no more hurt vs then sacrificium mensae sacrifice of the table doth hurt him and sacrificium incruentum sacrifice vnbloody hurts him and not vs for the popish sacrifice wherein blood is really offered by boulefuls and drunke vp by the Priest if not by the people can hardly beare the name of an vnbloody sacrifice without some charitable glosse or interpretation if the fathers should call it the vnfleshly sacrifice I thinke it would do his carnall presence little good and therefore I cannot see how the terme vnbloody can greatly further him Yet see how this fond Papist prattles one as though these termes Sacrifice Altar and vnbloody were equiualent with Transubstantiation they could not vse the word Transubstantiation because it was not deuised before the Councill of Lateran a worthie deuise no doubt if the bodie of Christ be made of bakers bread for Transubstantiation is a turning of one substance into another but if the bread vanish to nothing and then the body of Christ come into the void roomes which the bread leaues behind it as the Papists hold at this day then must the word Transubstantiation giue place too as well as the bread and cessio or or substitutio giuing place succession substituting or some such new deuise or other must succeed it howbeit the old fathers wanted no words to vtter their mind they were as well able to speake I trow as Pope Innocent and the priests of Lateran But though nothing else be commendable in this Lateran deuise yet may we see by it that it was deuised onely for the Latine Church for transubstantiatio is Latine and such Latin as cannot be handsomely expressed in the Greek tongue and the last session of the Councill of Florence holden two hundred yeeres after this of Laterane giueth vs to vnderstand that the Greeke Church neuer yeelded to Transubstantiation touching the vanishing away of the bread and substitution of the body of Christ me thinkes when I consider of it I heare old Nakefield tell how he came to a wild colt that lay fast a sleepe in the field and being merrily disposed cut a round hole in the forehead of it like prima tonsura clericatus the first shauing of a clearke and then blew his horne in the eare of the colt so as it started vp suddenly and plunged out at that hole and left his kinne behind him euen so the Popish priest finding bread a sleepe vpō the Altar blowes the horne of consecration in the eare of it and makes it skip out at some hole or other and leaue his accidents behind it marry herein our good Catholickes goe beyond Nakefield for he would go no further to tel that the colts skin stood still as plumpe as it did before though the stuffing was run away but these men makes vs beleeue that the body of Christ creepes in at the hole the bread went out and so fils the vacuity of the roome that the accidents or skinne of the bread remaines still as well stuffed as it was before without corrupting or shrinking or any alteration in the world so as in the Sacrament of their Altar men shal see round thing yet nothing is round a white thing yet nothing is white a thicke thing yet nothing is thicke a heauie thing yet nothing is heauie a lumpe of accidents yet nothing denominated round white thicke heauie or any thing else by any one of them all blame me if these men passe not Wakefield by many degrees they say that after consecration it is the reall body of Christ yet if you breake it you breake not the body of Christ if you bite it you bite not the bodie of Christ and which is most absurd you may eate the bodie of Christ but you may neither bite nor crush nor grind it with your teeth All this may be seene in Peter Lumbards Sententious distinctions Lib. 4. dist 12. Est ibi vera fractio partitio saith he quae fit in pane id est in forma panis vnde Apostolus ait panis quē frangimus quia forma panis ibi frangitur in partes diuiditur It is true breaking parting which is done in the bread that is to say in the forme of bread whereupon the Apostle saith the bread which we breake because the forme of bread is there broken and deuided in parts See the impudencie of these men that dare say that is not broken which Paul saith is broken nay which say that is broken which cannot be broken for to say accidents and shewes are broken and eaten with teeth is too great frowardnesse and this did my friend Peter see well ynough and therefore he intreats vs not to thinke much of the matter 1. Cor. 10.16 saying Ne mireris vel insultes si accidentia videantur frangi cum ibi sint sine subiecto Wonder not nor insult not if the accidents seeme there to be broken seeing they are there without their subiect Wel wee are content to pleasure you in so small a matter but when you make Saint Paul to say that broken accidents are the communication of the body of Christ I wish you had beene better aduised but howsoeuer you rid your hands of vs yet Pope Leo the ninth and Victor his successour and Pope Nicholas the second and the rest of their seuerall Councels gathered together at Vercels Turon and Rome almost a hundred yeeres before you were borne or your Sentences written will not be so easily shifted of for Leo and Victor condemned Berengarius and Pope Nicholas at length compelled him violently to recant vnder this forme of words Ego Berengarius confiteor panem vinum quae in altari ponuntur post consecrationem non solum sacramentum sed etiā verum corpus sanguinem Christi esse sensualiter non solum sub sacramento sed in veritate manibus sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri I Berengarius doe confesse that the bread and wine which are layd vpon the Altar are not onely a sacrament but the very body and blood of Christ and that they are sensiblie handled by the priests and broken and torne with the teeth of the faithfull not onely in sacrament but in trueth This is a Popes iniunction sitting in his chaire president in Councell in a matter of faith and doctrine which is of irrefragable authoritie in the Popish Church moreouer being a publicke confession it was drawen plainely without gards or welts and must be vnderstood literally Grammatically without shifs or sleights according to the simple purport of the words wherefore my good friend Peter when you presume to say thus Illa Berengarij verba ita distinguenda sunt vt sensualiter non modo in sacramento sed in veritate dicatur corpus Christi tractari manibus sacerdotum frangi verò atteri dentibus verè quidem sed in sacramento tantum Those words of Berengarius are so to be distinguished that the bodie of Christ is said
sensibly to be handled by the Priests not onely in a sacrament but in trueth but to be broken and torne with teeth truely indeed but onely in a sacrament Your glosse sets the text vpon the racke violenlty drawes the members of it a sunder which are copulatiuely chained together in the text tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri distinguenda sunt quoth he alas euery child may see it cannot beare such a distinction and therefore either suffer your Popes text to stand still in force or else set downe plainely like honest meaning men that your Pope and his Councell haue grossely erred Howbeit the former part of the Popes words haue most need of a glosse for when he saith that bread and wine after consecration is not onely a sacrament but also the true body and blood of Christ if he meane the accidents they can be neither body nor blood if he meane the substance that 's vanished Lib. 4. dist 1◠if he meane substantia mutata in id quod facta est the substance changed into that which it is made that is in carnem sanguinem Christi Lib. 4 dist 11. Into the bodie and blood of Christ as Lumbard some where seemeth to tell vs then is it not both a sacrament and the true bodie and blood of Christ too but only one of them namely id quod facta est that whereinto it is changed and here you may smell Transubstantiation though it were not yet deuised but it stunke so that Lumbard himselfe could hardly abide it Ibid. for thus hee writes Si quaeritur qualis sit illa conuersio an formalis an substantialis vel alterius generis definire non sufficio If a man aske what manner of conuersion it is whether formall or substantiall or of some other kind I am not able to determine it Which is as much to say as I cannot tell whether the substance of bread be changed into the bodie of Christ or no for graunt me this antecedent substantia panis mutatur the substance of bread is changed the conclusion wil follow of necessitie ergo est substantialis mutatio a substantiall change so he that tels me that he cannot define whether the change of bread into flesh and wine into blood be substantiall tels me withall that he cannot define whether the substance of bread and wine be changed into the body and blood of Christ These be the colours and shewes and accidents that haue bewitched a great part of the world and these be the glosses and interpretations that haue caused men to runne mad and at length to sleepe in their owne excrements but if you looke into the ages before Berengarius you shall find such as did write openly against these Popish accidents and formes without subiect and against all vntoward glosses in defence of the sacramentarie heresie as heretickes now call it without all controlement or contradiction which is a maine euidence to perswade that these reall conuersions and transmutations which be defended so stoutly and peremptorily in Poperie are not Catholicke but hereticall Iohn Scotus a learned man venerable Beds scholler taught the same doctrine wee hold at this day Iohan. Scotus almost two hundred yeeres before Berengarius so did Bertram Bertram a famous man in his time as appeareth by his booke De corpore sanguine Dei written at the request of Charles the Great and Doctor Tonstall witnesseth Lib. 1. de Sacr. Euchar. that before Transubstantiation was concluded in the Counsell of Lateran it was lawfull for euerie man freely to thinke of it as he thought good and if this euidence be not stronge inough to carrie away the matter then would I faine learne how they dare stand against Pope Gelasius that tels them plainely that the substance and nature of bread and wine remaineth still Gelas contr Eutych Non desinit esse substantia panis natura vini There ceaseth not to bee the substance of bread and nature of wine They tell vs verie demurely that by vertue of Christs prayer Luk. 22 32. the Popes faith cannot faile and that hee is to confirme his brethren yet herein they make Gelasius faith to faile and vtterly refuse to bee confirmed by him yet was it not Gelasius owne priuate opinion De Sacram. li. 4. cap. 4. Dialog 1 2 Ambrose saith of the consecrated bread and wine Sunt quae erant in aliud commutantur They are the same they were and are changed into another thing Theodoret Signa mystica post sanctificationem non recedunt à natura sua manent enim in priori substantia figura forma The mysticall signes after sanctification do not depart from their owne nature for they remaine in their former substance figure and forme Chrysostome Ad Caesarium in Math. hom 15. Panis sanctificatus dignus est dominici corporis appellatione etsi natura panis in illo remanserit The sanctified bread is worthy the name of the Lords bodie although the nature of bread remaine in it Origen Ille cibus qui sanctificatur per verbum Dei per obsecrationem iuxta id quod habet materiale in ventrem abit in secessum encitur That meat which is sanctified by the word of God and by prayer according to that which is materiall in it goeth into the bellie and is cast out into the draught And if all these authorities be reiected yee shall they neuer bee able to auoide the words of our Sauiour Christ who after the ministration of the Sacrament in both kindes concludeth after this maner I say vnto you Math. 26 29. Mark 14 25. I will drinke no more of this fruit of the vine till I drinke it new in the Kingdome of God vnlesse they can make men beleeue that blood may be the fruit of a Vine Let vs now returne to the examination of the ancient Father which our Papist imagineth to bee raysed from the dead What if hee should say saith he that the verie bodie of Christ is present in the Sacrament in forme of bread Many then say I hee should lye for Chrysostome saith In oper imper in Math. hom 11. In vasis sanctificatis non est ipsum corpus Christi sed mysterium corporis eius continetur In the sanctified vessels is contained not the verie bodie of Christ but the mysterie of his bodie But forasmuch as it is heere confessed that if this Doctor raised from the dead should answere that the bread is called the bodie of Christ in a figuratiue sense and that in Sacraments the signe is many times called by the name of the thing signified he doth cleerely in so answering determine the controuersie on the Protestants side what should wee labour further it being too too manifest that the Fathers doe answere so in their Bookes extant at this day and that in as plaine manner as can be wished Qui seipsum vitem appellauit Dialog
1. ibid. saith Theodoret. I lle Symbola signa quae videntur appellatione corporis sanguinis honorauit Hee that called himselfe the vine did honor the signes which are seene with the name of his bodie and blood And againe Seruator noster commutauit nomina corpori quidem symboli nomen de dit symbolo verò nomen corporis Our Sauiour changed the names and gaue to the bodie the name of the symbole and to the symbole the name of the bodie Chrysostome Ad Caesar Monach ad Bonis Epist 23. Contr. Adim cap. 12. Panis sanctificatus dignus est dominici corporis appellatione The sanctified bread is dignified with the name of Christs bodie Austine Sacramenta plerunque rerum ipsarum nomina accipiunt Sacraments doe often take the names of the things themselues And againe Non dubitauit Dominus dicere Contr. Marcion lib. 4. In 1. Cor. 11. De his qui init myst cap. vlt. hoc est corpus meum cum daret signum corporis sui The Lord did not sticke to say this is my bodie when hee gaue the signe of his bodie And againe facinus vel flagitium videtur inbere figura ergo est praecipiens passioni domini esse communicādū suauiter atque vtiliter recondendū in memoria quod pro nobis caro eius crucifixa vulnerata sit He seemeth to cōmand a heinous or horrible wickednes therfore it is a figure instructing vs to communicate of the passion of the Lord and pleasantly and profitably to keepe in memorie that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. Tertullian Hoc est corpus meum hoc est figura corporis mei This is my bodie that is to say this is a figure of my bodie Ambrose Quia morte domini liberati sumus huiusrei memores in edendo potando carnem sanguinem quae pro nobis oblata sunt significamus Because wee are deliuered by the death of the Lord being mindefull thereof in eating and drinking we doe signifie his flesh and his blood which were offered for vs. And againe Post consecrationem corpus Christi significatur After consecration the bodie of Christ is signified Such places as these be so common in the writings of the ancient Fathers that it is vtterly needlesse to rehearse any more of them Thus is your Papist preuented for our cause you see is cleerely determined Yet notwithstanding it is pittie the poore mans tale should not be heard if this Doctor sayth he should answere that God is omnipotent and able to doe what he will that he was able to make heauen and earth to doe great wonders and miracles in Aegipt were not the matter cleerely determined on the Papists side No verily were it not neither would any man euer thinke so if he knew the vertue and power of a Sacrament Pope Leo speaking of the water in baptisme though it be not transubstantiate saith thus Christus dedit aquae quod dedit matri De Natiuit serm 4. virtus enim altissimi obumbratio spiritus sancti quae fecit vt Maria pareret saluatorem eadē fecit vtregeneraret vnda credentem Christ gaue that to the water which he gaue to his mother for the power of the most high and the ouershadowing of the holy spirite which caused Marie to bring foorth the Sauiour made the water to regenerate a beleeuer So Austine Cont liter pet tan lib. 3. cap. 49. Nec iam baptizare cessauit Dominus sed adhuc id agit non ministerio corporis sed inuisibili opere maiestatis Neither hath the Lord now ceased to baptize but he doth it still not by the ministerie of his bodie but by the inuisible worke of his maiestie So Chrysostome Angeli qui adfuerunt in baptismo iam inenarrabilis operis modum non possunt enarrare adfuerunt tantum viderunt In Ioh. ho. 24. nihil tamen operati sunt sed pater tantum filius spiritus sanctus The Angels which were present in baptisme were not able to declare the manner of that vnspeakable worke onely they were present and beheld but wrought nothing but the father onely and the Sonne and holy spirite This verie power of the most high and ouershadowing of the holy Ghost this verie worke of the Maiestie of God is it and onely it that maketh these outward elements Rom. 4.11 Eph. 4 15 16. Ephe. 5 30. seales of the righteousnesse of faith and effectuall signes and meanes of our regeneration and growing vp into him which is the head euen Christ so as we be made flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones Immortalitatis alimonia datur à communibus cibis differens Cypr. de caena domini corporalis substantiae retinens speciem sed virtutis diuinae inuisibili efficientia probans adesse praesentiam A food of immortality is giuen differing from common meats retaining the forme of a bodily substance but proouing that a diuine power is present by the inuisible efficacie of it You see now I trow that Gods omnipotencie hath somewhat else to doe than to transubstantiate bread and wine and to vphold emptie accidents that haue no subiect And touching the words of Saint Ambrose which bee counted so pregnant for transubstantiation as we are here willed to read them in his Booke De ijs qui initiantur mysterijs So you may read them obiected by Steph. Gardiner and Chedsey and so answered by Peter Martyr that few Papists or none at al frō that day to this euer durst propound them Ambrose doth not say that the substance of bread and wine is abolished for he flatly auoucheth the contrarie when he saith sunt quae erant they are the same they were but that the nature of them is changed that whereas before they were common creatures and prophane by nature now by consecration they be holy signes such as doe not onely represent but exhibite the bodie and blood of Christ to the faithfull receiuer and bee effectuall and powerfull instruments whereby life and immortalitie is conuayed into vs and this exposition doth Ambrose himselfe confirme where he saith toward the end of the Chapter that this is a Sacrament of the true flesh of Christ and that after consecration the bodie of Christ is signified Nowe to make light of so wonderfull a change which passeth the capacitie of Angels as Chrysostome saith and to make it inferiour to the wonders of Aegypt whereof most were done by sorcerers as well as by Moses argueth an vnderstanding darkened with deepe ignorance and too much addicted to Popish deuises I could adde that this place of Ambrose is obiected also by Harding and answered by Bishop Iuell Art 10 diuis 3. and that this Booke is thought by many wise and learned men to bee falsely fathered vpon Ambrose but this that I haue sayd alreadie is sufficient to beat downe the fond bragges of our Papist and to shew him cleerely that Ambrose is wrested
string and carrying the vniuersall Church vpon his backe as though his words had neuer been nor could be answered and this facing may become a Papist reasonably well but when he brings in Ephanius with a wrong translation to second the matter whose testimonie hath ben often answered and the edge point of it turned long agoe to the very throte and bowels of transubstantiation I may truely say of him as the wise man doth of vnaduised pratlers Prou. 29.20 Cap. 26.12 namely that there is more hope of a foole than of him Epiphanius saith Et accepit haec And hee tooke these speaking plurally of many round cakes or peeces of bread which after hee cals hoc hoc this and this more distinctlyt his our translator cleane omitteth and englisheth hoc est meum hoc hoc this is mine and this and this this is my bodie and so forth Againe hoc est rotundae figurae insensibile quantum ad potentiam this is of a round figure insensible he translateth that is of a round figure and impossible to be discerned of vs. And againe qui non credit esse ipsum verum hee that beleeueth not that it is true Hee translateth thus who so beleeueth not that it is hee whereas ipsum verum agreeth grammatically with sermonem immediately before These forgeries bee verie materiall for when Epiphanius saith hoc meum est hoc hoc as of three round cakes wherof euerie one seuerally and separately is sayd to bee the bodie of Christ verily we must either admit a new trinitie in vnitie whereof euerie one seuerally is the bodie of Christ and yet all three but one bodie or else we cannot hold transubstantiation it will not be so hard a matter to exemplifie the mysterie of the Trinitie which is beyond all example if hoc hoc hoc be a trinitie in vnitie Secondly when Epiphanius saith that the round cake is without sense and powerlesse for so wee are taught to translate it by opposition following in these words Dominum verò nostrum nouimus totum sensum totum sensitiuum c. Wee know that our Lord is all sense and all sensitiue We see plainely that it cannot be sayd of the bodie of Christ simply and absolutely vnlesse we imagine the bodie of Christ to be senselesse and powerlesse Lastly when Epiphanius saith that wee must beleeue the words of Christ to be true as hee spake them we may not thinke that he vnderstood by ipsum verum verie Christ himselfe bodie blood and all as this man translateth in fauor of the popish single sacrilegious communion for that 's not sicut dixit as any man may easily perceiue The Counsell of Trent decreeth thus Sess 13. cap. 3. Si quis negauerit totum integrum Christum omnium gratiarum fontem authorem sub vna panis specie sumi anathema sit If any man shall denie that whole Christ and the author and fountaine of all graces is contained vnder the onely forme of bread let him be accursed But I beseech you tell vs by what wordes this strange consecration is made hoc est corpus meum makes but the bodie that is broken and bloud is not broken but shed Againe hic est sanguis meus makes but the blood that is shed and the bodie is not shed but broken Verily our Sauiour himselfe when he gaue bread gaue his bodie and not blood for that he gaue after supper when he took the cup Luk. 22 20. and if he gaue integrum Christum whole Christ when he gaue bread then he gaue nothing when he gaue the cup and therefore these good fellowes had need take heede they inuolue not the Sonne of God himselfe within their 1. Cor. 12 3. Anathema sit for no man speaking by the spirite of God calleth Iesus execrable In decret pontiff dist 2. cap. Comper No no they that diuide this holy mysterie bee Sacrilegi saith Pope Gelasius and so by good consequent this Anathema sit must returne home and fall vpon their owne bald pates that made it But to leaue these fashoods and to giue you the true meaning of this ancient Father in a summary Compendium wee must beleeue that bread in the Lords supper is the bodie of Christ not simply but in such a figure as taketh not away the truth of the Scripture as we also beleeue man to be after a true vnderstanding Gent. 1.26 27 the Image of God for as man is after a sort the Image of God as the word of God testifieth though hee be not throughly so neither in regard of bodie nor soule nor minde nor baptisme nor vertuous liuing not any other euident and liuely similitude wee see him to haue with God so doe wee beleeue that the bread which is of a round figure and without sense and feeling is after a true manner and meaning the bodie of Christ as the wordes of Christ teach vs though it be not so by substance or apparant proportion and portraiture of bodily members Wherefore though bread by nature be but a prophane common element appointed of God to feede our bodies yet by grace it pleaseth the Lord to make it and to call it his bodie that is a Sacrament of his bodie whereby as by an effectuall instrument the faithfull receiuers are spiritually fed and nourished to eternall life This I take to be Epiphanius meaning whereunto I will adde a few lessons for more perspicuitie and for the ouerthwarting of those two lessons which our Papist heere giueth vs. Frst Epiphanius being learned and industrious knew well inough wherein the Image of God consisted Ephes 4 24. Coloss 3 10. for Paul teacheth it plainely in his Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians Secondly this Image is so defaced and ouershadowed in the posteritie of Adam that nothing in man or about man seemeth answerable or agreeable vnto it Thirdly notwithstanding this obscuritie wee must beleeue the truth of Gods word that man is created after the Image of God and not ouerthrow that truth by allegoricall subtilties Fourthly wee haue the like example in the wordes of Christ at his last supper namely this bread is my bodie which Epiphanius knew to be spoken per gratiam by grace whereby that common element was aduanced supernaturally and mystically yet truely to haue the name of the bodie of Christ whereof it was a Sacrament Fiftly there is no apparant equalitie or likelyhood or outward sensible similitude or proportion of members why bread should be so called Lastly notwithstanding this difficultie we must beleeue that by bread is meant true bread and by bodie the true bodie of Christ and that the one is sayd of the other figuratiuely indeed because they be dispanita yet truly as our Sauiour spake and not flye to origenicall allegories which ouerthrowe the hystoricall truth of Gods holy word and turne it into fables These lessons I trow be plaine inough yet I doubt our Papist will
betwéen vs I desire to know of you whether that sacrifice which was offered was the sacrifice of the Masse which implyeth transubstantiation the sacrifice of the Protestats communion the sacrifice of prayer or the sacrifice of thankesgiuing for if it was none of the thrée last it must néedes bee the sacrifice of the Masse and so is transubstantiation prooued Pro. e And why not the Protestants communion It might bee either prayer or thankesgiuing for both are often times in the Scriptures called by the name of a Sacrifice Pap. Thus doe I prooue that it was neither and first that it was not prayer it is manifest by the place of S. Austine before cyted De verb. Apost Serm. 32. where he maketh mention of the prayers that the Church made for the dead and of the Sacrifice which it vsed to offer for them as of two distinct things for there he saith that at the time of the Sacrifice prayers were made for the dead that the sacrifice was also offered for them That it was not the Sacrifice of thankesgiuing it appeareth likewise by the same Doctor by the place by me aboue cited out of his Enchiridion where he sayth Neque negandum est defunctorum animas pietate suorum viuentium relouari cum pro eis sacrificiū redemptoris offertur c. Neither must we denie that the soules of the dead are releeued by the charitie of their liuing friends when as the sacrifice of our Redéemer is offered for them the sacrifice therefore which the Church did offer was the sacrifice of our redéemer and it was offered that the dead might be releeued how can you call the sacrifice of thankesgiuing the sacrifice of our redéemer or how can you say that the church did offer the sacrifice of thankesgiuing that the soules of the dead might be reléeued for thankesgiuing is for benefits receiued and not for benefits to be receiued it remaineth therfore that this sacrifice of the church was f This is a worthy disputer that concludes for our communion as well as his owne Masse either the Protestants communion or else that it was the sacrifice of the Masse and consequently that the bodie of Christ is really in the Sacrament The Answere THe knot he talks of was so loosely tyed that it was no masterie to vndoe it but now we shall haue such an argument as shall prooue vnto vs the consent of all ancient Fathers and the vniforme practise of the vniuersall Church for transubstantiatiō these be great words yet notwithstanding when he grounds this doughty argument vpon Austine Ambrose and Tertullian concluding thereof that in all these ages the church did offer a sacrifice for the quicke and the dead I can take them for no better than the words of a man beside himselfe he knew well inough that Ambrose and Austine were both of an age for he hath told vs once or twise that the one conuerted the other and if he knew not that the annuall offerings of a widow woman vpon the day of her husbands death enioyned her by Tertullian in these wordes Et offerat annuis diebus dormitionis eius was not the sacrifice of the Masse I must needes thinke his head was out of temper if these three Fathers had written in three seuerall ages it had been the least number that the word all could bee spoken of Aristot de caelo lib. 1. cap. 1. for we call two both and not all and therefore by what wit or common sense he could say all these ages of one age or two at the most if Tertullian had not been mistaken I cannot possibly imagine but for answere to these Fathers Contr. Collyr haeres 79. Epiphanius saith truely Deo abaeterno nullatenus mulier sacrificauit A woman did neuer in any case offer any sacrifice to God And againe Nusquam mulier sacrificauit aut sacerdotio functa est A woman neuer sacrificed nor exercised the priestly office Dialog cum Tryphon Whereunto adde out of Iustine Martyr that God receiueth no sacrifice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but onely of his Priests whereof it followeth that the annuall oblation that Tertullian speakes of was no sacrifice vnlesse you will say Epiph. haeres 49. that Tertullian was a Priscillianist or Artotyrite that allowed of Romane Priests and women Bishops to offer bread and cheese in Sacrifice to the Lord. And touching Ambrose I shewed before that hee offered not the verie bodie of Christ which is receiued of merite not of mercie how irreuerently soeuer it be handled but celebrated the communion of the bodie and blood of Christ ioyned with prayer and thankesgiuing so nowe Austine is left alone of whome I may say as our Papist taught me a while agoe namely that it is not probable that Saint Ambrose was a Protestant in this opinion and Saint Austine whome hee conuerted to the Christian faith a Papist howbeit you shall bee further instructed out of Lumbard Lib. 4. dist 12 that the ancient Fathers doe not vse the word Sacrifice and immolation in proper sense these be his words Vocatur sacrificium oblatio quia memoria est representatio veri sacrificij sanctae oblationis factae in Ara crucis It is called a sacrifice and an offering because it is a remembrance and representation of the true sacrifice and holy offering made vpon the altar of the crosse And a little after Quotidié immolatur in sacramento Hierar cap. 3. quia in Sacramento recordatio fit illius quod factum est semel We sacrifice dayly in the Sacrament because in the Sacrament there is a remēbrance of that which was once done or of that Sacrifice which was once made Dyenis in his Hierarchy calleth it De demonst si 1. cap. 10. Ad Hebr. hom 17. De ciuit Dei lib. 20. cap. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a figuratiue sacrifice and Eusebius memoriam magni sacrificij a remembrance of the great sacrifice and Chrysostome recordationem sacrificij a remembrance of the sacrifice and Austine himselfe signum representationem sacrificij a signe of representation of the sacrifice wherefore we can agree with your papist no farther in this point than to confesse that the ancient fathers called the sacrifice of the body blood of Christ improperly a sacrifice because it is a memorial and representation of that one all sufficient vniterable euerlasting sacrifice which our Sauiour the last true Priest that euer liued or shall liue vpon the earth offered to God vpon the Altar of the crosse and so the ground whereupon this popish argument is builded is sandy and deceitfull Now let me shew you that prayers and supplications and prayse and thankesgiuing are the onely true sacrifices of the new testament and that the ancient Christians of the Primitiue Church neuer knew or hard of any other to this purpose therefore you must remember that God receiueth no sacrifice but at the hands of a Priest for so we learned a
Dialogue Sectio VII SAint Austine Pompous funerals great troups of mourners sumptuous monuments these doe bring some cōfort such as it is vnto the liuing but they are not auaileable vnto the dead but we ought a VVhat is it that puts the matter out of doubt let that be shewed and we will doubt no longer not to doubt but that the dead are relieued by the prayers of the holy Church by the holesome sacrifice and by almes which are giuen that it might please our Lord to deale more mercifully with them than their sinnes haue deserued This custome the vniuersall Church doth obserue being deliuered by Tradition a Austine saith a patribus not ab Apostolis from the Apostles that whereas at the time of the sacrifice commemoration is made of b All communicants and onely communicants are prayed for is this catholicke doctrine think you all soules departed in the communion of the body and blood of Christ they should be prayed for and that the sacrifice also should be offered for them de verb. Apost sermon 32. We ought c Nor wee ought not to say it vnlesse we could proue it not to deny that the soules of the dead are relieued by the deuotion of their liuing friends when as eyther the sacrifice of our Redéemer is offered for them or almes giuen in the Church Enchir. ad Laurent prope fin When the Martyrs are mentioned at the altar of God they are not prayed for but d VVhat all confessors bishops popes and all all other which are dead which are there remembred are prayed for de verb. Apostol serm 17. When the sacrifice whether it bee of the altar or of almes déedes is offered for such as are dead e VVhy not before as well as after you may as well offer for the vnbaptized as for those that be valdé mali after Baptisme for those that be very good they be thanksgiuing for those which be not very euil they be propitiatory for those which be very euill although they profit not the dead yet are they some comfort vnto the liuing Dulcitij question quest 2. Reade his epistle ad Aurelium Episcopum and his Treatise de cura pro mortuis This was no doubt S. Austines f Or else you know not what faith is faith which he wrote taught and practised in his church and which was at that time generally receiued in the Latine Churches The Answere AVstine belike is plentifull in this question for we haue here foure seuerall places out of his workes which we will briefely runne ouer as they come In the first Austine is forced to turne his tale for whereas before where this place was alledged for Tradition prayer for the dead was no more but a Tradition of the fathers here Austine is intreated to say that it was deliuered by Tradition from the Apostles me thinks your Papist should know that our writers alleage this verie place of Austine to shew that this manner of praying was receiued of the Church long after the Apostles time Decad. 4. serm 10. as for example Bullinger in his Decades Illud dissimulare non possum saith he id quod isti traditionem Apostolorum appellant S. Augustinum nuncupare traditionem patrum ab ecclesia receptam nam sermone de verbis Apostoli 32. hoc à patribus inquit traditū vniuersa obseruat ecclesia c. This I cannot hide that that which they call a traditō of the Apostles Quest 1. Augustine calleth a tradition of the Fathers receiued by the Church see Serm. de verbis Apostoli 32. This saith he being deliuered by the Fathers doth the whole Church obserue And a litle after cōcludeth His significantius innuere videtur hunc ritū orandi pro defunctis haud dubie post longa internalla à temporibus Apostolorū ab ecclesia receptū esse By these words he seemeth more throughly to insinuate that this custome of praying for the dead was without all doubt receiued by the Church a long space after the Apostles times Wherefore this budgening and setting downe quid pro quo in so materiall a testimonie argueth a peruerse resolution rather to quench the fire of truth than the stubble and straw of our errours should be consumed But for answere I say that Austine himselfe doubted of that which here he saith we ought not to doubt of thus he writes in the questions of Dulcitius Siue in hac vita tantum homines ista patiuntur siue etiam post hanc vitam talia quaedam iudicia subsequuntur non abhorret quantùm arbitror à ratione veritatis iste intellectus huius sententiae Whether men suffer these things onely in this life or whether after this life some such iudgements follow this vnderstanding of this sentence is not without some shew of truth as I suppose Also in his Bookes De Ciuitate Dei Lib. 21. cap. 26 Siue ibi tantum siue hic ibi siue ideo hic vt non ibi saecularia quamuis à damnatione venialia concremantem ignem transitoriae tribulationis inueniant non redarguo quia forsitan verum est Whether thinges committed in this world though veniall in respect of damnation doe find a transitorie fire of tribulation here onely or here and there or therfore here because not there I seek not to conuince because perhaps it is true and in his Enchiridion Cap. 69. Tale aliquid post hanc vitam fieri incredibile non est vtrum ita sit quaeri potest That some such thing is done after this life it is not incredible and whether it bee so done it is a question Now then if Austine himselfe doubted whether men be punished transitorily after this life I knowe your Papist wil giue vs leaue to doubt whether the dead be releeued by our prayers Moreouer it is here likewise to be obserued that no soule were praied or offered for or thought worthy to be remembred at the Altar but such as departed in the communion of the bodie and blood of Christ Lib. 1. Contr. Iulian. lib. 1 de peccat merit remiss Concil 6. cap. 83. Carth. Con. 3. cap. 6. which includeth a generall beleefe of those times that none but Communicants could be saued and therefore Austine vrgeth it as hotly as any other tradition that the Eucharist as well as Baptisme was necessary to the saluation of all euen of new borne babes wherof it cōmeth that the bread wine was then thrust into the mouthes of Infants and dead carkasses both in the Greeke and Latine Churches Forasmuch then as this place of Austine teacheth two points of generall doctrine one that prayers Sacrifices and almes doe profite the dead the other that none can bee saued but Communicants and so prayers and sacrifices and doles to bee made for no other we thinke our selues no more bound to receiue the one at Austines hand than Papists thinke themselues bound to receiue the other Furthermore these
follow that if hell fire satisfie the iustice of God in the one it will also in proportionall time satisfie in the other which is not a coits cast from the heresie of the Chiliasts Obserue yet further that Austine here seemes contented that the pearle of the body and blood of Christ should bee layd to pawne for very euill soules euen the cursed enemies of God and laboureth to excuse it when he hath done such sacrificing saith he is some comfort to the liuing as if it were lawfull to pleasure the affections of men with the prostitution of the mysteries of God where he saith elswhere Lib. de Cura pro mort cap. 18. Harding Artic 19. oportet we must offer for all quia non discernimus because we cannot seuer the good frō the bad I answere that his quia doth not make good his oportet for the Sacrifice cōsisting of dead elements cannot apply it selfe without prayer and by prayer we may easily discard euill and cursed soules and so apply this pretended plaster to such sores onely as may be cured There is yet one excuse more behind where he tels vs that it is better our sacrifices should bee offered for such as can haue no benefite by them Lib. de Cura pro mort cap. vlt. quám vt desint ijs qui egent sicut benefacimus iniustis in hoc mundo ne praetereantur iusti then that they which haue need should want as wee doe good to the vnrighteous in the world least the righteous should not be regared This excuse were something worth if sacrificare pro valdè malis were commanded as benefacere iniustis is but sacrificing for damned soules being simply euill we must learne of Paul Rom. 3.8 not to do euill that good may come of it Howbeit these two last excuses teach vs that we cannot helpe Purgatory vnlesse we pray for Hell we must offer for the vniust that be in hell or els the iust that be in purgatory must be pretermitted and this is done for both nay for all tagge and ragge with all indifferency of words and deeds in one vniforme generalitie of prayer otherwise the liuing seeing their dead in any one point neglected cannot conceaue comfort but griefe and discouragement now I beseech you consider how this generall oblation can possibly be so parted among dead soules that for some it is eucharisticall for other some propitiatory and for some a meere nullitie but what speake I of parting it must be all eucharisticall for those that be valdè boni it must be all propitiatory for those that be non valdè mali and for all other either consolatory to the liuing or nullatory to the damned is this possible thinke you we cannot offer for Martyrs and Martyrs fellowes without agimus tibi gratias wee cannot offer for Purgatorians without prasta quaesumus and howe both these can bee confounded in one applicatory prayer as it were ale and beere in one pot to serue all turnes at once it is farre beyond the reach of my wit to conceiue Besides this there remaineth yet another inconuenience in that Austine holds the sacrifice of almes at as high a price in this office of relieuing soules as the sacrifice of the altar and so the qualitie of his speech seemeth to import for whē Paul saith Ephes 6.8 Vnusquisque quod fecerit boni hoc recipiet a Domino siue seruus siue liber What good thing soeuer a man doth that shal he receiue of the Lord whether he be bond or free He giueth vs to vnderstand that in respect of the Lords rewarding of vertue bond and free are of equall regard And therefore when Austine saith Sacrificia pro defunctis propitiationes sunt siue altaris siue quarumcunque eleemosinarum Sacrifices for the dead bee propitious whether they be of the altar or of any almes whatsoeuer his meaning is that these two sacrifices in respect of propitiating the dead are of equall estimation I doubt whether your Papist will allow this for currant diuinitie that in any work of our redemption corruptible things 1. Pet. 1.18.19 as siluer and gold giuen in almes should be aequallized to the precious blood of Christ which he dreames to be really present in the Sacrament and if it should happen that this absurditie will not stoppe his course yet when Chrysostome yeeldeth greater power to the sacrifice of Almes than to the sacrifice of the Altar I trow he will stoppe there if he be not desperate looke his Sermons vpon the Philippians Serm. 3. and there you shal find that such as died without Baptisme called Catechumeni finding no helpe in the prayers and other sacrifices of the Church were notwithstanding somewhat relieued by almes giuing in their names to the poore Omni huiusmodi destituti sunt auxilio saith he vno quodam dempto quonam illo pauperibus illorum nomine dare licet vndeillis nonnihil refrigerij accedit they are destitute of euery such helpe one onely excepted and what is that men may giue somewhat to the poore for their sakes wherby they receyue some refreshing heerehence therefore we may safely gather I thinke that Austine and Chrysostomes sacrifice was not the same with the Sacrifice of the Masse wherin a popish shaueling priest without all shame or feare of God offereth the Sonne of God to his Father Concerning the Treatise de cura pro mortuis agenda Instit lib. 3. 5. 10. Caluin hath truely censured it in these words Tot haetitationes continet vt suo frigore meritò debeat stulti zeli calorem extinguere c. It conteineth so many doubts that the coldnesse thereof might iustly extinguish the heate of foolish zeale And a little after haec vna ect fultura quia inualuit consuetudo c. If that booke haue any better helpes then haesitations and likelyhoods and custome let them be brought to light that we may see them if it haue no other no reason the bare frozen authoritie of any man liuing or dead hanging vpon vnchawed and vndigested coniectures should keepe vs in prison Epist 64. The Epistle to Aurelius which we are likewise willed to read hath this saying Oblationes pro spiritibus dormientium quas vere aliquid adiuuare credendum est super ipsas memorias non fint sumptuosae atque omnibus petentibus siue typho cum alacritate prebeantur nequé vendantur sed si quis proreligione aliquid pecuniae offerre voluerit in praesenti pauperibus erogetur ita nec deserere videbuntur memorias suorum quod potest gignere non leuem cordis dolorem id celebrabitur in ecclesia quod piè honestequé celebratur The offerings for the soules of the dead which we must beleeue doe indeed somewhat helpe let them not be sumptuous ouer their memories and let them be giuen to all that aske them without disdaine cheerefully not sold but if any man for religions sake wil offer any mony let
it be presently bestowed on the poore so shall men not seeme to forsake the memories of their friends which might be occasion of no small griefe of heart and that which is celebrated in the Church shall be godlily and honestly celebrated It is not very easie to gesse what these oblations were for the sacrament cannot be sumptuous vnlesse we met some precious stone of great value in the Communion Cup as Cleopatra did in a cup of Ippocras other oblations cannot be sold nor yet giuen to euery one that asketh them if it be said that the sacrament might be called sumptuous not in it selfe but in regard of the pompe and costly braueries of funerals it is easily seene that Austine heere speakes not of funerals but memorials which as they were sumptuous so were they celebrated with feasting and ioy not with mournefull calling vpon God for a gaole deliuerie and therefore we may better vnderstand this same aliquid adiunare somewhat to helpe of helping the liuing who otherwise might conceiue sorrow of heart or of the inflaming of mens deuotion to zeale and feruencie of prayer when they behold the representation of the death of Christ in the reuerend mysteries then of offering Christ in sacrifice to God his father for the reliefe of the dead Vero aliquid adiuuare credendum est We might belieue that they doe indeed helpe somewhat saith Augustine but that euery one that celebrated the memory of his friend should beleeue that his friends soule was in purgatorie crauing yeerely reliefe at his hands that saith not Austine it may be his friends soule was in heauen it may be it was in hell it may be it was deliuered out of purgatorie the last yeere or the yeere before and therefore it may be that oblations could not helpe him and so consequently that Austines credendum in this case is no whit better then an ignorandum howbeit you may tell your papist that this place is not for his profite for if his massing soule Priest may not sell his oblations and prayers but giue them freely and cheerefully to all that aske tht poore man will hardly be able to keepe a Concubine Austine saw that veniale peccatum veniall sinne was like to prooue venale venall or set to sale and therefore he saith prebeantur neque vendantur let them be giuen not sold But now no money no masse no penny no pater noster Wherefore to conclude all in a word if this had bene Austines faith he would not haue taught it so loosely and vntowardlie yet howsoeuer he teacheth it as faith or opinion or custome or what else soeuer the faith of one moderne sacrifice Sacrificatorians is of another Edition The Dialogue Sectio VIII SAint Ambrose who a This Ambrose neuer saw S. Austine nor S. Austine him conuerted Saint Austine to the faith die likewise hold and practise the same doctrine for thus he prayeth before the celebration of the diuine mysteries Let the inuisible forme of the Holy Ghost descend to teach me thine vnworthie Priest reuerently to handle so high a mysterie that thou mayest mercifully receiue at my hands this sacrifice to the helpe both of quicke and dead Precatio prima praeparans ad b The word Missa is not to be found in all Ambrose missam The Answere BElike Ambrose and Austine must agree in all points because the one conuerted the other otherwise this tale of Austines conuersion is told out of season but by your leaue if this counterfect prayer be construed after the Popish fashion I doubt whether Austine will giue it allowance Howbeit supposing this Iacke Strawe to be the right Ambrose I answere that he speakes not here of this mysterie as it is a sacrament putting vs in mind of God for then the vertue of it could not depend vpon the worthinesse the reuerent or irreuerent handling of the Priest but as it is a sacrifice putting God in mind of vs now if Ambrose purposed to offer vp the very body and blood of the sonne of God in sacrifice to his father the absurdity of receiuing it mercifully in regard of his reuerent handling remaineth still for the reall body and blood of Christ had bene acceptable to God of it selfe without helpe of Ambroses holinesse Contr. epist Par. lib. 2. cap. 8. Austine could not abide that Parmenian should say that the Bishop is mediatour betweene God and the people and auoucheth that if Saint Iohn had taken so much vpon him euery good faithfull Christian would haue taken him for Antichrist rather then the Apostle of Christ and therefore if Ambrose had prayed that God would mercifully receiue the body and blood of his sonne at his hands making himselfe mediatour betweene the sonne of God and his father as Popish Priests venter to doe at this day in the Church of Rome I may well thinke Austine notwithstanding his conuersion would haue detested it Lib. 4. part 2. Cum sacerdos orauerit prohostia transubstātianda eamque transubstantiatā patri obtulerit orat pro ipsius acceptatione Whē the Priest praieth for transubstantiating of the hoste and doth offer it being transubstantiated to the father he prayeth for the acceptation of it Thus saith Durand and the Priest in the Masse desireth God to looke Propitio ac sereno vultu propitiously and cheerefully vpon the body and blood of Christ his sonne and to receiue the same as once he receiued the sacrifice of Abel c. This is a presumptuous and a desperate blasphemy yet must we either make Ambrose guilty of it in this praier or else see him discharged of transubstantiation There is a full discourse in Irenaeus where it is prooued out of the Scriptures Lib. 4. cap. 34. that God euer accepted him that offered better than the offering and that no oblation is pleasing vnto God when hee that offereth it doth not please him better and therefore it is sayd in Genesis Cap. 4.4.5 that the Lord had respect vnto Abel and his offering but vnto Cain and his offering he had no regard and if the offering of a wicked man were acceptable to God it had bene out of season to charge that man to goe away from the Altar to be reconciled with his brother Matth. 5.23 before he presume to offer his oblation so long as a man choseth his owne wayes and inwardly delighteth in abhominations Esa 66.23 c. his killing of a bullocke is as if he slew a man his sacrificing a sheepe as if he cut off a dogs necke his offering an oblation as if he offered swines flesh and such a mans offering incense to God is as if he blessed an idoll It commeth to passe often among men that the wicked is accepted for his gift and so absolued because the iudge is either needy or couetous but God hath no neede of our sacrifices he neither eats the flesh of Buls nor drinkes the blood of Goats Psal 50.30 he neither eats bread nor drinkes wine
not think his knot is yet loosed there is nothing saith hee in the Sacrament that is incomprehensible but Epiphanius saith not so though he say it neither can it bee inferred out of quot sunt similia sunt for the Image of God was comprehensible in Adam though it be defaced in vs and things may be Similia secundum magis minus but not to multiply quarrels let vs graunt that he saith to bee true what then Marrie then I would learne saith hee if it bee not Christs true bodie really present but a figure therof what wonder or incomprehensible matrer is there here is a little prety It three times repeated in the knitting of this knot It is his bodie It is not like to a naturall bodie and if it be not Christs bodie c. I beseech you what meanes this man by his It is It something or is It nothing or what is It Epiphanius saith It is of a round forme therefore It is not accidens for rotundum is not accidens but rotunditas if It be a substance then It must bee either the bodie of Christ and so the bodie of Christ is of a round forme or else it must bee bread and so indeed all the three Euangelists are bold to call It Math. 26 26. Mark 14 22. Luk. 22 19. 1. Cor. 10 16.17 1. Cor. 11 23 26 27 28. and so is the Apostle Paul twise in one Chapter and foure times in another and hee himselfe for all this mincing of the mattter comes downe in the end out of the clouds and confesseth the Sacrament to be of a round forme whereof it followeth that it is neither an accident nor the reall substance of Christs bodie but bread as the Scripture cals it Now for the vnloosing of his knot I say that it is incomprehensible howe a round peece of bread should bee such a figure as is worthy to bee called the bodie of Christ and so to exhibite and conuey the graces and merites of Christs passion into vs that our sinnes are remitted our faith encreased and wee incorporate and made members of his bodie of his flesh and of his bones Let him shew me that this is not farre beyond the comprehension of mans reason and I will giue him his asking But for a full cleering of Epiphanius it is to bee remembred that Manes and his disciples liuing vpon the sweat of other mens browes and supposing all things to haue life soule as man had were wont to consecrate the bread and wine that was giuen them to fill their slowe bellies withall after this sort Ego non seminauite non messui te non molui in clibanum non misi alius obtulit comedi innoxius sum c. I sowed thee not I reape thee not I ground thee not I baked thee not another offered it and I did eate I am innocent c. Wherunto Epiphanius answereth ipsi non recidunt botrū sed edunt botrū Haeres 66. circa medium vtrum grauius est etenim vindemians semel recidit botrū qui vero comedit per dētes sectores ac manducatores singula grana edomat per hoc magis multipliciter torquet ac secat non amplius similis erit ei qui semel secuit is qui manducauit consumpsit They cut not the bunch of grapes but they eat it which is greater the Grape-gatherer did once cut the vine but he that eateth it doth cut and grinde with his teeth all the graces and in the respect he doth torment it much more and hee that hath eaten and consumed it is no longer like to him that onely once cut it You heare what Epiphanius saith for confutation of the Manichies Now cōsider how that he saith can possibly be good if the liuing sensitiue bodie of Christ blood and all be eaten of the Catholickes might not the Manichies then reply that they were more to be borne withall that were compelled by hunger and thirst to eat and drinke liuing things of meane regard crying for griefe Ego non seminaui te non messui non molui c Than Epiphanius and his Catholickes that presumed to eat the liuing flesh of Christ and to drinke his blood verily Epiphanius being learned wise would not haue left his reason in this case wide open without either fence or shelter against the aduersarie if the reall presence and manducation of the bodie and blood of Christ had been catholickely beleeued in his time Peter in the Acts when a voice from heauen commanded him to kil and eat though he were hungry and in a traunce yet he forgat not the law of God but answered God forbid Lord for nothing polluted or vncleane hath euer entred into my mouth and shall wee thinke that the same Peter when our Sauiour saith take Act. 10 10. c. Et cap. 11 5 c. eat this is my bodie and take drinke this is my blood would neuer make any question neither he nor any of his fellow Apostles against the eating of mans flesh and drinking mans blood if they had vnderstood the wordes of Christ after the popish fashion Euen so hee that thinketh that Epiphanius holding the reall eating and drinking of the bodie and blood of Christ would dispute so loosely as he doth against the Manichies must needs thinke withall that his wits were in a deeper traunce than Saint Peters and so fitter to gather wooll than to confute heretickes The Dialogue Sectio XVII I Will leaue this knot for you to vnloose at better leasure and assay you with another argument to prooue the a This will you neuer prooue while you liue nor your child after you consent of all ancient Fathers and the vniforme practise of the vniuersall Church in this doctrine of transubstantiation but first I will set downe certaine places out of the Fathers whereon to ground mine argument although I haue alreadie vsed the same places for the proofe of prayer for the dead This Custome saith b These places are answered all of them Saint Austine the vniuersall Church doth obserue being deliuered by tradition from the Elders that whereas at the time of the Sacrifices commemoration is made of all soules departed in the communion of the bodie and blood of Christ they should be prayed for and that the sacrifice also should be offered for them De verb. Apost Sermone 32. You shall also finde that there was a Sacrifice offered for the quicke and dead in Saint Ambrose his first prayer Praeparans ad missam and in Tertullians Booke de Monogamia about the middest of the Booke the place beginneth dic mihi soror in pace c. Hereby it is manifest that c How many ages were they I pray you in all these ages the Church did d That is to say Signum repraesentationem sacrificij Aug. de ciuit dei lib. 10. cap. 15 offer a sacrifice for the quicke and the dead which being agréed vpon
as Iustine Martyr and Tertullian testifie that the Christians in their time did sacrifice not only by thanksgiuing which is for benefits receiued but also by prayer which is for benefits to be receiued the edge of this wise dispute is vtterly blunted To goe yet a little further if it should bee graunted him that this sacrament is a sacrifice absolutely in it selfe yet I hope it cannot releeue soules nor doe any such feat by it selfe as it consisteth of dead elements vnlesse prayers and supplications and giuing of thankes be annexed vnto it for he that neither prayeth nor giueth thankes be hee priest or king Aaron or Melchisedecke cannot be said to offer this sacrifice and relieue soules it cannot vnlesse it be offered Now then see the vnskilfulnesse of this prating disputer who teareth into pieces things that be inseparably knit together and so in this foolish fit desireth to know whether this sacrifie was the sacrifice of the Masse the sacrifice of the Protestants communion the sacrifice of prayer or the sacrifice of thankesgiuing let him shew me that either his Masse or our communion is said or song without prayer and thankesgiuing or else let him hold his peace till he haue learned to dispute better Augustine distinguisheth his sacrifice from prayer and thankesgiuing but he doth not separate them and so his meaning must needes be that our prayers and supplications are profitable at all times but specially then when the Communion of the bodie and blood of Christ is ministred and our soules inflamed thereby and stirred vp to greater deuotion In Philip hom 3. and hereunto Chrysostome accordeth saying Stante vniuerso populo manus in caelos extendente caetuitem sacerdotali verendoque posito sacrificie quomodò deū non placaremus pro istis orantes The whole people standing and lifting vp their hands to heauen as also that companie of the Priests and the reuerend sacrifice layed before how should we not appease God when we pray for them This is sufficient to shew that the pricking arguments you speake of draw no blood and that they may be answered sine sanguine sudore yet a knacke or two of Popish knauerie is heere to be discouered that you may the better see the sleights of these cōpanions for when he foresaw out answere to Austine like to be as I haue set it downe hee thought it his best way to falsefie Austines testimonie after this prettie fashion Austine saith that at the time of the sacrifice prayers were made for the dead and that the sacrifice was also offered for them but doth Austine say that the sacrifice was offered at the time of the sacrifice is it credible that Austine spake so foolishly no friend Papist Austines wordes are these pro defunctis cum ad ipsum sacrificium loco suo commemorantur oretur ac pro illis quoque id offerri commemoretur The dead must be prayed for when they are remembred at the sacrifice in their order and must be declared that it is offered also for them That is when the dead are mentioned in their order at the time of the sacrifice let them be prayed for and that the people may be stirred vp to pray the more deuoutly let it be told them also that the same sacrifice is offered for them and for the better explication of his meaning Austine presently after in the same place as Chrysostome in the place before alleaged mentioneth prayer and not the sacrifice saying Orationes Deo non inaniter allegantur Prayers are not directed in vaine to God whereby inclusiue such prayers are to be vnderstood as were sharpened and set on edge by the celebration of the sacrament Againe obserue how your Papist lets slip the Protestants communion through his fingers and concludes no more but thus therefore this sacrifice of the Church was either the Protestants communion or else the sacrifice of the Masse well but is this all he purposed to prooue with his sprinckling arguments if this be all our controuersie will soone be at an end and yet he neuer the neerer his transubstantiation no no this is not the daysie which he skipt at he must prooue that the sacrifice of the Church which the ancient fathers speake of was the sacrifice of the masse and no other and that shall he neuer be able to doe till he haue remoued the Protestants Communion as wel as prayer and thankesgiuing out of his way This he could not but know if he had any wit in his head therefore what can be sayd else to this but that the Protestants Communion was too to hot for him han-dle and that all the wit and learning he had was not able to out-face it The Dialogue Sectio XVIII PRo I may say vnto you heere as the Auditor in Tusculanes questions sayd vnto Marcus Spinosiota haec prius vt confitear me cogunt quà m vt assentiar your pricking arguments doe rather compell me to graunt than perswade me to consent for although by my silence I may seeme to graunt as not being able to vnloose your Gordions knots yet am I so farre from consent as I was at the beginning of this conference which bringeth to my remembrance a merry tale I haue heard of a scholler of Oxford who hauing attained some pretty skill in Sophistry would needs take vpon him to prooue vnto his father by the rules of Logick that two chickings which were set vpon the boord in a dish were three the father although he could not vnfold his sonnes arguments yet was he so farre from being perswaded by them as I am now from being perswaded by yours and for an infallible demonstration that he could not be deceiued in his opinion he tooke vnto himselfe the two chickins leauing the third which lay a As the bodie of Christ doth in the pix for foolish Papists to feed one inuisibly in the emptie dish for the Logician to feede vpon euen so although you haue prooued your assertions by such arguments as I am b It is not so hard a matter to doe not able to answere and prooued the same by the testimonie of such reuerend witnesses as I cannot except against yet cannot I beleeue the same because all my sences together with infinite absurdities and impossibilities that would follow thereon doe infallibly demonstrate the contrarie doe not all our senses tell vs that Christs naturall bodie is not in the sacrament doth not our reason and vnderstandin teach vs that a natural bodie cannot be in infinite places at the same instant and that it is impossible the sacrament being diuided into a c This is a greater mysterie than the mysterie of the Trinitie million of parts that euery of these parts should be the entire body of Christ yet that al these bodies are but one the same body can all the arguments and reasons by you produced and vrged be more forcible to perswade me to be of your opinion than these demonstrations to
merites for so the same popish Doctor confesseth willing vs to note three seuerall persons in our prayers Vnam ipsiùs Dei à quo petimus alteram Christi per cuius meritum petimus tertiam eius qui petit One of God himselfe the second of Christ through whose merite we aske the third his that asketh And so concluding that neither the first nor the second may be attributed to dead Saints and therefore to craue mercie not for Christs sake but for Peter and Pauls sake and to bee deliuered from all euill not by the merites and mediation of Christ but by the merites of the Prophets or the Patriarkes or whosoeuer else dead or aliue is not allowed by his owne Doctors Yea but the last words of that Chapter De Sanctorum beatitudine teach you that we mention Saints in our prayers after this forme Concede nobis Deus intercessione huius sancti tale beneficium per Christum dominū nostrum Grant vs O God by the merite of such a Saint such a benefit through Christ our Lord. I graunt you that this is set downe as a patterne of Catholicke prayer wherein by intercession he vnderstandeth not onely the prayers but also the merites of dead Saints for so wee learne before in the same Chapter in these words Sancte Petre da mihi hoc illud tuis precibus meritis Saint Peter giue me this or that by thy prayers and merits Also per Christum is as much to say as per Christi preces merita by Christs prayers and merits as I shewed before Now shew vs how you can tel that either hic sanctus or haec sancta hath or will pray or pawne their merits for you and if you know it not what makes you so bold as to speake more to God than you know to bee true Againe the liuing know not whether the merits of these or those Saints bee drawne drie for they cannot supererrogate more than they haue Bellar. de purg lib. 2. cap. 2 haue still and giue still they cannot without a new supply and supply they can haue none after this life so likewise the dead know not whether their prayers and merites shall preuaile vnlesse they knew who bee chosen who bee reprobates that cannot bee knowne because God hath sealed it as Paul saith the foundation of God of remaineth sure 2. Tim. 2 19. and hath this seale the Lord knoweth who are his c. Wherefore either the Saints pray and bestow their merits at all aduenture without faith or assurance of Gods acceptance which Peter Lumbard likes not of Lib. 4 distinct 45. or else this popish doctrine is but a dreame of a drie Summer Thirdly it would be knowne when these superfluous workes are made acceptable to God Is it as soone as the breath is out of the Saints mouth or before or else a week or a month or a yeere after or when else if before or presently after his death as they must either begin then or neuer then Christ hath done that which belongeth to him alreadie so as wee need not now conclude our praiers with per Christum dominum nostrum Last of all I would know whether any of these Saints that had so many spare works did themselues in their time pray after Bellarmines popish fourme did they pray that other Saints that were dead before them would procure them this or that benefit which they had need of either they knewe their owne stoare or they knew it not if they knew it they were much to blame to ioyne prayer with the Church after Bellarmines patterne and so to lauish needlesly the treasure of the Church wheras they might haue prayed as neuer any durst pray Lord graunt me this or that for my owne merites sake if they knewe it not and so continued all their life time howe come wee to knowe it when they are dead Iwis it is not the Popes Canonization that can stoppe this gappe for it cannot bee shewed that euer Pope presumed to canonize any one Saint before the time of Charles the great and if there had been any certaine rule to dubbe Saints by in Austines time hee would neuer haue sayd Multorum corpora honorantur in terris quorum animae torquentur in Gehenna Many mens bodies are honoured in earth whose soules are tortured in hell Wherefore it behooues our good Catholickes to looke better about them before they put themselues and their prayers to so dangerous a venter Now in conclusion let mee intreat you to note further how these men open their owne shame there where they would faine hide it for when Bellarmine knewe that the Church of Rome prayed to the Virgine Marie and the Apostles not as secondarie mediators but principals thus hee slubbers vp the matter as though it were but a triflle De Sanct. beat lib. 1. ca. 17 Non agimus de verbis saith he sed de sensu verborum nam quantum adverba licet dicere S. Petre miserere met salua me aperi mihi aditum coeli c. dummodo intelligamus salua me miserere mei orando pro me da mihi hoc illud tuis praecibus meritis Wee deale not about the wordes but about the sense of the wordes if we respect the wordes it is lawfull to say Saint Peter haue mercie vpon me saue me open mee the gate of heauen so that wee vnderstand saue mee and haue mercie vpon me by praying for me and giue me this and that by the prayers and merits As if he should say Be sure ye name Peter or the Virgine Marie or the Saints to whome ye pray else all is marred but God the Father 1. Tim. 2 5. and Christ his sonne the onely mediator between God and man You may vnderstand them as accidentall implements that may adesse abesse sine interitu subiecti You neede not care greatly for naming them for the holy Virgine Gods mother and Peter and Paul and the rest of Gods friends will excuse the matter Thus these men can remember dead Saints and let God and his Christ go as though they counted it but a small matter to forget God Psa 9.17 Rom. 10 9.10 and knewe not that we must confesse the Lord Iesus with our mouthes as well as beleeue in him in our hearts Howbeit they that forget the mediation of Christ in their Masse-booke Durand lib. 4. parte 2. vide Sect. 8. where they pray for the acceptation of his bodie and blood and that God would looke vpon them propitio ac sereno vultu for they cannot pray pro Christo and per Christum both at once will hardly remember it when they are let loose to wander in the wildernesse of Bellarmines Intelligamus The Dialogue Sectio XXV Free-will COncerning Frée-will wée doe say with Saint Iames that euerie good and perfect gift commeth from aboue and with Saint Paul Deus operatur in nobis velle perficere and wée must not
as they were warned of their errour so are you as they without repentance lost the benefite of Christs sacrifice so shall you if the Fathers had been as often and plainely admonished as you haue been they would being holy and sincere men haue reformed their iudgement and keeping the head though they erred in some part the Lord will not impute that error vnto them And againe they erred not so wilfully as you and therefore we account not of them as of you who haue multiplyed your errours and left almost no one ground of pure religion vnshaken This is a sufficient answere to such beggarly petitioners yet his mouth will not be stopt till wee shew some of the Popish reuolts from Gods ancient truth to the seuerall heresies whereof Poperie consisteth To this end therefore we may remember the double condemnation of Eustathius in two seuerall councels Socrat. Hyst lib. 2 cap. 33. Casaria and Gangra for such Catholicke Articles as runne currant among Papists at this day as for example forbidding to marry abstinence from meats sundring men from their wiues and seruants from their Maisters vnder colour of Religion abhorring the blessing and communion of a married Priest and such like articles as were condemned most of them of all Churches vnder heauen 200. yeeres before Eustathius was borne for thus writes Apollonius a Martyr Euseb hystor lib. 5. cap. 16. speaking of the hereticke Montanus Hic est qui coniugia dissoluere docuit ieiuniorum leges praescripsit qui Pepuzam ac Tinium modicas ciuitates Phrygiae Ierusalem vocauit vt cunctos vndique ad illas congregaret qui pecuniarum exactores constituit qui sub pretextu nomine oblationum numerum captationem artificiosè concutus est qui salaria doctrinae praedicatoribus subministrauit vt per ventris studium doctrina ipsius inualesceret This is he which dissolued mariages prescribed lawes of fasting which called Pepuza and Tinium two little Cities of Phrygia Ierusalem that hee might gather men from euerie place thither which appointed exactors of money which vnder the pretence and name of offering did cunningly deuise to get gifts who ministred stipends to the preachers of his doctrine that so for his bellies sake his doctrine might be euerie where declared The same Father and Martyr sayth that his Prophets and Martyrs did extort money not onely from the rich but also from the poore euen widowes and Orphanes Marcion and Appelles forbad mariage as appeareth in Tertullian The Manichies were condemned first by Pope Leo and then by Gelasius as the first Fathers of communicating vnder one kinde De prescrip ad haeret Serm. 4. de quadrag In decret pontif distinct in cap. comperimus In Catalog dogm Manich. lib. de anima in fine Dialog 2. Contra Eutyc Can. 36. Haeres 70. The same heretickes were the Fathers of monkish idlenesse and therefore Epiphanius cals them Desidentes vespae nihil operantes c. Idle Waspes and doing no worke The Doctrine of Purgatory was first recōmended to Tertullian by the paraclet of Montanus The hereticke in Theodorets dialogues saith as the Papists doe Symbola dominici corporis saguinis post inuocationem sacerdotis mutantur alia fiunt The Symboles of the Lords bodie and blood after the inuocation of the Priest are changed and made other things And Pope Gelasius tels the hereticke Eutiches Non desinit esse substantia panis naturavini There ceaseth not to bee the substance of bread and the nature of wine The Counsell of Eliberis enacted that that which is worshipped should not bee painted vpon wals thereby condemning Popish Imagerie Epiphanius faith of the Audians * They vse great store of Apocryphall writings Epiphanius haeres 46. 47. 61. c. De preser advers haeret libro de baptis in fine Euseb hystor lib. 3. cap. vlt. lib. 2. cap. 15. De prescript advers haeret Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 23. 24 lib. 3. cap. 2 Canus lib 3. cap. 3. fund 4. Bellarm. de verb. non script lib. 4. cap. 8. Vtuntur Apochryphis multis abunde The Tatians the Eucratifes the Apostolickes and such like heretickes were the first founders of single life and being so highly esteemed it tooke hold in time vpon the Church Womens baptisme which is currant in Poperie came first from heretickes wiues of whome Tertullian sayth that they were Procaces audentes docere contendere exercismos agere curationes repromittere forsitan tingere Malepart such as boldly tooke vpon them to teach to contend to exercise such as promised to cure diseases and perhaps also to baptize Papias a Chiliast was the first father and founder of Traditions and Peters primacie or Romish Episcopalitie Tertullian and Irenaeus tell vs that heretickes held the Apostles did not reueale Omnia omnibus sed quaedam palà m vniuersis quaedam secretò paucis All thinges to all men but some things openly and to all some thinges secretly to a few as namely Basilides Carpocrates Valentinus Marcion Carinthus And this is the opinion of Papists at this day This is sufficient for a tast that therby you may iudge how toothsome Poperie is that consisteth of these and many other such roots of bitternesse And that you may be yet better infourmed how the good corne of true religion may bee ouer-growne with the weeds of popish errours and heresies and yet in time get the victorie againe and ouer-maister them Cap. 2 19. the Church of Thyatira so highly commended in the Reuelation may bee a plaine document vnto vs which though it seemed to be euacuated by the Cataphrygian heresie Epipha haeres 51. yet a hundred yeeres after the Church reuiued againe and multiplyed and so by Gods mercie conquered the woman Iezabel and her hereticall Prophets euen so it fareth with the Church of God in generall for howsoeuer it pleased God for the punishment of our sinnes to giue Antichrist leaue by little and little to growe to such a height that at length hee ouer-shadowed and ouer-dropped all truth and sinceritie yet when God saw his time hee began to raise vp such worthy men as lopt off his braunches Daniel 4. and shooke off his leaues and scattered his fruit and so continueth and will continue to execute his iudgements vpon that man of sinne that in the end he will not leaue so much as the stumps of his roots in the earth Touching Puritanie which still this fellow quarrels withall when hee can prooue it to bee either a Church or a Religion by it selfe we will shape him an answere in the meane time let him know that no Protestant in England or out of England holds any doctrine necessarie to saluation but such as is warranted by Scripture neither are we left wholly to our selues in matters of discipline to appoint what wee thinke good Rom. 14.23 1. Cor. 14.26.40 but are guided by the generall rules of Gods word how to behaue our selues in the