Trent opposed this word realiter Figmento Calvinistico to the Calvinisticâ—…ll figment Ibid. Bellarmine confesses it For hee saith Protestants do often grant that the true and reall Body of Christ is in the Eucharist But he adds That they never say so farre as he hath read That it is there â—…ruly and Really unlesse they speake of the Supper which shall be in Heaven Well first if they grant that the true and Reall Body of Christ is in that Blessed Sacrament as Bellarmine confesses they doe and 't is most true then A. C. is false who charges all the Protestants with deniall or doubtfulnesse in this Point And A. C. p 65. secondly Bellarmine himselfe also shewes here his Ignorance or his Malice Ignorance if he knew it not Malice if he would not know it For the Calvinists at least they which follow Calvine himself do not onely believe that the true and reall Body of Christ is received in the Eucharist but that it is there and that we partake of it verè realiter which are b Calv. in 1. Cor. 10. 3. verè c. in 1. Cor. 11. 24. realiter Vids suprà Num. 3. Calvine's owne words and yet Bellarmine boldly affirmes that to his reading no one Protestant did ever affirme it And I for my part cannot believe but Bellarmine had read Calvine and very carefully he doth so frequently and so mainly Oppose him Nor can that Place by any Art be shifted or by any Violence wrested from Calvine's true meaning of the Presence of Christ in and at the blessed Sacrament of the Fucharist to any Supper in Heaven whatsoever But most manifest it is that Quod legerim for ought I have read will not serve Bellarmine to Excuse him For he himselfe but in the very c Bellar. L. 1. de Eucharistia c. 1. §. Secundo docet Chapter going before quotes foure Places out of Calvine in which he sayes expresly That we receive in the Sacrament the Body and the Blood of Christ Verè truly So Calvine sayes it foure times and Bellarmine quotes the places and yet he sayes in the very next Chapter That never any Protestant said so to his Reading And for the Church of England nothing is more plaine then that it believes and teaches the true and reall Presence of Christ in the * The Body of Christ is given taken and eaten in the Supper of the Lord onely after an Heavenly and Spirituall manner And the meanes whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten is Faith Eccl. Ang. Art 28. So here 's the Manner of Transubstantiation denied but the Body of Christ twice affirmed And in the prayer before Consecration thus Grant us Gracious Lord so to eat the Flesh of thy deare Sonne Jesus Christ and to drinke his Blood c. And againe in the second Prayer or Thanksgiving after Consecration thus We give thee Thanks for that thou dost vouchsafe to feed us which have duly received these holy Mysteries with the spirituall food of the most precious Body and Blood of thy Sonne our Saviour Jesus Christ c. Eucharist unlesse A. C. can make a Body no Body and Blood no Blood as perhaps he can by Transubstantiation as well as Bread no Bread Wine no Wine And the Church of England is Protestant too So Protestants of all sorts maintain a true and reall Presence of Christ in the Eucharist and then where 's any known or damnable Heresie here As for the Learned of those zealous men that died in this Cause in Q. Maries dayes they denied not the Reall Presence simply taken but as their Opposites forced Transubstantiation upon them as if that and the Reall Presence had beene all one Whereas all the Ancient Christians ever believed the one and none but moderne and superstitious Christians believe the other If they do believe it for I for my part doubt they do not And as for the Vnlearned in those times and all times their zeale they holding the Foundation may eat out their Ignorances and leave them safe Now that the Learned Protestants in Q. Maries dayes did not denie nay did maintaine the Reall Presence will manifestly appeare For when the Commissioners obtruded to Io. Frith the Presence of Christ's naturall Body in the Sacrament and that without all figure or similitude Io. Frith acknowledges †Io. Fox Marâ—…rolog To. 2. London 1597. pag. 943. That the inward man doth as verily receive Christ's Body as the outward man receives the Sacrament with his Mouth And he addes a Fox ibid. That neither side ought to make it a necessary Article of Faith but leave it indifferent Nay Archbishop Cranmer comes more plainely and more home to it then Frith For if you understand saith b Cranmer apud Fox ibid. p. 1301. he by this word Really Reipsâ that is in very deed and effectually so Christ by the Grace and efficacy of his Passion is indeed and truly present c. But if by this word Really you understand c I say Corporalitèr Corporally for so Bellarmine hath it expresly Quod autem Corporalitèr propriè sumatur Sanguis Caro c. probari potest omnibus Argumentis c. Bellar. L. 1. de Eucharist c. 12. §. Sed tota And I must bee bold to tell you more then That this is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome For I must tell you too that Bellarmine here contradicts himselfe For he that tels us here that it can be proved by many Arguments that we receive the Flesh and the Blood of Christ in the Eucharist Corporaliter said as expresly before had he remembred it that though Christ be in this Blessed Sacrament verè realiter yet saith he non dicemus Corporaliter i. e. co modo quo suâ naturâ existunt Corpora c. Bellar. L. 1. de Euchar. c. 2. §. Tertia Regula So Bellarm. here is in a notorious Contradiction Or els it will follow plainly out of him That Christ in the Sacrament is existent one way and received another which is a grosse absurdity And that Corporaliter was the Doctrine of the Church of Rome and meant by Transubstantiation is farther plaine in the Booke called The Institution of a Christian man set forth by the Bishops in Convocation in Hen. 8. time An 1534 Cap. Of the Sacrament of the Altar The words 〈◊〉 Unaâ—…r the forme and figure of Bread and Wine the very Body and Blood of Christ is Corporally really c. exhibited and received c. And Aquinas expresses it thus Quia tamen substantia Corporis Christi realiter non dâ—…iditur à sua quantitate dimensivâ ab aliis 〈◊〉 â—…bus indè est quod ex virealis Concomitantiae est in hoc Sacramento tota quantitas dimensiva Corporis Christi omnia Accidentia ejus Tho. p. 3. q. 76. Ar. 4. c. Corporaliter Corporally in his naturall and Organicall Body under the Formes of Bread and Wine 't
spiritualiter idest invisibiliter per virtutem Spiritus Sancti Thom. p. 3. q. 75. A. 1. ad 1 um Spiritualiter manducandus est per Fidem Charitatem Tena in Heb. 13. Difficultate 8. Faith made spiritually partaker of the true and reall Body and Blood of Christ †I would have no man troubled at the words Truly and Really For that Blessed Sacrament received as it ought to be doth Truly and Really exhibit and apply the Body and the Blood of Christ to the Receiver So Bishop White in his Defence against T. W. P. Edit London 1617. p. 138. And Calvin in 1 Cor. 10. 3. Verè datur c. And againe in 1 Cor. 11. 24. Neque enim Mortis tantùm Resurrectionis suae beneficium nobis offert Christus sed Corpus ipsum in quo passus est resurrexit Concludo Realiter ut vulgò loquuntur hoc est Verè nobis in Coenâ datur Christi Corpus ut sit Animis nostris in cibum Salutarem c. truly and really and of all the Benefits of his Passion Your Romane Catholikes adde a manner of this his Presence Transubstantiation which many deny and the Lutherans a manner of this Presence Consubstantiation which more deny If this argument be good then even for this Consent it is safer Communicating with the Church of England then with the Roman or Lutheran Because all agree in this Truth not in any other Opinion Nay †Hoe totum pendet ex Principiis Metaphysicis philosophicis ad Fidei Doctrinam non est necessarium Suarez iâ—… 3. Thom. Disput. 50. §. 2. Suarez himselfe and he a very Learned Adversary what say you to this A. C doth Truth force this from him Confesses plainely †That to Beleeve Transubstantiation is not simply necessary A. C. p. 64. 65. to Salvation And yet he knew well the Church had Determined it And * Bellar. L. 3. de Eucha c. 18. §. Ex his colligimus Bellarmine after an intricate tedious and almost inexplicable Discourse about an Adductive Conversion A thing which neither Divinity nor Philosophy ever heard of till then is at last forced to come to this a Sed quidquid fit de Modis loquendi illud tenendum est Conversionem Panis Uini in Corpus Sanguinem Christi esse substantialem sed arcanam ineffabilem nullis naturalibus Conversionibus per omnia similem c. Bellar. in Recognit hujus loci Et Vid. §. 38. Nu. 3 Whatsoever is concerning the manner and formes of speech illud tenendum est this is to be held that the Conversion of the Bread and Wine into the Body and the Blood of Christ is substantiall but after a secret and ineffable manner and not like in all things to any naturall Conversion whatsoever Now if he had left out Conversion and affirmed only Christs reall Presence there after a mysterious and indeed an ineffable manner no man could have spoke better And therefore if you will force the Argument alwayes to make that the safest way of Salvation which differing Parties agree on why doe you not yeeld to the force of the same Argument in the Beliefe of the Sacrament one of the most immediate meanes of Salvation where not onely the most but all agree And your owne greatest Clarkes cannot tell what to say to the Contrary I speake here for the force of the Argument which certainly in it selfe is nothing though by A. C. made of great account For he sayes 'T is a A. C. p. 64. Confession of Adversaries extorted by Truth Iust as * Sed quia it a magnum firmamentum vanitatis vestrae in hâc sententia esse abitramini ut ad hoc tiâ—… terminandam putares Epistolam quo quasi recentiùs in Animus LegeÌ„tium remaneret brevitèr respondeo c. S. Aug. L. 2. cont Lit. Petil. c. 108. Andhere A. C. ad hoc sibi putavit terminandaÌ„ Collationem sed frustra ut apâ—…bit Num. 6. Petilian the Donatist brag'd in the case of Baptisme But in truth 't is nothing For the Syllogisme which it frames is this The Papists and the Protestants which are the Parties differing agree in this That there is Salvation possible to be found in the Romane Church But in Point of Faith and Salvation 't is safest for a man to take that way which the differing Parties agree on Therfore 't is safest for a man to be and continue in the Romane Church To the Major Proposition then I observe first that though many Learned Protestants grant this all doe not And then that Proposition is not Universall nor able to sustaine the Conclusion For they doe not in this all agree nay I doubt not but there are some Protestants which can and do as stifly and as churlishly deny them Salvation as they doe us And A. C. should doe well to consider whether they doe it not upon as good reason at least Next for the Minor Proposition Namely That in point of Faith and Salvation 't is safest for a man to take that way which the Adversary confesses or the Differing Parties agree on I fay that is no Metaphysicall Principle but a bare Contingent Proposition and may be true or false as the matter is to which it is applyed and so of no necessary truth in it selfe nor able to leade in the Conclusion Now that this Proposition In point of Faith and Salvation 't is safest for a man to take that way which the differing Parties agree on or which the Adversary Confesses hath no strength in it selfe but is sometimes true and sometimes false as the Matter is about which it is conversant is most evident First by Reason Because Consent of disagreeing Parties is neither Rule nor Proofe of Truth For Herod and Pilate disagreeing Parties enough yet agreed against Truth it selfe But Truth rather is or should be the Rule to frame if not to force Agreement And secondly by the two Instances †§. 35. N. 3 before given For in the Instance betweene the Orthodox Church then and the Donatists this Proposition is most false For it was a Point of Faith and so of Salvation that they were upon Namely the right use and administration of the Sacrament of Baptisme And yet had it beene safest to take up that way which the differing Parts agreed on or which the adverse Part Confessed men must needs have gone with the Donatists against the Church And this must fall out as oft as any Heretick will cunningly take that way against the Church which the Donatists did if this Principle shall goe for currant But in the second Instance concerning the Eucharist a matter of Faith and so of Salvation too the same Proposition is most true And the Reason is because here the matter is true Namely The true and reall participation of the Body and Blood of Christ in that Blessed Sacrament But in the former the matter was false Namely That Rebaptization
or Crimes are against Points Fundamentall or of great Consequence Els S. Paul would not have given the Rule for Excommunication 1 Cor. 5. Nor Christ 1 Cor. 5. 5. himselfe have put the man that will not heare and Obey the Church into the place and condition of an Ethnick and a Publican as he doth S. Mat. 18. And Salomon's S Mat. 18. 17. Rule is generall and he hath it twice My Son forsake not the teaching or instruction of thy Mother Now this is either spoken and meant of a naturall Mother And her Prov. 18. Uid S. Aug. 2. Conf. e. 3. and Prov. 6. 20. Eccluâ—… 3. 3. Prov. 15. 20. Authority over her Children is confirmed Ecclus. 3. And the foole will be upon him that despiseth her Prov. 15 Or'tis extended also to our Mystiâ—…all and Spirituall Mother the Church And so the Geneva b For sake not thy Mothers instruction that is the Teaching of the Church where in the faithfull are begotten by the incorruptible seed of Gods Word Annot. in Prov 1. 8. Note upon the Place expresses it And I cannot but incline to this Opinion Because the Blessings which accompany this Oâ—…edience are so many and great as that they are not like to be the fruits of Obedience to a Naturall Mother onely as Salomon expresses them all Prov. * Prov. 6. 21 6. And in all this here 's no Exception of the Mothers erring For Mater errans an erring Mother looses neither the right nor the power of a Mother by her error And I marvell what Sonne should shew reverence or Obedience if no Mother that hath erred might exact it 'T is true the Sonne is not to follow his Mothers error or his Mother into Error But 't is true too 't is a grievous crime in a Sonne to cast off all obedience to his Mother because at some time or in some things she hath fallen into error And howsoever this Consideration meetes with this Inconvenience as well as the rest For suppose as I said in the whole Catholike Militant Church an absolute Infallibility in the prime Foundations of Faith absolutely necessary to Salvation And then though the Mother Church Provinciall or Nationall may erre yet if the Grand-Mother the whole Vniversall Church cannot in these necessary things all remaines safe and all Occasions of Disobedience taken from the possibility of the Churches erring are quite taken away Nor is this Mother lesse to be valued by her Children because in some smaller things age had filled her face fuller of wrinkles For where 't is said that Christ makes to himselfe a Church without spot or wrinkle Eph. 5. That is not understood of the Ephes. 5. 27. Church Militant but of the Church Triumphant * In id progrediuntur Pelagiani ut dicant vitam Iustorum in hoe seculo nullum omnino habere peccatum ex his Ecclesiam Christi in hac mortalitate perfici ut sit omnino sine maculâ rugâ Quasi non sit Christi Ecclesia quae in toto terrarum orbe clamat ad Deum Dimitte nobis deâ—…ita nostra c. S. Aug. L. de Haeresibus Haer. 88. And to maintaine the contrary is a Branch of the spreading Heresy of Pelagianisme Nor is the Church on earth any frâ—…er from wrinkles in Doctrine and Discipline then she is from Spots in Life and Conversation The next thing I consider is Suppose a Generall Councell infallible in all things which are of Faith If it prove not so but that an Error in the Faith be concluded the same erring Opinion that makes it thinke it selfe infallible makes the Error of it seeme irrevocable And when Truth which lay hid shall be brought to light the Church who was lulled asleepe by the opinion of Infallibility is left open to all manner of Distractions as it appeares at this day And that a Councel may erre besides al other instances which are not few appeares by that Error of the Councell of a Sess. 13. Constance And one Instance is enough to overthrow a Generall be it a Councell b S. Matth. 26. Christ instituted the Sacrament of his Body and Blood in both Kinde 1 Cor. 11. 23. To breake Christs Institution is a damnable Error and so confessed by c Returne of Vntruths vpon Mr. Ieweil Ar. 2. untruth 49. Stapleton The Councel is bold and defines peremptorily That to communicate in both kindes is not necessary with a Non obstante to the Institution of Christ. Consider now with me Is this an Error or not d 4. De Eucharist c. 26. Bellarmine and Stapleton and you too say 't is not because to receive under both kindes is not by Divine Right No no sure For it was not Christs e Bellarm. ibid. §. Vicesimo proferunt Precept but his Example Why but I had thought Christs Institution of a Sacrament had beene more then his Example only and as binding for the Necessaries of a Sacrament the Matter and Forme †And now lately in a Catechisme printedat Paris 1637. without the Authors Name 't is twice affirmed thus The Institution of a Sacrament is of it selfe a Command Conference 14. p. 244. And againe p. 260. Institution is a Precept as a Precept Therefore speake out and deny it to bee Christs Institution or els grant with Stapleton It is a damnable Error to goe against it If you can prove that Christs Institution is not as binding to us as a Precept which you shall never be able take the Precept with it g S. Matth. 26. 1 Cor. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Liturg. S. Chrysost. Drinke ye All of this which though you shift as you can yet you can never make it other then it is A binding Precept But Bellarmine hath yet one better Devise then this to save the Councell He saith it is a meere Calumny and that the Councell hath no such thing That the Non obstante hath no reference to Receiving under both kindes but to the time of receiving it after Supper in which the Councell saith the Custome of the Church is to be observed Non obstante notwithstanding Christs Example How foule Bellarmine is in this must appeare by the Words of the Councell which are these * Licet Christus post Coenam instituerit suis Discipulis administraverit sub utrâque specie Panis Uini hoc venerabile Sacramentum tamen hoc Non obstante non debet confici post Coenam nec recipi nifi a jejunis Here Bellarmine stayes and goes no farther but the Councell goes on Et similitèr quòd licèt in Primitivâ Ecclesiâ Sacramenta reciperentur sub utrâque Specie à fidelibus tamen haec Consuetudo ut à Laicis sub Specie Panis tantum suscipiatur habenda est pro Lege quam non licet reprobare Et asserere hanc esse illicitam est Erroneum Et pertinacitèr asserentes sunt arcendi tanquam Haretici Sess. 13. Though
is contrary to the Holy Word of God And so likewise Bishop Ridley Nay Bishop Ridley addes yet farther and speakes so fully to this Point as I thinke no man can adde to his Expression And 't is well if some Protestants except not against it Both you and I saith d Apud Fox ibid p. 1598. he agree in this That in the Sacrament is the very true and naturall Body and Blood of Christ even that which was borne of the Virgin Marv which ascended into Heaven which sits on the right hand of God the Father which shall come from thence to judge the quicke and the dead Onely we differ in modo in the way and manner of Being We confesse all one thing to be in the Sacrament and dissent in the Manner of Being there I confesse Christ's Naturall Body to bee in the Sacrament by Spirit and Grace c. You make a grosser kinde of Being inclosing a naturall Body under the shape and forme of Bread and Wine So farre and more Bishop Ridley And a Apud Fox ibid. p. 1703. Archbishop Cranmer confesses that he was indeed of another Opinion and inclining to that of Zuinglius till Bishop Ridley convinced his Iudgement and setled him in this Point And for b Tantùm de modo quastio est c. Et facessat calumnia auferri Christum à Coenà suà c. Calv. L. 4. Inst. c. 17. §. 31. Veritatem Dei in quâ acquiescere tutò licet sine controversia amplectar Pronunâ—…i it Ille Carnem suam esse Anima mea cibum Sanguinem esse potum Talibus alimentis animam Illi meam pascendum offero In S. Coena jubet me sub Symbolis Panis Vini Corpus Sanguinem suum sumere manducare bibere Nihil dubito quin Ipse Verè porrigat ego recipiam Calv ibid. §. 32. Calvine he comes no whit short of these against the Calumnie of the Romanists on that behalfe Now after all this with what face can A. C. say as he doth That Protestants deny or doubt of the true and reall Presence of Christ in the Sacrament I cannot well tell or am unwilling to utter Fiftly whereas 't is added by A. C. That in this present case there is no perill of any damnable Heresie Pun. 5. A. C. p. 66. Schisme or any other Sinne in resolving to live and die in the Romane Church That 's not so neither For he that lives in the Romane Church with such a Resolution is presumed to believe as that Church believes And he that doth so I will not say is as guilty but guilty he is more or lesse of the Schisme which that Church first caused by her Corruptions and now continues by them and her power together And of all her Damnable Opinions too in point of Misbeliefe though perhaps A. C. will not have them called Heresies unlesse they have beene condemned in some Generall Councell And of all other sinnes also which the Doctrine and Misbeliefe of that Church leads him into And marke it I pray For 't is one thing to live in a Schismaticall Church and not Communicate with it in the Schisme or in any false Worship that attends it For so Elias lived among the Ten Tribes and was not Schismaticall 3. Reg. 17. And after him Elizaus 4. Reg. 3. Reg. 17 4. Reg. 3. 3. But then neither of them either countenanced the Schisme or worshipped the Calves in Dan or in Bethel And so also beside these Prophets did those Thousands live in a Schismaticall Church yet never bowed their knee to Baal 3. Reg. 19. But 't is 3. Reg. 19. 18. quite another thing to live in a Schismaticall Church and Communicate with it in the Schisme and in all the Superstitions and Corruptions which that Church teaches nay to live and die in them For certainly here no man can so live in a Schismaticall Church but if he be of capacity enough and understand it he must needs be a Formall Schismatick or an Involved One if he understand it not And in this case the Church of Rome is either farre worse or more cruell then the Church of Israel even under Ahab and Jezabel was The Synagogue indeed was corrupted a long time and in a great degree But I do not finde that this Doctrine You must sacrifice in the high places Or this You may not go and worship at the one Altar in Ierusalem was either taught by the Priests or maintained by the Prophets or enjoyned the people by the Sanedrim Nay can you shew me when any Iew living there devontly according to the Law was ever punished for omitting the One of these or doing the Other But the Church of Rome hath solemnly decreed her Errours And erring hath yet decreed withall That she cannot erre And imposed upon Learned men disputed and improbable Opinions Transubstantiation Purgatorie and Forbearance of the Cup in the blessed Eucharist even against the expresse Command of our Saviour and that for Articles of Faith And to keepe off Disobedience what ever the Corruption be she hath bound up her Decrees upon paine of Excommunication and all that followes upon it Nay this is not enough unlesse the fagot be kindled to light them the way This then may be enough for us to leave Rome though the old Prophet forsooke not Israel 3. Reg. 13. And therefore in this present case there 's perill great perill of 3. Reg. 13. 11. damnable both Schisme and Herefie and other sinne by living and dying in the Romane Faith tainted with so many superstitions as at this day it is and their Tyrannie to boot So that here I may answer A. C. just as * Petilianus dixit Venite ad Ecclesiam populi ausugite Traditores ita Orthâ—…doxos tum appellavit si cum iisdem perire non vulus Nam ut facile cognoscatis quod ipsi sunt rci de fide nostra optimè judicant Ego illorum infectos baptizo Illi meos quod absit recipiunt baptizatos quae omnino non facerent si in Baptismo nostro culpas aliquas agnovissâ—…nt Videte ergo quod damus quam sanctum sit quod destiuere metuit Sacrilegus Inimicus S. August respondet Sic approbamâ—…s in Haâ—…reticis Baptismum non Haercticorum sed Christi sicut in Fornicatoribus Idololatrâ—… Veneficis c. approbamus Baptismum non corum sed Christi Omnes enim isti inter quos Haerctici sunt sicut dicit Apostolus Regnum Dei non possidebunt c. S. August L. 2. cont Lit. Petiliani c. 108. S. Augustine answered Petilian the Donatist in the fore-named case of Baptisme For when Petilian pleaded the Concession of his Adversaries That Baptisme as the Donatists administred it was good and lawfull and thence inferred just as the Iesuite doth against me that it was better for men to joyne with his Congregation then with the Church S. Augustine answers We do indeed approve among Hâ—…reticks Baptisme
ad hoc teneri Divino jure Bel. L. 1. de Sacrament in genere c. 2. §. 2. Bohemians must have a Dispensation that it may be lawfull for them to receive the Sacrament as Christ commanded them And this must not be granted to them neither unlesse they will acknowledge most opposite to Truth that they are not bound by Divine Law to receive it in both kindes And here their Building with untempered Mortar appeares most manifestly For they have no shew to maintaine this but the fiction of Thomas of Aquin That he which receives the Body of Christ receives also his Blood per †concomitantiam by concomitancy because the Blood goes alwayes with the Body of which Terme †Tho. p. 3. q. 76. A. 2. c. alibi passim Thomas was the first Author I can yet finde First then if this be true I hope Christ knew it And then why did he so unusefully institute it in both kindes Next if this be true Concomitancy accompanies the Priest as well as the People and then why may not he receive it in one kinde also Thirdly this is apparently not true For the Eucharist is a Sacrament Sanguinis effusi of Blood shed and poured out And Blood poured out and so severed from the Body goes not along with the Body per concomitantiam And yet Christ must rather erre or proceed I know not how in the Institution of the Sacrament in both kindes rather then the Holy unerring Church of Rome may doe amisse in the Determination for it and the Administration of it in one kinde Nor will the Distinction That Christ instituted this as a Sacrifice to which both kindes were necessary serve the turne For suppose that true yet hee instituted it as a Sacrament also or els that Sacrament had no Institution from Christ which I presume A. C. dares not affirme And that Institution which this Sacrament had from Christ was in both kindes And since here 's mention happen'd of Sacrifice my Punct 3. Third Instance shall be in the Sacrifice which is offer'd up to God in that Great and High Mystery of our Redemption by the death of Christ For as Christ offer'd up a Christ by his owne Blood entred once into the Holy Place and obtained eternall Redemption for us Heb. 9. 12. And this was done by way of Sacrifice By the offering of the Body of Iesus Christ once made Heb. 10. 10. Christ gave himselfe for us to be an Offering and a Sacrifice of a sweet smelling savour unto God Eph. 5. 2. Out of which place the Schoole infers Passioâ—… Christi verum Sacrificium suisse Tho. p. 3. q. 48. Art 3. c Christ did suffer Death upon the Crosse for our Redemption and made there by his one Oblation of himselfe once offered a full perfect and sufficient Sacrifice Oâ—…lation and Satisfaction for the sinnes of the whole World Eccles. Ang. in Canone Consecrationis Euchar. himselfe once for all a full and all-sufficient Sacrifice for the sinne of the whole world So did He Institute and Command a b And Christ did Institute and in his Holy Gospell Command us to continue a Perpetuall Memory of that his pretious Death untill his Comming againe Eccles. Ang. ibid. Memory of this Sacrifice in a Sacrament even till his comming againe For at and in the Eucharist wee offer up to God three Sacrifices One by the Priest onely that 's the c Sacramentum hoc est Commemorativum Dominicae Passionis quae fuit verum Sacrificium sic Nominatur Sacrifiâ—… Tho. p. 3. q. 73. A. 4. C. Christ being Offer'd up once for all in his owne proper Person is yet said to be Offer'd up c. in the Celebration of the Sacrament Because his Oâ—…lation one for ever made is thereby Represented Lambert in Fox 〈◊〉 Martyrolog Uol 2. Edit Lond. 1597. p. 1033 Et postea 'T is a Memoriall or Representation thereof Ibid. The 〈◊〉 of the Sentences judged truly in this Point saying That whâ—… is offer'd and Consecrated of the Priest is called a Sacrifice aâ—… Oblation because it is a Memory and Representation of tâ—… true Sacrifice and Holy Oblation made on the Altar of tâ—… Crosse. Arch-Bishop Cranmer in his Answer to Bishop 〈◊〉 concerning the most Holy Sacrament L. 5. p. 377. Aâ—… againe this shortly is the minde of Lombardus That the thâ—… which is done at Gods Board is a Sacrifice and so is that 〈◊〉 which was made upon the Crosse but not after one mannâ—… 〈◊〉 understanding I or this was the Thing indeed and that is 〈◊〉 Commemoration of the Thing Ibid. So likewise Bishop 〈◊〉 acknowledgeth incruentum rationabile Sacrificium 〈◊〉 of by Euseb. De Demonstrat Evang. L. 〈◊〉 Ieâ—…ls 〈◊〉 against Harding Art 7. Divis. 9. Againe The 〈◊〉 of the Holy Communion is sometimes of the Ancâ—…ent 〈◊〉 called an Vnbloody Sacrifice not in respect of any Corpoâ—… fleshly presence that is imagined to be there without 〈◊〉 shedding but for that it representeth and reporteth to 〈◊〉 minds that one and everlasting Sacrifice that Christ made 〈◊〉 Body upon the Crosse. This Bishop Jewel disliketh not in his Answer to Harding Art 17. Divis. 14. Patres Coenam Dominicam duplici de causa vocarunt Sacrificium incruentum Tum quod sit Imago solennis repraesentatio illius Sacrificii 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod Christus cum sanguinis effusione obtulit in Cruce Tum quod sit etiam Eucharisticum Sacrificium id est Sacrificium Laudis gratiarum actionis cùm pro beneficiis omnibus tum pro redemptione imprimis per Christi mortem peractâ Zanch. in 2. Praecep Decal T. 4. p. 459 And D. Fulke also acknowledges a Sacrifice in the Eucharist In S. Mat. 26. 26. Non dissimulaverint Christiani in Coena Domini five ut ipsi loquebantur in Sacrificio Altaris peculiari quodam modo praesentem se venerari Deum Christianorum sed quae esset forma ejus sacrificii quod per Symbola Panis vini peragitur hoc Veteres praese non ferebant Isa. Casaub. Exercit. 16. ad Annal. Baron §. 43. p. 560. Commemorative Sacrifice of Christs Death represented in Bread broken and Wine poured out Another by the * In the Liturgie of the Church of England we pray to God immediately after the reception of the Sacrament That He would bee pleased to accept this our Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving c. And Heb. 13. 15. The Sacrifice Propitiatory was made by Christ himselfe only but the Sacrifice Commemorative and Gratulatory is made by the Priest and the People Archbishop Cranmer in his Answer to Bishop Gardner L. 5 p. 377. Priest the People joyntly and that is the Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving for all the Benefits and graces we receive by the precious Death of Christ. The Third †I beseech you Brethren by the mercies of God that you give up your Bodies a living Sacrifice holy and acceptable unto God Rom. 12.