Selected quad for the lemma: blood_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
blood_n body_n figure_n word_n 5,550 4 4.9200 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A14406 Actes of conference in religion, holden at Paris, betweene two papist doctours of Sorbone, and two godlie ministers of the Church. Dravven out of French into English, by Geffraie Fenton; Actes de la dispute & conference tenue à Paris. English. Fenton, Geoffrey, Sir, 1539?-1608.; Vigor, Simon, d. 1575.; Sainctes, Claude de, 1525-1591.; Du Rosier, Hugues Sureau.; L'Espine, Jean de, ca. 1506-1597. 1571 (1571) STC 24726.5; ESTC S112583 180,168 252

There are 17 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

respecte of their nature and substance but onely touching the vse and signification and that only during the Action in which they serue For to consecrate the signes as the water in Baptisme and the breade and wine in the supper is no other thing than to assigne and make them serue to a holy and sacred vse by the publike declaration of the ordinance of God made to that ende and not to chaunge them touching their nature and substance the which vanishing and being made nothing there shoulde be no more signe nor by consequence any sacrament So that euen as the water in the Baptisme after the Consecration remaines water without that his nature or substance be in any thing chaunged or altered so the bread and wine in the supper touching their substance remaine after the consecration suche as they were afore for there should be no Analogie nor correspondencie betwéene the signe and the thing signified For what comparison conformitie is there betwene the accidents of the bread and the truthe of the body of Iesus Christe séeing that the accidents of the breade as the whitenesse and roundnesse destitute of their substance as the Sophisters doe falsly imagine coulde not nourishe or sustaine the bodie and by that meane should not be proper to signifie that the fleshe and bloude of Iesus Christe nourishe and sustaine oure soules So that we must hold this for resolute that the bread and wine remaine in their substance the same being clearely verified by Iesus Christe who speaking of that which he gaue to his Disciples to drinke in the Supper calles it specially the fruite of the Vine Which can not be referred to the accidentes but is necessarily to be vnderstanded of the wine in his proper substance As also by that which S. Paule saythe calling the Elementes of the Supper Breade and Wine thrée seuerall times yea after they were Consecrated Like as also he wrytes elsewher we that are many are one bread and one body bicause we participate all of one lofe wherein he teacheth vs there by his comparison of the lofe that euen as it is made of many graines so wrought and mingled togsther that they can not be distinguished or seperated one from an other euē so also ought the faithful in the Church to be so knit and vnited togither in one selfe body as they may séeme to be membres one of another This comparison wold be altogither foolishe out of purpose if the bread which we eate in the supper were not true bread Gelasius Bishop of Rome wryting against Eutichus saithe that the sacramente which we take is a thing Diuine and yet forbeares not to be a substance and nature of breade and wine Theodoret also in his first Dialogue vseth these propre termes the Lorde hath honored with the name of his bodie and of his bloud the visible signes which represente them without chaunging their nature but adding only grace to the nature The same Author in his second Dialogue speaking also of the breade and wine distributed in the supper saythe that after the sanctification these misticall signes forsake not their nature for they remaine in their proper substance kinde and figure by meane whereof they are seene and handled after the Consecration neither more or lesse then afore S. Iohn Chrysostome wryting to the Monke Cesarius saythe in the Supper we call breade that which is there present afore it be sanctified And after the sanctification by Gods grace and meane of the minister it hath no more the name of breade but of the body of our Lord yet the nature of bread remaines there By the places aforesaide as well of the holy scripture as Auncient Doctors and others which mighte be yet alleaged for this matter it appeares that the breade and wine in the supper remaine alwayes as hath bene said in their proper nature and substance after the Consecration as well as before wherein it néede not to be doubted that the Faith of the auncient Churche hath not alwayes bene so and that Transubstantitiaon was neither established nor holdē for an Article of Faithe in the Romishe Church vntil the time of Innocent the thirde To withstande and reiecte all that hathe bene sayde touching the nature and substance of the signes which remaine after the Consecration suche as be aduersaries to this Doctrine alleage ordinarily the woordes of Iesus Christe speaking of the breade in the institution of his supper take eate this is my bodie And staying vpon the proper and natural signification of the termes they defend obstinately that the substance of bread is vanished in the Consecration and that there remaines no other substance except that of the bodie of Iesus Christe The reason of this is that they obserue not the Figures and manner of spéeches which are ordinarily vsed in the holy Scripture when and as often as there is Question of the matter of the sacramentes For then the name of the things signified is ordinarily attributed to the signes which represent and signifie them as the name of the alliance is attributed to the Circumcision bicause it was assigned to signifie and ratifie it The Lambe by like reason is called the passage and Baptisme washing of regeneration and that not bicause they be things like to the signes and mysteries signified by them But for the conformitie that is betweene them The signes as S. Augustine him selfe dooth say take oftentymes the name of the things which they represent So that the error procéedes in that they take and vnderstand the manners of spéeches figured as if they were propre and naturall That this spéeche take and eate this my body is figuratiue it appeares by that which our Lord Iesus Christe addes after of the cuppe saying this cuppe is the newe Testament in my bloud which is shed for you Héere he calles the cuppe Testament and new aliance in his bloude wherin we must necessarily confesse that there is figure and that with oute it the saide place could not be wel vnderstand nor aptly interpreted For it is a thing manifest that an aliance which is a contrary couenant betwéene parties made and cōceiued vnder a certaine promisse and woorde is not the wine and yet it is so called by figure bicause the wine which is distributed in the supper is as the seale by the which the saide aliance is sealed and the faithe of the same confirmed By suche or like manner must we also vnderstand and expoūd this sentence this is my body the same being as much to say as this is the newe Testament in my bodie which is deliuered for you For as by the effusion of his blud the new Testament was ratified so was it also by the death of his body we néede not searche better interpretation of the words of Iesus Christe than Iesus Christe himselfe For it is certaine that that which he saide of the cuppe is as a glose and cleare and familiare exposition of that which he sayd of
the bread more briefly and darkely which is also proued by S. Paule The breade which we breake saithe he is not the Communion of the body of Christe which is a manner of figuratiue spéeche bicause that to speake and vnderstād properly the bread which is a corporall and materiall thing is not the Communion which we haue in the body of Iesus Christe which is a thing spiritual and inuisible and yet it is so called as being a signe thereof to represent it to vs and assure vs of it euen as we call commonly the letter signed and sealed which containes the declaration of the last will of a man his Testament albeit it is not his testamēt which is properly the declaration which he hath made verballie of his said will but it is so called bicause it is the instrument and testimonie thereof And euen as the Scripture and the Auncients as well to recommende and raise the dignitie of the signes and cutte of by that meane the mistaking of them as also for the conformitie and likenesse that is betwéene the signes the things signified haue attributed sometimes the names of the same things signified to the signes which they represent and speaking of the signes haue vsed figuratiue speeche So they haue spoken of them sundry other times properly to take away all occasion of abuse and preuent that in taking without distinction the signes of the thing signified by them there shuld be attributed to them the effectes which appertaine not but to the matters only which they signifie of these two sundry reasons and manner of spéeche there be examples as well in the scriptures as in the Auncient fathers Of the firste we haue an example in the Circumcision when it is called by figure aliance Gene. 17. vers 13. And of the seconde there is also an example in the same Chapter vers 11. where the Circumcision is properly called signe of the aliance in Exo. 12. ver 11. there is also an other example of the firste manner of figuratiue spéeche where the Lambe is called the Passeouer of the Lorde and touching the seconde man which is propre an example also in the same place vers 3. where the bloude of the Lambe is called a signe In like manner and order when is mention in the scripture of the supper the woordes run somtimes of the bread by figure as when it is called the bodye of Iesus Christe or the Communion of the body as hathe bene said before and sometimes also it is spoken of properly as when it is saide who so euer shall eate of this breade also euery one then proues himselfe and eates so of this breade Like diuersitie in bothe the manners of spéeche is founde oftentimes in the Auncient fathers touching the matter of the supper For sometimes they speake of the breade by figure calling it the body of Iesus Christe as S. Cyprian when he sayeth the body of the Lorde is taken with foule handes and his bloude dronke with a prophane and defiled mouthe and in an other place that we sucke his bloude and fasten oure tongs in the woundes of our Redéemer Likewise S. Ierome when he saithe that Exuperius Bishop of Tholoze caryed the bodie of our Lorde in a little pannier of Willowes and his bloude in a glasse S. Chrysostome also when he wrytes that Iesus suffreth himselfe not onely to be seene but also to be touched and eaten and that teethe are fixed in his fleshe and touched with tong Lastly S. Augustine With what care do we take heede when the bodie of Iesus Christe is administred to vs that nothing of the same fall from our handes to the earthe All which sentēces with their likes are figuratiue wherin is no doubt that in the right and directe interpretation of them ought not to be taught to the readers but that in them the name of the thing signified is applied to the signes which signifie it which may be easily gathered of other sentences and textes of the saide Auncients where speaking properly of the breade and wine which are distributed in the supper they cal them signes and figures As Tertullian Iesus Christ saith he tooke breade and distributed it to his Disciples and makes it his body when he saith this is my body which is to say a figure of my body And Cyprian by the wine shewes the bloude of Christe Also in a Sermone which he made of the supper of oure Lorde As often as we do this we whette not our teethe to bite but breake and distribute the holy breade in true Faithe by the which we distinguishe the matter diuine and humaine Also in a Sermon he made De C●●●●●le the Lord gaue with his proper handes bread and wine in the Table wherein he performed his laste repaste with his Disciples but on the Crosse he deliuered into the hands of the armed men his body to be wounded to the ende he might imprin●e so muche the more deepely the truthe into his disciples and they to declare to the people how the bread and wine were his body and bloud and howe the sacrament agréed with the thing for the which it was instituted and also howe one sacrament is made of two things and therefore is named with two names and one selfe name is giuen to that which signifieth and to that which is signified S. ●asile propones to vs figures and patrones of the sacred bodie and bloud of Iesus Christe And likewise S. Augustine the Lord had no horror to say this is my body when he gaue the signe of his body The Lord receiued Iudas to his supper wherin he recommended and gaue to his Disciples the figure of his bodie S. Ierome After he had eaten the Pascall Lambe with his disciples he tooke bread to strengthen the hart of man and past to the true sacrament of the passage to the end that as A●lchisedech had done before in his figure he mighte also there represent his true bodie S. Ambrose this sacrifice is a figure of the body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christe Chrysostome he hath dressed this Table to the ende he may shew vs daily the breade and wine in mysterie and similitude of the body and bloude of Christ And it happeneth sometimes that a Doctor in this matter expoundes the other as may be perceiued in the conference of the two places the one of S. Augustine alreadie alleaged and the other of Tertullian in the Booke of the crowning of a Knighte where he sayth we hardly suffer that any thing of oure breade and wine fall on the earthe In place of that which S. Augustine to the same matter saythe as hathe bene recited heere before we take diligent heede that nothing of the body of oure Lorde fail on the earthe And euen as in diuers places the Auncientes as hathe bene declared haue vsed the two manners of speeche aforesaide speaking of the supper sometimes by figure somtimes simple and properly so it is oftentimes
the greatnesse of our God to maintein his woorkes incredible by nature which are comprehended in his woord in our Faith and also to confute all suche as woulde deny any of them as impossible to be done by any manner what so euer And bicause Caluin and Beza with their Ministers raise them selues against the power and greatnesse of our Lorde and openly deny him to be able to commit the body bloude of Iesus Christ vnder the formes of Breade and Wine and bicause also that in the Religion pretended reformed to resist the efficacy of the woorde This is my Body this is my Bloude they teach not a more great reason nor more familiare to al those that are out of the way than the impossibilitie of God to be able to make a body to be in twoo or many places that is to say in the Sacrament and in Heauen wée obiecte with good righte to the Ministers that in their Doctrine they derogate the firste Article of Faithe which is of the Almightinesse of god And also we knowe that the anciente manner of the Christians disputing againste the aduersaries of Faith was oftentimes to beginne to aske whether that whereon they doubted were possible to God or not or whether onely he woulde not doo it in which sorte and order Tertullian and others propone the pointes wherein they enter into contention againste the Heretikes In like sort afore we passe further into the matter of the holy Sacramēt we would in preamble wise fele of the Ministers whether they iudged it to be in Goddes power to make a body occupy many places or whether only he would not c. wherein wée are enforced to aduertise al Christians of one manner of dealing common to al the Ministers of the pretended reformed Religion which is when they are asked if God can establish the body of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament or not they aunswere that there is no question of the power of God but of his Will onely And when wée produce matter which declares the will of God then of the contrary they deny that his wil is suche bicause it is impossible to him Alleaging here their contradictions according to the nature of the body And bicause they thinke this to be impossible in action they depraue and interprete the woorde of the Supper otherwayes than either it beares or is written Here is also to be noted that wherin an Almaine called Heshusius reprocheth Caluin that he his felowe Ministers are goodly noble amplifiers of the power of God but when it comes to the déede and pushe as the saying runnes they neither giue or graunte him any more than they thinke méete to introduce their errours and fansies resembling as the saide Almaine compares them a good Traitor who most dooth cherishe and magnifie a man when he is most ready to betray him as Iudas did our Lorde wherin wée are constrained to say of the Ministers touching Goddes Almightinesse as Tertullian saith of the Heretikes Credendo non credunt which is in beleuing the Omnipotencie they beleue it not for when they haue saide that there muste be no exception they hold againe an other way that it must not stretch to euery thing that mannes sprite can conceiue and so they will not apply it but to what they thinke good couering themselues with the nature wisedome eternal wil of God which are no lesse vnknowne and incomprehensible to them than his Omnipotencie in which respecte wee aduise euery one not to be abused with the speach of Caluin nor his ministers but to consider the woorkes which they deny to be in the power of god Wée haue produced to them these foure questions Whether God may make a body to be in twoo places and of the contrary twoo bodyes in one place Whether he can lodge one body in one space lesse than his greatnesse and whether he can make it inuisible which haue bene specially culled and chosen for that vpon them are founded the principal arguments of the pretended reformed Religion againste the true presence of the Bodye and Bloude of Iesus Christ in the Holy Sacrament Wée beleue simply as al other things that the foure questions are possible to God and haue proued it by the infinitie of his power both by the scriptures who giue vnto him al vertue ouer creatures without any exception and also by Examples and straunge myracles don vpon bodyes against their natures which are writtē as Tertullian holdeth in his Booke of the Resurrection to the ende wée beleue that our God is more mighty than al Lawe and nature of al bodyes whereunto he addes that such knowe God very euill who thinke that he hath not in his power things which thei cannot comprehende in their fansie From whence it comes as S. Cyril saith that such wicked sprites reiecte and condemne al things as impossible bicause they vnderstand them not Besides wée thinke wée haue sufficiently shewed no lesse by expresse scripture than by the Exposition of the same taken of the Ancient Christians that it was not only in Gods power to make twoo bodyes to be in one place and one body without place equall to his greatenesse but also that he had already truely done it in the byrth of the body of our Lorde Iesus Christe in the Resurrection of the same ●●is entry throughe the doores shutte and in his Ascension aboue al the Heauens like as also wee haue deduced that there was equall and like repugnancy in those deedes as in the other of one body in twoo places whiche by the scripture is no more excepted from the power nor will of God than the others as to iudge it impossible to be done neither hath there bene any Christian afore our time which durst affirme the same to be impossible and out of the power of God notwithstanding the occasion was often offered if they had any waye estéemed it impossible as the Ministers of the supposed refourmed Religion pretende Of the contrary the most parte of the auncient Authours of the Primitiue Churche haue holden expressely that it was in Goddes power to bestowe a creature in many places according to S. Ieromes opinion againste the Heretike Vigilantius that the soules of the Sainctes maye assiste in many places with the immaculate Lambe our Sauiour Iesus Christe Yea there was question Whether the saide soules and sprites of the Holy ones did assiste at any time the Churches where their Graues and Monumentes were the same resembling with S. Augustine in his Booke whiche he wrote of the care to be had of the Dead Chapter 16. wher he saithe that by the power of theire nature the soules cannot be here belowe and in Heauen or in many places but that the same may be done by the power of God and he will not resolue whether they vnderstande our affayres by suche assistaunce in many places or by reuelation of the Aungels or other meane of the power and grace of God. Morouer it is
only he could do it but also he would do it and so consequently are determined to refute all the blasphemies heresies of the supposed reformed side which are contained in the supper to the ende also we be not thought to eschue the combate of the supper the Masse as the ministers haue reproched to vs protesting notwithstanding to kéepe in meaning that after we haue concluded resolued vpon this matter to returne to the examination of the mōstrous errors of the ministers which containe great numbers against the other Articles of the Créede which the ministers feare by all likelihoode in that they are not willing we pursue the order begon as foreseeing that in the next conference we wold open vnto them an other blasphemie maintained by the reformed church against the bountie of God according to Caluines doctrine which is that God works in the reprobate the euill sinne which they cōmit which is an execrable atheisme no lesse than the denial of gods omnipotēcie and in like sort as such as shal read these cōferences if they continue to the end discussing of the ministers errors their religion against al the articles of the Créede shall maruel to vnderstand the absurdities blasphemies discending from them so yet there is an other point the drawes the ministers to demaund the disputation of the supper which is that they haue al their matter redily prepared by many of their sect which haue written therof as especially they will not want the great Booke of Peter Martir by which they are furnished with sundrie infamous obiections certaine texts of the Ancients either cut of depraued or euil applied to impugne in shew the truth of the body in the sacrament but to the defense of all their other errors they are very slenderly prouided wherin their cōscience is a sufficient witnesse that by the scripture iudgmēt of general councels cōmon consent of the authorities of the ancients they are cōuinced condēned of their errors against the said Créede But to enter into the supper of the ministers we say it is a prophane eating drinking not differing from the cōmon eating drinking sauing that it is so much the worse as they abuse the holy institution of the supper of Iesus and pollute and defile such their banket withal impietie blasphemie we maintaine also that they do great wrong to the sacrament of Iesus Christe to attribute falsly to suche their banker so prophane and defiled the name of sacrament And to the ende to proue it more cleare we aske them if they receiue a common doctrine allowed not only in the catholike church but also of all the sects which are separated frō it the same is that in the confection of sacramentes there be two things essentiall and necessary the matter or the element and the woorde Secondly what word is necessary with the element to cōstitute a sacrament namely that which they cal the sacrament of the supper and whether they must vse certain woords or not Thirdly if the woorde haue any vertue or efficacie in this sacrament and what And if it worke any thing in the matter of bread and wine Fourthly whether by the same woord the consecration be made of the matter of the sacrament or not In the fifth place if by the woord there be not made consecration of the matter that is howe the same consecration is made and by what vertue the sacrament is made For the sixth if bisides the bread wine and the spirituall graces benefites of Iesus Christ is receiued in the supper really the true body bloud of Iesus Christe in his propre substance not only in spirituall effect vpon this Article we require of the ministers an open confession of faithe We ask further if in receiuing the bread afore they take the wine they receiue by the eating of the bred the body blu● of Iesus Christ or only the body to be●●●rt if they admit that which the diuines cal a concomitance of the body bloud of Iesus Christ We aske also if the supper bisides the assurance it giues them of participation in the flesh of Iesus Christ in their redemption do woorke in them re●ission of sinne We aske lastly if by the supper there is receiued any thing which can not be receiued oute of the Supper or if withoute taking of breade to goe to the Supper or to assist it may be receiued as muche of the body and graces of Iesus Christ as if they did assist the supper We will debate afterwards the other Articles contained in the laste pamphelet of the ministers bicause the former demaundes are to be first examined as grounds of the other Articles proponed by the ministers For the rest after the supper of the ministers is confuted and the Real presence of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the sacrament confirmed we will procéede by order and withoute confusion to teache clearely by the pure and moste expresse woorde of God that the Masse was instituted said by Iesus Christe and that also he commaunded his Apostles to say it which they did according to the ordinaunce of their Maister That the Masse is a true sacrifice of the Euangelical law That suche as reiecte the Masse and admit no outwarde sacrifice in the Church nor priesthoode are without true law and without true Religion and therefore worse than Idolatrers That the Masse is of value to obtaine remission of sinnes fauoure and grace of God and that it is of value bothe for the quicke and the dead That it is no abuse in the Church if the Priest communicate alone in the Masse when the assistantes will not communicate with him That suche commit horrible blasphemie which call the woorshipping of the body of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament the worshipping of breade and wine and falsly doe they call such veneration of the body of Iesus Christ idolatrie To be short there is nothing in the masse as it is celebrated in the Church at this day which is not good and holy in it selfe and conformable to the woorde of God. We require the ministers to Aunswere to the demaunds héere before written pertinently clearly and by order Sunday .28 of Iulie the years aforesaide The Aunswere of the Ministers to the vvryting of the Doctors sent to them by the Duke of Nyuernois the .28 of Julie .1566 about .7 of the clocke in the Euening THe Doctors in the beginning of their writing reproche vs as that in our complainte against them we imitate the Donatistes wherin they iustifie oure former iudgement and opinion of them that the moste parte of their wrytings swarmed more with matters of repeticion iniuries scoffes and inuectiues than with argumentes and good reasons like as also the example of the Donatistes becomes them farre better than vs bicause the Donatistes soughte to restraine the name of the Churche who comprehendes vniuersally all the chosen and Faithfull that eyther
touching their escapes they are to be conuinced by the simple reading of the bookes Touching the residue of the Ministers resolution containing many iniuries slaunders and wronges against vs we aunswer nothing hauing regarde to the maner of theyr doinges Like as also we consider it should be but paine lost to teache the Ministers who for their instruction esteeme more their particular reuelation than all the doctrine of the vniuersall church and all the Christians together And lastly we pardon them with all our heartes at the wrongs they haue done vs as beyng people estraunged from their full sense and without iudgement which they well declare by the maner of their doing The Doctors obiection touching the Supper against the Aunswer of the Ministers IT appeares sufficiently in the actes of the first dayes arguing why in the beginning of the conferences we touched not the articles of the supper wherein the Ministers do maliciously slaūder vs in saying we refused to enter into the matter of the same as is truly proued as well by our sundry offers made to them to conferre thereof verbally to the ende to aduaunce it with more spéede and so at leysure to set it downe in writing which the Ministers refused as also by our former obiections touching the article of the almightynesse By these we touched the groundes wherupon are builded the errours of the religion pretended reformed against the reall presence of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the holy Sacrament The same being to be iustified further in that wée obiect to them certayne argumentes agaynst their Supper the rather to make them enter into it To the whiche eyther they haue aunswered nothing at all or at least so impertinentlye that euen the woordes of their aunswer discouer their disposition to flée the combat As yet they continue by their last writings hiding so farre as they can that which they thinke of the supper notwithstanding they haue bene required to aunswer both to purpose and truth But whether they or wée refused the effect standes to iudge For though they wyll not aunswer yet we wyll not forbeare to aduise them and reueale to the whole world the intollerable errours aswell in the Supper as in all the doctrine of the Ministers Who being asked yet dare not confesse and iustifie what hath bene written by the inuenters of their supper But now to begyn to speake of the supper the Ministers mayntaine it celebrated according to the ordinaunce of Iesus Christ and maner with the Apostels vsed in all the primitiue Churche when she floorished and whylest she remained in her purenesse Whereunto we aunswer with this question howe manye worldes they thinke that the doctrine hath remayned in her purenesse touching the Supper and whether as then the Church stood not as pure in the doctrine of al the other Articles as in this Besides whether since that tyme there was not found any place through the whole worlde where the true doctrine of the supper and the other Articles was retayned and preserued As also in what place and by whom from world to world it was preached and aduaunced In these we desire to be satisfied by the Ministers as importing muche bicause that afore Caluin preferred hys Catechisme there was no memorye in any Region of suche doctrine as he taught neither was the supper celebrated in the maner it is now in the reformed Church And we woulde gladlye relieue the Ministers who in their writinges séeme straungelye passioned that we haue sayde that their Supper differs not from a common Banquet sauing that it is woorse as beyng prophane and polluted But to encounter this they make a great speake of all the action of their sayde Supper and by goodlye accessories carying a forme of all pietie they labour to make it highlye commended couering a goodly nothing betwene two platters And of the contrarye to treade downe and deface the most precious sacrifice of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in the Masse by tearing in péeces some accessorye of the same as though wée vsed it without reason and signification whiche the Ministers eyther vnderstande not or dissemble not to vnderstande But as thynges ought not to be taken and estéemed by their accessories but according to their value nature and truth so the Ministers haue to foresee that all the sectes standing at this day in all the worlde against the catholike Churche for the matter of the Sacrament vse at least thys brauerie that they do Who if they were asked there is not one of them which would not enforce to proue that their sect approcheth nearer Iesus Christ hys Apostels and the primitiue Churche than the Religion pretended reformed Touching all which we referre our selues to the writinges of the Lutherians Zwinglians Anabaptistes Trinitaries Maister Alasco with other lyke Therefore it is not reasonable by these faire voyces and speeches to preferre the supper of the Ministers afore other sectes with iudgement that it is good holye impoluted and according to gods word but rather to repute it infected and defiled with impietie as couering a dreame in place of truth and giues the accessaries of pietie to impietye and falshoode Neither haue we dispraysed their Supper for the thankes they giue to God or in respect of their confession of sinnes or their preaching if it containe matter of truth or for any other preparatiue But in this haue we named it to be detestable as not containing but common bread and wyne contrary to the ordinaunce of Iesus Christ and yet they attribute vnto it some spirituall effect with other goodly accessaries of pietie the same being a matter of more abominatiō and inuented by Sathan who séekes by suche maner of supper to quenche and abolish the true supper according to the institution of Iesus Christ and rob the faythfull of the fruite and truth of the said true supper in making them giue onely common bread in place of the body and bloud of our sauiour Iesus Christ Here we could recite the wicked accessories as well as they speake of the goodly which are in their supper as the secrete and newe enterprises which are practised vnder colour and shaddowe of the assemblies drawne together at their sayd supper but least the Ministers reproche vs that the Clerke speake of weapons of contributions c. we wyll altogether hold our peace and referre our selues to that which is contenting our selues to deduce certayne causes by the which we maintaine that there is no truth in the sayd Supper according to the institution of Iesus Christ First that in the supper of the Ministers and their lykes there cannot be made any consecration of the matter of the bread wyne which are there proposed and therfore there is not made in the sayd matter anye mutation either before the vse or in the vse or after and by consequence that the bread and wine in that Supper cannot be but common That there is no consecration made in their Supper it
be broughte in by Caluin and his like to eschue confession that God is able to bring to passe that one body be in diuerse places and yet the proper text of the Scripture witnesseth that two bodyes may be by the power of God in one selfe place as also that one bodye hauing colour and afore visible by Goddes power is made inuisible without any let to the eies of suche as may sée the same being confirmed by S. Luke saying Aphantos egeneto apanton I nuisibilis factus est ab ipsis notwithstanding there were no more le●te of the parte of the Disciples For it is saide afore that theire eies were opened to know him Whereunto all antiquitie consentes The Doctours adde to confirme the penetration of the dimensions an other acte that our Lord mounted to the Heauens which he did neither diuide nor rent and therfore it must needes be that he penetrated them as the Scripture beares in proper termes The Doctoures signifie to the saide Ministers that they cannot produce one onely Anciente of sounde renowme hauing expounded these places of whom thei may learne their so many diuerse interpretations neither dothe it serue to colour their exposition the texte alleaged of the Actes of the Apostles where S. Peter went out of prison in which place is no speach at al of opening the doores of the said prison neither is it saide as in S. Iohn that the doores of the prison being shut S Peter came foorth but that the Aungell arriued there when the Garde before the doore watched the prison where they saye the doores were open to S. Peter it agreeth not with the opinion of S. Iohn that the doores were shutte when our Lorde entred The like reason alleaged by the saide Ministers of the fifth of the Actes is vnprofitable to this purpose aswell as the firste and for the same cause And to shewe clearely and euidentely that againste the naturall propertie of Bodyes God can make that a greate and grosse Bodye maye passe into a space and place inequall to his greatenesse largenesse and thickenesse The Doctoures haue recited that whiche our Lorde saithe in S. Mathewe 19. It is more easie that a Cable enter the eie of a Néedle than a Riche man into the Kingdome of Heauen whereunto the Ministers haue aunswered two things The one that in the inuolution we must not turne Cable but rather Camel notwithstanding their own french Bible of the impression of Antony Kebul which they haue brought conteineth the versiō of this word Cable like as also Caluin in his Harmony of the foure Euangelists saith it is the better Wherein may be séene and founde true that which Tertullian inueigheth againste the Valentinians and Irenaeus againste him in the firste Booke Chap. 14. that suche as are separated from vs to putte themselues in an other schoole deuise alwayes some new thing to the end the Disciples may be founde more able than the Maisters But be it that the woorde of Camel is graunted to them which the Doctoures doubte not hathe bene expounded by S. Hilarie S. Ierome others the reason is yet stronger For it is more vnlikely and repugnante that a crooked Camel grosse and greate enter the hole of a Néedle than a Cable The other reason giuen by the Ministers is that God maye bring to passe that a Camell or Cable enter the eie of a Néedle whiche is notwithstanding againste the pure woorde of Iesus Christe whiche saith It is not impossible to God to doo it but rather easie and by comparison more easie to God than to make a Riche man enter into the Kingdome of Heauen whiche our Lorde saithe notwithstanding to be possible not to men but to God to whom nothing is impossible whereupon the doctours saie that if God can doo that whiche is moste harde he maye doo that whiche is moste easie The texte of the Scripture importes that God may bring to passe that a rich man enter into the Kingdome of Heauen whiche is moste harde then he maye bring to passe that a Camell or Cable enter the eie of a Needle whiche is more easie The aunsweres of the Ministers here before confuted tend to these absurdities and blasphemies that Iesus Christ by his Omnipotencie could not enter throughe the doores being shutte that he coulde not issue out of the wombe of his Mother through her body without breaking that he could nor bring to passe that a body visible should be inuisible that a body greate and grosse coulde be in a place inequal to himselfe that he could by his Diuine power make penetration of the Dimensions and that he maye bring to passe by the same power Diuine that one body be in two places for it is al one reason of this laste Article and the others albeit such things are declared in the Scripture not onely possible but that the moste parte haue bene done And the Doctoures doe much maruell how the Ministers dare denie this séeing themselues must necessarily confesse if the Doctrine of the Supper which they giue be true that the bodye of Iesus Christe is in diuers places which they proue thus The faithfull receiue in their soules Really the substance of the body and bloud of Iesus Christe by the operation of the holy Ghost and not onely the bread and wine or the effecte and vertue of the same Sacrament as Calume saithe in his institutions lib. 4. cap. 17. sect 11. The Doctoures conclude thus it is impossible that a person receiue the substance of the body of Iesus Christ in himself but that the body of Iesus Christe must be in him All the Faithfull which be at the Supper receiue him in their soules so that it muste néedes be that the body of Iesus Christe be in them and by consequence in diuers places as euery where where their Supper is made and likewise in Heauen They say further that Caluine in his Institutions lib. 4. cap. 17. sect 24. mainteines that in the Supper the power of God is requisite to the ende the Fleshe of Iesus Christe penetrate into vs and that humaine nature can not comprehende that but néedes must Gods power woorke in it By which meane Caluine puttes by the power of God the Fleshe of Iesus Christe in many places as bothe in heauen and vs into whom he must penetrate by the power of God And in the .10 number he saithe that the truthe signified and represented by signes muste be represented and exhibited in the very place where the signes be which he proues by reason in many places that is that the signes must not be voide no more than the pilloure was voide of the holy spirite But euen as the essence and substance of the holy Ghoste was conioyned and present with the pilloure euen so that the Fleshe and Bloud of our Lord afore there was true Sacrament must néedes be knitte and vnited with the signes The places be against Heshusius and in his Booke of the Supper
1. Cor. Cap. 11. Whereunto howe so euer the Ministers Aunswere the Doctoures desire that the text of Caluine together with the reasons which he brings of the holy spirite may be well weighed and considered They Obiect further that the Ministers in their Supper attribute more to the humaine vertue than to the omnipotencie of God yea they doe more than God coulde doe as in that they vaunt to doe a thing by their Faith which implies contradiction saying in their Confession of Faithe exhibited at Poissi to the Bishoppes which were in the congregation that Faith makes things absent present at one instant in one place that is in the soules of the Faithfull when they make the supper the same being as much as if they had saide that faith makes things not present present in one time place so as to euery Faithful man in the Supper comming woorthily the Body of Iesus Christe is there present in vertue of Faith And yet is he not there present as themselues holde saying He is but in Heauen wherein maye be séene implication of contradiction that is presente and not presente Really neither can it serue to any purpose a little stippe or scape whiche they saide to vs that the body of Christe is on high corporally but in the hearts of the Faithfull in the supper spiritually For the spiritualitie can not take away the substance of the thing and their Faith can not bring to passe that a body is not a body and that a body hathe not his dimensions as they haue saide héere before Therefore in what sorte so euer they confesse that the Faithfull in the Supper receiue the substance of the body of Iesus Christe into their soules they muste necessarily and willingly confesse that either their Faithe is more mightie than the vertue and infinite power of God or else that God can bring to passe that his body shall be locally in Heauen and Sacramentally Really notwithstanding and substancially in the Sacrament of the Aultare in which pointe the Doctoures desire to heare the Ministers and after to sette downe their Aunswere by writing The Ministers can neuer shewe by the woorde of God that their Faithe can bring to passe that in one instant and in one place a thing shall be present and not present And it is as muche to say a thing present and not present by Faithe as to say the body of Iesus Christe is in a Faithfull man and is not Neither néede there to be put any chanell of the power of the holy Spirite to make the Fleshe of Iesus Christe slide from Heauen hither if the saide Fleshe were not but in Heauen and yet come to vs. And touching the poyntes which the Doctoures haue obiected that Peter Martyr and Theodore de Beza were the first that saide that God could not bring to passe that one body might be in two places which newe Doctrine the Ministers would confirme by antiquitie we not name it otherwayes than blasphemie The Doctors say that many times they haue prayed the ministers not to lose time to the end things might be better cleared to say nothing that were not to purpose which notwithstanding they alleage forthwith the testimonies of the fathers to shew that a body by nature is circumscript naturally can not be in many places but the same authors speake nothing that God is able to do it And yet S. Augustine and others in their places recited by the Doctors touching the Article of the doores being shutte witnesse that by the power of God two bodies may occupie one place which containes the like difficultie and when it comes to the profe of the reall presence of the body and bloud of Christ they are to shew euidently that all the auncients wholly which haue spoken of the Sacrament haue not onely confessed hys abilitie to bring to passe that his body was on highe in heauen and héere belowe in the Sacrament but also they with one accorde haue aduouched to beléeue according to the woorde of Iesus Christe that he is in Heauen and heere in the Sacrament The Doctoures demaunde of the Ministers if any afore Peter Martyr and Theodore de Beza haue denyed this power of God whome they maruell not if they so muche magnifie séeing of them they haue taken all the places alleaged For the Article that begins where the Doctours pretende that the forme c the Doctoures say this forme is common as often as the power of God is debated vppon neither can she proofe be better guided than to folowe the woorde of the Aungell that there is nothing impossible to God From which when any thing is exempted there is alleaged the selfe same that the Ministers inferre that there is a repugnancie of things wherof folowes an implication of contradiction as did the auncient Heretikes against the Fleshe of Iesus Christe alleaging alwayes some impossibilitie according to nature doing the like againste the Article of Resurrection and Incarnation as if there had bene contradiction that God was man man was God As shall be easie to a wicked mind to forge alwayes some contradiction in his spirite according to the propreties of nature for the Article beginning wher the Doctors alleage that God can change c The Doctoures say they haue not well conceiued their meaning For they take for a thing absurde that a substance resting affected of his qualities may by Gods power haue effectes contrary to his qualities As if God coulde not bring to passe by his omnipotencie that the fire possessing his natural heat in place to burne do refreshe and qualifie which no man of sounde iudgement and a Christian would not denie For the Article touching the limitation of the povver c the Doctoures say it séemes by the Aunswere of the Ministers that Gods power is limitted according to his will which is as muche to say as God can not but that which he willes which is manifestly false Touching the Hebrue alleaged it séemes the Ministers haue desire to shewe their skill therein For suche recitall is nothing to purpose resting principally vpon the woorde danar which is as muche to say as a thing but it meanes not that we oughte to vnderstand it as a thing done the sense of the place is suche by the woorde shall any thing be hid from me And bicause harde things be hid and things impossible also more hid they haue therefore turned is there any thing hard or impossible to me which Pagninus and other interpreters of the Hebrue tonge shew well that the verbe Pala signifieth to hide The Doctoures had not made Aunswere to this but to make it knowne that they are not astonied at one woorde of Hebrue For the Article beginning touching the daunger c the Doctours say they are but woordes superfluous and what so euer the Ministers were able to produce others mighte vse againste them And where they say it is a reproche in that they
are obiected to corrupte the scripture the Doctors say the the Ministers can not deny that they chaunge not the sense and glose the matter of the Supper this is my body this is my bloude By which and suche like Authorities vnder pretext of obscure reasons euery one may pretend to corrupte the other Scriptures and alleage certaine impossibilities of nature and contradictions For the Article beginning touching the opinion of the scripture that the body c the Doctors say that in time and place they will declare their Obiections and make a more large discourse of the Sacrament of the Altare Touching the Obiection of the Doctoures that the contrary parte doe not grounde their affirmation which is that God can not bring to passe that one body be in two places vppon the expresse testimonie of the Scripture or that they can deduce it thereof the Ministers haue alleaged for all their places but that God can not lie God can not deny him selfe But the Doctoures say this consequence is nothing woorthe God can not lie God then can not bring to passe that one body be in two places which notwithstanding it had behoued the Ministers to haue made so if the places brought in had serued to the purpose like as also when it is saide that God can not lie as the Ministers haue recited to be able to lie is not power but infirmitie So that it behoued to say thus according to the true sense God is not infirme or weake as to be able to lie than God cannot bring to passe that one body be in two places which consequence woulde be ridiculare And where the Ministers haue broughte in certaine authorities of the Auncientes to proue that there is diuersitie betwéene the Creatures and the Creator and that the Creator by Nature is euery where and the Creatures are not in diuers places naturally The Doctoures receiue with reuerence the Authorities of the holy Fathers but there was no néede of their trauaile to produce the saide places for the confirmation of a thing so manifest and which was not in difficultie But the Doctors are yet to vnderstand one only place of the Scripture or one onely Testimonie of the Auncientes which sayeth that God coulde not bring to passe that one body were in diuers places The Doctoures desire the Ministers to receiue with like reuerence the Auncients specially touching the interpretation of the holy Scripture whose Exposition shall be the iudge betwéene them and the Ministers Vppon a request made to the Lorde of Neuers by the Ministers to assigne a day for Aunswere particularely to euery Article and reproche heaped before by the Doctoures in their Obiections The saide Lorde prouided that the Ministers shoulde take away with them at nighte one of the Copies of the Obiections to the ende to come readely prepared the next day by noone to Aunswere them whereunto the doctoures agréed who for their partes made like request for sufferaunce to Replie to the Ministers Aunsweres if they sawe it were so good with the which they will giue Resolution touching this Article of Gods omnipotencie to the ende to passe further and examine the Reall veritie of the bodie of Christe in the Sacramente of the Altare like as also the Ministers for their partes doe agrée to yelde a full Resolution to what so euer shall be deduced by them The morowe folowing being Wedensday the seuentens of Iulie the companie being assembled the Lorde of Neuers considering that the day afore the Doctoures had furnished all the time so that the Ministers had no oportunitie to aunswere presently thoughte there was no lesse leisure due to them to Aunswere and therefore with other necessary respectes which woulde haue bene a long and weary season he ordained from thence foorthe the conference to passe by wryting and that the Ministers shoulde bring againe the Copie that was giuen them to Aunswere and sende it vnto him signed by them and two Notaries whereof he woulde cause his secretorie to drawe oute an other copie to sende to the Doctoures reseruing with him selfe the Originall and in like case woulde sende the Ministers the copie of such as the Doctoures should send to him Wherunto the one and other parte submitted them selues and disputed afterwarde by wryting as foloweth The Aunswere of the Ministers to the Doctoures Obiections giuen vppon Tuesday the sixtienth of Julie THey denie that the Doctoures consequence is necessary which is God can not bring to passe that one body be in two places at one instant and that therfore God is not almightie bicause Gods omnipotencie ought not be measured but by the things only conformable to his will and do not derogate either his nature his wisedom his truth or the order he hath established in the world Whereunto that which the Doctoures preferre dothe directly resiste that one selfe body at one selfe instante may be in diuers places by which it should folowe that a body may be a body and not be limitted and so by consequence that he may be and may not be all together For the measures as to be long large and thicke and to be bounded and limitted within certaine endes are so essentiall to the bodie that withoute them he is no more a bodie in whiche spéeche the Ministers doe in nothing diminishe Goddes omnipotencie but of the contrarie establishe it not attributing to him any mutabilitie or chaunge in his Councell nor contradiction in his will for feare to make him lie a thing impossible to him by the Scripture And touching that which the Doctoures alleage of the ancientes that they haue not denied the almightinesse of God the Ministers haue declared héere before that they haue and in what cases it may happen yea Fertullian in his Booke which he wrote against Praxeas speaking of this matter vseth this spéeche Certainely nothing is hard to god But if withoute iudgement we vse this sentence and interprete it according to our fond fansie we may faine al things of God and say he hathe made them bicause he coulde make them wherin we must not beléeue that bicause he might and may do all things that therefore he hath made that which he hath not made but rather to enquire if he haue made it and so the conclusion folowes that the power of God is his wil and his not power likewise his not wil. It rested then to the doctors to shewe that God would make a body which in one instant should be in diuers places as to shew that he could do it And it is a maruellous matter that they impute againste the ministers to derogate the almightinesse of God as to except frō the same that which is contrary to his wil séeing they themselues confesse it and except the same things as standing betwéene them and the Doctors no other difference than that they say that God brings to passe that one body be in diuers places in one instante bicause he can doe it and the
bicause the one is a miracle of Gods power in nature and the other a wonder againste nature and contrary to Gods will. In the Article folowing the Doctoures doe falsly impose vppon vs an opinion that it was a thing impossible to God that a Camel passe thorow the eie of an néedle séeing in our former Aunsweres we neuer touched that pointe but only that part of the sentence speaking of rich men But now to Answer the Obiection and fully resolue it we say the euen as God may saue a riche man by chaunging him and purging his heart of all vaine trust and presumption wherewith being infected he is incapable to enter into the kingdome of heauen euen so it is no lesse easie for him to make a Camel passe by the creuise of a néedle hauing circonsised and digged the greatnesse of the same with other things which mighte let him to passe In the first place that the Supper which is celebrated in the reformed Churche is the true institution and ordinance of the true Sonne of God. And after that the end for the which it was instituted is to assure the Faithfull of the true participation which they haue in the fleshe of Iesus Christe crucified for their saluation and in the bloud shedde for remission of their sinnes and lastly for the confirmation of the newe aliance which God hath contracted with his people Thirdly we say it is necessary that the breade and wine remaine in their propre substance yea after the Consecration and that other wayes they could not be sacraments of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ Finally we say that the vnfaithfull presenting themselues to the supper can not by meane of their infidelitie receiue other thing than the outward signes of bread and wine and that to their iudgement and condemnation On the other side we propone to the Doctoures touching their Masse that as it is celebrated at this day in the Romishe churche it is nothing but an inuention and tradition of man. That it is a corruption and prophanation aswell of the holy supper of our Lord Iesus Christ as of the true and lawfull vse of the same That it is an abuse of the sacrificature of the Papistes priestes and that in the newe Testament there is no other sacrificature ordained to procure and obtaine remission of sinnes nor also to intercesse either by prayers or merites to obtaine the fauor of God than the onely sacrificature of Iesus Christe We say moreouer that the sacrifice of the Romish priests is a blasphemie and Sacrilege and that there is none other Oblation than that which Iesus Christe hathe once made in the Crosse of his body by which the ire of God might be appaesed his iustice satisfied sinners reconciled to God sinne pardoned and the bonde of eternall deathe cancelled and made nothing We say the seperation of the priest in the Masse from the rest of the people is a defacing to the Communion of the supper and by consequence damnable afore God. It is an intollerable Idolatrie to worship breade wine whether it be in the Masse or out of the Masse There rest yet two pointes in the wrytings of the Doctoures wherof we admonishe them the one is that we neuer found in the scripture that faith was a humaine worke but that it is a woorke of God and a gifte which he giues to his chosen The other is that we confesse not to be able to produce any Auncient author which hathe saide in plaine termes that one body cannot be in one instant in diuers places bicause the contrary séemes so absurde and straunge and so contrary to reason and faith which all faithful men ought to haue that we thought such opinion could neuer find place in the hart of any professing to be a Christian To ende this Aunswere we could with greater delite entreat vppon the questions aforesaide than dispute vppon the opening of the doores the sepulchre and the heauens as to our gréefe we haue done those dayes passed and that for two reasons The one bicause the decision and resolution of such questions can not be drawne and gathered of the scripture And the seconde bicause it can not muche serue either to the aduauncement of the honoure and glory of God or to the reléefe and instruction of his Churche Thursday 25. of Iulie the yeare aforesaide The Replie of the Doctors to the vvriting of the Ministers sent vnto them by the Duke of Neuers the .25 of Julie 1566. about .8 of the clocke in the Euening WHere the ministers complain of their wrong to be called blasphemers as making themselues innocent with Iesus Christe S. Stephen and Naboth vppon whome suche crime was falsly imposed the Doctoures say that in this they folowe the good Donatistes who stoode alwayes vpon complaint of the great wrongs and iniuries which they saide they endured of the Catholikes And yet the Histories stande as witnesses of their conformitie with Iesus Christe S. Stephen and Naboth and also howe néerely these ministers resemble those holy examples The Anabaptistes might haue saide no lesse to them of the reformed churche when they call them Heretikes And so muche also might haue sayd and did say Seruet who for his blasphemies was burned at Geneua estéeming himselfe happie to be iudged by Caluine a blasphemer for his Doctrine and to endure the sentence and paine of death Therfore we must not beléeue the Minysters to be other than the blasphemers though they shake of that name no lesse impudently than any other heretike But it behoues to examine whether their Doctrine import blasphemie or not we say there is no blasphemie more worthy of greater cursse than to denie the almightinesse of God which is no lesse than to denie simplie that God is not which deniall containes a Theme For to take from God that which is proper to him according to his nature is as much to say he is not God according to S. Basile in an Homelie of his intituled God is not author of euil He writes that it is no lesse blasphemie to say God is Author of euill than to say that God is not God bicause that to take from God his bountie which is naturall to him is wholely to spoile him of his Diuinitie wherein the like may be saide of his omnipotencie which who so denieth or diminisheth denieth also his Diuinitie The question then is to knowe if the ministers will abolishe the omnipotencie of God not in propre termes for they séeme to confesse it but in affirming that his almightinesse is measured according to his wil so that he cannot doe but that he wil with other suche like propositions contained in their former Answeres which whether we haue proued or not to containe blasphemies we lay vs vpon euery sound iudgement which hath any way serched the holy scriptures or the bookes of the Auncient Christians which as they may also be knowne by the friuolous Aunswers of the ministers to
body yea euen his owne inuisible And that he could not bring to passe that a Camel or cable kéeping his grosenesse might passe thorow the hole of a Néedle From these is deriued the deniall of his almightinesse a blasphemie moste execrable and very atheisme These be the disordered absurdities which such are enforced to confesse that denye the Reall presence of the body of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Aultare which the Doctors pray may be well considered by the Readers of this present cautele Where the ministers in the last Article of their Answer chalenge vs for calling Faith an humaine worke seeing it is of God that is not to be maruelled in them no more than a numbre of other truthes which séeme straunge to them bicause their Doctrine is grounded vpon the foundation of error amongst the which this is not least in degrée that man hath not a frée will and that for a man to thinke well to wil well and to do well dothe not worke with God contrary to many places of the Scripture which settes a man woorking with God bothe for his Faithe and workes and receiues recompence for the same which shall be more aptly handled in an other place without varying from the matter We are very glad the Ministers confesse that the Auncientes neuer saide that a body was in two places which is true but the reason they giue why they haue not saide it is of the forge and inuention of the Ministers they might tel vs as muche out of the testimonie of scripture wherin is no more founde than in the writings of the Auncients wherof we haue sundry times warned the said ministers who chalenge to groūd all their Doctrine vpon Gods woorde If the ministers at the beginning had confessed the truthe of the omnipotencie or that they would haue acknowledged that Christe might bring to passe that his body mighte be on high and néere below in the Sacrament really and truely if he would we had no néede to handle the questions passed which notwithstanding contain no small consequence as the ministers estéeme the same appearing by the wrytings of the Auncients who haue handled those places with great diligence and with them haue aided themselues againste the heretikes But bicause the ministers wil not agrée that God may bring to passe that one bodie be in diuers places at one instante And that if they had begon to shewe his will to be suche as to ordaine that the body of Iesus Christe might be in heauen and in the sacrament they might haue sayde as is the opinion of these of their secte that God would it not bicause he could it not And albeit we had rather treate first of the omnipotencie than of the wil so séeing the first hath ben sufficiently handled we are nowe in minde to proue that Iesus Christe woulde and did ordaine his body to be in diuers places in the proofe wherof we will enter into the first conference after we vnderstande the fansie of the Ministers what they helde in their Churche touching this matter to the ende we trauaile not in vaine as iudging that they folowe not the opinion of Caluine and Beza for which cause we say they muche abused the people faining to teache according to the Custome and Direction of the Refourmed Churche and yet in their Aunsweres they declare the contrarie Where they holde themselues righte happie to endure suche reproches as to be estéemed seducers by vs Let them remember that all sectes may say as much as they but whether it be righte or wrong we shall make séene by the examination of their Doctrine The Resolution of the Doctoures touching the Article of Gods omnipotencie as for the regarde of the foure Questions proponed by them to the Ministers the same seruing to the vnderstanding of the Reall presence of the Bodie and Bloud of Iesus Christe in the holy Sacrament ALl men disposed with patience to runne thorowe the scriptures and beginning from Abraham the Father of the Faithfull euen vntill the laste wryting of the Apostles shall finde that the very roote and fountaine of all infidelitie ordinarily was in hauing regarde to the propretie of creatures and common order of nature as to gainesay and enter into doubt and distrust of the woorde of God. In respecte of which reason Tertullian and other firste Christians saide wel that the Philosophers and suche as depended vppon naturall things were the Fathers of Heretikes bicause the contemplation of nature engendred almost al heresies of the contrary men may perceiue that the omnipotencie of God is proponed by the scriptures as a knife cutting in sunder all argumentes which might come of naturall reasons as to take a certaine and last resolution to beléeue al that is written and imported by the said woord of God albeit it séeme impossible and incomprehensible to all creatures and that our Faithe might rest vppon the same power in all doutes what so euer All the difficulties that Abraham made vppon the promises which God made to him proceeded of certaine impossibilities of nature which he saw in himselfe in his wife wherin it séemes that his cōsideration stretched no further til God vsed his authoritie and said to him I am God almightie since warning of God Abraham forgate all regardes to the propreties of his nature and tooke holde of this buckler of faith which is to knowe and fully persuade himselfe that God is almightie to whome nothing is hard or impossible And after this when there was question to slea his onely sonne notwithstanding he had greate apparance of contradiction in nature and in the woord of God giuen to him which was that from the séede of that sonne should issue one that should blisse all nations and yet he must kill him afore he had any linage discending of his bodie yet he did not contest as opposing this contradiction of nature and of the woord of God to maintaine that which had bene saide and promised him was impossible but he had recourse to the pilloure of the Faithe of the Faithfull as S. Paule to the Hebrues which is to the omnipotencie with this persuasion that God had the meane to make the one and the other true as to make his Sonne die and raise him vp againe to the ende to drawe out of him afterwarde linage and posteritie albeit as then there had bene no example of the Resurrection Likewise the consideration of creatures and the order of nature which Moises saw before him made him fal into infidelitie but God shewed him his fault when he denyed that he was able to nourish the people long with flesh séeing the nature of the deserte did not beare it warning him to raise vp his spirite to the almightinesse against nature and there to settle and assure his Faithe Moyses saide Héere be sixe hundred thousande people in the midst of whom I am and thou hast said I wil giue them fleshe to the ende they eate a whole
most certaine that the Auncient Fathers of the Churche in the matter of the Holy Sacramente haue acknowledged mainteined that the Body of Iesus Christe by Omnipotencie was in many places as S. Ambrose vpon the tenth of the Epistle to the Hebrewes and S. Chrysostome in his seuententh Homilie vpon the same Epistle where they both almoste in one phrase and woordes write that albeit in many places there be many actions and oblations of the Body of Iesus Christe yet hauing regard to the thing which is offered that is to the true Lambe and body of Iesus Christe that Sacrifice offered in many places is but one bicause it is but one selfe thing the true Lambe and true body of Iesus Christe which is but one and remaines whole in all places where he is offered And they adde further that the Oblation of the same in diuers places is not an iteratiō of the sacrifice of the Crosse but in commendation of the same so that in the sacrifice of the Masse they acknowledge and distinguishe twoo pointes the one concerning the Realty of the thing that is offered which they saie is the true Lambe and true Body of Iesus Christ who as then remaining one and in his entyer is notwithstanding in many places And the other concernes the action of suche a thing by the Prieste whiche is no iteration nor like action or oblation to that of the Crosse but diuers in commemoratiō notwithstanding of that which was made on the Crosse S. Chrysostome in his thirde Booke of Priestehoode cryes out and saith Oh myracle and power of God He that uts on the Right hande of the Father aboue is holden betwene the handes of euery one in this sacrament S. Augustine vpon the 33. Psalme declares that the body of Iesus Christ in the supper was in two places that is in his visible place amongeste his Apostles and yet betweene his proper handes in suche sorte as he carried him selfe But afore he concluded vpon this S. Augustine debates with him selfe howe it was possible that a person shoulde beare his Body betwéene his handes And after he hath examined it to be impossible to Dauid and al other creatures he discends at last to the Diuine power which was in Iesus Christe by the whiche to him alone amongest other men that myracle was possible But leas●e wée depraud or wrest the intent of S. Augustine bicause he was carried in a certaine maner as though that diminished the truth let vs consider that the end meaning of S. Augustine is to shewe that Iesus by his Omnipotencie carried himselfe which was impossible to any Creature But if he had only carried in the Supper betweene his handes the Figure Sacrament and Signe of his Body and not the Reall Truthe he had done no more than the leaste man mighte haue done séeing euery one maye beare the Figure Image Signe or Sacrament of his body betwéene his handes or fastened as a Brooche to his Cappe without myracle or power supernaturall so that the certaine manner which S. Augustine vseth diminisheth nothing of the Truth which is that he was visible betweene his hands and in one manner supernatural albeit Real and true S. Basil with others in his Liturgie auowes the body of Iesus Christ to be in Heauen and yet present in the Sacrament by Omnipotencie And yet the Ministers are grounded principally vppon the saide S. Basil to proue the impossibilitie that one bodye or an other creature maye be in many places But he protestes expressely in the very place alleaged by the Ministers not to speake but according to the natural propertie And in his Liturgy he declares that it is not only in Gods power to bring to passe that the body of Iesus Christe be in Heauen and in the Aultare but also that it be truely done so To end this question of one body in many places we say that it is not only in the power of God but also we must beleue that it is so done in the Sacrament to the ende God be not founde a lyer or a deceiuer in his woord by which Iesus affirmed to his Apostles that that whiche he gaue with his handes was his true Body deliuered for vs Which Argumente Tertullian makes in his Booke of the Resurrection after he had disputed against suche as denied it to be possible to God wherin it séemes that they saide as the Ministers said firste there was something impossible to God by Scripture whiche is that he could not lye nor deceiue of which they tooke occasion to passe further and dispute that the Resurrection was also impossible to him like as also the Ministers of the point that could not lie haue labored to inferre that to put one body in two places was impossible to him as well as to lie and deceiue in the ende Tertullian accordes with the Martianistes that he had rather confesse that God could not deceiue and that he is only weake and impotent in deceit to the ende that thereby it might be séene that he hath not otherwayes taughte or spoken nor otherwayes disposed the facte than is contained in his woorde Then if he can not as Tertullian concludes deceiue and abuse we must beléeue the resurrection as his word beares it and not otherwayes to the ende there be no deceit in the sayd woorde and in God Euen so we say and willingly confesse that God can not lie nor deceiue in regarde wherof we must beléeue that he hath so willed and ordained the truthe of the supper as the woord pronounceth and not otherwayes And if it be so that the woord beare Verbatim and expressely that he affirmes that that which he gaue with his handes to his Apostles to eate was his body deliuered for vs we must thē beléeue that his word speakes not otherwayes then his wil is least he be estéemed a lier And that as he hathe saide this is my Body this is my bloud that truely it is so which God willing we meane to handle in the next conference for declaration that not onely he might establishe his body in the holy Sacrament but also that he would and did so Articles proponed by the Doctors for the next conference and others folowing according to the order of the said Articles ALbeit according to the order of the conference touching the Créede of the Apostles we ought secondly to entreate of an other Article like as euen the ministers themselues in the first dayes of conference did not only consent but made request offering the Articles of their Confession Imprinted vnder Date .1564 to be examined by vs from the firste to the last yet we séeing it can not be much from the matter after we haue handled the omnipotencie of God which stretches so farre as to make him able to bring to passe that the bodie of Iesus Christ be in heauen and in the sacrament continuing stil this matter to enter into the profe of his wil are content to shew that not
persuaderi As also Tertullian Duritia haeretica vincenda est non suadenda And touching the iniuries which the ministers multiplie in this behalf against vs in that they folowe all the aduersaries to the truthe and giue good testimonie what disquiet of minde suche kinde of people suffer when their errors are laid afore them of whom such is our pitie that we pray God to restore them to their good minde as knowing that the Conuersion of an heretike is one of the things reserued to the omnipotencie of God. The ministers labor in vaine to produce much Gréeke to shew that penetrare coelos signifieth not to passe the Heauens without opening bicause this verbe Dierchestai is found to passe where is opening But we neuer said that penetrare or Dierchestai can not be applied to places opened or that in opening them they were pierced thorow For we know in all Authors that doth encounter We said that as the ministers would inferre the Reall opening of the heauen by the rigor and propretie of the verbe aperire so might they alleage that the heauens were shutte in the Ascention of Iesus Christe by the verbes Dierchestai and penetrare signifying with rigor to pierce or passe thorowe without that of it selfe it importe opening notwithstanding it may be vsed where is a place open But by the rigour of their signification opening can not be necessarily inferred if by some woorde from else where or euident condition of the thing that is pierced the opening be not shewed as it is in the textes alleaged by the ministers In the Ascention these Verbes Dierchestai and penetrare be vsed as to pierce neither is any woord added which imports diuision of the heauens whose condition nor the estate of the glorified bodie of Iesus Christe doe not enforce any necessary vnderstanding of opening to be made to suffer the saide body of Christe to enter Therfore we argued of the rigor of penetrare as the ministers did of the wresting of aperwe which is founde in the scripture and not to signifie a Reall opening of the heauens more often than penetrare is red in the Scripture to signifie diuision or actuall seperation of the heauens for eperire coelos is founde very often for spirituall and imaginatiue opening and penetrare coelos is scarcely euer taken for actuall diuision of the Heauens And therfore better was our reason to conclude by the rigor of the verbe Dierchestai or penetrare to passe without actual diuision of the heauens than the ministers to infer the opening of the same by wresting the Verbe aperire In the last Article the ministers obiecte to vs to haue passed ouer certaine places of scripture by which appeares that Faithe is a woorke of God whereunto we say that in some of our wrytings we haue expresly confessed that Faithe in that it is a gifte of God is a woorke of god But in that he that beléeues woorkes with God in beléeuing for Nemo credit nisi volens it is a humaine worke and it is not repugnāt one selfe woorke for diuers considerations to be a woorke of God and a woorke of man And where they bring the Auncientes to haue sayde if not in propretermes yet in like that God can not bring to passe that a body be in diuers places that is false for they neuer either coulde or can shewe it as also they gainesay their laste wryting for bringing the reason why the Auncientes saide it not in expresse termes they alleaged it was bicause they neuer thoughte suche absurditie coulde fall into the braine of man which reason oughte to take place as well to speake it in termes like as in expresse termes séeing it is one selfe thing signified as wel by the one as by the other For the rest the ministers neuer Aunswere to the principall whereof they haue bene often warned and eftsoones we doe admonishe them although they terme a thousande times our spéeche matter of repetition it is that we require them to bring scripture to proue that it impugnes the order established in the world the truthe wisdome omnipotencie and immoueable wil of God one body to be in two places which they can not doe but Aunswere according to their custome nothing wherein may be discerned that their Doctrine is not founded vppon Gods woorde but vpon their propre opinion or particulare inspiration which can not be but of Sathan for being contrary to the common consent of the vniuersall Churche it can not be of the holy Ghost And vppon the same are founded also the other Articles of their Religion albeit they disguise and promisse at euery woord the word of God. A short aduertisement of the Doctors vpon the resolution of the Ministers touching the omnipotencie of God. WE maruaile of the maner of spéeche and writing vsed by the Ministers who since the beginning of the conference could neuer endure to pursue conclude one onelye point without entermedling of others which belonged nothing to the matter of the question as maye appeare by the reading of their Actes Wherein afore they set downe their resolution of Gods omnipotencie they heaped together as many Articles as they coulde remember and thrust them one vppon an other withoute occasion and reason Notwithstanding vpon their owne request we had set afore them articles of the Supper yea to the intent that after we had disputed of the almightynesse of God to make present the body and blood of Iesus Christ in the holye Sacrament we might discende by order into the declaration and proofe that suche was Gods wyll and also that he is there But we are not ignorant of the good customes of those of the religion pretended reformed to blow in the eyes of the Christians all the articles of their religion together with the polutions they inuent thereupon all vppon one lyne to the ende nothing be determined but all rest in confusion and that the Serpent runne away when he hath vomited his poyson Besides by the obseruation of their aunswers it is to bée discerned that they neuer rested vpon any certaine and selfe aunswer But to euerye question they haue returned aunswers no lesse diuers than impertinent and sometimes not to be suffered of the which we giue warning to all suche as shall reade the conferences and laying our selues vppon their iudgement beséeche them to haue good regard to the doinges of the Ministers side Moreouer we tell the Ministers that either they may or ought to know that all the sectes of our time bleare the eyes of such as they meane to blinde with the selfe same traine of articles which they haue gathered together in their resolution and that to obtaine audience in the catholike Churche and to bring in theyr errours and heresies vnder the name of Gods glory Of the which they vaunt them selues to be protectors no lesse than the Ministers wherein lyke as notwithstandyng all these they are not to be receiued or allowed in their opinions and conclusions so the Ministers cā not
appeares first by this that it belongs not to al persons to cōsecrate the bread and the wine in the supper but only to such as are lawfully ordained by the imposition of the handes of the Pastors and Bishoppes according to the succession since the Apostles till our time And it is moste certaine that the most parte of the ministers of the supposed reformed church are not ordained by the authoritie of the handes of the Pastors who haue power by succession of one to an other since the Apostles So that we must conclude that suche ministers vsurping the office that pertaines not to them can not make any consecration and by consequence they giue but common bread and wine of which Article shall be spoken when we handle the sacrifice and priesthoode Secondly to make consecration of bread and wine it suffiseth not that the person be fit to consecrate the matter but it is also necessary that by a certaine meane the lawfull minister make the consecration which is by Benediction and pronuntiation of certaine woordes vpon the matters proposed as Iesus Christe did firste obserue wherein bicause the ministers albeit they were lawfully ordained and had authoritie and power to consecrate do not vse Benediction and pronuntiation of certaine woordes vppon the Breade and Wine impugning first that which Iesus Christe did and after left it to the Apostles and their successoures to doe so they can not pretende any consecration of the Breade and Wine nor that in them doe come any mutation whereof it foloweth that as they differre not from other Breade and Wine so that banket and feast is but common and that it is blasphemie to attribute to it the name of Christian Supper And this is a partie cause why we said the ministers supper was a banket prophane and polluted We haue required the ministers to Aunswere pertinently and fully to our Demaundes which bicause they haue not done to the ende to intercept all vaine trauaile we thinke it not good for the present to impugne their Aunsweres only we summon them eftsoones to Aunswere that which is proponed to them without shifting of the conference which they pretend to holde in so deare regarde The first Demaund was general for all the Sacraments to wéete if the ministers beléeued that two things were essentiall and necessary to the confection of the Sacramente which are the matter or element and the woorde the Ministers Answere that the Sacrament considered in his perfection consists in thrée things c. they speake in determinately so that it can not be iudged if their spéeche vnderstand the Sacrament only which they call of the Supper or generally of all as they were asked albeit in respecte they alleage Ireneus it may be easily gessed that they meane not but the Sacrament of the Supper we haue also to note the woordes of their Addition considered in his perfection as alwayes to haue a hole to créepe out when we speake of the essence of the Sacrament We demaunde that they Answere to the Question proponed in general of all the Sacramentes séeing there is like reason touching the essence of the Sacraments in generall and that also they declare openly what things are essentiall and necessary in the Sacrament to be made a Sacramente without speaking for the present of the perfection of one Sacrament containing the essence and spirituall frutes which are not of the essence of the Sacrament Touching the seconde Demaund the Ministers Answere no more pertinently than to the firste And specially where we made a Demaunde that certaine woordes muste be vsed for the confection of the Sacramente and what was necessary for the Sacramente of the Supper the ministers haue sayde that the base and secrete speeche of certaine woordes addressed to the Elementes was not a necessary speeche to the confection of the sacrament We did not Demaund whether that spéeche should be pronounced high or lowe But the Question was if there be any necessary spéeches to make the sacrament which ought to be pronounced vpon the matter or in administring the matter and what might be those woordes for the supper wherin it is not inoughe to say that the word by the which the ordinance of Iesus Christ is declared is the woorde of the sacrament But they muste Answere in what woordes that speeche consistes and when it ought to be pronounced Touching the sixthe Demaunde which is the principall the ministers care not to Answere pertinently and clearely only they exhibite a captious Answer by which it can not be perceiued what is their opinion of the presence and participation of the body of Iesus Christe in the supper And so doe they temper their spéeche that there is neither Zuinglian nor Almanist which confesseth not as muche or more than they that is to say that they are conioyned to our Lord Iesus Christe and that they possesse him ii vertue of their Faithe and by the operation of the holy Ghoste as to be made fleshe of his fleshe and bones of his bones c. But it is farre from the question which was if in the sacrament of the supper the Faithfull receiue in their soules besides all the spirituall graces amongst the which is communication with our Lord Iesus Christe the true bodie and the true bloude of him Really truely and touching the substance And if in the supper the Ministers make not distinction of the substance contained and perceiued in the Sacrament from the frutes and effects which procéede therof And to be short we aske if the Ministers receiue and allowe that which Caluine in his Catechisme Institution other Bokes hathe written of the Supper and that whiche is receiued therein Touching the seuenth Demaund the Ministers haue not vnderstand what was proponed to them touching the concomitance for they haue taken it as if the Demaund ran whether it was lawful to receiue the sacrament vnder one kind or not which was not ment nor put in question onely this was the difficultie that was proponed to them whether in their supper when the bread is receiued and afore the wine be receiued they participate really with the true body of Iesus Christe and not participate with his bloud till they haue taken the wine or whether in eating the bread the bodie be receiued afore the cuppe be taken To which Demaundes to the ende Paper be not spente and moiled for nothing we admonishe the ministers to Answere without swaruing or varietie and yelde open Confession of their Faithe And that we may knowe what Doctrine we may impugne or approue Touching the Articles of the Masse we reserue them to their propre places which is of the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Iesus Christe after it be knowne and proued that they are present in the supper and holy sacrament Sunday the fourthe of August the yeare aforesaide An Answere of the Ministers to the vvryting of the Doctours sent vnto them by the Duke of Nyuernois the Wedensday morning the seuenth
conference to the ende it dissolue afore this matter be cleared In which respect to conclude and resolue in all the conference we are determined with Gods grace to set downe in writing no lesse briefly than as clearly as we can all that which God hath taught vs and we learned by his word of these matters as wel to satisfie our duty to God and his honor our obedience to the Lorde of Neuers and the Lady of Buyllon as also to content in the end and edifye the church A conclusion and resolution of the pointes aswell of the supper as of the Masse contayning that which the Ministers beleue and teach therof in their churches by the woord of God. THe ende soueraigne felicitie of men is to be knit with God dwel in him for that it is the onely meane by which their desires may be contented and satisfied and their harts and mindes fully deliuered from the hard and cruell seruitude of sinne and al other passions lustes feares distrusts which oppresse thē the same being the occasion that S. Paule placed perfect blessednesse and euerlasting rest of the happy in that the God is in them all things But bicause mē are naturally corrupt and vicious and of the contrary God is pure and holy in all perfection the difficulty is how to chuse the meane by which they may approche vnto him seing there is no societie betwene light and darknes nor any cōmunion betwene iustice and iniquity This meane cannot be found in them bicause that of them selues they are altogether inable and incapable to be raysed from the miserie and malediction whereunto they are falne headlong in such sorte as being blynde of vnderstanding they cannot knowe what is good for them and muche lesse séeke for it being frowarde and of hardened heartes And therfore it is necessary to forsake and come out of themselues and searche the meane aforesaid in Iesus Christ who was giuen vnto them of the father to be their iustice wysedome sanctification redemption way lyfe and truth Onely there restes now to know how they may be vnited and conioyned with him The Apostle teacheth vs it is done by faith by which Iesus Christ dwelleth in our heartes and restes in vs so that he and we are made all one as he is one wyth his father There be two principall causes of this fayth the one is outward and the other inwarde The inwarde is the holy spirite which is called a spirite of faith bicause he is the author thereof and hath created and produced it in the hearts of men inclining and disposing them to receiue in all obedience the worde and promise of God preached vnto them by the faithfull Executors and Ministers of the same whiche word is the externall cause of faith And as this faith increaseth and riseth by degrées so doth also the vnitie wée haue with Iesus Christ and by this meane with God vntyll as S. Paule saith that we concurre and méete all together in the vnitie of the faith and knowledge of the sonne of God in perfect man in the maner of a perfect stature of Christ This encrease of faith comes by the operation and vertue of the holy spirite which was the originall and first author of it And then after by the continuance of the worde purely preached and pronounced And lastly by the lawfull vse of the Sacramentes prouided as seales for the certaintye and confirmation of the fayth and assurance which we haue of the sayde coniunction with God by Iesus Christ together with participation of all the benefites grauntes giftes graces and blessinges which are purchased for vs by his fauour as remission of synnes our regeneration and mortification of the flesh with his concupiscence For the better signification of which thinges and to assure vs of the exhibition and vse of the same Baptisme was ordayned of God to the ende that in the water sprinkled vpon our bodies and in the promise of God added therewith we may behold as wyth our eyes the inuisible grace which God doth to vs to wash vs and make vs cleane of our spirituall ordures and so to sanctifie vs and make vs new creatures as also to assure vs continuallye of the eternall lyfe and make vs encrease in the hope we haue by our participatiō of the flesh of Iesus Christ crucified for our redemption and of his bloud shed for the remission of our synnes The bread and wyne are distributed to vs in the supper by the ordinance of Iesus Christ But as we acknowledge an vnitie and sacramentall coniunction betwene the exterior signe and the thing signified by it so we saye of the other side that betwene them both there is such a distinction that the one ought not to be confused with the other neither the spirituall thing so tyed to the corporall which representes it that either the one without the other cannot be receiued or by necessity they both bée alwayes indeuidablye knyt together Whereof it followeth that such are in errour who hold that in the supper the bread is transnatured into the substāce of the body of Iesus Christ And likewise those that say it is there knit and vnited corporally so that who soeuer receiues takes those signes be he faithfull or infidel takes and receiues immediately the thing signified by them Which errour wyth the moste part of others crept in vpon this matter hath proceeded in that men haue not well comprehended what it is to eate the body and drinke the bloud of Iesus Christ which ought not to be vnderstand as a maner that corporal meates are taken eaten but onely of a spirituall fashion as is declared in the sixt of S. Iohn which consistes in that that Iesus Christ dwelles in vs and we in him the same being done by the faith we haue in him As S. Augustine teacheth in his .25 treatise vpon S. Iohn saying why doest thou prepare thy belly and thy teeth beleue and thou hast eaten it Likewise in his third booke of Christian doctrine chap. 16. as followeth whē Iesus Christ saith if you eate not the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall not haue lyfe in you It seemes he commaundes to commit a great crime so that it is a figure by the which we ought not vnderstand other thing but that we must communicate with the passion of the Lord and kepe in memorie that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. Then the eating of the flesh and body of Iesus Christ is no other thyng than a straight coniunction and vnitie wée haue with hym which is wrought by the fayth we repose in his promises euen as by the mutuall promises made and receiued betwene a man and his wyfe the mariage concludes and is established betwene them wherein albeit being so knit they happen by any occasion to be seperate and farre of one from the other touching their bodies yet are they
for all that one flesh and one body by meane of the societie and matrimoniall acquaintaunce betwene them In like sort be it that Iesus Christ with whom we are knyt and vnited by faith and trust we haue in him and in his promises be as in respect of his body resident in heauen and we remaine here on earth so that there is a great distance betwene him and vs touching his bodye yet that doth not hinder vs to be flesh of his flesh and bones of his bones and that he is not our head and we his mēbers he our husband and we his spouse that we are not of one self body tyed with him that we are not cloathed of him and that we dwell not in him as the braunches in the vine Neither is there distance of time or place what soeuer it be nor difference of seasons which may hinder that coniunction that the faithfull eate truly his flesh and blood For as the auncient Fathers notwithstandyng they were two or three thousande yeares afore Christ dyed yet forbare not to communicate in his flesh crucified and eate the same meate spirituallye which we eate and drinke the same drink spiritually which we drinke so the faythfull also whiche are comen twelue or fiftene hundreth yeares after forbeare not in what place soeuer they be to participate as the Fathers with the same meate and drinke which they did Neither is there anye other difference betwene the eating of the Fathers that were before the comming of Iesus Christ and suche as haue followed hym but the reason of the more or of the lesse whiche is that in the one there is more ample and expresse declaration of Gods good wyll towardes vs than in the other By which we ought to conclude that from the beginning of the world vntyl the ende there was neuer nor euer shall be other coniunction betwene our Lord Iesus Christ and his Churche than spirituall that is purchased by the spirite of god For euen as there is but one fayth in the Fathers and in vs which considereth alwayes on the one and other syde our Lorde Iesus Christe euen so are not wée conioyned with him in other sorte than they were So that as the Fathers had no other societie or communication then spirituall euen so it followeth also that we neither are nor can be otherwise vnited with him than spiritually And yet do we not say that we and the Fathers are not fleshe of hys flesh and bones of his bones that altogether we participate not as wel with his humanitie as with his diuinitie But all our saying and opinion stretcheth to this that this participation which we haue there is by the operation and vertue of the holy spirite Which Iesus Christ in S. Iohn speaking of this coniunction teacheth clearelye in these fewe wordes the thinges whereof I speake to you are the spirite and life as also S. Paule our Fathers sayth he haue eaten the same spirituall meate and dronke the same spirituall drinke Wherein when we speake of thys spirituall eating both in vs and in our Fathers it must not be thought therefore that we would reiect the holye Supper of the Lord or once thinke that in the same the vse of breade and wyne is superfluous no more then the vse of the water in the Baptisme For our Lorde knowing the hardnesse of our vnderstanding together wyth the infirmitie and weakenesse of oure hearts and by a pitie compassion he hath of vs seekyng to remedye the same was not onely content to leaue vnto vs the ministerie of hys word to assure vs of the participation which we haue in hys flesh and bloud and all the benefites lykewyse depending thereupon But he hath also added thereunto the signes of breade and wyne which he hath annexed to his word as seales to seale in our heartes by the vse of the same the fayth which wée haue of the sayd coniunction by his woord Like as it dyd not suffise him to haue contracted the alliance with Abraham by the word and promise he made him but he added further the signe of Circumcision as a seale to confirme and assure more amply the sayd alliance To the ende then that euery one vnderstande what is the supper of the Lord and also what we beleue and teach of it ther must be considered and acknowledged in the same three thinges First the ordinaunce of the Lord contayned in hys woorde and declared by his Minister according to his commaundement By the which word this holy ceremony was ordained and established in the Churche to edifie and entertayne the members of the same which must be diligentlye obserued as to haue it in such honour and reuerence as appertaineth and not to put it on the beadroll or sorte of other ceremonies who haue no other ground or reason of authoritie than the onely wil and traditions of men yet there must be héede taken that by the institution and ordinance whereof we speake ther is vnderstanded a certaine pronunciation of words or any vertue which is hid in them as do the prests of the Romish church who by ignorance and their superstitious opinion thinke to haue consecrated and transubstanciated the bread and wyne which is in their Masse by the vertue of fiue wordes Hoc est enim corpus meum breathed and pronounced vpon the elementes Wherein they are no lesse deceiued than abused bicause the woord which is the formall cause of the sacrament is not a word sayd and spoken simply but a declaration of the institution and ordinance of God don by the Minister according to his cōmaundement and a predication of the death of Iesus Christ wyth the fruite of the same by the which the heartes of the hearers are raysed into contemplation and meditation of his benefites and theyr faith kyndled and enflamed in his loue And where this is not done as is sayd we must not thynke that the elementes are sacramentes as S. Augustine teacheth vppon S. Iohn 80. Treatise in these termes from whence comes this vertue to the water that in touching the bodie it washeth the heart but that it is done by the woord not bicause it is pronounced but by reason it is beléeued this woorde is the woorde of faith which we preache sayeth the Apostle which is if we confesse with our mouthe that Christe is the Lord and beleeue in our heart that God hath raised him from the deade we shal be saued wherin continuing his matter he addes in the end these woordes this woorde of faithe which we preache is the same without doubt by which baptisme is consecrated to the end it may clense and washe The ministers inferre héere before two things the one that the woorde of Consecration is not as is saide a simple pronunciation but a publike and manifest declaration of the institution and ordinance with all the misterie of the deathe of Iesus Christe The other that the signes and Elementes consecrated are not chaunged in
founde that in one selfe place the two manners of speeche haue bene vsurped in their wrytings as in a Canon of the Councel of Nace wher is saide it hathe bene thus concluded of the Table of the Lorde and of the mysterie vppon the same meaning of the woorthie bodie and bloude of Iesus Christe At the Table of the Lorde we ought not to re●● fixed basely vppon the bread and wine there se●te oute but to raise our hartes on highe by Faithe with persuasion that vppon the holy Table is exhibited the Lambe of God which takes vpon him the sinnes of the worlde which is sacrificed of the Priestes and not killed And communicating truely with his bodie precious bloud we oughte to beléeue that those things are signes of our Resurrection By which may be séene howe in one place the fathers haue spoken properly calling breade and wine the signes and elementes which are presented in the supper and by figure also naming the same signes the Lambe of God which takes vpon him the sinnes of the worlde Suche therefore as reade the scriptures and Aunciente Fathers are warned by the discourse of the two manners of spéeche aforesaide to vse diligent héede that for not distinguishing the places where the saide spéeches are vsurped they confounde them not taking that which oughte to be vnderstande by figure as if it were properly spoken and proper spéeche as if it were vnderstande by Figure wherein must be alwayes remembred in the reading of the scripture as also the Auncientes the opinion of S. Augustine in his Booke of Christian Doctrine we muste beware saythe he that we take not a Figuratiue spéeche for the letter whereunto may be referred the saying of the Apostle the letter killeth and the spirite reuiues So that to vnderstande that which is sayde by figure as if it were spoken properly is a fleshly wisdome Vppon the ende of the Chapter he remembreth one worthy sentence that it is a miserable seruitude of the soule to take the signes for the thing signified and not to be able to raise the eye of the spirite aboue the corporall creature to drawe the eternall lighte To come to the thirde parte of the supper being the spirituall and celestiall thing which is there represented and exhibited vnto vs as well in the elements as in the action we say that it is Iesus Christe crucified offred on the Crosse to God his father for the expiation perfect satisfaction of all the sinnes of the world And to make vs enioy the fruite of this sacrifice and to applie to vs iustice remission of sinnes life grace of God with all the other fauors and blissings which by the same sacrifice haue bene purchased obtained for vs The word and the Sacramentes haue bene left and ordayned for vs and specially that of the Supper wherin as vpon a table we behold Iesus Christ sufferyng for vs all the dollours and anguishes of death paying our debts and cancelling the bonde that was against vs carying vppon him selfe our malediction to discharge vs of it and by his obedience reconciling vs to God his father and appeasing his wrath towardes vs All which thinges are represented and assured to vs in the Supper when with a true fayth we come thither to celebrate it Then the Supper was not ordayned to be a sacrifice propiciatorie as the Doctors teache and the Romish churche falsly beleueth but to be a Sacrament to kéepe fresh and preserue alwayes the memorie which wée ought to hold constantlye of the death and sacrifice of Iesus Christ There is great difference betwene sacrament and sacrifice bicause in sacrifice we present to God our oblatiōs and in the sacrament God of the contrarie doth offer and communicate with vs hys graces and giftes Also in the sacrifice for synne there is death and effusion of bloude of the host and oblation and not in the sacrament but onely the application of the fruites and effectes of the sacrifice So that in the Supper Iesus Christ is not eftsoones sacrificed but the fruites of his obedience and of the merite of hys sacrifice are there distributed and receiued by the faythfull By the reasons aforesayde we conclude that it is a blasphemie and sacriledge to call the bread of the Masse of a romish Priest an host saluatorie And if to proue it the auncientes be alledged in whose writinges it is found that sometime the Supper was called oblation and sacrifice we answer that first that belonges nothyng to the Masse of the Priestes betwene the which and the Supper there is no affinitie And then that which the auncientes haue sayde that they neuer vnderstoode it a Sacrifice propiciatorie by the which remission of synnes is gotten and obtayned Neither haue they beleued or thought that there was an other sacrifice to appease Gods wrath and purchase a reconcilement betwene him men than the onely sacrifice of Iesus Christ made by him onely once vpon the crosse We say then in effect thrée thinges first that there neither is nor can be other sacrificator of the newe Testament than Iesus Christ The reasons are bicause there is none but he of whom it hath bene said thou art priest eternally according to the order of Melchisedeck Also ther is none but he to whom may be applyed the conditions and essentiall qualities of the sacrificator and of the sacrificature which be that the sacrificator be holy innocent without spot seperated from sinners exalted aboue the heauens who hath not neede euery day to offer sacrifices first for his own sinnes and then for the sins of the people Also there is none but he which either is or may be mediator betwene God and men that is able to satisfie the deuine iustice capable to beare endure the wrath of God that can tame and ouercome death that by his death and proper bloude is able to procure the ratification of the new testament and who lastly is able in fauour and contemplation of hys merites and dignities to obtayne of God the remission of synne with other graces which are necessarie to such as seeke him and trust in him Secondly we saye there is no other sacrifice for synne but that of Iesus Christe who is the onelye Lambe that beares the synne of the world that there is but his bloud by the which our abominations are washed made cleane To be short that God takes no pleasure in other sacrifice or oblation and that he requires no other Holocaustes nor offering for synne and that for this reason Iesus Christ as is written of him in the roule of the law is come to do and accomplish the wyll of God his father Thirdly we say of the sacrifice of Iesus Christ that it is onely and once offered by him●elfe without néede euer after to repeate or reitterate it considering his perfection and vertue by the which synne is abolished and perfect and eternall sanctification obtained to all the chosē as appeareth in the. 9 10. to
to the sacrifice which they pretend of the body and blood of Iesus Christ where it is sayd for the which we offer thee or who offer thee c. That which we say of the sacrificature that it is common to al the church to offer to God sacrifice of thankes giuyng ought not to be slaūderously interpreted as though we wold confuse the ecclesiastical ministery wyth the sayd sacrificature and by that meane reuerse and trouble the order of the church giuing to euery one an autority power to gouerne it For we know well inough that vocations are different amongst the people of God and that it is necessarye that in the church ther be Pastors Doctors with other Ministers as Deacons and Auncients to guide it well and edifie as well by continual preaching of the word as carefull execution of other thinges concerning their charges onelye wee must distinguish those vocations which are particular from the sacrificature aforesaid which ought to be generall and common as is sayd to all the Church Such now as with diligence wyll obserue the matters here before discoursed proued by Gods word may easely see iudge that the Masse as it is celebrate at this day in the Romish church is the whole corruption reuersement of the institution of the supper which Iesus Christ hath established and left in his church so that at this daye it is impossible to finde or discerne one onely mark of his first ordinance For of a sacrament which Iesus Christ left in his church to ed●y and entertain it in a present memory of his death they haue made a sacrifice by the which the remembrance of the same Iesus Christ is altogether buried defaced Wherin there is this thing specially maruelous and no lesse worthy to be wel noted that the which appertained not but to the sonne of God impossible to any to do but to himselfe as to sacrifice for synne to reconcile men vnto God to appease his wrath towards them to intercesse for fauour and helpe of them the Prests attribute to themselues And that which is lawfull cōmaunded yea possible for them to do as to solemnise the memory of Iesus Christ in taking breaking distributing and eating the bread and drinking the wine to declare his death they haue altogether left So that as we may say that whatsoeuer Christ did in the supper and commaunded to do the Priestes do nothing at all euen so what he did on the crosse and commaunded man neuer to do it the Priests vndertake and seeke to do it The errors and abuses aswel of transubstanciation as of sacrificature and sacrifice expiatory and the repeticion of the same which be the principall partes and as it were the groundes of the Masse haue bene heretofore confuted and sufficiētly ouerthrown as wel by Gods word as other reasons here alledged in the declaratiō of the parts of that supper And now ther restes no more to batter wholy this Idol but to shew that the residue of the Masse is no better stuffe nor better grounded in Gods word For the adoration which is there done to the bread and wine is an idolatry condemned and cursed of god And it is not likely to be true that Iesus Christ instituting the supper had not ordained it S. Paule reciting this as he had receiued it of the Lord had not taught it and that the auncient church had omitted it if it had bene a thing wherin God might haue bene any way honored Besides the seperation of the Priest from the people is directly contrary to the article of faith of the Communion of the church and contrary to the purpose end for the which the supper was ordained the same tending to confirme and entertaine the societie that ought to be betwene the faythfull and bynde them alwayes more strayghtly one to another So that as it cannot be more rightly tearmed than a presumption intollerable and a manyfest disdayne of the rest of Gods people So that whiche the Doctors haue alledged to excuse and couer such a sacriledge is no lesse vaine and friuolous which is that the Masse of the Priestes doth not forbeare to be good not withstanding the assistants wyl not communicate ther. For first they are forbidden to eate alone in the supper and there is no supper where is no communion as S. Paule teacheth rebuking the Corinthians for departing one frō an other in the celebration of their supper When saith he you assemble your selues together it is not to eate the supper of the Lord séeing whē ye come to eating euery one aduaunceth to take it particularlye Therefore vpon the end of the chapter teaching them what forme to vse therein he sayth therefore my brethren when you assemble to eate tary one for an other Besides it happeneth often times that in their Masse there is none but the Priest and a litle Clarke to aunswer him whom they wyll not take to communicate with them Also howe can they excuse the Masses which are soong in Monasteries wher the people are defended to communicate with the Moonkes that celebrate them yea it is ordinarelye séene in great parishes in Paris and elswhere that when the people communicate they are seperate from the Prests who doing their businesse a part disdayne to eate and cōmunicate at one table with them And what cōmunion is there betwene the Priestes and the people séeing that in place to breake in the assemblye one selfe loafe to the ende that all participating therein shoulde by that meane be the more straightly conioyned and knyt in one selfe body euerye one hath his owne a part the Priest a greater and the people one somewhat lesse Séeing also the Chalice is in no sort distributed Furthermore what indeuor is vsed by the prests to inuite and exhorte the people to comunicate wyth them yea euen the Bishops who at this day hold it as a matter of shame to communicate with Artisans and other people of meane condition For conclusion if the Doctors had well considered the customes of the auncients who caused to go out of the place wher the Communion was done the Catachumeni and others not prepared to communicate And likewise if they had remembred the doctrine of S. Iohn Chrisostome shame would haue forbid them to defend such an abuse and impietie as is that of their Masse Wherin to the ende the people shal not rest ignorant in the opinion of that holy Doctor we wyl here deuide it word by word It is in vayne that the dayly oblatiō is done it is in vayne that we remayne at the aulter ther is no body that Communicates there I say not this to the ende you Communicate in any fashion but to the ende you make your selues woorthy of it Arte thou not woorthy to Communicate no more art thou to pray A little after he saythe further if any were called to a banket and washed his handes and being set at the