning the conuiction of my Lord of Essex CAP. XIX FOR as much as my intention in this treatise was to detect and confute certayn slanderous lyes of our aduersaryes spread abroad agaynst vs in some of theyr late bookes and lybels no lesse touching matter of religion then matter of state I can not forbeare to discouer vnto thee here good reader their notable impudency in charging vs to be enemies of the Passion of Christ and to euacuate the merits therof by ascribing our saluatiō to our owne workes which they are wount to publish in their sermons and common table talke and haue of late insinuated in a pamphlet concerning the conuiction of my Lord of Essex wherein treating of Sir Christofer Blunt that he protested to dy a Catholyke some foolish minister I think foysted in an aparenthesis signifying that he dyed not such a Catholyk but that he hoped to be saued by the merits of Christs passion not ascribing his saluation to his owne workes as though other Catholykes that teach merits of workes did not hope to be saued by the passion of Christ wherin I know not whether I should wounder more at their ignorance or their malice their ignorance if they know not what we hold and their malice if they know it and yet slander vs. For who knoweth not that wee acknowledge the blessed passion of our Sauiour to be the root and ground of our redemption and reconciliation to God and the fountayne from whence floweth all our iustification and saluation saying with S. Peter that we are redeemed with the precious blood of Christ the immaculat lambe and with S. Paule that wee are iustified in his blood shal be saued from wrath by him and that there is no other name wherein wee can be saued but the name of IESVS neuerthelesse wee know withall that though his passion be most meritorious the redemption that wee haue therby most copious yet it was his wil that wee shuld doe somewhat of our parts to haue the benefit therof which our aduersaries cannot but grant confessing as they doe that to be partakers therof they must be baptysed they must beleeue they must repēt after they haue sinned seeing vpon the warrāt of the holy scriptures they ad all this to the passion of Christ without derogation to the dignity therof what reason haue they to blame vs if vpon the same warrant we ad another condition no lesse expresse in scripture then any of the rest seeing our sauiour himselfe sayth if thou wilt enter into lyfe keepe the commaundments to which purpose S. Paule also sayth omnibus obremperantibus sibi factus est causa salutis that is to say he was made a cause of saluation to all such as obey him and in another place the dooers of the law shal be iustified before God and not the hearers only and S. Iames wee think a man to be iustified by workes and not by faith only and our Sauiour himselfe not euery one sayth he that sayth to mee Lord Lord shal enter into the kingdome of heauen but he which doth the wil of my Father by all which wee see that good workes are necessary to saluation and must concurre therto with the merits of Christs passion which being the root fountayne of all mannes merit giueth as it were lyfe and force both to fayth and also to the good workes of faythful men to make them meritorious before God wherin three things are to be noted for the better explication of this matter The first is that there is two manners of iustification the one the iustification of the wicked man be he infidel or christian in mortal sinne the other the iustification of the iust man or an increase of Iustice the first proceedeth merely of the grace of God without merit of workes for that it is not in the power of nature being auerted and alienat from God to conuert it selfe vnto him without his grace vocation therfore S. Paule worthely excludeth frō the first iustificatiō both of the Iewes the gentils all merit of man The second which is the iustification of the iust man or encrease of Iustice is procured by good woorkes proceeding of Gods grace without the which their can be no iustification and therfore the Catholikes do teach not only the precedence of Gods grace before euery good woork according to that of the prophet misericordia eius praeueniet me his mercy shal preuent or goe before me but also the concurrence therof according as S. Paule sayth non ego sed gratia Dei mecum not I but the grace of God with me and as our Sauiour sayth sine me nihil potestis facere without me you can do nothing and agayne S. Paule omnia possum in eo qui me comfortat I can do all things in him that strengthneth or comforteth me Of the first iustification S. Paule sayth in diners places that wee are iustified gratis freely or for nothing by the grace of God by fayth and not by woorkes as meritorious and of the second he sayth speaking of the effect of almes yt shal multiply your seed and shal augment the increase of the fruit of your iustice and saynt Iames a
poynts which I haue handled what hath alwayes bin the doctrin of the Churche of God concernâ—ng the same and that therfore King Lucius could receiue no other froÌ„ the Catholyke RomaÌ„ Churche by the which he was conuerted to the Christian fayth and yf I thought it needful to rip vp euery other particuler point controuersed betwyxt our aduersaries and vs I could easely shew the same in euery one But what needeth it seing they cannot proue that any Pope I wil not say from S. Eleutherius to S. Gregory but from S. Peter to Clement the eight that now gouerneth the Churche hath taught and decreed any different doctrin from his predecessors whereas on the other syde wee shew euidently that in a perpetual succession of our Roman Bishops there hath ben also a continual succession of one the selfe same doctrin where vpon it followeth infalibly that King Ethelbert and the English could not receiue from S. Gregory the Pope any other fayth then King Lucius and the britans receiued from saynt Eleutherius and that wee which now hold communion with the Roman Churche teache no other doctrin then that which was taught by them to our ancestors and hath successiuely come from S. Peter consequently from our Sauiour Christ. Therefore thou mayst wel wonder good reader at the impudency of our English ministers that are not a shamed to preache teache the contrary wherby thow mayst also see how lamentable is the case of our poor country wherein such haue the charge and cure of soules as haue not so much as common honesty to say the truth in matters as cleare as the Sunne and teach such a religion as for lack of better reasons and arguments they are forst to mayntayne it with manifest lyes slanders yea and murders of innocent men whome they execute for fayned crymes vnder colour of matter of state acknowledging therby sufficiently the truth of our Catholyk fayth seing they are ashamed to aâ—ow that they trooble any man for it whyles they confesse that they punish and put to death heretykes namely the Anabaptists directly for their religion and their impudency is so much the more notorious for that their publyk proceedings in the dayly execution of penal and capital lawes touching only matter of religion doth contradict and conuince their sayings and writings wherein they affirme that they put none to death for religion But for as much as I haue treated this matter at large in diuers partes of my Apology besydes that I vnderstand that some others also entend to treate thereof in the answere of a ridiculous challenge made by O. E. fraught with most absurd paradoxes as wel concerning this poynt as others touching our Catholyke fayth I remit thee good reader therto and so conclude this treatys beseeching almighty God to geue our aduersaries the light of his grace and vs in the meane tyme pacience and constancy and to thee indifferency to iudge of maters so much importing the eternal good and saluation of thy soule which I hartely wish no lesse then my owne FINIS A TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS OF THIS TREATISE THE preface wherein are declared the causes of the long delay of printing the Apology and withall is noted the impudency of a late wryter in England disguysing his name with the letters O. E. who auoweth the fiction of Squyres employment for a truth and affirmeth that none are put to death in England for religion An Answere to two malitious slanders auowched in the foresayd libels concerning the conquest of England falsly supposed to be pretended sollicited by the Catholyks touching the late enterprise of the King of Spayne in Ireland Also concerning sir VVilliam Stanley and the Iesuits calumniated by the lybellers CHAP. 1. Concerning father Parsons in particular and that the extreame malice that the heretyks beare him is an euident argument of his great vertue CHAP. 2. That the Catholykes are persecuted martyred now in England for the same causes that the martyrs dyed in the primatiue Churche and of the great iniustice donne to two Priests condemned at Lincolne by Iudge Glanduile CHAP. 3. Of the impudeÌ„cy of a minister who being present at the death of the two martyrs aforesaid affirmed publykly that our country was conuerted by saynt Augustin the monk to the protestants religion by occasion where-of the truth of that poynt is euidently declared CHAP. 4. Of the first conuersion of our country whyles it was called Britany in the tyme of King Lucius with euideÌ„t proofes that our Catholyk fayth was then preached and planted there CHAP. 5. The same is coÌ„firmed proued out of Gildas the sage Ca. 6. Certayne poynts of controuersy are discussed whereby it is proued that King Lucius receiued our Catholyke fayth and first of the Popes supremacy in Ecclesiasticall causes CHAP. 7. That our Sauiour made S. Peter supreme head of the churche CHAP. 8. That the successors of saynt Peter to wit the Bishops of Rome succeed him in the supremacy of the Churche CHAP. 9. That the Bishops of Rome exercised supreme autority in the tyme of King Lucius CHAP. 10. The matter of holy Images is debated and the vse thereof proued to haue ben in the Churche of God euer since our Sauiours tyme. Chap. 11. The commandment of God touching Images is explicated the practise of the Churche declared Chap. 12. Concerning the relicks of saynts and the reuerend vse thereof Chap. 13. That our doctrin concerning the sacrifice of the Masse was generaly receiued and beleeued in the tyme of King Lucius and first that it was foretold and prophecyed by Malachias Chap. 14. That not only the sacrifice of Melchisedech but also all the sacrifices of the old law were figures of the sacrifice of the masse and are changed into the same and by the way is declared the necessity of sacrifice as wel for common welth as for religion Chap. 15. That our Sauiour Christ instituted and offred at his last supper the sacrifice of his blessed body and blood proued by his owne woords by the expositions of the Fathers with a declaration how he is sacrificed in the masse and lastly that he gaue commission and power to his Disciples to offer his body and blood in sacrifice that is to say to say the Masse Chap. 16. That the Apostles practised the commission geuen them by our Sauiour sacrificing or saying Masse them-selues and leauing the vse and practise thereof vnto the Churche that the ancient Fathers not only in King Lucius tyme but also for all the first 500. yeares afeer Christ taught it to bee a true sacrifice and propitiatory for the liuing for the dead Chap. 17 An answere to the obiections of our aduersaries out of S. Paules epistle to the Hebrewes with a declaration that the heretyks of this tyme that abolish the sacrifice of the Masse haue not the new testameÌ„t of Christ and that they shew themselues to be most pernicious enemies of humain kynd Chap. 18.
the head wheron the priest did also lay his hands to shew that it was offred as a price pro capite for the head or lyfe of him that made the oblation Therfore for as much as this kynd of worship is the greatest most proper testimony we can externaly yeild of vassellage and seruitude to our creator it cannot without preiudice of his right be coÌ„municated to any creature whatsoeuer in which respect it is caused by the deuynes latria as due to God alone and for that cause not only the deuil that seeketh to robbe almighty God of his glory but also such men as haue made themselues to be held for Gods traue euer affected this kynd of woorship as the highest and most due to diuinity Seeing then sacrifice is most essential to religion and a most proper and principal act therof it followeth that there can be no perfect religion without priesthood and sacrifice for which cause S. Paule speaking of the translation of the law maketh it to depend wholy vpon the translation of the priesthood saying that the priesthood being translated there must needs be withal a translation of the law And Daniel the Prophet describing the religion of the Iewes falne to desolation sayd that they had neither sacrifice oblation nor incence amongst them And now to speake a word or two by the way of common welth where as nothing is more natural to mankynd then the same to the which all men are by a general instinct of nature so inclyned that ther was neuer found any people so barbarous but they liued in society it is to be noted that it hath neuer ben read nor heard of that any common welth hath ben without sacrifice whervpon Plutarch sayth that though a man may happely fynd some cittyes without wals without scooles without learning without theaters without money yet no man euer saw citty without temples wherin sacrifice might be offred to God And Aristotle speaking of things precisely necessary for common welth ordeyneth that special care be had of sacrifice to the Gods Wherof two reasons may be geuen the one for that nothing is more truly political nor tendeth more directly to the establishment of common welth then publik sacrifice wherby not only a league of frindship and ciuil vnity is made amongst men by the participation communion of the thing that is sacrifised but also their passeth as it were a couenant betwyxt God and them wherby they become his particuler people and he their God and protector without whose particuler prouidence and protection no common welth can eyther prosper or stand The other reason is for that sacrifice being as before I haue declared most necessary to religion is consequently necessary for common welth wherof the true natural end is religion God hauing ordeyned man and all humain things principally for his owne seruice and therfore the very heathen Philosophers namely Plato and all his followers make the end of common welth to be nothing els but a religious wisdome consisting in the knowledge â—oue and seruice of God and Aristotle placeth it in contemplation of deuine things wherto he also specially requyreth the knowledge loue and seruice of God which is nothing els but religion in which respect he geueth the cheef preeminence and dignity amongst the magistrats to priests whose special function and office is to offer sacrifice The which is also confirmed by the custome of all good coÌ„mon welths as the ancient kingdomes of the AEgyptians and Romans wherein the kings themselues were priests and offred sacrifice as also the cheefe magistrats amongst the Gretians were wont to do and in the common welth of the Romans after the suppression of their kings yea and when they florished most the office of priests was so preeminent that the cheefe bishops commanded and controled the consuls and as Cicero sayth praefuerunt tum religionibus deorum tum summae reip that is to say had the cheefe authority not only in matters concerning religion but also in the common welth Seeing then religion is naturally the end of common welth and sacrifice a most necessary and principal act of religion it followeth that sacrifice is no lesse natural and essential to common welth then to Religion But to leaue the consideration of common welth apart and to conclude with religion and sacrifice I say that for as much as they are both most natural to man and that the woorkes and effects of grace do not ouerthrow but nobilitate and perfect the good inclinations and woorkes of nature yt must needs follow that our sauiour by the law of grace did no more depriue man of publike sacrifice then of religion but that as he left him a most perfect and deuine Religion farre excelling that which he had before eyther in the law of nature or in the law of Moyses so he left him also a most deuine sacrifice wherby he might dayly pay the tribute of nature in a farre more excellent manner then he did in eyther of the former states This is no lesse pâ—ainly then learnedly taught by saynt Clement S. Peters disciple and successor who in his book of Apostolical constitutions declaring that our Sauiour did not by the law of grace abrogate the law of nature nor take away so much as any natural inclination in man butâ— confirme and perfect the first and moderate the later he sheweth withall what was fulfilled and what was chaÌ„ged in the law of Moyses and amongst other things that he sayth were changed he nameth baptisme priesthood and sacrifice saying that in steed of dayly baptismes our sauiour ordayned only one and for bloody sacrifice he instituted rationale in cruentum misticum sacrificium quod in mortem domini per symbola corporie sanguinis sui celebratur that is to say a reasonable vnbloody mistical sacrifice the which is celebrated by the sacraments or signes of his body and blood in representation of his death Thus fayth saint Clement of the proper sacrifice of the new law that is to say the masse as it is euident by his owne words which saint Ireneus confirmeth signifying that as there were oblations in the old law so there are oblations in the new law and sacrificia in populo sacrificia in Ecclesia sacrifices amongst the people of the Iewes and sacrifices in the Churche in so much that he teacheth that sacrifices were not reiected by mutatioÌ„ of the law but changed whereto he addeth also this differeÌ„ce that â—acrifice is now offred by vs not as it was by the Iewes that is to say as by bond men but by free men because our sauiour hath deliuered vs from the bondage of the law and thus sayth this ancient father of the sacrifice of the holy eucharist or masse which a litle before he cauleth the new oblation of the new testament applying therto the prophesy of Malachy as I haue noted in the last chapter To this purpose
of the Eucharist to serue vs not only for a food and spiritual meate but also for a sacrifice offring the fame him-selfe first to his Father and then geuing commissioÌ„ and power to his Disciples to do that which he did to wit to offer and sacrifice the same saying hoc facite in nâ—eam commemorationeÌ„ that is to say do make or sacrifice this in remembrance of me for this woord facite as wel in the Syriac Hebrew and Greek as in the Laryn signifieth to sacrifice no lesse then to do or make as in Leuiticus faciet vnum pro peccate he shal sacrifice one of the turtle doues for remissioÌ„ of sinne and in the book of Kings faciam bovem alterum I wil sacrifice the other oxe the lyke may be seene in diuers other places of the holy scriptures where the Hebrew Greek woord which doth properly signify facere must needs be vnderstood to do sacrifice in which sence facâ—re is also vsed amongst the Latins as cum faciam vttulapro frugthus c. when I shal sacrifice a calfe for my corne c also in Plautus faciam tibâ— fideliam mulsiplenam I wil sacrifice vnto the a poâ—ful of sweete wyne and agayne in Cicero Iunoni omnes consules facere necesse est all the consuls must needs sacrifice to Iune But howsoeuer it is it litle importeth for the matter in questioÌ„ whether faecere do properly signify to sacrifice or no seing it is euident that all the doctors of the Churche do vnderstaÌ„d that Christ coÌ„maunding his Apostles to do that which he did commaunded them to sacrifice S. Denis who was conuerted by S. Paul at Athens declaring the practise of the Churche in his tyme fayth that the Bishop in the tyme of the holy mysteries excuseth himself to almighty God for that he is so bold to sacrifice the host that geueth health or saluation aleadging for his excuse our Sauiours commandment to wit hoc facite do this in my remembrance S. Clement in his Apostolical constitutions speaking to Priests in the name of the Apostles fayth suscitato Domino offerte saecrificium vestrum de quo vobis praecepit per nos hae facite in meam commemorationem on easter day when our Lord is risen offer your sacrifice as he commaunded yow by vs saying do this in my remembrance Martialis who also conuersed with the Apostles sayth that the Christians offred the body and blood of our Sauiour Iesus Christ to lyfe euerlasting because he commaunded them to do it in remembrance of him Iustin the Philosopher and Martyr within 140. yeares after Christ sayth that God who receiueth sacrifice at the hands of none but of Priests did foretel by his Prophet that those sacrifices should be grateful to him which Iesus Christ commaunded to be offred in the Eucharist S. Cyprian sayth our Lord and God Iesus Christe is the cheefe Priest and offred first sacrifice to God the Father and commaunded that the same should be donne in his remembrance S. Chrysostome teaching that the sacrifice which is dayly offred in the Churche ys alwayes one and the self same sacrifice be it offred neuer so oft addeth that which we do is donne in remeÌ„brance of that which was donne by our Sauiour far he sayd do this in remembrance of me I omit for breuityes sake S. Augustin S. Ambrose Primasius Bishop of vtica S. Isidore Haymo and diuers others that testify in lyke manner that our Sauiour saying to his Apostles do this gaue them coÌ„mission and power to sacrifice and thus much for the institution of the masse by our Sauiour THAT THE APOSTLES practysed the commission geuen them by our Sauiours sacrificing or saying Masse them-selues and leauing the vse and practyse therof vnto the Churche and that the ancient Fathers not only in King Lucius tyme but also for the first 500. yeares after Christ teach it to be a true sacrifice and propitiatory for the liuing and for the dead CHAP. XVII NOW then to speake breefly of the practyse of the Apostles and of Gods Churche euer since It being manifest by that which I haue sayd already that our Sauiour himselfe did not only institute offer the sacrifice of his body and blood at his last super but also gaue commission and power to his disciples to do that which he did it cannot be douted but that they executed this power and commission and did not only consecrate and make the body of our sauiour as he did but also sacrificed the same Therefore whereas we read in the Acts of the Apostles that they vsed to assemble themselues together ad frangendum panem to break bread it is doutles to be vnderstood that they offred this sacrifice informe of bread according to the commission coÌ„maundmeÌ„t of our Sauiour that the same was the publike ministery wherein the scripture sayth they were occupied when they were commanded by the holy ghost to segregat Paul and Barnabas whereof it is sayd ministraÌ„tibus illis Domino ieiunantibus c. whyles they were ministring to our Lord and fasting c. which being in the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signify the ministery of sacrifice in which sence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are taken in the scripture when they are vsed absolutely and spoken of any publyke and holy ministery wherof wee haue examples as wel in the epistieto the Hebrewes in dyuers places as also in the gospel of S. Luke author of the Acts of the Apostles who speaking of Zacharias the priest and of his ministery or office which was to offer sacrifice calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therfore Erasinus of whose iudgement in lyke cases our aduersaries are wont to make no smaâ—e account had great reason to translate the foresayd woords 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. sacrificanâ—bus illu Domino c. as they were sacrifycing to our Lord c. and so coÌ„mon was this sence vnderstanding of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for sacrifice that the grecians haue no other proper woord for the sacrifice of the Masse Furdermore that the ministery of the Apostles in breaking bread was a sacrifice it appeareth euidetly by S. Paule who to withdraw the Corinthians from sacrificing to Idols did represent vnto them the sacrifice which he and the Apostles did vse to offer in the breaking of bread making a playne antithesis betwyxt the one sacrifice and the other and comparing the bread which they brake as wel with the lawful sacrifices of the Iewes as also with the vnlawful sacrifices of the gentils Of the first he sayth Behold Israel according to the flesh are not those which eate of the sacrifices partakers of the Altar and agayne speaking of the other flie sayth he from the woorship that is to say the sacrifices of Idols and yeilding a reason thereof the cup sayth he which wee blesse
is it not a communication of the blood of our Lord the bread which wee breake is it not a participation of our Lords body and after more playnly those things which the gentils do sacrifice they sacrifice to deuils and not to God I wold not haue yow to be partakers with deuils yow cannot drinke the cup of our Lord and the cup of deuils yow can not be partakers of the table of our Lord and the table of deuils c. Thus farre the Apostle who as yow see euidently compareth or rather opposeth cup to cup table to table Altar to Altar sacrifice to sacrifice and therfore saynt Ambrose vnderstandeth in this place the table of our Lord to be the Altar faying he which is partaker of the table of Deuils mensae Domini id est altari obstrepit doth oppose himselfe against the table of our Lord that is to say the Altar and saynt â—ilary expoundeth it to be mensam sacrifictorum the table of sacrifices Also S. Chrisostome vpon these woords Calix beuedictionis the cup of blessing and the rest that followeth in the text sayth in the person of Christ if thou desyre blood sayth be do not sprinkle the Altar of Idols with the blood of brute beasts but my altar with my blood S. Augustin in lyke sort interpreteth this place of the sacrifice of the Churche saying that S. Paul teacheth the Corinthians ad qoud sacrificuÌ„ debeant pertimere to what sacrifice they ought to belong and Haymo who wrote about 800. yeres agoe sayth that calix benedictionis the cup of blessing which S. Paule speaketh of is that cup which is blessed a sacerdoâ—ibus in Altars of priests in the Altar so that if wee consider the circumstances of S. Paules woords with the interpretation of these learned Fathers it can not be denyed but that he and the other Apostles in the ceremony of breaking bread did not only administer the Sacrament of the eucharist to the people as our aduersaries would haue it but also offer sacrifice Which may sufficiently be coÌ„firmed as wel by the liturgy or masse of S. Iames the Apostle yet extant agreeing with ours for as much as concerneth the substance of the sacrifice as also by a constitution of the Apostles mentioned by S. Clement saynt Peters disciple wherein they decreed that nothing should be offred super Altare vpon the Altar more then our Lord had commaunded and speaking furder in the same decree of the sunday he signifyeth that they exercysed that day 3. seueral acts of religion that is to say euangelij praedictionemâ— oblationem sacrificij sacricibs dispensationem the preaching of the gospel oblation of sacrifice and the distribution of the holy meate that is to say the holy eucharist wherby it is euident that the publyke ministery of the Apostles consisted not only in preaching and ministring the Sacrament of the eucharist but also in oblation of sacrifice here to I may ad the testimony of saynt Andrew the Apostle Who being vrged by Egeas the proconsul to sacrifice to the fals God answered that he sacrificed dayly and distributed to the people the flesh of the immaculat lambe as witnesseth the Epistle of the churches of Achaia declaring the story of his passion besyds that Epiphanius a most auncient Father of the Churche doth testify that all the Apostles did sacrifice who writing against the sect of heretykes called Colliridians and reprehending them woorthely for hauing certayne women priests that offred sacrifice to our lady which could not be offred to any but to God alone sayth it was neuer heard of since the world beganne that any woman did sacrifice neither our first mother Eua nor any of the holy women in the old Testament no nor the virgin Mary her selfe nor the 4. daughters of Philip the deacon though they were prophetesses and then hauing named Zacharias father to saynt Iohn for one that offred sacrifice in the old law he addeth that all the 12. Apostles whome he nameth particulerly did sacrifice whereof it were a sufficient argument though there were no other that those Fathers who partly liued with them and receiued of them the Christian fayth and partly succeeded them immediatly do signify not only the vse of the sacrifice in the Churche in theyr tyme but also their constant and most reuerend opinion thereof as it may appeare sufficiently by that which I haue already aleadged out of S. Clement S. Denis S. Martial S. Iustin and S. Ireneus all which do vniformely teach that Christ deliuered this sacrifice to his Apostles and the last of them to wit S. Ireneus scholer to S. Policarp who was scholer to S. Iohn the Euangelist sayth that the Churche receining it of the Apostels did offer it throughout the world in his tyme which as I haue sayd before was in the tyme of K. Lucius and therfore I shal not neede to enlarge my selfe furder in this matter to produce the testimonies of the later fathers partly because I haue already accomplished my principal intention in this treatyse which is to proue that king Lucius could receaue from the Churche of Rome no other but our Gatholyke Roman fayth as wel in this poynt of the sacrifice of the Masse as in all other which wee professe and partly because in handling and explicating the prophecies and figures of the old testament and the actions and woords of our Sauiour and of his Apostles concerning the institution vse and practyse of this sacrifice I haue already aleadged so many playne and euident testimonies of the fathers that it is needles to aleadge any more Seeing it is most manyfest therby that all those of the first 500. yeares both taught our doctrin in this poynt and vnderstood the scriptures concerning the same as wee doe and that they speake not of this sacrifice as our aduersaries wil needs vnderstand them as of an improper sacrifice but in such sort that they euidently shew their opinions of the propriety verity and excellent dignity therof and therfore in S. Denis scholer to S. Paule it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Budaeus translateth sacrificium sacrificiorum the sacrifice of sacrifices In S. Cyprian verum plenum sacrificium a tiue and ful sacrifice which he sayth the priest doth offer in the person of Christ to God the Father In S. Chrisostome sacrificium tremendum horror is plenum caleste summéque venerandum sacrificium a dreadful sacrifice ful of horror a heauenly most reuerend sacrifice In S. Augustin singulare summum verissimum sacrificium cui omnia falsa sacrificia cesserunt the singuler and the most highest and most true sacrifice wherto all the salse sacrifices of the gentils haue geuen place In Eusebius sacrificium Deo plenum a sacrifice ful of God In S. Iohn Damascen tremendum vitale sacrificium a dreadful sacrifice and geuing lyfe In Theodoretus sacrificationem agni deminies the sacrificing of the
lambe of God and in the first general councel of Nice held by aboue 300. Fathers situm in sacra mensa agnum illum Dei tollentem peccata mundi incruente a sacerdotibus in molatum the lambe of God placed vpon the holy table the which lambe taketh away the sumes of the world and is vnbloodily sacrificed by the priests wherto may iustly be added the doctrin of all the Fathers that this sacrifice is propitiatory for the liuing and for the dead grounded no dout vpon the woords of our sauiour himselfe in his first institution and oblation therof when he said to his Apostles representing the whole Church this is my body which is geuen pro vobis for you that is to say for remission of your sinnes and more playnly in oblation of the cup this is my blood which is shed pro vobis or as saynt Math. sayth pro multis in remissioneÌ„ peccatorum for you for many to the remission of sinnes for this cause saynt Iames the Apostle in his liturgy saith offermius â—â—bi wee offer to thee o Lord the vnbloody sacrifice for our sinnes and the ignorance of the people and saynt Martial the most ancient martyr who as I haue sayd liued with the Apostles affirmeth that by the remedy of this sacrifice lyfe is to be geuen vs death to be eschewed and S. Denis a foresaid cauleth it salutarem bostiam the host or sacrifice that geueth health or saluation S. Athanasius sayth that the oblation of the vnbloody host is propitiatio a propitiation or remission of sinnes Origin cauleth it the only commemoration which makes God mercyful to men S. Cyprian termeth it medicamentum holocaustum ad sanandas infirmitates purgandas iniquitates a medicin burnt sacrifice for the healing of infirmityes and the purging of sinnes S. Ambrose speaking of the Eucharist sayth that Christ offreth him selfe therin quasi sacerdos vt peccata nostra dimittat as a priest that he may forgeue our sinnes S. Augustin considering that all the sacrifices of the old law were figures of this sacrifice as he often affirmeth that amongst infinit others there were some that were called hostiae pro peccato sacrifices for remission of sinne By the sacrifices saith he that were offred for sinnes this one of ours is signified wherein is true remission of sinne and to ad somewhat more hereto concerning the custome of Gods Churche to offer this sacrifice also as propitiatory for the dead S. Iames the Apostle in his liturgy prayeth to almighty God that the sacrifice may be acceptable vnto him for remission of the peoples sinnes and for the repose of the soules of the dead also saynt Clement reacheth for a constitution of the Apostles to offer the holy Eucharist in Churches and Churchyards for the dead S. Chrisostome also often affirmeth it for a decree of the Apostles to offer sacrifice for the dead saying it was not rashly decreed by the Apostles that in the most dreadful mysteries there should be commemoration made of the dead for when the people clergy stand with their hands listed vp to heauen the reuerend sacrifice set vpon the Altar how is it possible that praying for them wee should not pacify the wrath of God towards them S. Gregory Nissen in lyke manner proueth the vtility and profit therof by the authority of the Disciples of Christ that taught deliuered the custome to the Churche as witneseth saynt Iohn Damascen who affirming it to be an Apostical tradition confirmeth the same with the testimonies of S. Athanasius and saynt Gregory Nissen Tertullian often maketh mention of oblations offred for the dead yerely in their anniuersaries aleadging it amongst dyuers other for an ancient custome and vnwritten tradition of the Churche S. Cyprian also mentioneth a constitution made before his tyme that for such as make Priests their executors or tutors to their Children no oblation or sacrifice should be offred after their death which statute he ordayned should be executed vpon one called victor that had offended against the same S. Cyril Byshop of Hierusalem hauing spoken of other parts of the sacrifice of the masse sayth then wee pray for all those that are dead beleeuing that their soules for whome the prayer of the dreadful sacrifice is offred receiue very great help therby S. Augustin sayth that according to the tradition of the ancient fathers the whole Church vseth to pray and offer the sacrifice of the blessed body and blood of Christ for those that are dead and that it is not to be douted but that they are helped thereby and in his book of confessions he signifieth that the sacrifice of our redemption that is to say the blessed body and blood of our Sauiour was offred for his mothers soule when shee was dead S. Gregory the great to declare the excellent effect of the sacrifice of the masse offred for the dead telleth of one that being taken prisoner in the warre and thought to be dead was deliuered on certayne dayes of the weeke of his chaynes and fetters which fel from him so oft as his wyfe caused the sacrifice of the masse to bee offred for his soule and of this S. Gregory taketh witnes of many of his auditors whome as he sayth he presumed did know the same The lyke also in euery respect recounteth venerable Bede our countryman in the story of England which he wrote about 800. yeares agoe of one Imma seruant to King Elbum which Imma being prisoner in the hands of his enemies and chayned could not be tyed so fast but that his chaynes fel of once a day at a certayne hower when his brother called Iunna an Abbot sayd masse for him thinking he had ben slayne and this sayth saynt Bede he thought good to put into his history for that he took it for most certayne hauing vnderstood it of credible persons that had heard the party tel it to whome yt happened To conclude this custome of offring the blessed sacrifice of the masse for the dead was inuyolably kept in the Churche of God euen from the Apostle tyme without contradition vntil Aerius an Arrian heretyke impugned the same all prayer for the dead about 360. yeres after Christ for the which he is put in the Catologue of heretykes by saynt Augustin S. Epiphanius as our aduersaryes deserue also to be for teaching and defending the same haeresy AN ANSVVERE TO THE obiections of our aduersaries out of S. Paules epistle to the Hebrewes with a declaration that the heretykes of this tyme who abolish the sacrifice of the Masse haue not the new Testament of Christ and that they are most pernitious enemies to humain kynd CHAP. XVIII BVT now our aduersaries against vs or rather against these expresse scriptures and Fathers obiect some texts and arguments of S. Paule to the Hebrewes by the which he conuinceth
open iniustices donne vnto vs in this kynd for yf this had beene the first we should haue had lesse cause to complayne this might haue passed the better vncōtrold as many others of lyke sort haue donne but seing this māner of proceeding against vs is now so vsual in England that it is growne to a common practise and therby much guyltles blood shed many innocent men slaundered many weake scandalized the simple abused and deceyued the true cause of our suffring obscured and our religion defamed no reasonable man can blame me I hope if vpon so iust an occasion as the defence of my brethren our common cause and my selfe that am more perticularly interessed in this matter then many others I lance a litle this long festring sore to the end that the malignitie therof being discouered it may receyue some cure and remedie through your Lordships wisedomes whome yt importeth and in whose hands yt resteth to remedie the same For this purpose may it please yow to consider that ther is such a symphathy betwixt persecution calumniation as they are euer lightly found to concurre and go accompagned for besyds that calumniation is of it self a kynd of persecution we neuer read that Gods Churche was euer persecuted but his seruants were calumniated slaundred in which respect our Sauiour fore warning his Apostles Disciples of the persecutions that they were to suffer armeth them no lesse against slaunderous and calumnious tongues then against other furious assaultes of his their enemies saying happy are yow when men shal rayle vpon yow and persecute yow speak all euil of yow belying yow for my sake and after exhorting them to pray for their persecutours insinuateth also the concurrence of calumniatours saying pray for them that persecute and caluminiate yow and S. Paule speaking of persecution raysed against him the rest of the Apostles sayth we are cursed and we blesse we are persecuted and we indure yt we are blasphemed and wee beseech This wil be also more manifest yf we consider the nature and propertie of the cheife persecutour of Gods Churche whose armes and instruments all other persecutours are I meane the deuil himselfe who being as the Scripture sayth a lyer and the father of lyes yea and a slaunderer in which respect he is called Diabolus which signyfieth nothing els in the greeke tongue but a calumniatour can no more forbeare to lye and slaunder then the dog to bark when he is augrie or the snake to hisse and therfore whēsoeuer by Gods permission he maketh warre against the Churche he employeth his instruments no lesse to slander and calumniate Gods seruants then corporally to afflict and persecute them Hereof the experience hath beene seene in all the persecutions aswel of our Sauiour himself as of his Apostles infinite other Martyrs whensoeuer the Churche hath beene persecuted eyther by Infidels or heretyks our Sauiour was slaūdered to be a seducer of the people to woork by the deuil to be enemie to Caesar to hinder the paying of his tribute and lastly to make himself a King S. Paule was falsly charged with prophaning the Temple with sowing sedition stirring vp the people to rebellion and many other such lyke odious and greiuous matters S. Stephen the first Martyr was stoned to death vpon the testimonie of false witnesses that were suborned to accuse him of blasphemy against God and Moyses In lyke sort in the persecutions vnder Nero Dioclesian Antonius others the Chrystians were put to death vnder colour that they had set a fyre the citie of Rome killed sacrifised children eaten mānes flesh stirred vp the people to seditiō against the Emperours and their Gods and religion The Arrian heretikes in Greece accused S. Athanasius to be a whore maister a witche and a traytour The Vandales that were also Arrians in Africk kylled the Catholykes there vnder pretence that they had secret intelligence with the Romans against their state and gouermēt as we are now and lastly the Emperesse Theodora wyfe to Iustiniā the Emperour did cruelly persecute S. Siluerius Pope of Rome and all his cleargie obiecting falslie against them that they had written to the Gothes to inuite them to inuade the Roman Empyre and other lyke calumniations wherby to spil their blood with lesse admiratiō and repugnance of the common people In all which it is to be noted that as S. Gregorie Nazianzen sayd of Iulian the Apostata when he persecuted the Christians the enemies of Gods Churche endeuoured by all subtyle crafty meanes to procure that they which suffred for Christs cause should be punished as wicked and facinorous men yea and to make them and their religion more odious to all they slaundered them commonly with matters pernicious and daungerous to all as with treason against the Prince and State so that whilest they were punished as publyke enemies neyther fauoured nor pittied by any their persecutors had free scope to discharge all their furie vpon them without contradiction This hauing beene alwayes the custome and practise of the enemies of the Christian and Catholyke fayth which we professe yt is no marueil though those which impugne the same in England in these our dayes prouoked or rather possessed by the same spirit of lyes and calūniations that their praedecessours were do hold the same course that they haue donne partly slaundering vs with such deuised matter as this of Squyre which neuer had essence or being in rerum natura but only in imagination and fiction of the deuisers and partly ordayning lawes and statutes wherby some principal points of Catholyke Religion or els some necessarie consequence exercise and issue therof being made treason many may be intrapped within some shew of offence against these lawes and statutes whervpon agayne yt enseweth that the common people who hold for Gospel all that our English parlament enacteth and haue not the capacitie to discerne betwixt a true and a fayned treason hearing that the Catholykes are alwayes put to death as traytours whome they vnderstand to be none but such as commit some heynous crymes against the Prince or state are brought to imagyn that all Catholyks are perturbers and enemies of the common wealth and that their religion is not the common and general religion of Christendome or that ancient fayth in which all their forefathers liued and dyed and our Realme florished so many hundred yeares together but rather some particuler and pestilent opinion of some sect sprong vp of late that cannot stand with the safety of Kinges and Princes nor with the quietnes of their states And verely I dare say that such of the common sorte as are not aboue 40. yeares of age and neuer saw Catholyke tymes in England and haue heard of so many executions of trayterous papists as we are tearmed do think Papistery to be nothing els but a very compact of treason or perhaps vnderstand that Papist and
may haue therin the which may be considered eyther as common to all the enemies of Catholyke religiō or els as particuler to these our Aduersaries now a dayes of the first I haue spoken before discoursing of the concurrēce of calumniation and persecution where I proued that it hath beene alwayes the custome of the persecutours of Catholykes to seek by imputation of fals crymes to obscure the true cause of their sufferings and consequently the glorie of their martyrdomes wherin neuerthelesse how much they haue fayled of their purpose I meane as wel these of our tyme as those other their praedecessours it is euident by common experience seing almightie God hath in all ages so disposed and day he doth for his owne glorie that the cleare light of truth and innocencie hath dispersed the clouds of calumniation in such sort that his seruants haue triumphed ouer all the malice of men and remayned no lesse glorious with a double crowne of martyrdome then their enemies ignominious and odious for there double persecution For the proof hereof let vs look back to former tymes see what the persecutors of Gods Churche haue gayned by the lyke deuises haue they therby any iote obscured the glorie of Gods seruants who are esteemed honoured and serued through-out the Christian world for glorious Martyrs and saynts of God and receyue more honour glorie in one festiual day of theirs then all the Monarks of the world in all the feasts of their lyfe Are not the Altars Temples buylded to God in their memories more triumphant then the thrones and trophes of all earthly Kings doth any Princes power extend it selfe so farre as theirs whose dominion reacheth from the east to the west frō the one Pole to the other whose subiects seruāts and supplyants are not only the common people but Princes and potentates Kings Emperours that crouch kneele and present their petitions at their toombes and monuments or whersoeuer ther is any litle memory of them Are all the royal robes crownes and diademes of Emperours and Kings so much esteemed and reuerenced in their owne Kingdomes as is throughout Christendome the least rag or relyke of any one of them wherto we see Almightie God geueth no lesse vertue and power oftentymes when it is for his glorie and their manifestation to cure the sicke to heale the lame to rayse the dead to cast out Deuils then he gaue to the hemme of our Sauiours garment to the handkerchefs that touched S. Paules body to the shadow of S. Peter This hath alwayes beene so notorious in Gods Churche that S. Chrisostome speaking of the great miracles done by the body and relykes of the blessed martyr saint Babilas maketh the same a manifest argument against the Paynims to proue that Christ is God which I wish by the way that our Protestants in England may note for their confusion seing that denying the vertue of saynts Reliks they do paganize with them and do deny therby an euident argument of Christs diuinitie but to proceed On the other syde what honour haue their calumniatours and persecutours purchased to themselues are not their very names odious and execrable to all posteritie as the memory of the other is aeternized with immortal glorie is not theirs buryed in aeternal infamie To this purpose sayth the book of wisedome that the wicked shal see the end of the iust man and shal not vnderstand what God hath determined of him and why our Lord did humble him they shal see him and contemne him but our Lord shal deride them for they shal fal afterwards without honour shal euer be amōgst the dead in shame and infamie Hereby may our aduersaries partly iudge what they shal gayne in the end by murdering so many Catholyks as they do vnder colour of treasons and enormious crymes but for their further satisfaction in this point let them look abroad into Christendome and see what acount is alreadie made of their supposed traytors I meane such as die directlie for religion made lately treason who of all Christian Catholyke people in the world are held for no lesse glorious martyrs thē those of the primitiue Churche as appeareth not only by the publike testimonie of the most famous wryters of this age but also by the deuotion that all Catholyks yea and the greatest Princes and potentates of Christendome do beare to the least relyke of any one of them which they think themselues happie to haue keep with all due respect and reuerence besydes that it hath pleased almightie God to glorifie his name already with diuers notable miracles donne by the same which hereafter wil be knowne with sufficient testimony of the truth therof and as for their martyrdomes I haue no doubt but as alreadie they are knowne acknowledged and honoured by all true Catholykes so in tyme also conuenient they wil be approued by the authoritie of the whole Churche whiles in the meane tyme the memory of their persecutors shal be damned eyther to the deep pit of obliuion or els to euerlasting ignominie as they may see it hath alreadie happened to their praedecessours and thus much for the end common to all persecutours OF OTHER ENDS PARTICULER to our English aduersaries and of their disloyaltie therin towards her Maiestie CHAP. XVII THE other ends particuler to our home aduersaries at this day may be thought to be partlie publyke and for the common good as they in the depth of their wisedome or rather in the height of their follie do imagin and partlie for their owne particular profit or emolument The publyke are these first to incense the Queenes Ma tie against vs to the end she may geue them leaue to exercise freelie all crueltie vpon vs wherby they hope in tyme to destroy vs and to extinguish the memorie of Catholyke religion wherin I wish them by the way to note how farre they are deceyued of their expectation how almightie God doth daylie infatuate and frustrate their councels and turne them to their owne confusion seing that notwithstanding all their rigour there are at this day many more recusants in England and sincere Catholyks that wil geue their liues for their Religion then ther were when the persecution first began so that we see how true it is which Tertulian sayth Sanguis Martyrum semen Ecclesiae the blood of Martyrs is the seed of the Churche But to proceede The second is to irritate also her Ma tie against the King Catholyke who is therfore cōmōly made an abettor of all those fayned conspiracies least otherwayes she being of her owne inclination desirous of peace might come to some cōposition with him so Christendome be brought to repose which these mē imagin would in tyme grow to be daungerous to their gospel or rather to their particular states commodities which they may be presumed to esteeme more then any ghospel but how this piece of pollicie standeth with true reason of
his persecution with craftie and subtyle deuises enuying them the name and glorie of Martyrdome that the souldiours of Christ had got in former persecutions and therfore he endeuored to vse violence in such sort as it should not appeare ordayning that the Christians which suffred for Christ should be put to death as malefactours this affirmeth S. Gregory NaziaÌ„zen of Iulian the apostata wherein yow may see a true pattron of your owne proceedings for to exemplify the same with answere to the question yow aske concerning the temper of the lawes made in the 23. yere of her Ma ties raigne what other cause had yow to make those lawes in that yeare but that yow knew that Father Campian and diuers Seminary Priests were come into EnglaÌ„d lately before therfore to make the world beleue that their comming was to no other end but to sow sedition and trouble the State yow did not only make those lawes but also shamfully mundered the same yeare thesaid famous man and 11. godly innocent Priests with him for fayned conspiracies proued against no one of them disauowed by them all at their deathes which sufficient proof of their innocency as before I haue declared at large in the 11. chapter besydes many other since made away in lyke manner vpon lyke fals pretences and especially in the yeare 88. after the Kinges Armada had past through the channel in which yeare yow executed aboue 40. Priests and Catholykes in diuers partes of England to make the world beleeue that they had intelligence with the Spaniards or had procured the comming of thesaid Armada which could not bee proued nor so much as iustly suspected of anyone of them Moreouer I dare boldly affirme neyther shal yow euer be able with truth to controle me that wheras our Seminaries haue yeilded within these 30. yeares 5. or 6. huÌ„dreth Priests that haue laboured in that vyneyard wherof yow haue put to death more then a hundreth yow could neuer iustly charge any one of them with sedition or matter of state except it were Ballard executed with Babington and the rest whom as I wil not excuse because I know not how farre he waded in those matters so wil I not condemne him considering the proceedings of yow and your fellowes with Catholykes in lyke cases yet this I wil be bold to say that if he had any dealing therin it was without the consent or knowledg of any of his superiours yea or of any intrinsecal frend of theirs wherof I could yeild a sufficient reason if it were conuenient But let vs admit that he was as deep in those matters as any of the rest haue yow therfore any reason to condemne all other Seminary Priests for his act I do not blame yow heer for punishing any Catholyke that yow should fynd to be truly seditious but I fynd it strange against all reason and iustice that yow do not only punish vs for fayned crymes but also impute the doings of one or of a few to all which was alwayes in my tyme and I think it stil the absurd dealing of your lawyers in the araignment of Catholykes vrging against them the attemptes of Doctor Sanders in Ireland and Feltons setting vp of the Bul and such like as though euery Catholyke were priuie to their doings or thought himself bound in conscience to do as they did which kynd of argument your lawyers would neuer vse if they were not eyther most malitious or ignorant or thought all their audience to be fooles For what conclusion can be drawne from one or some particuler to a general as to say Eaton the preacher did pennance on the Pillery in cheapsyde and after at Paules Crosse for lying with his daughter such a minister was hanged for a rape such an other for sodâ—my such a one for a murder ergo all ministers are mnrderers sodomites rauishers of women and incestuous persons Would your ministers allow this conclusion or els that lawes should be made against them all for the offence of some of them and yet to say truly there haue beene so many examples of ministers conuict executed for such crymes that yow might with more reason exterminate the whole ministery as a very sink of sinne then condemne all Catholykes as seditious for Doctor SaÌ„ders and Feltons cause oâ— all Seminary Priests for Ballards But to conclude this point it is euident ynough that neyther Ballards offence yf he committed any nor theirs that were executed with him could be any occasion of those rigorous lawes against Seminary Priests which were made some yeares before when as I haue said yow had not any one example of a Seminary man that had beene or could be touched with any sedition other then such as yow fayned of them your selues Furthermore what iust cause had yow to make the distinction in your lawes betwixt Queene Marie Priests Seminary Priests haue yow found any more in the one then in the other but only that yow know the old Priests of Queene Martyrs tyme were so spent and wasted already that ther was not left of them perhaps half a score in England who also yow thought would be in a short tyme consumed wheras of the others yow saw a continual spring that would flow perpetually to the vndouted destruction of your heresy in tyme if it were not stopped in which respect yow thought good to seeme to fauour the first that yow might with more shew of reason persecute the later Neuerthelesse yow haue hanged some of those Q. Marie Priests as wel as the other only for doing their function counting them therin no lesse seditious then the Seminary Priests and yet yow say yow spare the one sort as only superstitious and punish the other as seditious But such seditious and superstitious Priests as these are were the very Apostles and Disciples of our Sauiour for they absolued from sinne as these do they administred the Sacraments of Baptisme or the Aâ—ter extreeme vnction the rest as these do they said masse that is to say they offred in sacrifise the blessed bodie and blood of our Sauiour as these do they did preach and teach the Christian Catholyke doctrine as these do finally they were persecuted punished for sedition as these are Thus Sir yow may see yow had not those causes which yow pretend to change the temper of your Iawes nor to distinguish betwyxt Seminarie and Queene Marie Priests neyther any reason at all to cal them eyther superstitious or seditious But let vs see some more of your gloses THE CONFVTATION OF an inuectiue which the Author of the Pamphlet maketh against the Iesuits CHAP. XXIIII IN your 10. and 11. page yow make a digression to treat of the strange mysteries as yow cal them of the Iesuits doctrin how they mingle heauen and hel and lift vp the hands of the subiects against the anointed of God yow wonder that Princes do not concurre in