great likelihood of their saluation to whom the benefit of Christian parentage being giuen the rest that should follow is preuented by some such casualty as man hath no power himself to auoid So that the most this Fellow can impute vnto vs is that In some case of ineuitable and inunicable necessity little infants may bee charitably supposed saued by their parents faith And so that of Iohn 3. 5. for necessity of water will iustifiably bee answered If it bee possible to attaine it That of Tit. 3. 5. vrgeth no more but that the washing of Regeneration is the ordinary entrance into life As for Gen. 17. 14. to admit all paralleld in Circumcision and Baptisme all were not damned that died vncircumcised nor all cast away that die vnbaptized as this Fellow himself will or must grant but those that neglect contemn or omit the meanes which may bee had As for Mark 16. 16. the very words doo support this mitigation for though Christ saith Hee that beleeueth and is baptized shall bee saued yet he doth not say Hee that is not baptized shall be damned but Hee that beleeueth not shall bee damned that being euery way of indispensable necessity this sometime tolerable the rather because we are plainly taught of God that The seed of faithfull parentage is holy from the birth which the children of Pagans are not these hauing an habituall interest and consecration to God in their parents which the other want But whatsoeuer in charitable constructions may be thought of extraordinary courses they are not for vs we must leaue them to God in whose most rigorous courses of constitutions and most sharp denunciations deep mercies are euer hidden who though he bee the God of iustice yet is hee the Father of mercies And yet ordinary waies are for vs and our children Ordinary way vnto life eternall there is none but by Baptisme of water and the holy Ghost Gag them Sir Goose that teach otherwise The Church of England is not guilty thereof XXXIIII That imposition of hands vpon the people called by Catholiques Confirmation is not necessary nor to be vsed NOT by Papists alone but by Protestants also is it called Bishopping or Confirmation not vsed onely by them but by Protestants likewise commended commanded to bee vsed Look in the Communion-book good Reader and wonder at the impudent face of this leud Impostor that dares giue the Lie vnto publick Records that dares tell the world It is midnight at mid-day for if there be then any Sun in heauen this imposition of hands by the Bishop alone called Confirmation is both maintained as necessary vsed and commanded as euery man knoweth in the Church of England Would any man but hee or some of his Camerades take vp the priuate fansie of euery Peddler and expose it to view for Protestants doctrine contrary to knowledge to conscience But so it is If it were not for such courses the poor needy Fellow would haue nothing to prate on vnto his Proselyte-gossips in Partridge-Alley The Lie is so loud the case so apparant for Bishopping or Confirmation I shall not need to say any thing but Blush for shame XXXV That the Bread of the Supper is but a figure of the body of Christ. IS but a signe or figure and no more Strange and yet our formal words are This is my body this is my bloud This is is more than this figureth or designeth A bare figure is but a phantasme He gaue substance and really subsisting essence who said This is my body this is my bloud And yet our Catechisme in the Communion-book authorized saith expresly The body and bloud of Christ taken and eaten in the Lords Supper not the figure or signe of his body and bloud which can neither bee taken nor yet eaten Poore Woodcock or Catholique Cockscomb that sendest a Protestant to seek a figure who is as reall and substantiall as any Papist Were the peace of the Church and vnity of faith which is more mystically insinuated in this Sacrament than else-where in the Materials therof both Bread and Wine so deare and precious as it ought to bee vnto such common Barretters of Christendome as Priests and Iesuites are for priuate ends this and many other Controuersies on foot might cease For it is confessed on either side that Sacraments which haue their Beeing from institution are signes of Gods loue and promise seales of his couenant and grace and instruments and conueiances of his mercy What they intimate signifie and represent they conueigh vnto the soule In the ordinary Catechisme alone allowed and I would no other were tolerated the question beeing asked What meanest thou by this word Sacrament the answer is I mean an outward and visible signe of an inward and spirituall grace giuen vnto vs ordained by Christ himself as a meanes whereby wee receiue the same and a pledge to assure vs thereof This is more euen in your little vnderstanding than a bare figure a means and a pledge whereby c. Sir we acknowledge right willingly and professe that in the blessed Sacrament as you call it of the Altar the Body and Bloud of our Sauiour Christ is really participated communicated and by means of that reall participation life from him and in him conueied into our soules This wee beleeue and professe knowing that he is able to effect it who hath spoken it by that mighty working whereby hee is able to doo whatsoeuer he hath said We are not sollicitous for the manner how he worketh it not daring to pry into the secret Counsels of the most High We haue learned that Reuealed things are for vs secret things are for God Therfore we wonder why the world should be so much ammused at and distracted with those vnexplicable Labyrinths of Con-substantiation and Trans-substantiation which onely serue to set the world in diuision nothing to piety nor yet information As we therefore condemn that presumptuous definition of Trans-substantiation in the Laterane Councell so wee doo not like nor yeeld assent vnto that jejune and macilent conceit of Zwinglius and Oecolampadius whereby men account of this Sacrament but onely as of a bare shadow emptie void and destitute of Christ but ingenuously profess that by this Sacrament Christ giueth vs his very body and bloud and really and truely performs in vs his promise in feeding our soules vnto eternall life As for the manner how 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This inexplicable that vnutterable it is faith onely that can giue the resolution Trans or con we skill not of Iohn 6. 51. The bread that I will giue is my flesh which I will giue for the life of the world Therefore his flesh is bread the Bread of life Most true but not therefore his flesh by Trans-substantiation You finde not that in the Gospell or any where else Life begun in Baptisme by the Lauer of Regeneration is confirmed and sustained in the holy supper by his body and blood How I cannot explicate How
yeeres after Christ though he died about 544. This man wrot nothing that I can heare of eyther in Sidonius who liued at that time or Hinckmarus or Flodoard or Sixtus Senensis or Bellarmine or Chesneu or any other Hee that wrote the notes vpon Saint Paul's Epistles taught indeed at Rhemes as appeareth by Flodoard and thence grew the error I suppose of those who took him for Saint Remigius Bishop of Rhemes but hee is called Remigius Antisiadorensis because hee was borne at Auxerre Of him we read in Sixtus Senensis that hee wrote on Saint Paul's Epistles He is of a much later date liuing vnder Charles the bald about 880. Howsoeuer we are not touched by him or any of the rest for wee neither beleeue nor say that the Bread of the Supper is but a bare figure of the body of Christ not his Body we professe wee receiue the Lords Body and drink his bloud in commemoration of his Death and Passion as hee hath appointed If you say otherwise we haue done with you XXXVI That wee ought to receiue in both kindes and that one alone sufficeth not WEE ought so indeed nor is it sufficient to administer the Communion as the Romanists now doe vnder one kinde This is the authorized and receiued and iustifiable Doctrine and Orthodox practice of the Church of England Artic. 30. thus we reade The Cup of the Lord is not to bee denied vnto the Lay-people For both the parts of the Lords Sacrament by Christs ordinance and commandement ought to be ministred to all Christian men alike And in the Communion book it is expresly said That the chiefe minister if there bee moe present as it often hapneth in Colledges especially and Cathedrall Churches shall receiue it first himself and then deliuer it to other Ministers and so to the People in both kindes This is our practice and our profession for which I ioyne issue with all Papists liuing that it is the prime originall institution of our Sauiour which giueth Birth and Beeing to a Sacrament that it is Sacriledge to alter it therefrom that it neuer was otherwise vsed in the Church of God for aboue 1000 yeeres after Christ Let all the Papists liuing prooue the contrary and I will subscribe to all Popery As for this poore fellow hee can say no more then hee findeth ready to hand or is put into his mouth his Camerades were conscious to themselues of nouelty and innouation for in a point so notorious so scandalous of such consequence wee are not sent as accustomed to see any Fathers It is manifest saith Cessander a man professing himselfe a Romane Catholique though of wonderfull modesty moderation and learning that in administration of the sacred Sacrament of the Eucharist the Vniuersall Church of Christ vntill this day and the Westerne or Romane Church for more then 1000 yeeres after Christ especially in their solemne and ordinary dispensation of this Sacrament did exhibit and giue vnto all faithfull Christians not one only but both the kinds of Bread and Wine as is most cleere and euident out of innumerable testimonies of the old Writers both Greeke and Latine which I can make good and of some will giue a taste Ignatius in his Epistle to the Philadelphians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One Bread is broken vnto all and one Wine giuen to the whole multitude This man was Saint Iohn's Disciple Martialis as you say one of the 70 Disciples Epist 1. Sect. 3. Nunc autem multò magis sacerdotes Dei honoratis qui vitam vobis tribuunt in calice et viuo pane and he speaketh you see to the people Dionysius Areopag S. Paul's Disciple pag. 157. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. for hauing discouered the couered vndiuided bread and diuided it into many parts and distributed to all the Vnity of the Cup hee consummateth in those Symbols and signes the Vnity of the Church and so in many other places S. Clement Saint Peter's Disciple and Successor in his Masse hauing set downe the order and forme of consecration cometh to participation thus Let the Deacon giue the cup and when all haue receiued men and women let the Deacons carry the remainder into the Reuestry So Saint Mark in his Liturgie another Disciple of Saint Peter So Saint Peter himself in his Liturgie or Masse as you call it So the rest Iustin Martyr in the end of his Apologie describing the seruice of those antient Christians saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They whom we call Deacons giue to euery one present part of the consecrated Bread and Wine Irenaeus in lib. 4. cap. 33. prooueth the Resurrection because we participate of the body and bloud of Christ And lib. 5. cap. 11. speaking of a Christian man he saith that de calice qui sanguis eius est nutritur de pane qui est corpus eius augetur That railing Feuardentius in his Notes vpon Irenaeus was not able to produce one Testimony for half Communions though he vaunt it was a practice in the Apostles time Tertul. in de Resurrect speaking of all Christians in generall Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur vt anima saginetur And because these Patrons of a desperate cause contrary to all art and reason conclude negatiuely The cup was not communicated because the bread is alone sometime remembred we may inferre alike The bread was not giuen but the cup because Tertul. in depudicitia remembreth onely the cup thus Aqua aliis initians cui ille si fortè patrocinabitur pastor quem in calice depingis prostitutorem ipsum Christiani Sacramenti mento et ebrietatis idolū moechiae asylum post calicem subsecuturae de quo nihil libentius bibas quà m ouem poenitentiae secundae The man was then I yeeld a Montanist but that hinders not his credit from relation of truth and vniuersall practice on foot though he oppugn it Clemens Alexandrinus Stro. 1. p◠117. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For which cause some men when as they distribute the holy Eucharist as the custome is permit euery man of the common people to take a portion And what he meaneth by Eucharist himself explaineth 2. Paedag. 2. cap. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The mixture of both in one that is of Wine and the Word is that which wee call the Eucharist whereof the Faithfull when they participate are sanctified in soule and body both Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria in Euseb Hist lib. 7. cap. 8 writing vnto Xystus Bishop of Rome relateth of an antient Christian no Priest but a Lay-man that vpon occasion supposed he had not been well baptized Of him he writeth there that long before and often hee had been partaker of the body and bloud of Christ not of his body alone but of his bloud also in expresse words Saint Cyprian in moe places than one Epist 63. Tamen quoniam quidam vel ignoranter vel simpliciter in Calice Dominico sanctificando plebi ministrando non hoc
faciunt quod secus Christus c. The Cup of the Lord communicated to the Laity And again Quomodo possumus propter Christum sanguinem fundere qui sanguinem Christi erubescimus bibere By which reason of Saint Cyprian no Roman Lay-Catholique can shead his bloud for Christ that neuer drank the bloud of Christ Which argument he vseth in another place Epist 54. Sect. 2. With what ground can we teach or exhort them to shead their owne bloudin confessing the Name of Christ if putting them forth vpon that seruice wee denie them the bloud of Christ or how can wee dispose and fit them to drink the cup of Martyrdome vnlesse wee first admit them to their right of communication in drinking the Lords cup in the Church Let our good Catholiques answer this who so punctually forsooth and precisely follow the steps of Antiquity without any swaruing These are all within 300 yeers after Christ and all expresse for the Cup. Athanasius in his second Apologie being accused for breaking a Chalice writeth thus What manner of cup or when or where was it broken In euery house in euery shop there are many pots any which if a man break hee committeth not sacriledge But if any man willingly break the sacred chalice he committeth sacriledge but that chalice is no where but where there is a lawfull Bishop This is the vse destined to that chalice none other wherein you according to institution do drink vnto and before the Laity This was the custome in Athanasius time this in all the Fathers times as I could deduct almost out of euery one This is euery where the custome in all the world vnto this day but in the Roman exorbitant Church as Cassander saith and was not quite abolished in that Church till about 1300 yeeres after Christ and by much art colluding and fine forgery was retained from being cast out of that Church in the late Conuenticle of Trent onely kept-in for a faction but mightily opposed by learned honest and conscionable Catholiques For why who can alter Christ's Institution who dare change that which he hath ordained Sacrificium verum plenum tune offert in Ecclesia Deo Patri si sic incipiat offerre secundùm quod ipsum Christum videat obtulisse saith Saint Cyprian But saith he again and we knowe it is true Constat Dominum obtulisse calicem in commemorationem Passionis Et quia Passionis eius mentionem in sacrificijs omnibus facimâ—â— nihil aliud quà m quod ille fecit facere debemus Why Because otherwise wee offer not the Sacrifice as wee should Nec sacrificium Dominicum legitima sanctificatione celebramus nisi oblatio et sacrificium nostrum responderit Passioni and that cannot be without powring out of wine that representeth the sheading of his bloud But your Church hath altred it presumptuously done Who gaue your Church such authority Heare Saint Cyprian again Quare si solus Christus audiendus est non debemus attendere quid alius ante nos faciendum putauerit sed quid qui ante omnes est Christus prior fecerit Neque enim hominis consuetudinem sequi oportet sed Dei veritatem Nam si Iesus Christus Dominus Deus noster ipse est summus Sacerdos Dei Patris sacrificium Patri seipsum primus obtulit hoc fieri in sui commemorationem praecepit vtique ille sacerdos vice Christi verè fungitur qui id quod Christus fecit imitatur sacrificium verum ac plenum tunc offert in Ecclesia Deo Patri si sic incipiat offerre secundùm quod ipsum Christum videat obtulisse You doo not this therefore in Saint Cyprian's iudgement your sacrifice is neither full nor true Much more in that Epistle Saint Cyprian hath and also elsewhere vnto the purpose But you haue Scriptures for the nonce expresly in our Bibles contrary to that we teach and practice to iustifie what you practise and teach touching this sacriledge and perfidiousnesse in altering Christs institution Maruell you should haue Scripture against Scripture Christs institution beeing so direct for Drink you all Produce your Scriptures Ioh. 6. 51. If any man eat of this Bread hee shall liue for euer And the Bread which I will giue is my flesh Heere is eating of Bread and that same Bread Christs flesh but heere is no such matter as wee ought to receiue Bread onely or that Bread alone sufficeth Yes for Lo euerlasting life attributed by our Lord himselfe to eating onely vnder one kinde I grant for doe they in your countrey vse to eat vnder two kindes Is Wine eaten with spoones there I haue heard of communicating and receiuing vnder one kinde but neuer till now heard talke of eating vnder one kinde Goe learne to speake and then write In the Interim I take your meaning Christ that mentioneth onely eating doth not exclude drinking doth not say nor meane eating onely sufficeth Bread is not exclusiue heere no more then where our Sauiour went to eat Bread with a Pharise at which time in your Learning and Logick he did not drink all dinner-time or supper-time because he went onely to eat Bread But Sir your wisdome must knowe that hee which eateth Bread according to the Scripture phrase drinketh also Bread importing necessaries for mans life and to eat Bread is both to eat and drink as to eat his Body is as well to drink his bloud So anon the same Euangelist Vnlesse you eat the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his bloud you shall not haue life in you Lo heere euerlasting life not had without drinking Looke you to this if you looke to haue euerlasting life Iohn 4. 14. Christ promiseth Water to drink of which water whoso tasteth shall thirst no more therefore say you He promised no Wine therefore say I By your reason hee gaue not Bread Therefore if needs you will haue one kinde and no more haue it in Wine not Bread Againe hee telleth his Disciples else-where that hee would drink no more of the fruit of the vine vntill hee drink it new in the Kingdome of God hee maketh no mention of any Bread Therefore in Heauen belike Wine is drink and onely Wine drunk but they eat no Bread there And yet wee read of Angels food which I can tell you who take it literally I might say our Sauiour speaketh heere of Bread and not of Wine in regard of that fore-going occasion which was the first motiue vnto this his Discourse namely his miraculous feeding 5000 men with fiue loaues so that hee kept him to the Subiect and occasion But this wise mans obseruation is cleane cashierd by our Sauiours Epexegesis afterward ver 53 54. hee plainely and expresly maketh it plaine that hee meant not to exclude bloud speaking of flesh nor shut out Wine where he mentioned Bread Euerlasting life to returne your owne words vpon your self is attributed by our Lord not to eating onely vnder one but both kinds Except you eat the flesh
of the Sonne of man and drink his bloud you haue no life in you Lo without drinking no life euerlasting then poore deceiued Papists what will become of you you shall perish in your sinnes though your bloud shall bee required at the hands of your ignorant or rather deceitufll guides that thus mis-leade you from Christs Institution Luk. 24. 30 35. Christ at Emmaus communicated his disciples vnder one kinde Two things are insisted on out of these words as it appeareth by the laying downe First that this was actio sacra a Communion of the Body of our Sauiour then that it was done vnder one kinde this is taken as granted because there is no mention of drinking of Wine there is made mention of breaking the Bread Ignorants and wilfull take things amisse an ordinary Hebrew phrase it is in the Scriptures to eat bread to break bread for to eat and drink to take a refection or repast This man imagineth that all their meales were sicca conuiuia altogether without any liquor nor Wine nor Water vsed though in hot countries Such a foole would haue no other answer made vnto him but as Arisotle would haue made to him that should deny motion or that hee should neuer drink at his meales the best answer could possibly be made vnto him That it was actio sacra and not communis our Sauiour did celebrate the Communion of his Body and Bloud though I know it is controuerted for my part I will not contend at present I know it is held so by Augustine Theophylact and I adde too Beda and Hierome with others but take heede of the Precedent for if hee communicated onely Bread then I know not what vse of Wine at all there will bee in the blessed Sacrament For these were peraduenture of his Apostles but without all question of his Disciples and so had interest in the Cup if any had at all See more wee cannot Acts 2. 42. then we haue seene already mention made of breaking of Bread which is not exclusiue from drinking of Wine no more then 1. Cor. 11. 13. drinking doth exclude eating at all Poore shifts for Sacriledge and impiety of late made an Article of faith in the Church of Rome He that instituted the one ordained the other ioyntly both and at the same time with all circumstances alike if any aduantage is it is for Drink not for Eat For Drink you all of this saith the Author of the Sacrament hee saith not expresly Eat you all of this as foreseeing that impiety which in time humane presumption should bring-in vpon and against his owne institution fulfilled in the Church of Rome at this day XXXVII That Sacramental vnction is not to bee vsed to the sick VSe it if you will wee hinder you not nor much care or enquire what effects ensue vpon it but obtrude it not on vs or vnto the Church as in Censu of the Sacraments of the time of Grace as Baptisme is held and the Lords Supper Visible signes of inuisible Grace Powerfull instruments ordained by God to work in our Soules eternall Life by conueighing the meanes thereof vnto them Sacramental vnction call it if you please so farre as in the writings of the antient Fathers all Articles peculiar vnto our Christian faith and beliefe are sometime called Sacraments all duties of religious piety vnto God all diuine and Ecclesiasticall ceremonies are named Sacraments in which sense you might reckon not seuen but seuenscore if you were disposed to make a search for Sacraments In the Apostolicall and Primitiue Church it was a custome to anoint the sick with oyle to pray ouer them and so commit them vnto God This Saint Iames remembreth 5. 4. Is any sick among you Let him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray ouer him anointing him with oyle in the name of the Lord. The Apostle doth not call it a Sacrament Sacramentall vnction as the Thesis proposeth and which is that should bee expresly prooued Our Bibles say the sick were anointed but not our Bibles nor theirs doe say that this anointing was a Sacrament And Fathers wee are not sent to see that proue it so the place is not to purpose as it is proposed Mar. 6. 13. is a Text defacto They anointed with oyle many that were sick and healed them but de iure there is not a word in that Text whether yea or no this Anointing should bee a Sacrament The Master of controuersies confesseth himselfe that it is not accorded whether in this Text or not Sacramentall vnction was instituted and himselfe is of opinion that it is not grounding on the resolution of the Councell of Trent to which all Papists are tyed to subscribe and yeeld and how dare you bring this as a proofe Now say the truth Sir Goose and shame the diuell How plain are these Texts that set your great Directors together by the ears Where were your sick wits that did not aduise you Take heed of falling foule with the Councel of Trent the cynosura of your faith Sure they were made of the pappe of an apple so easily they squeeze themselues out to nothing your great Dictators haue found hitherto but one direct Text Iames 5. 4. can we think your sharp sight should spy out three more a Fox or a Fearne-bush somewhat or nothing for Mat. 16. 18. Acts 28. 8. nor oyle nor vnction is remembred bare imposition of hands vpon the sick and diseased so that wee stand in some possibility heerafter to haue added an eightth Sacrament to the former seauen XXXVIII That no interior grace is giuen by the imposition of hands in the Sacrament of holy orders THis indeed is contrary vnto the expresse words of our Bible and therefore directly contrary to our Opinion Doctrine and Practice Can this fellowe bee so ignorant as not to know or rather so impudent as to deny that in giuing of holy orders we vse those memorable formall words of our Sauiour Receiue the holy Ghost Was euer man made Minister in the Church of England but in that sort with that forme Can hee deny that wee not onely practise it but propugne it command it to bevsed enquire of and punish the neglect opposition and contempt thereof What shall wee say to such a base detracting Varlet as shameth not in view of heauen and earth to deny the Sun shineth at noone-day Romane Catholiques I admire your patience that suffer such Hog-rubbers to leade you by the nose and make you beleeue the snowe is black Poore deceiued Soules trust no such Merchants that would sell you to the diuell for a morsell of bread and make you stand out vpon tearms of Separation for their owne aduantages against the Church as Schismaticks in which you liue and haue beene baptized XXXIX That Priests and other religious Persons or any others who haue vowed their chastity vnto God may freely marry notwithstanding their vowes TOuching marriage of Ministers this is our Doctrine resolued
be Our Sauiour had formerly discoursed of eating his flesh and drinking his blood His very Disciples supposing as you doe that he meant they should eate his Flesh as they did the Fishes or vsed to eate the Paschall Lambe were here it offended Our Sauiour vnderstanding this their scandall replyeth in these words according to your Latin Authenticall edition Hoe vos scandalisat spiritus est qui viuificat caro non prodest quicquam verba quae ego locotus sum vobis spiritus vitasunt You remember an allegation you brought out of S. Paul If these things be hidden they are hidden vnto those that perish I put it to you if this be obscure it is obscure to him that will not see or to him who iustly God hath abandoned and giuen ouer Nothing can be more direct and plaine then that our Sauiour telleth them his speech of eating his flesh was Sacramentall not carnally but spiritually to be vnderstood This is it saith Chrysostome which he meaneth You must conceiue of me spiritually For he that taketh this carnally is not benefitted thereby nor getteth any good therewith It was a carnall thought to make a doubt in what sort he came downe from heauen And to suppose him the sonne of Ioseph And to dispute how can he giue vs his flesh to eate All these were carnall thoughts which must be mystically and spiritually vnderstood The words that I speake vnto you are spirit and life that is are diuine and spirituall hauing nothing carnall not any inference or consequence naturall But are freed from all such necessity as this surpassing legal tyes and conditions below conteining another sense and meaning then is literally set downe If this be not an important passage goe gagge Saint Chrysostome and other ancient Fathers that put this saying into the Protestants mouths as plaine a text of Scripture as in the beginning God made heauen and earth Plaine or obscure yet to no purpose For it affirmeth nothing lesse then that which they pretend to prooue thereby And what is that are you aware of it That the flesh of Christ profiteth nothing It is plaine the flesh profiteth nothing It is plaine the passage is of Christs flesh Therefore the flesh of Christ profiteth nothing This you say is absurd And so say I nay I adde this is impious For his Flesh is life and giueth life and therefore nothing profiteth so much as that If the passage be not of Christs flesh of what is it can you tell I beleeue you cannot But your instructors can tell you they would haue it taken that Carnalis intelligentia non prodest Good And so say I. But Intelligentia cuius of a certaine indiuiduum vagum abstrahendo from all subiect or obiect whatsoeuer Idle and absurd But Carnalis intelligentia of that which must bee taken spiritually And so of this place and principally and primarily of this place as giuing occasion vnto this Axiome of our Sauiour The flesh profiteth not This is not vrged by Peter Martyr or any Protestant against Hoc est corpus meum This is my body but against This is my body by this means This way that is by Transubstantiation Which is carnally to take that which was spoken and intended spiritually onely It is easily granted you by the Protestant and you might haue made your friends of this aduice that way That it is doubtlesse better to explicate an obscure passage by one that is cleere then one that is cleere by a passage obscure For reason it selfe and commonsense will dictate this that the proofe must be more euident then the thing prooued The epexegesis more manifest then that which is explaned The Protestants obserue this course they say You in this so small a Pamphlet as I haue let you see are culpable that way more then once It is much more cleere and euident what our Sauiour meaneth by Flesh and Spirit Then how This can be my body Sic etiamsi carnem ait nihil prodesse ex materia dicti dirigendus est sensus Nam quia durum intolerabilem existimauerunt sermonem eius quasi verè carnem suam illis edendam determinasset vt in spiritu disponeret statum salutis praemisit spiritus est qui viuificat Atque ita subiunxit caro nihil prodest ad viuificandum scilicet Tertul. de Resur cap. 37. Intanglements and obscurities in this place if there be any proceede from your glosses not the places nor yet the Resolutions of antiquity Were your rule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That one text shold giue place to many rather then many vnto one or fewer yet apply that rule you may where it will or neede be fitted here no neede of any such aduise at all where Alterius sic alter poscit opem locus conspirat amicé The fourth will hardly come vnder the title of aduice it is rather a vaunt at most and best an Information what is obserued in the Gagge concerning texts out of Scriptures Apocryphall to make good the assertions against the Protestants The man supposed exception would sometime be put in against some of his witnesses though for my part I haue passed them all without putting backe any as homines legales to say what they could for he knew well enough they were exceptiue and not passeable in strict tearmes and iust exception Therfore to preuent what he feared their credit is salued as much as may be that is they are brought in as o in cypher to enhaunce the number onely so as they with others may make vp a tallie Others beside them passe currant and with weight They without others carry no credit Know saith he that to preuent this obiection viz. that the testimonies are authenticall no such scriptures as they call and haue prooued and will maintaine to be Apocrypha are here produced but still they goe accompanyed with others that are Canonicall by their owne confession Which I grant is obserued for the most part at least Nor will we refuse a testimony of Aristotle or Demosthenes that agreeth with and commeth in with subordinate dependance vpon Scripture Where Scripture is apparant and consent incident and manifest But non feremus as in the point of Purgatory is obtruded a plainer and more obuious place of Toby to interlope betwixt two Canonicall Texts the hardest two in Saint Paul and all agree in one as well as harpe and harrow nor any correspondency in the vinculo communi as is pretended to make vtraque vnum and all speake for that which is farre enough from all or any state of Purgatory after death The second branch of your fourth point I mislike not at all for the matter of it Scripture is not in the words but in the sense and meaning of the words that is in the notions and intents of the Spirit of the highest intimated vnder the couert of words There are moe things then words to expresse those things by Hence doubts and ambiguities doe
Traditions Act. 16. 4. this is one Act. 15. 29. To abstaine from bloud and strangled Exempt such dishes specified from such dressing haue with you to Masse to Mr. Mayes as I am inuited by Sir A. P◠peraduenture your selfe 2 Tim. 1. 13. We finde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the forme of wholesome words in our Bibles And if this be Traditions vnwritten iudge you good Catholiques and set not so high a price vpon this arrant blunderer then whom a verier Goose neuer handled Goose-quill And so goe see if your leasure will serue Fathers that affirme somewhat not what they should The first you must see if you please is Irenaeus Lib. 3. cap. 4. for he will not trouble your seeing with Clemens Ignatius Dionysius Areopagita Polycarpus Egesippus Iustinus Martyr all elder than Irenaeus and vaunted of by his good masters and no doubt as much to poynt as Irenaeus who yet is held to be resolute and irrefrageable in that place Propter quod oportet deuitare quidem illos quae autem sunt Ecclesiae cum summâ diligentia deligere apprehendere veritatis Traditionem For which cause wee must shun and eschew them but with all possible diligence make choyce of the things belonging to the Church and lay hold vpon the Tradition of truth Which Tradition is no other thing but the rule of our faith The holy Scripture nothing vnwritten vncertaine beside much lesse against Scripture This is somewhat in your opinion but that which is the thing intended indeede is this which followeth in Irenaeus Et si quibus de aliquâ modicâ quaestione disceptatio esset nonne oporteret in antiquissimas recurrere Ecclesias in quibus Apostoli conuersati sunt ab ijs de praesenti quaestione sumere quod certum re liquidum est Thus hee questioneth I answere affirmatiuely yes No doubt we ought for resolution in poynts of doubtfull controuersie relye vpon that decision of the eldest Churches Doe we refuse this triall good Sir Gagger Where you will in what poynt you will I vndertake thus to iustifie the Church of England name you the Controuersie one or moe and maintaine the contrary if you can or dare The question is not with Irenaeus what must be Law but how the Law is to be expounded and interpreted Scripture the Law and Tradition the Interpretation that is the perpetuall praxis of the Church to expound the doubtfull texts of Scripture But Irenaeus proceedeth farther than so it will be said For What if the Apostles had left vs no writing at all Nonne oportet ordinem sequi Traditionis quam tradiderunt ijs quibus committebant Ecclesias Farther indeede but to no purpose this is vpon supposition If it had been so which is not so nor could be so Secondly it followeth not that because if God had not giuen Israei a Law it is probable hee would haue continued his former course with Abraham Isaac and the Patriarchs therefore when he had giuen them his Law they were still to looke for immediate or Angelicall Reuelations as before No more is it consequent to reason pietie or Irenaeus intent that albeit if no Scripture had beene written onely Tradition must haue beene followed therefore Scripture being written wee should as otherwise addresse our selues vnto Tradition But thirdly wee come home to poynt Shew vs any thing tendred by those Ecclesiae antiquissimae to be belieued and obserued and see if wee respect it not as well and as much as you Till you shew vs such Traditions leaue your prating idlely at randome touching worth and weight and vse and authoritie of Traditions Your Traditions tendred in these dayes are onely in name as Simon Magus was and Simon Peter the same no more of credite than hee of pietie both alike Origen is next to be seene in cap. 6. ad Roman Hee calleth Baptisme of Infants a Tradition and let it be so It is the vniuersall iudgement and most ancient practise of the Catholique Church deduced at least from Scripture if not proued in Scripture as the controuersor himselfe confesseth Be it a Tradition it is more for our aduantage than otherwise For we admit receiue defend and practise it which must needes giue the lye vnto your proposition That according to the Doctrine of the Protestants Apostolicall traditions ancient customes of the holy Church are not to be receiued nor doe oblige For the World knoweth your brazen face will blush to deny it wee receiue it practise it are obliged by it S. Damascen may stand by vnlesse you meane to make your friends with him a childe in yeares of yesterdayes birth in respect of those old Heroes of the Primitiue times Not that he saith any thing Lib. 4. cap. 17. more than an other or more effectuall and to purpose but because he is not of that desert or esteeme to be ranked with the Fathers of the Primitiue times being long post natus and a Partian many wayes for which cause I answere him not S. Chrysostome is peremptory and through for Traditions In 2. ad Thessal 2. vers 16. he saith Hence it is plaine and apparant that the Apostles deliuered not all in writing but very many things without booke Thus hee but to what end For no Protestant liuing in his right wits will deny this That the Apostles spake much more then is written And whatsoeuer they spake as Apostles in execution of their Ministery is of equall authority with that which they wrote For inke and paper conferre no authoritie or validity beyond the subiect and author of the writing Therefore the Tradition of the Apostles and of the Church is without all question of good credite and esteeme and so much wee professe Art 34. I graunt it hath displeased some which is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is Tradition which auoweth it seeke no further I see no reason why any should be so displeased therewith For if it be a Tradition of the Catholique Church and such Traditions onely hee meaneth Chrysostome saith there no more than hee may No more than Augustine and Tertullian haue said It is Tradition I goe no further No more will◠in any thing for my part I promise you that is controuerted betwixt you and vs at this day Make that appeare which you propose to haue been a Tradition of the Catholique Church and you and I shall soone agree shake hands and no more adoe Saint Basil you haue kept for the close it seemeth and for the vpshot of all and he indeed is in the place remembred very much for all Traditions vnwritten deriued to the Church from the Apostles I know some Protestants especially of preciser cut doe discredit the Author as a Counterfeit onely vpon Erasmus bare word who sauoured some discongruity which I could neuer finde of stile I am not of that or their minde Others being at a stand because of their owne priuate fancies oppose Saint Basil vnto Saint Basil For my part I beleeue
should I that cannot tell how who can doo it my body is nourished by the ordinary meat and drink I take yet is that familiar and in vse euery day When Christ gaue it he said This is my body Saint Paul repeating the Institution saith This is my body It was neuer denied to bee his body it is affitmed still to be his body Mad Papist that imputest to poor Protestants an Idoll a Chimaera of thy owne brain that The bread is but a figure and no more of Christs body Protestants say it not they neuer said it As commonly it happeneth that all Reformations or Innouations are vpon and into extremes so some happely haue that departed long since from the Church of Rome But what is that to our Church that publiquely priuately all and som directly maintains the clean contrary Your great Aduiser C. W. B. hath said enough could he see what himself hath said or you vnderstand what hee alledgeth to stop the mouth of such Gabblers as you and he for euer in the coÌ„trary assertions of the Protestants But the diuell bred you in a Faction and brought you vp in a Faction and sent you abroad to do him seruice in maintaining a Faction otherwise acknowledge there is there need bee no difference in the point of reall presence See your Fathers if I doo I shall doo more than you haue done for I auow it you neuer read Ignatius for this Read that Epistle ouer vnto the Smyrneans and see if you finde any such thing there if you doo then trust not mee again if you doo not what descrueth that impudent imposture S. Ignat. in his Epist ad Smyr But I can shew you better euidence for Bread and Wine out of Ignatius pag. 125. edit Paus Maestrei The flesh of our Lord Iesus Christ is one His Bloud one which was shed for vs also one Bread was broken for all one Cup distributed vnto all Bread and Wine after consecration Both distributed to all against your halfe Communion And againe pag. 261. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Breaking one Bread which is the medicine procuring Immortality Thus I finde nothing in Ignatius for you this I haue and happly more could against you were I desirous with you to maintaine a faction Iustin Martyrs testimony I acknowledge in the end of his Apologie and willingly make his words our owne For wee doe not receiue these things as common Bread or common Drink but euen as our Lord Sauiour Iesus Christ by the Word of God becomming flesh had flesh bloud for our sakes so are we taught that the food which was blessed by him in the Word and Prayer through which food beeing altered and changed our flesh and bloud is sustained becommeth the flesh and bloud of him that Iesus who took our flesh in his Incarnation Thus that antient Father not fully represented by your director who saith not any thing that Protestants deny For they confesse They eat the flesh of the Sonne of God and drink his bloud they are one with him and hee with them but commeth not home to the Papists Resolution that wee eate it and drink it by Transubstantiation but the contrary for but foure lines before hee calleth it Bread and Wine after Consecration Those saith hee whom wee call Deacons doe giue to euery one that is there present part of the Bread Wine and Water consecrated Saint Cyprian Serm. 5. de lapsis Now good Sir Gagger can you tell how many Sermons de lapsis Saint Cyprian wrote ignorant Asse and yet bold Bayard Saint Cyprian wrote no Sermons de lapsis hee wrote a booke de lapsis diuided into sections by some or other But Reader see the audacious Dunsery of this Ignaro C. W. B. had in his Catalogue of the Fathers of the third Age for transubstantiation cited Cyprian thus Ser. 5 de lapsis for Sect. 5. de lapsis vnlesse he also took his Authors by tale vpon trust and Ser. de coena Domini This blunderer stumbled vpon the first false or true to purpose or not all was one to him and set it downe the second quotation hee left out yet that is it which hee should haue taken for in the first Sect. 5. de lapsis there is nothing in the second Ser. decoena Domini as he will haue it though it bee no Sermon Sect. 6. there is thus The Bread which our Lord reached vnto his Disciples beeing changed not in appearance but in Nature by the omnipotency of the Word is made flesh Saint Cyprian said as much as this once or twice before No man denyeth a change an alteration a transmutation a transelementation as they speake no man otherwise beleeueth but that the naturall condition of the Bread consecrated is otherwise then it was beeing disposed and vsed to that holy vse of imparting Christ vnto the Communicants Stay heere be contented with That it is and doe not seeke nor define How it is so and we shall not contest or contend with you Hoc Sacramentum aliquando corpus suum aliquando carnem sanguinem aliquando panem Christus appellat portionem vitae aeternae cuius secundum haec visibiâ—ia corporali communicauit Naturâ— Panis iste communis in carnem et sanguinem mutatus procurat vitam et incrementum corporibus ideoque ex consueto rerum effectu fidei nostrae adiuta infirmitas sensibili argumento edocta est visibilibus sacramentis inesse vitae aeternae effectum et non tam corporali quà m spirituali transitione Christo nos vniri Thus the same Saint Cyprian so we we confesse it we beleeue it we cannot comprehend it Saint Ambrose saith no more then wee will subscribe Lib. 4. de sacramentis Before consecration it was Bread common ordinary meere Bread but after consecration it becommeth the flesh of Christ because then the Sacrament is consummate But doth Saint Ambrose tell you how it is so made That I finde not that I expect that I must finde or I finde nothing to your purpose One Father yet you adde Saint Remigius saith but you cannot tell where your Director told you it was in his comments vpon the 10. Chap. 1. ad Corinth The flesh which the Word of God took in the Virgins wombe and the Bread consecrated in the Church are the same body And yet beeing consecrated he calleth it Bread How can your Saint Remigius make that good Hee should haue said for doubtlesse hee meant so The Bread which was beeing consecrated in the Church is transubstantiated into that flesh which the Word of God took in the Virgins womb and becom the same body This Remigius saith not a great signe hee meant not And indeed hee did not meane it hee goeth no further then Reality he determineth not modum praesentiae at all And yet this Remigius is not peraduenture the man you would haue him namely Saint Remigius Archbishop of Rhemes who conuerted King Clouis of France to the Christian Faith who liued within 500
descended not into hell nor deliuered thence the soules of the Fathers AProposition of two feet neither relying vpon either The soules of the Fathers might not bee thence deliuered though Christ descended into hell and Christ might very well go down into hell and yet not deliuer any Fathers thence as finding some other work there to doo and hauing other causes of his descent finding no Fathers to deliuer For the former part of this Position that Hee went not into hell with what face what fore-head can this Fellow shew wee teach it when in our Creed wee professe that He went down into hell and haue publiquely defended it against opposition Nay wee more beleeue it than the Church of Rome doth and are more punctuall in it than are they They quarter out hell into foure Regions Hell of the Damned Purgatory Limbus Infantium and Limbus Patrum This diuision without warrant of holy Writ be it granted them into which of these Quarters into all or into some did the soule of our Sauiour separate from his body descend Say they Into the hell of the Fathers onely really into the other parts virtually or by effects Thus Thomas and who dare deny him Thus the Current of their Schools This is their Tenent and no otherwise Wee professe and beleeue that Christ went into hell that is that the humane soule of our Sauiour in the Interim of separation from the body did essentially and really go downe into hell the place of the Damned and of the Diuels not alone into Limbus of the Fathers which was not there not to suffer any thing there at all for all suffrings ended vpon the Crosse In the Land of darknes and shadow of death began the first step of his exaltation that free among the Dead he walked where he would not being consined to any place that he took reall possession of a part of his Kingdome and presented his person vnto those his vassals hauing beaten his enemy in his chiefest hold chased him out of the castle of his strength triumphed ouer him in himself and preached confusion vnto his foes that would not entertain his mercy in time of life nor partake of grace offred them vnto repentance This is our belief concerning his descent into hell if not orthodox antient and receiued let this wrangler shew where how and we will yeeld vnto better discretion from Antiquity It is idlely supposed that the descent granted we must needs inferre withall a Limbus Patrum or deliuerance of the Fathers out of hell there being alledged not contrary to Scriptures nor Analogy of faith not inferring impiety impossibility improbability absurdity or contradiction so many true good and catholick reasons of our Sauiours descent thither beside this The Fathers he meaneth are the Patriarchs and Prophets and righteous men that liued and died before Christ came in the flesh that expected the Promises and beleeued in hope but enioyed not the fulnesse which we doo since Being dead they are considered two waies in regard of state in respect of place For place the Scripture runneth in generall tearms In the hands of God In Abraham's Bosom With their people and such like thus affirmatiuely determining no certaine place negatiuely resoluing they were not there whereas now they are in the highest heauens and glorious where the Body of Christ resideth exalted aboue all Powers and Principalities For He first entred into the most holy place by his owne bloud They without vs were not to bee perfect standing the first Tabernacle the holiest of all was not yet opened The way was new which he prepared for vs. The gates to be opened were eternall gates neuer opened since they were gates but gates and eternall shut gates together Therefore wee professe with holy Saint Ambrose euery day in our Liturgie When thou hadst ouercome the sharpnes of death thou didst open the Kingdome of Heauen to all Beleeuers This we acknowledge is the receiued opinion of the fathers and for ought I knowe of Protestant Diuines not a few Though they were not in heauen in regard of place yet were they in happinesse in respect of state The soules of the Righteous said he before Christ came are in the hands of God and no kinde of torments shall once touch them This is also the consented doctrine of Antiquity If no kinde of torment then not losse nor paine then not in hell for I neuer heard of hell without all manner pain So it followeth not in opinion of the Antients the soules of the Faithfull were not in heauen aboue properly therefore they were in hell properly Gods hands in which they were are not so shortned his Kingdome is not so narrowed but that hee might well haue moe places than one Receptacles Repositories Resting-places for the righteous where hee would dispose them enow could we be content Curiosity will not stay heer but proceed to enquire Where were they then In what place of the world was their abiding I answer I cannot resolue that for the Scripture hath not determined it Nescire velle quae Magister maximus docere non vult erudita est inscitia It is learned nescience Not to knowe what our grand instructer will not teach It is enough to knowe they are in better case now than they were then With Christ they entred into his Rest Euer they were in the hands of God though not euer in like distance or proportion with God So what need we wrangle about the place if the matter bee agreed touching state See how contrary to our owne Bibles Ephes. 4. 8. out of Psal 68. 18. When he ascended vp on high he led Captiuity captiue and gaue gifts vnto men Christ in his Ascent led Captiues along The Question is Who these Captines were No Sir the question should first of all bee What this Ascent was You take it of his Resurrection It plainly is referred vnto his Triumph into the heauens in his Ascension both in the Prophet and Apostle and by all Interpreters but your self But to follow you in your follies Be it as you would haue it of his Resurrection must these freed Captiues needs be the soules of the Fathers which Christ deliuered out of hell Yes no nay no other possibility For they were not the soules of the Saued nor the Diuels therefore the soules of the Fathers Sir can you finde no mo but these Diuels or Saued Iustin Martyr could and he is ancient pag. 57. edit Rob. Steph. with him in his opinion and I think hee was in his right wits We are those Captiues that since the Ascension of our Sauiour by the preaching of the Gospell of peace are captiued vnto truth being freed and deliuered from error Irenaeus in his wits too I suppose goes not far from this meaning for hauing remembred the Text whcih he referreth to the Passion hee inferreth thus Dominus per passionem mortem destruxit soluit errorem corruptionemque exterminauit ignorantiam destruxit Tertullian was
of Scripture or thereabout It seemeth strange vnto me that not one of these should fall foule vpon that infinite number of corruptions and falsifications which you talke so freely and loudly of vnto your Catholike Reader Had there beene any such thing to be discouered your charity wee know is no way so Transcendent as to conceale it wee should haue heard thereof on both eares to a purpose He can doe little that can not belye his aduersary in grosse though put him to proofe and he prooueth recreant Do this I challenge your Gagship if you can or dare or prooue your selfe a Gagler and a Goose for euer For variety of reading deprauation corruption falsification here I offer to charge and prooue your most Sacrosanct Authenticall edition of Trent in the best and most corrected copy you can choose is as guilty of at and euery one of these particulars as you or your betters can proue our Bibles to be When you will or when you dare vndertaken it shall be And this in my mind is but a cold comfort vnto a Catholike who opineth poore deceiued soule that hee may be secure and build his saluation vpon the facing impudency of euery light-skirt mountebanck and shaued emposter You do well to seale vp the truth and vprightnesse of this forlorne cause of yours with security and assurance that is to captiuate their vnderstanding with implicite faith For you know and I can make it good that let the Truth you talke of come to scanning Lucians true History will be as warrantable It is true I deny not our translations all and singular and so your owne done by your owne men differ both amongst themselues as also from the Authenticall Latin as you call it notoriously your Authenticall Latin differeth from it selfe Is this to the disparagement darkning and obscuring of the Catholike verity Looke you to that I can rid my hands of it well enough and cleere both our Church aâ—d Bibles of all such imputation or impeachment of Catholike verity any way If it bring such disparagement the reason is in my conceit you swarued euen from the Councell of Trent which neuer intended such a royal prerogatiue vnto your Latin edition as the Iesuits and Iesuited faction giue vnto it I speake not this to disparage it I professe I respect it as much as any Translation extant and to quite your kindnesse in being content to be tryed by our Bibles I will be tryed in any point the Church of England maintaineth this day against the Church of Rome by no other but your owne Authenticall Latin Eate your words Goodman Gagger I am your aduersary I professe my selfe I will and dare offer my selfe to giue what aduantage you can make thereof to be tryed by your owne Translation and to deserue your loue the more may happily ere long Gagge your mouth in this very kind of putting you to it with your owne translation In the interim put mee to it when you please I will not waue your so Authenticall Latin in maintaining the assertions of our Church And so much for your second point of aduice vnto your Reader Thirdly you aduise him somewhat farther off for generall affronting the Protestant in any point whatsoeuer as I can conceiue it in briefe thus The manner of the Protestant is in conference of controuerted points when he is vrged with text of Scripture plaine and euidens to beate backe the argument or as you phrase the thing to Counterpoint it with some other text of Scripture For instance when you bring those euident few words This is my body they vse to rebutt it with Iohn 6. 63. The flesh profiteth nothing the words that I speake vnto you they are spirit and they are life and by this allegation suppose they haue put by the point of your weapon or giuen you a great ouerthrow as you speake In such a case your aduice is to shew the party amiably that this is not to proceede by order and that he dealeth not with thee as he ought nor sincerely in opposing a passage darke and obscure to confound a passage that is most cleere A man may take good counsell of his enemy though against his will and so haue no cause to thanke him for it Sir Gagger of your selfe and your owne gagle this aduice we meane to make vse of and put it home to your selues as we haue occasion frequent enough I know no men guilty of this blameable carriage at least so guilty as your selues be I haue rubbed your memory with it sometime as it fell out But here hauing so iust cause you can not blame me if I gagge you with your owne gagge Misticall passages are not argumentatiue What so mysticall as the Reuelation In which are tot Sacramenta as many darke passages as there by words And yet we want not proofes of plainer particulars from mysticall signing in the forehead The number of the beast Power giuen to the Saints ouer nations What more absurd then to prooue ordinary oeconomy in Gods disposition by extraordinary dispensation This you haue done out of Math. 17. 3. Math. 27. 52. or points of faith as you would haue them out of a dreame 2 Mac. 15. 12. Prayer vnto Saints is defined in your Creed Your proofes for that against euident scripture Psal 51. 15. are Luk. 16. 24. Iob 5. 1. Without Purgatory Popery cannot stand The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 two pillars of Purgatory are those two places of S. Paul 1 Cor. 3. 13. 1 Cor. 5. 29. then which there are not two more obscure places in all the scripture Adde to them a third though of a baser alloy that intricate and depraued place of 2. Mach. 12. 44. I could goe further and gagge you Doper out of your owne practise Who if you had not so much honesty as to forbeare belying of your opposites should haue had so much discretion as not to obiect that vnto another which had you that good signe of a bad cause in you Blushing might ashame you being by recrimination retorted vpon your selfe I say belye for it is not better nor worse but euen so For Transubstantiation that monster of monsters you haue neuer done with This is my body Which we deny not either in words or sense The very body of Christ really receiued in the Sacrament of the Altar is warranted by those formall words of Institution This is my body but not per modum Con or Trans or any other like It is not said This is my body corporally eaten orally there carnally conceiued of grossely This cannot be say the Protestants and for proofe thereof that the thing being granted the manner cannot be so conceiued proceedeth thus That which one Scripture proposeth cannot bee contraried by another But this carnall sense of those words This is my body is contraried by another an instance In Iohn 6. 63. The flesh profiteth nothing as plaine a text against carnall eating of Christs flesh as can