is no consecration THis change and so horrible a depravation of the institution of the Lord hath wholy abolished the nature of the Sacrament For Sacraments are sacred signes Not onely the Ancient but also all the Doctors of the Roman Church doe define the Sacrament after that manner saying that Sacramentum est sacrum signum So in Baptisme water is the signe and Christs blood is the thing signified And in the holy Supper the bread and the wine are the signes but the body and blood of Christ are the things signified Even therefore as if the water were taken away from Baptisme it would be no more a Sacrament nor Baptisme so the Eucharist in the Roman Church is no more a Sacrament since the signes to wit the bread and wine are abolished in stead of which they put Christs naturall body and blood which they call the Sacrament Wherefore the Councell of Trent ordaineth that the Sacrament be worshipped Ses XIII chap. 5. By this meanes Christ in the Masse is the figure and the signe of himselfe Bellav lib. 2. de Euchar cap. 24 Christus sui ipsus sigura fuit as Bellarmine with the rest teacheth as if one should say that a man is the picture of himselfe Moreover the Sacraments are not instituted for to make Christ come downe to us but to lift up our hearts to him Nor for to eate Christ with our teeth but to feed our soules and strengthen our faith Againe by Transubstantiation the consecration of the Sacrament is destroyed and there is nothing in the Masse that is consecrated The bread is not consecrated for they hold that the bread is no more bread Christs body is not consecrated for Christ cannot be consecrated by men Neither can the accidents of bread and wine be consecrated For lines colours and taste are not the offering which is pretended to be offered unto God Therefore there being nothing consecrated there is no consecration and there being no consecration there is no Sacrament CHAP. IV. That by altering the Lords Institution the Romane Church hath changed the nature of Christ THis change is gone so farre that Christs humane nature by Transubstantiation is wholy destroyed and abolished For the Scripture speaking of Christs humane nature saith that he is like unto us in all things Heb. 2.17 c. 4.15 sinne excepted But the Roman Church gives unto Christ a body that is nothing like ours Whence followeth that he is no more our brother so that all the glory of the faithfull which consisteth in haveing a brother who is the eternall Sonne of God is altogether abolished For the Church of Rome forgeth unto Christ a body which is in many severall places at one and the same time which is in Heaven and upon severall Altars but not in the space that is between From whence followeth that Christs body is separated from it selfe and farre from it selfe and higher and ower than it selfe There is no lesse aburdity in willing that an humane body â—e at the same time in severall remote places than to will that a man in one and the selfe same moment be in two severall yeares and so be young and old at once and out-live himselfe The same doctrine giveth unto Christ an humane body which is whole in every crumme of the Hoste and hath his head and his feet in one and the selfe same place and both his eies under one point Can a man say that a body whose parts are not one out of the other and differ not in situation and which taketh and filleth no place and is more spirituall than the very spirits themselves is a true humane body And for that cause the priests of the Romane Church shave or keep short the beard of their upper lips For that Church beleeveth that if a Priest should dip his mustachoe in the chalice the whole body of Christ would remaine hang'd at every haire thereof The same doctrine forgeth unto Christ two bodies of a contrary nature and unto which are attributed contradictory things For the body of Christ which was at the table celebrating the Eucharist did speake and stirre his hands But he that was in the mouthes and stomaâ—â— of the Apostles neither spake not stiâ—â— his hands The soule of Christ as he at the table was in anguish but tâ—â— which was in the Apostles mouth suâ—â—red no griefe Christ after he was riâ—â— from the table entred into the gardâ—â— did sweat great drops of blood but that was in the Apostles stomacks did 〈◊〉 sweat drops of blood Which of thâ— two is our Saviours Or if it be the sat Christ how is he contrary to himselfe Furthermore by this doctrine 〈◊〉 whole history of Christs life is madeâ—â— diculous and turn'd into a fable Fâ—â— if Christs body may be in severall remoâ—â— places at once it may be said that whilâ—â— he was in the Virgins wombe peradventure he was in other wombes And thâ— whilst he was upon the Crosse he walked in Spaine From thence also followeth that all the journies that Chrisâ— made to and fro going and comminâ— from Galilea to Judea were to no purpose For why did he goe from Galilea to Judea if he might be in both places at one the same time and be found it Judea without budging from Galilea What say they is not God omnipotent for to doe this I answer that God without question could doe all these things if he would But I say It is impossible that God should will such things For he is no lyar and cannot contradict himselfe But it were to contradict himselfe if he would that at one and the same time a man should speake and not speake stirre and not stirre suffer and not suffer and be farre and remote and divided from himselfe He will have Christs body to be a true humane body God will not have a thing so absurd and contradictory wherby they will that in the Hoste there be accidents without a subject Innoc. III. lib. 4. de myster Missa cap. 11. Est enim hic color sapor quantitas qualitas cùm nihil alterutro sit coloratum aut sapidum quantum aut quaâ—â— and as Pope Innocent the third teacheth that there be in the hoste greatnesse and nothing great color and nothing coloured As if one should suppose an ecclipse of the Sunne without a Sunne a halting of a legge and no legge a sicknesse without a sick-man Besides the omnipotencie of God is not the rule of our faith but his Will By that meanes a man might maintaine all the fables of the Alcoran saying that God is powerfull so to doe Joyne to this that God doth nothing but wisely Therefore he will never have Christ to be subject to sinnefull men now that he is glorified and be exposed to 〈◊〉 disgraces and ignominie which thâ— make him suffer every day whereof shâ—â— be spoken hereafter CHAP. V. Of Maldonats audaciousnesse 〈◊〉 giving Saint Paul and Saiâ— Luke the lye and
Cup his blood These things Bethren are called Sacraments because in them one thing is seene and another is understood What is seene hath a corporall forme What is meant hath a spirituall fruite If then thou wilt understand what the body of Christ is heare the Apostle saying to the Faithfull Ye are Christs body and his members If ye bee therefore Christs body and members your mysterie is set on the table of the Lord c. He giveth the same exposition in the 26 Treatise upon Saint John By this mâ—ate and by this drinke the Lord will have to bee understood the society and fellowship of his body and of his members to wit the holy Church of the Predestinate And in the Roman Canon in the a Distinction of the Consecration at the Canon Hoc est a Coelestis anis qui â—hristi caro 〈◊〉 suo modo â—ocatur â—rpus â—hristi cum 〈◊〉 vera sit â—cramentii â—rporis â—hristi illiâ—s videliâ—t quod â—alpabile â—ortale in â—uce posiâ—m est tâ—b Glos â—oeleste Saâ—amentum â—uod vere â—praesenâ—t Christi â—rnemdiciâ—r corpus â—hristi sed â—aproprie crum diciâ—r suo moâ—â—sed non â—iveritate sed significante mysterio Vt sit sensus vocatur Chriâ—â— corpus id est significatur The heavenly bread which is the flesh of Christ is after its manner called the body of Christ although to speake truely it be the sacred signe of Christs body to wit of that which being visible palpable mortall was put upon the Crosse And thereupon the Glosse of the Doctors hath these words which truely are excellent The heavenly Sacrament that representeth truely the flesh of Christ is called the body of Christ but improperly for it is thus called after its manner but not according to the truth of the thing but by a significant mystery So that the sense is that it is called the body of Christ that is to say that it is signified S. Cyprian in his 63 Epistle will have in the sacred Cup water to be mingled with the wine His reason is because that as the wine is the blood of Christ so the water is the People and that the People ought not to bee divided from Christ b §. 9. Quando in Calice vino aqua â—iscetur Christo populus adunatur c. Sivinum tantum quis â—crat sanguis Christi inc pit esse sine nobis si veroaqua sit sola â—ebs incipit esse sinc Christo If saith he any one offereth nothing but wine Christs blood beginneth to bee without us but if the water be alone the people begins to be without Christ Whereby it followeth that as Cyprian did not beleeve that the water was transubstantiated into the people so did he not beleeve that the wine was transubstantiated into the body of Christ And in the same Epistle c Vinum fuit quod sanguiuem suii dixit That which Christ called his blood was wine And in the 76 Epistle d Dominus corpus suii paneÌ„ vocat de multorii granorum adunationâ— congestum The Lord called his body the bread compounded with the gathering together of many graines We have a Treatise of the two natures of Christ against Nestorius and Eutyches made by Pope Gelasius who wrote about the yeare of our Lord 495. There is this sentence to be found which vexeth and grieves mightily our Adversaries e Certe Sacramenta quae sumimus corporis sanguinis Christi divina res est propter quod per eadeÌ„ divinae effiscimur consortes naturae tameÌ„ esse non desinit substaÌ„tia panis vini Et certe image similitudo corporis et sanguinis Christi in actione mysteriorum celebraÌ„tur Certainely the Sacraments that we take of the body blood of Christ are a divine thing for which cause also by them we are made partakers of the divine nature and yet the substance or nature of the bread and wine ceaseth not to be And verily the Image and similitude of the body and blood of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries Note that hee disputed against the Eutychians who held that the substance of the body of Christ was passed and changed into the substance of the divine nature The controversy was not about the conversion of the accidents but of the Substance which Gelasius maintaineth to remaine in the body of the Lord as the substance of the bread remaineth in the Sacrament Now no man can doubt but that this Book be of Gelasius Bishop of Rome Hoc etiam eatae meâ—orie Papa Gelasius c. in co â—bro quem â—emoratus â—â—ntistes â—onscripsit â—dversus eâ—â— qui in 〈◊〉 omino Ieâ— duarum at urarum â—olunt indiâ—â—aÌ„ credere â—ritatem Quomodo â—cend t in â—â—lum nisi â—â—ia localis verus est â—mo aut â—omodo aâ—st fidelâ—â—s suiâ—â—nisi â—â—a idem â—mensus 〈◊〉 â—rus dâ—us seeing that Fulgentius who lived in Gelasius time alleadgeth it * in his Book to Feâ—randus the Deacon in the 2 proposition and attributeth it to the Pope Gelasius Fulgentius Disciple to S. Austin in his second Book to Trasimondus chap. 17. a How is Christ ascended into Heaven but because he is in a place and a man indeed Or how is he present to his Faithfull ones but because he is infinit and a God indeed Again in his Book of the Faith to Peter the Deacon chap. 19. b Cuâ— nunc id est tempore nov Testamenti cum Paâ—e et Sp Sancto cum quibs illi est una diviniâ—as sacrificium â—ais et â—â—niâ—n side et charitâ—te sancta Ecclesia Catholica per uversum orâ—â—â—â—eâ—rae offerre non cessat etc. The holy Catholick Church which is over all the world now that is to say under the New Testament ceaseth not to offer unto Christ Jesus with the Father and the holy Ghost with whom he is one and the same Godhead a Sacrifice of bread and wine in Faith and Charity For in those caâ—n ill oblations of the Old Tetestament there was a figure of Christs flesh which he was to offer for our sins being without sin But in the sacrifice of the Eucharist is made an action of thankesgiving and a remembrance of the flesh of Christ which he offered for us and of the blood that himselfe who is God hath shed for us Besides this that he calleth the Holy Supper a remembrance and a Sacrifice of bread and wine it is very remarkable that he saith that this Sacrifice of bread and wine is offered unto Christ Jesus Whereby it appeareth that this Sacrifice is not Christ himselfe for Christ is not Sacrificed unto Christ Facundus an Affrican Bishop who wrote about the yeare of our Lord 550 in the defence of three heads or points of the Councell of Chalcedon * Potest Sacramentum adoptionis adoptio nuÌ„cupari sanguâ—neÌ„ dicimus noÌ„ quod proprie corpuâ— ejus sit panis poculum sanguis sed quod in se mysterium
in us hee must be eaten by the mouth of the bodie Christ by the same reason must eate us that we may dwell in him 11. Christ for to divert and turne away our mindes from carnall thoughts addeth in the 63 Verse The fâ—est profiteth nothing It is the Spirit that quickneth Since that by the spirit hee meaneth his Spirit whereby he regenerateth us by the flesh also he understandeth his human body Whereof he saith that it profiteth nothing to wit being taken after that manner as the Capernaites did imagine themselves What would it profit a man to have in his stomach the head and feet of Christ Jesus whether hee doe swallow him by peeces and parcels or doe swallow him whole For the absurditie is a like 12. Christ addeth The words that I have spoken unto you are spirit and life that is to say are spirituall and quickening They are not quickning but to them that understand them spiritually and that imagine not a carnall and corporall manducation So teacheth Saint Austin in his 27 Treatise upon Saint John Hee demandeth * Quid est spiritus vita sunt Responder Spirit aliter intelligenda sunt Intellexisti spiritaliter spiritus vâ—â—a sunt Int ellexisti carnalâ—ter â—tiam siâ— spiritus vâ—â—a sunt sed tibi non sunt What meaneth these words are spirit and life His answer is That they must be under stood spiritually Hast thou understood them spiritually They are spirit and life unto thee Hast thou understood them carnally In this manner they bee also spirit and life but not unto thee 13. And upon that the Capernaites and some of the Lords Disciples were scandelized and said that these words were an hard saying he saith unto them * Illi putabant cum erogaturum corpus suum ille autem dixit se ascensurum in coelum utique integrum Cum videritis Fil um hominis ascendentem ubicral prius certe vel tune videbitis quia non co modo quo putatis crogat corpus suum Certe vel tunâ— intelligetis quta gratia ejus non consumitur morsibus What and if ye shall see then the Sonne of man ascend where he was before Which words Saint Austin in the same Treatise explaineth thus What meaneth that Thereby he resolveth that which had moved them They thought he would give them his body but he saith unto them that he would ascend up to heaven to wit whole and entire When ye have seene the sonne of man ascending where he was before certainely then at leâ—st shall ye see that he giveth not his body as ye thinke Then at the least shall ye understand that his grace is not consumed with biting CHAP. III. That the Romane Church by this doctrine depriveth the People of Salvation THat which grieves our Adversaries most in all this discourse of the â—ord is this clause of the 53 Verse Veâ—ily I say unto you Except ye eate the flesh â—f the sonne of man and drinke his blood â—e have no life in you For if by these words Christ doe speake of the partiâ—ipation of the Sacrament it followes that the People of the Roman Church whom they have deprived of the cup â—hall have no life and are lost eternally â—or they drinke not Christs blood To say as Bellarmin doth that the People â—akes the blood in the Hoste is to say â—ust nothing For Christ commandeth â—ot onely to take his blood but also commandeth to drinke it If he speaketh of the Sacrament hee commandeth men not onely to be partakers of his blood but also declareth the kind and manner how he will have them to participate thereof for to drinke is thâ— kinde and manner of participating thereof Briefly he commandeth to drinke But to eate a dry Hoste or wafer is noâ— to drinke That if to eate is to drinke the Priest drinketh twice in the Masse once in taking the Hoste and anotheâ— time in taking the Cup. Vnto which thâ— common sense contradicteth and Popâ—â— Innocent the third too in his fourt Booke of the Mysteries of the Masse Chapter 21. Neither is the blood drunâ— saith he under the species of the bread nor the body eaten under the species of tâ—â— wine Here then our Adversaries do forge an absurd figure whereby to drinâ— signifieth to eate Everywhere else the doe distinguish eating from drinking but here they confound them as if thâ— were all one Indeede to eate and 〈◊〉 drinke taken in a spirituall sense signifieth one and the same thing Bâ—â— when the question is of the Sacramâ—â— of the Eucharist and of eating thâ— bread and drinking the Chalice tâ— eate and to drinke are different thing That if to eate the Hoste be to drink so to drinke the Cup shall be to eaâ—â— the Cup. And if drinking bee take figuratively why not also the word eating Here the truth is so strong that Vasquez the Jesuite sticks not to dispute with might and maine against Bellarmin who saith that the Lord commandeth only the perception of his blood but not the manner of participating therunto * Vasquez in III. partem Tomo 3. Disp 206 num 50. Hoc respoÌ„ sum mihi non proba tur quia verba Domini non tantum reseruntur ad rem sumpt am sed ad modum sumeÌ„ dâ—eam Nam manducare bibere si verba proprie usurpentur â—â—â—tois species cor venire non possunt neque enim sanguis sub specie panis bibâ— dicitur sicut neque corpus sub specie vini manducari ut optime notat Innocent III lib. 4. de Mysteriis Missae qu mvis sumâ— dicatur Christus autem praecipit ut bibamus I do not approve saith he of this answer because the words of the Lord have not only reference unto the thing that is taken but to the manner of taking it For to eate and to drink if the words be taken properly cannot agree with any species whatsoever For the blood is not said to be drunk under the species of the bread no more than the body is eaten under the species of the wino as Innocent the third observeth very well in his 4 Book chap. 21. And he addeth a thing very considerable to wit that from this answer of Bellarmin who will have this word drinking to bee taken improperly it will follow that in the whole chapter there shall not be a word spoken of the Cup. Salmeron another Iesuite is of the same opinion saying * Salmer Tom. 9. Tract 24. Quinon bibit non bibit sanguinam â—eet carneÌ„ et sanguine siâ—mat that he that drinketh not drinketh not the blood though he do take the flesh and blood But the same Jesuites that contest against their own fellows bring no better things themselves They say that when Christ said Except ye drink my blood yee have no life in you he bindeth the people to drink the Cup and that they drink it indeed in as much as the Priest drinketh for the people and representeth the
in correctiâ—â— Saint Matthew Saint Marâ— And touching the fruit of thâ— Vine OF all the words which the Loâ—â— used in the Institution of the Eâ—charist none gaule and vex our Adversaries more than those which he pronounced in delivering the cup saying This Cup is the New Testament and thosâ— by which he calleth that which was iâ— the cup the fruit of the Vine For they are forc'd as we shall see heareafterâ— to acknowledge in these words Thâ—â— Cup is the New Testament a figure like unto that which is in these words This is my Body and confesse that it is the signe and remembrance of it Besides that to presuppose that Christ called his blood the fruit of the Vine is out of all likelyhood Against these words of the Lord This Cup is the New Testament related by Saint Luke and Saint Paul Maldonat the Jesuite is madde and furious and stirred up with an audaciousnesse full of impiety and speaketh of these two organs of Gods Spirit as of two lyars that have not related the Lords words according to the truth And will have men to give credit to the testimony of Saint Matthew which saith This is my blood and not to the words of Saint Luke and Saint Paul which witnesse that the Lord said This cup is the New Testament Here be his words upon the 28 Verse of the 26 chapter of Saint Matthew * Nec multis opus est verbis Nego Christum haee verba dixâ—sse Cum enim Matthaeus qui aderat Marâ—us qui ex Matthaeo didicerat scribant Christum his verbis sanguinem suum tradidesse Hic est sanguis mens novi Testamenti aequum est credere Matthaei potâ—us Marci qua Iucae Pauli verbis usum esse c. There needs not many words I denie that Christ said these words For seeing that Matthew which was present and Marke that had learned it of Matthew writ that Christ gave his blood in these words This is my blood of the New Testament it is reasonable to beleeve that Christ did rather use the words of Matthew and Mark than those of Luke and Paul And a little after maintaining that Christs intenâ—â— was to give his owne blood hee speaketh of Saint Luke and of Saint Paul as no having well conceived Christs meaning saying Luke and Paul seeme to speakeâ— such sort as if Christ had chiefly aimed this viz. to declare that he gave the No Testament rather than his blood And little after Though we should faine anâ— suppose that Christ spake as it is written iâ— Luke and Paul c. Truly this presumption is intolerable to dare contradict thus an Evangelist and an Apostle Luke and Pauâ— saying I deny that Christ spake these wordâ— And to make himselfe a Judge of the fidelity of the Apostles saying this maâ— is more credible than that man anâ— deeme that for to excuse Saint Luke anâ— Saint Paul one must faine and presuppose that which is not Every man that hath any remnant oâ— modesty and feare of God shall ratheâ— beleeve that all the Evangelists and Apostles are to be beleeved alike and that all have spoken the truth For iâ— we beleeve that they have reported somâ— thing falsly all the rest of the Scripture becommeth suspect and uncertaine And though we should grant that Saint Luke and Saint Paul have brought some alteration in the words of the Lord yet were we bound to beleeve that they were moved by the holy Spirit to speake after that manner for to cleare and illustrate Christs words and turne the mindes of men from grosse thoughts and take away from the spirit of error the occasion of forging a Transubstantiation This Jesuite having thus abused Saint Paul and Saint Luke a little after upon these words I will drinke no more of this fruit of the Vine cleaveth to Saint Luke his side against Saint Marke and Saint Matthew and * Maldonat in 26. Matth. vers 29. Haec verba quae Matthaeus Marcus referunt Christum de calice dixisse non de co calice dixit quo sangu nem suum dedit sed de coqui in coena agni Paschalis à patre familias inter accumbentes distribui solebat 〈◊〉 will have Christ to have said these words I will drinke no more of this fruit of the Vine of the cup of the Passeover against the testimony of Matthew and Marke who report that Christ said these words upon the cup of the holy Supper Wherein indeed he maketh Christ a lyar For after the Pascall cup he dranke the cup of the Eucharist wherein there was wine The Lord had spoken against the truth if in drinking in the cup of the Pascall Lambe he had said he would drinke wine no more seeing he dranke of it a little after Add to this that Saint Matthew and Saint Marke make not any mention of the Pascall cup and consequently call not the fruit of the Vine that which was in a cup whereof they spake not In this Maldonat hath the Antiquity Popes Councels and the Jesuits themselves against him which maintaine that these words I will drinke no more of this fruit of the Vine ought to be understood of the cup of the holy Supper Saint Cyprian in the 63 Epistle The Lord said †Dico vobis non biham à modo c. Qua in parte invenimus calicem mixtum suisse quem Dominus obtulit Apostolis â— vâ—nü suisse quod sanguine suum dixit I say unto you I will drinke no more henceforth of this creature of the Vine untill that day when I drinke it new with you in my Fathers Kingdome Wherein we find that it was a mingled cup which the Lord offered and that which he called his blood was wine The Councel of Wormes in the fourth chapter * Apud Iuonem part 3. fol. 65. Vâ—nuÌ„ suit in redâ—ptionis nostrae mysterio cum dâ—xit Non bâ—bâ—m de genimine c. It was wine in the mystery of our redemption when the Lord said I will drinkâ— no more of the fruit of the Vine Pope Innocent the third in the fourth booke of the Mysteries of the Masse Chapter 27. * Quod autem vinum in calice consecraverit patet ex co quod ipse subjunxit non biba à modâ— c. Now that it was wine which Christ consecrated in the Chalice it appeareth by that which hee addeth I will drinke no more of the fruit of this Vine The Catechisme of the Councell of Trent in the Chapter of the Sacrament of the Eucharist †SalvatoreÌ„ vino in hujus Sacramenti institutione usil esse Catholica Ecclâ—sia semper docuit The Catholick Churcâ— hath alwayes taught that our Saviour used Wine in the institution of this Sacrament seeing that himselfe said I will drinke no more of this fruit of the Vine Salmeron the Jesuite in the IX Tome in the fourteenth Treatise holdeth the same and the Jesuite Vasquez upon the third
consecrated cup the Lords body would be whole in that drop that should hang 〈◊〉 the end of the pinne Whence followeth that the contained is greater thaâ— the continent as if one should say that 〈◊〉 crowne which is in a purse is bigger than the purse and that the Earth is bigger than heaven that compasseth it about 5 They give to the body of Christ 〈◊〉 length without extent that is to say 〈◊〉 length without length since all iâ— length is under one point that hath noâ— length 6 They say that Christs body is in this place but not locally as if a man should say it is white but not whitely They say that the body of the Lord iâ— present but not corporally but rather spiritually But for a body to be spiritually present is a thing no lesse absurd than for a spirit to be corporal-present 7 They will have Christs body in the crament to be long and large and yet hold no space How is that possible â—â—ce that length and breadth are spaces 8 They say that Christs body in the crament is present not circumscripâ—ely that is to say not bounded or enâ—â—osed of any place Yet what they deâ—â— of the whole they confesse it of every â—â—verall part of the body For they canâ—ot deny but that in the Lords body the â—aines are inclosed and circumscribed â—ithin the scull and that his heart is enâ—â—osed and limited within the pericardiâ—n and the lungs within the breast or â—â—est since they say that it is a true humane body 9 They say that the consecrated hoste 〈◊〉 Christ and that the Priest breakes the Hoste and yet breakes not Christ They â—ay that Christs blood is shed in the Masse and yet budges not and comes not out of the veines But all effusion is a motion how can then Christs blood be shed without motion 10 They say that the Priest drinketh Christs body and soule under the species of the wine By that meanes they make Christs body liquid For although theâ— say that the Priest drinks the Lords boâ—â— under the species of the wine yet under these species it doth not lose its soliditiâ—â— 11 They say that Christ did eate himselfe and swallowed up his owne body Whence it followeth that he had at thâ— same time his mouth in his head and his head in his mouth and that the whole was inclosed in one part whereas parâ— are comprized in the whole A maâ— should be esteemed madde that would say that the scabberd is within the blade of the sword and the purse within a crowne And all this without beeing able to tell us what benefit comes to us that Christ should have eaten himselfe The absurditie redoubles in that that Christ eating was infirme and passible speaking and moving and fitting But Christ that was eaten by Christ was impassible and without infirmity neither speaking nor moving fitting lying nor standing By this means Christ passible hath devoured the impassible And Christ did eate himselfe not such as hee was but such as he was not 12 It is true that things contradictory may agree in one and the same subject in severall times or in severall parts or in severall respects that is to say in comâ—aring this thing with severall things * Arist l. 1. Elenchorie c. 5. whereas we say code respectu saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad idem and gives for example of divers respects that one and the same number may be the double and nor the double being coÌ„pared to divers nuÌ„bers â—or example a man may be yong and old 〈◊〉 severall times be white in one part of â—s body and blacke in the other Hee â—ay be tall and little poore and rich 〈◊〉 severall respects that is to say in â—omparing him with severall persons â—ee may be tall in comparison of a â—â—warfe little in comparison of a Giâ—â—nt rich in comparison of a begger â—nd poore in comparison of Seneca or Lucullus But here they attribute unto Christ contradictory things at one and the same time not in severall parts and without comparing him with any other but himselfe They will have him at one and the same time to have beene the contained and the continent speaking and moving in the Eucharist and neither speaking nor moving in the mouthes of the Apostles having a length without length an extent without a space 13. They say that as God may doe that one and the same body be whole and entire in severall remote places and so bee farre and separated from himselfe that is to say that he be one and not be one So likewise God can make that two bodies hold but one place by penetration of dimensions as they prattle in their Schooles That is to say that God can make that a vessell that holds a pinte without making it bigger or larger may containe two pintes yea three yea tenne yea a thousand yea a million and so ad infinitum So thâ—â— this pinte shall containe the whole Seâ— without being made bigger and without the water of the Sea being any whâ—â— diminished Yea by this doctrine thâ—â— whole World without diminishing oâ— its bignesse may be enclosed in one graiâ— of wheate 14. Philosophy by a thousand reasons proveth that it is impossible that there be any Vacuum in the World and our Adversaries teach it so in their Schooles and with good reason By Vacuum is understood a space of place which is not filled with any substance a place that is full of nothing Yeâ— notwithstanding the Roman Church by Transubstantiation puts a Vacuum in the consecrated cup. They say that this chalice is full but they cannot tell with what body it is filled up It is not full of wine For they holde it is no more wine It is not full of the body of Christ for they hold that Christs body in the Eucharist filleth no place As for the accidents they are not a body So no bodily substance shall be found that filleth the chalice 15. It is not to be imagined but that when Christ did breake the bread to his Disciples some crummes thereof fell uppon the table and some residue of that sacred bread was left behind Now according to the Church of Romes doctrine in every one of these peeces of bread Christs body was whole and entire Whereupon wee aske if when Christ after hee was risen from the table swate drops of blood that body of the Lord which was under these crummes swate also drops of blood Item if when Christ was put upon the Crosse that body which was under these crums or under the residues of that sacred bread was likewise crucified under the species of the bread For if it was not crucified under these species of the bread behold there was 2 Christs the one crucified the other not crucified Or if under those species Christs body was crucified they must also put under the same species the Crosse and the Souldiers that crucified him For to be crucified without a crosse is a thing
Inventions They use meere Water in Baptisme They have no holy Water They me not consecrate their Church-yards They bury their dead in the fields and with â—easts as also they deserve it c. And â—ee addeth that the Emperour in stead of destroying them granted unto them safety and liberty But he should have added to this that the Emperor Sigismond having by armes assaulted and scuffled with them lost there many Battles For which cause he did let them rest in peace In this discourse Aeneas hath chopt and thrust in some calumniations as when he saith they give the Eucharist to madde men and to Infants and bury their dead with beasts Things very absurde and that never were As for the rest all our Religion almost is seene in it Hungaria at the same time was full of Faithfull people holding the same beleife They presented to the King Vladislaus in the yeare of our Lord 1508. their Confession of faith conformable to ours defending themselves against an Austin Frier that had accused them to the King of many errors namely for that they did not obey the Pope called not upon Saints denied Purgatory received the Communion in both kinds and rejected Transubstantiation Vpon which last point they speak thus This Frier writeth that the bread and wine in their naturall substance are changed into the body and blood of Christ This Confession is to be fouÌ„d in Fascioulo rerum expetendarum and are changed into Christ God and man so that nothing of the substance of the bread and wine remaineth but that the onely accidents are meerely upheld by miracle This Confession of faith hath no foundation in the Lord Christ Jesus his words who never spake one word of the conversion of the substance And a little after By that is manifested that the Primitive Church had this Beleife and hath confessed it and hath not erred and did not bowe at this Sacrament For in that time they received the Sacrament sitting and reserved nothing of it and carried none of it out of the house c. About the same time in the yeare 1520. Calvin being yet very young the Faithfull of Provence presented to the Parliament of Aix their Confession of Faith conformable to ours Vpon the point of the Sacrament they speak thus We are not entangled with any errors or heresies condemned by the Ancient Church and we hold the documents and instructions approved by the true Faith And as for the Sacraments particularly we have the Sacraments in honour and beleeve that they be testimonies and signes by which Gods grace is confirmed and assured in our consciences For which cause wee beleeve that Baptisme is a signe whereby the purgation that we obtaine by the blood of Jesus Christ is corroborated in such sort that it is the true washing of Regeneration and renovation The Lords Supper is the signe under which the true Communion of his body and blood is given unto us And these poore Churches were the remainder of the horrible Persecutions exercised by the space of three or foure hundred yeares by Kings and Princes at the instigation of Popes Which Churches they had defamed with horrible heresies accusing them to be Manicheans and enemies of Marriage even as they accuse us now to be enemies unto the Saints and the blessed Virgin and to beleeve that good workes are not necessary to salvation and that we make God Author of sin A few yeares before under the raigne of good King Lewis the XII who was called the Father of the People happed a memorable thing which Carolus Molinaeus a famous Jurisconsulte reciteth in his Booke of the French Monarchie He saith that certaine Cardinals and Prelates did goe about to stirre up and incite this good King to destroy and exterminate the Inhabitants of Cabrieres and Merindoles in Provence saying they were Sorcerers Incestuous persons hereticks condemned already by the Apostolick Sea But this King answered that he would condemne no body to death without hearing both sides and be fully acquainted with the cause And that for that end he sent one Adam Fumee a Master of Request and John Parin a Jacobin Frier his Confessor for to transport themselves into the place where they lived and be informed of their Religion Which they did and reported to the King that among these men they had found no Images nor any â—race or vestige of any ornaments of Masses or Papall Ceremonies That they had found nothing touching Magicall Artes whoredomes and other crimes laid upon them The King understanding this cryed out with a lowde voice and swore that those people were better Christians than hee and his people and confirmed their priviledges and immunities That fell out about the yeare 1412. Calvin scarce being borne Pope Julius the second made warres against this King But the King defeated his Armie and the Emperours neare the City of Ravenna Assembled a Councell at Piso against the Pope Caused money to bee coyned with this Inscription round about PERDAM BABYLONIS NOMEN as Thuanus relateth in the first Booke of his History But under the raigne of King Francis the first Successor unto Lewis the twelfth these poore Churches of Provence suffered hard and rude persecutions and Massacres Neverthelesse they subsist yet at this day and Thuanus in the sixth Booke of his History speaketh of their Religion Hee saith that these Valdenses for hee tearmes them so did say that the Church of Rome had departed from the faith of Christ Jesus and was become Babylon and the great Whore whereof is spoken in the Revelation That none ought to obey the Pope nor his Prelates That Monachall life was a sinke of the Church and an Infernall thing That the fiâ—â—â— of Rurgatorie the Masse the Dedicatiâ— of Churches the Service of Saints as Suffrages for the dead were inventionâ— Satan Then hee addeth To these 〈◊〉 and principall heads of their doctrine 〈◊〉 thens were falsly added touching Muriage the Resurrection the state anâ— condition of the dead and touchâ—â— meates The same Author in the 27 Booke speaketh of the Churches of the Valsies of the Alpes which he saith to be descended from the ancient Valdeuses which have yet at this very day a Religion altogether conformable to ourt and saith that in the yeare 1560 they presented their Confession of Faith unto those whom the Duke of Savoye their Lord had sent them by which they declared that they stuck fast and adheared to the ancient doctrine contained in the Old and New Testament and to the Apostles Creed and to the foure first Generall Councels and that for the rule of a good life they kept themselves close to the renne Commandements of the the Law That they taught to live chastely soberly and justly and to yeeld obedience unto Princes and Magistrates That neverthelesse they rejected Sacrifice of the Masse the â—â—â—rament of Penance Auricular Conâ—â—sion humane Traditions Prayers for the dead but cleaved to the holy Scripâ—â—es Which things they said to have â—â—eived
corporis ejus sanguinisque contineant c. The Sacrament of Adoption to wit Baptisme may be called the Adoption even as we call the Sacrament of his body and blood which is in the bread and in the consecrated Cup his body and blood Not that to speake properly the bread is his body and the Cup his blood But because they containe in them the mystery of his body and blood This Book of Facundus drawn out of the Vatiean Library was published by Jacobus Sirmoudus a Jesuite who for this cause was suspected And I heare he hath been in trouble about it a Turrian li. 1. de Eucharist c. 18. §. Ad illud Vasq in 3. part Thomae Tomo 3. Dis 180. c. 9 pag. 107. Greg de Val. lib. de Trans c. 7. Sicut enim antequam sactificetur panis paneÌ„ nominamus divina auteÌ„ illum sanclificante gratia incdiante Sacerdote liberatus quideÌ„ est ab appellatione panis â—lignus habiâ—us est Dominici corporis appellatione etiamsi natura panis in co remansit Turrianus and Vasquez and Gregory of Valentia Jesuites object unto themselves a place of Chrysostome in his Epistle to Caesarius which Epistle also is in Biblioth Patr. Printed at Colen anno 1618 in the 8 Tome That place is such Afore the bread be sanctified we coll is bread But the divine grace sanctifying it by the meanes of the Priest it is freed indeed from the appellation of bread and is honored with the name of the body of the Lord though the nature of bread remaine in it These Iesuites answer that this place is not of John Chrysostome but of another John of Constantinople Which they say without proofe Yet it matters not for it sufficeth they acknowledge that place to bee of an ancient Author The 8 Books of Apostolicall Constitutions attributed to Clement the first Bishop of Rome are not of him Neverthelesse these Books are ancient and there is much good to be learned in them In the 5 Book chap. 16. it is said that b Cum verâ— anttypa mysteria pretiosi Corporis sanguinis sui nobis tradidisset Christ having given the figurative mysteries of his body and blood went to the mount of Olives And in the 7 Book chap. 26. c Etiam agimus gratias tibi Pater pro pretioso sanguine Iesu Christi qui effusuâ— est pro nobis et pro pretioso corpore cujus haec Antitypa perficimus We give thee thankes for the precious blood of Christ which was shed for us and for the precious body whereof we performe the signes by his command for to shew forth his death There would never be an end if wee should gather up all the places of the ancient Fathers wherein they say that that which we receive in the Eucharist is bread and that the bread and wine are Signes Symboles Figures and Antitypes of the body and blood of the Lord I will adde but two Canons of a Councell which are very formall The 24 Canon of the III Councell of Carthage is such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let nothing be offered in the sacred service but the body and blood of the Lord as also the Lord hath ordained it that is to say nothing but bread and wine mingled with water The same Canon is found repeated in the very same words in the Councell of Trull in the Canon 32 aswell in the Greeck as in the Latin Copies Upon which Canon Baâ—samon maketh this Commentary The two and thirtieth Canon of the Councell of Trull hath ordained very at large a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the nonbloody Sacrifice was made with bread and wine mingled with water because that the bread is the figure of the body of the Lord and the wine the figure of his blood Here is then above two hundred Bishops gathered in a Councell that interpret these words the body and blood of Christ by the bread and wine mingled with water The same Councell in the 23 Canon ordaineth that when a man officiates at the Altar the Prayer must always be directed to the Father Whence appeareth manifestly that then they worshipped not the Sacrament seeing that the Councel forbiddeth when men assist at the Altar to addresse their Prayers to Christ If this hoste be Christ it must be worshipped and by consequent invocated And that it may appeare how lately this opinion of Transubstantiation was received in the Tome de Divinis officiis which is in Biblioth P atr we have an Epistle of that Great Emperor Carolus Magnus where he saith b Cum adaltare assistitur semper ad Patrem d rigatur oratio Christ supping with his Disciples brake bread and gave them likewise the Cup in figure of his body and blood This Epistle happily might bee written about the yeare of our Lord 800. Walefridus Strabo who wrote about the yeare 850 in his Book of Ecclesiasticall things chap. 16. c Christus coenando cii discipulis panem fregit calicem pariter cis dedit in figuram corporis sanguinis sui In coena quam ante traditioneÌ„ suaÌ„ ultimaÌ„ cum discipulis habu t post Paschae veteris solemnia corporis et saÌ„guinis sui SacrameÌ„ta in panis et vini substaeÌ„tia cisdeÌ„ discipulis suis tradidit et ea in coÌ„memorationeÌ„ sanctissimae suae passionis celebrare perdocuit The Lord at the last Supper he made with his Disciples afore he was betrayed after he had made an end of the solemnity of the ancient Passeover gave to his Disciples the sacred signes of his body and blood in the SVBSTANCE of the bread and wine and taught them to celebrate them in remembrance of his most holy Passion Rupertus Abbot of Deutsch neare Colen who lived in the yeare 1112. and whose works are yet extant hath condemned Transubstantiation and taught that the Substance of bread remaineth after the Consecration Here are his words upon the 12 chap. of Exodus d Rup Tuitiensis in Exo. 12. Sicut Christus humâ—na naturam nec mutavâ—â— nec destruâ—â—â— sed assumpsit ita in SacrameÌ„to nec destruit nec mutat substantiaÌ„ panis vini sed assumit in unitatem cororis et sanguinis sui Even as Christ neither changed nor destroyed the humane nature but joyned himselfe to it So in the Sacrament he neither destroyeth nor changeth the substance of the bread and wine but joyneth himselfe to it in the unity of his body and blood This place of Rupertus is alleadged by Salmeron in the 16 Treatise of the IX Tome § Ruit and Bellarmin in his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers alleadgâ—s out of him many such like places and blameth him for it To so many places that say that the substance of the bread remaineth after the Consecration our Adversaries do reply that by the word of Substance the Fathers understand the Accidents As it is a great absurdity by the word of Accidents to understand the Substance So
the pronouncing of the words of Consecration For by these words This is my body the Priest offâ—reth nothing to God But every Sacrifice is an offering made unto God Furthermore in every Sacrifice he that sacrificeth addresseth himselfe to God but these words are addressed to the broad Which is more we have seene hereabove the Confession of our Adversaries acknowledging that in all this action Christ offered nothing to God Therefore he made no Sacrifice 11. It is to be noted that in the Roman Church the Order of Priesthood is a Sacrament whose it stitution they wil have to be found in the Institution of the Eucharist when the Lord said Doe this as if Christ by one and the same words had instituted two Sacraments With as much absurditie as if one would needs finde the Institution of Marriage or of Extreame Vnction in the institution of Baptisme That if these words Doe this in remembrance of mee bee the formall and expresse words whereby Christ conferred the Order of Priesthood how comes it to passe that the Bishops when they dâ—e conserre that Order in the Ember weeks make no mention of these words at all 12. Our Adversaries put two sorts of Sacrifice The one bloody the other unbloody which they call the Sacrifice of Melchisedek and which they say to be farre more excellent that the blooddy sacrifice and will have the Masse to be the Sacrifice after the Order of Melchisedek Whence followeth that the Masse is more excellent than Christs death which is a bloody Sacrifice It is great wonder then that the Apostle to the Hebrewes speaking so at large of the Priesthood of Melchisedek maketh not any mention at all of Masse nor of Eucharist 13. But how is it thay by these words Doe this in remembrance of mee Christ should command men to sacrifice him in the Masse since it is impossible to sacrifice Christ in remembrance of Christ seeing also that Saint Paul immediately after these words addeth the explication of them saying For as often as yee cate this bread and drink this cup ye doe shew the Lords death 1. Cor. 11. He teacheth us that to Doe this is to eate bread and drink the cup in remembrance of the Lords death Here therefore every man that seareâ— God and loves the Lord Jesus shal consider what a crime it is for moratal men and sinners to intrude and take upon themselves to Sacrifice the Eternall Sonne of God to his Father and to bee Priests after the Order of Melchisedek without charge and without commission CHAP. XXXIIII In what sence the holy Supper may be called a Sacrifice Of Melchisedeks Sacrifice And of the Oblation whereof Malachy speaketh THe holy Scripture calleth our Almes our Prayers our Praises and Thankesgivings and generally what worship soever wee render unto God Sacrifices In this sence the holy Supper may be called a Sacrifice For the question betweene us and our Adversaries is not whether the Eucharist may be calâ—ed a Sacrifiee But whether it be truly and properly a Sacrifice of redemption and whether the Priests in the Masse sacrifice the body of Christ really and truely for the sins of the quick and of the dead Touching that our Adversaries bring no manner of proofe out of the new Testament wherein neverthelesse the institution of this Sacrifice should appeare Only they all eadge out of the Old Testament the example of Melchisedek who as they say sacrificed bread and wine Gen. 14.18 Which they produce falsly for that place saith no such thing Melchisedek brought out bread and wine to Abraham for to refresh his wearieâ— troopes but offered not bread and wine to Abraham in Sacrifice The very Biblâ— of the Roman Church hath proferens and not offerens Neverthelesse we wil suppose that place to be faithfully alleadged For if the Masse be the Sacrifice oâ— Melchisedek it will follow that the Masse is a Sacrifice of bread and wine and not of slesh and bones and blood From thence it followeth also that the Masse is not a Sacrifice of redemption For bread and wine offered up in Sacrified cannot bee the price of our redemption It were an abuse to think that Melchisedek hath sacrificed bread for the redemption of any one The propitiatory sacrifices under the Old Testament were made by the death of the victime and no propitiation was made without shedding of blood saith the Apostle Heb. 9. â—2 In summe it is to speak against the commâ—n sence to argue thus Melchisedek offered bread and wins Therefore the Priest sacrificeth the Lords body and blood They object likewise a place of Malachy chap. 1. wherein God promiseth that in every place Incense shall be offered unto his Name and a pure offering Which is a Prophesie of the calling of the Gentiles whereby God foretels that among the â—â—tions and acceptable service shall bee offered unto him Of the Sacrifice of the Lords body he speaketh nothing of it The novelty of this service is that it shall be made among all Nations whereas in Malachies time â—it was but made in the Jewish Nation They say also that the Passeover of the Old Testament was a Sacrifice and by consequent that the Lords Supper that succeeded thereunto must be Sacrifice They speake with as much reason as if I should say that the night must be cleare because it succeedeth to the day which is bright and cleere and that old Age is strong and lusty seeing it succeedeth to yong Age which is strong and lusty The succession of one thing unto another bringeth commonly great alterations Adde to this that our Adversaries will not have the Masse to be such a Sacrifice as that Passeover was For the Passeover was not offered by the Priests and was not made upon the Altar of the Temple it was a domesticall sacrifice which particular men made at home in their own houses As it appeareth by the Passeover which Christ did celebrate among his Disciples in which no Priest was employed And even though by this example our Adversaries had prooved that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice yet there would remaine for them to prove that in this Sacrifice Christs body is really sacrificed CHAP. XXXV In what sense the Fathers have called the Eucharist a Sacrifice THe ancient Fathers indeavouring to draw the Heathen unto the Christian Faith who esteemed there is no Religion without sacrifice and the Jewes whose Religion under the Old Testament did chiefly consist in Sacrifices have called the holy Supper a Sacrifice and the Sacred Table an Altar and those that serve at it Levites But they shew sufficiently how they call the holy Supper a Sacrifice since they call it Eucharist that is to say Thankesgiving and not a Sacrifice of Propitiation Saint Austin calleth it indeed the Sacrifice of our price in the ninth Book of Confessions chapter 12. But wee have produced a multitude of places out of the same Father that say that in matter of Sacraments the signes are wont to take the name of
conforme himselfe to the Lords Institution 45. Chap. X. Places wherein the Doctors and Councels of the Roman Church maintaine that the Pope and the Church of Rome are not subject to the Scripture and have greater authority than the Scripture and may make voide and abolish the Commandements of God 46. Chap. XI That our Exposition of these words This is my body is conformable to the Scripture and to the nature of Sacraments and approved by the ancient Fathers and confirmed by our Adversaries 55. Chap. XII That our adversaries to avoide a cleare and naturall figure forge a multitude of harsh and unusuall ones and speake but in figurative tearmâ—â— And of Berengarius his confession 63. Chap. XIII Of the Ascension of the Lord and of his absence and of that our Adversaries say that in the Sacrament he is Sacramentally present 68. Chap. XIV Confession of our Adversaries acknowledging that Transubstantiation is not grounded in the Scriptures That the Primitive Church did consecrate by the Prayer and not by these words This is my body 76. Chap. XV. Of the adoration of the Sacrament The opinion of the Roman Church 82. Chap. XVI Examen of the Adoraâ—â—â—n 〈◊〉 Sacrament by the word of God That the ancient Christians did not worship the Sacrament 88. Chap. XVII Of the Priests intention without which the Roman Church beleeveth no consecration nor Transubstantiation is mad â—6 Chap. XVIII That our Adversaries in this matter intangle themselves into absurdities and insoluble contradictions 104 Chap. XIX Of accidents without a subject Places of Fathers 117. Chap. XX. Answers to some examples brought out of the Scriptures by our Adversaries for to prove that the body of Christ hath beene sometimes in two severall places 122. Chap. XXI Of the dignity of Priests And that our Adversaries debase and vilifie the utility and â—fficacy of Mâ—sses and make them unprofitable for the remission of sinnes And of the traffick of Masses 126 Chap. XXII That the Roman Religion is a new Religion and forged for the Popes profit and of the Clergies 138. Chap. XXIII Answer to the question made unto us by our Adversaries Where was your Religion before Calvin 146. Chap XXIV That our Adversaries doe reject the Fathers and speake of them with contempt 161 Chap. XXV Of the corruption and falsification of the Fathers Workes and of the difficulty to understand them 169. Chap. XXVI Places of the Fathers contrary to Transubstantiation to the manducation of the body of Christ by the corporall mouth 175. Chap. XXVII Confirmation of the same by the custome of the Ancient Church 197. Chap. XXVIII Explanation of the places of the Fathers th t say that in the Eucharist we eate the body and blood of Christ and that the bread is changed into the body of Christ and is made Christs body Specially of Ambrose Hilary and Chrysostome That the Fathers doe speake of severall kindes of body and blood of Christ 200. Chap. XXIX That divers ancient Fathers have beleeved a mystical Vnion of the Godhead of Christ with the bread of the Sacrament 212. Chap. XXX Pâ—rticular opinion of Saint Austin and of Fulgenâ—â—uâ— and of Innocent the third 226. Chap. XXXI Tâ—at the Church of Rome condemning the Impâ—â—â—â—tion is fâ—llen her selfe into an error a thousand times more pernicious by Transubstantiation And of the Adoration of the accidents of the bread 228. Chap. XXXII That the Sacrifice of the Masse was not instituted by Christ Confesssion of our Adversaries 231. Chap. XXXIII That the Sacrifice of the Masse agrees neither with Scripture nor with reason 235 Chap. XXXIV In what sence the holy Supper may be called a Sacrifice Of Melchisedeks sacrifice And of the Oblation whereof Malachy speaketh 243. Chap. XXXV In what sence the Fathers have called the Eucharist a sacrifice 247. The Second Booke OF THE MANDUCATION of the Body of Christ Chap. I. OF two sorts of manducation of Christs flesh to wit the spirituall and corporall and which is the best 253. Chap. II. That in the sixt of Saint John the Lord speakes not of the Sacrament of the Eucharist nor of the manducation of his flesh by the mouth of the body 260. Chap. III. That the Roman Church by this doctrine depriveth the People of salvation 269. Chap. IV. That the Principall Doctors of the Roman Church yea the Popes themselves doe agree with us in this point and hold that in the sixt of Saint John nothing is spoken but of the spirituall manducation and that those that contradict them doe speake with incertitude 274. Chap. V. Reasons of our Adversaries for tâ— prove that in the sixt Chapter of Saint John it is spoken of the Manducation by the mouth of the body 280. Chap. VI. Testimonies of the Fathers 285. Chap. VII Impiety of Salmeron the Iesuite and of Peter Charron And of Bellarmins foure men inclosed in one sute of clothes That by this doctrine Christ hath not a true body in the Sacrament 292. Chap. VIII Of the progresse of this abuse and by what meanes Satan bath established the Transubstantiation 298. Chap. IX Of the judgement which the Doctors of the Roman Church doe make touching the apparitions whereby a little Child or a morsell of flesh hath appeared at the Masse in the hands of the Priest and touching Christs blood that is kept in Reliques 312. Chap. X. Of the corruption of the Papall Sea in the Ages wherein this errour was most advanced 317. Chap. XI Of the oppression of England How Reliâ—ion passed out of England into Bohemia Of Wicklef Of John Huz and of Hierome of Prague Of the Councell of Constance Of Zisca and Procopius and of their Victories 323. Chap. XII The Confession of Cyril Patriarch of Consta tinople now living touching the Sacrament of the Eucharist 324. ERRATA Page 5. Line 3. Reade any p. 10. l. 1. What is in the Margent must be in the Text. p. 11. l. 5. r. of this bread p. 28. l. 2. r. nor stirred and line 11. r. Saviour p. 68. l. 8. r. sensibly p. 69. l. 11. r. chap. 17. 11. p. 70. l. 23. r. Word p. 76. l. 15. r. Doctor p. 79. l. 15. r. Church p. 105. l. 10 r. as if I should say p. 121. l. 23. r. of miraculous p. 136. l 18. put a full point after fourefold p. 145. l. 20. r. benefit p. 152. from the 14 line to the 27 should be Italica p. 157. l. 2. r. yeare 1512. p. 177. l. 21. r. remained p. 178. l. 25. r. For the old Passeover p. 182. l. 1. r. Father p. 186. l. 2. r. invisible p. 187. l. 9. r. Brethren p. 194. l. 2. r should be made p. 200. l. 12. r. three sorts p. 223. l. 10. r. those of Ambrose p. 233. l. 17. r. acknowledgeth p. 244. l. 7. r. alleadge p. 248 l. 12. r perfecting l. 23. r. sacrificed p. 250. l. 28. 30. r. gifts p. 253. Chap. 1. r. Of the two sorts c. p. 282. l. 22. r. of
this chapter p. 287. l. 5. the word even must be put in the next line and read that even c. CYPRIAN IN HIS LXIII EPISTLE TO CAECILIVS §. 7. SPEAKING OF THE EVCHARISTICALL CVP. The holy Apostle teacheth that we must no manner of way swerve or depart from that which is commanded us in the Gospell and that the Disciples ought to practise and doe the same things which the Master hath done and taught And in the XI §. If Christ must be heard alone we ought not to regard what others before us have thought fitting to be done but what Christ who is before all hath done first For we must not follow the custome of man but the will of God The Commentary upon the first to the Corinth attributed to Saint Ambrose in the XI Chapter The Apostle saith that that man is unworthy of the Lord which celebrates this mysterie otherwise than it was celebrated by him For that man cannot be devout which presumes to doe otherwise than it was given us by the author THE ANATOMY OF THE MASSE FIRST BOOKE CHAP. I. THe Institution of the holy Supper by Christ Jesus as it is contained in the first Epistle of the Apostle Saint Paul to the Corinthians Chap. 11. 23 I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed tooke bread 24 And when he had given thankes hee brake it and said Take eate This is my body which is broken for you this doe in remembrance of me 25 After the same manner also he tooke the cup when he had supped saying This cup is the New Testament in my blood This doe ye as oft as you drink it in remembrance of me 26 For as often as ye eate this bread and drink this cup ye doe shew the Lords death till he come 27 Wherefore whosoever shall eate thiâ— bread and drinke this cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the bodie anâ— blood of the Lord. 28 Let a man therefore examine himselfe and so let him eaâ—e of that bread anâ— drink of that cup. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnatioâ— to himselfe not discerning the Lords body Saint Mathew in the 26 Chap. and 29 Verse addes these words of the Lord. BVt I say unto you I will not drinke henceforth of this fruit of the Vine untill that day when I drinke it new with you in my Fathers Kingdome And in the 27 verse he testifieth that Christ presenting the cup to his Disciples said Drink ye all of it CHAP. II. Foure and thirty contrarieties between the Lords holy Supper and the Masse and how farre the Church of Rome is departed from the Institution of the Lord. NOne can deny but that our Lord Jesus did institute the holy Supper aright and as it ought And it were an impiety to find fault with his institution Therefore the shortest way yea the only meanes to end all our differences would be to come back to Christs institution and to speake as he spake and to doe as he did That is the thing which we desire and beg with so much earnestnesse and whereunto the Church of Rome can by no meanes agree For the Councell of Trent in the XXII Session denounceth Anathema on all those that shall say that in the Canon of the Masse there is any errour Yet neverthelesse it is evident that the Masse is nothing else but a changing and a disfiguring of the Lords Institution Whereof we will give some examples 1. Christ instituting the holy Supper among his Disciples spake in a knowne and intelligible tongue to the assistants On the contrary the Priest in the Masse speaketh in a tongue which the people understand not 2. Christ presenting the Cup to his Disciples said Drinke ye all of it And St. Paul in the 1 to the Cor. Chap. 11. vers 28. bids the people of Corinth to drink of the cup saying Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate of that bread and drink of that cup. And in the 10. Chap. 17. Verse We are all partakers of one bread and of one cup according to the Version of the Romane Church solely authorised by the Councell of Trent 3. Christ in celebrating the Eucharist spake not of sacrificing his body and made no offering unto God his Father On the contrary the Priest in the Masse pretends to sacrifice Christs body and offereth him up to God in sacrifice propitiatory for the quick and for the dead without a warrant and without Gods command 4. Christ in the holy Supper made no elevation of the hoste as likewise the Apostle worshipped not the Sacrament but sat still at the Table On the contrarie the Priest in the Masse lifts up the hoste and maketh the people to worship it 5. Christ did not cause any bones nor reliques of Saints to be put under the sacred table and did not aske of God the remission of sinnes through the merits of those Saints whose reliques were under the table On the contrary the Priest in the Masse kissing the Altar speakes thus to God a Oramus te Domine per merita Sanctorum tuorum quorum reliquiae hic sunt omnium Sanctorum ut indulgere digneris omnia peccata mea We pray thee Lord through the merits of thy Saints whose reliques are here that thou wilt vouchsafe to pardon me all my sinnes 6. Christ said to his Apostles Take eate On the contrary in the Romane Church a great number of private Masses are sayd at the intention of such as pay for them without communicants and without assistants in which the Priest saith Take eate but there is no body either for to take or for to eate Yea even in publick Masses the Priest oftentimes eateth and drinketh alone 7. Three Evangelists viz. S. Matth. in the 26 chapter S. Marke in the 14. Chap. and S. Luke in the 22. and S. Paul in the eleventh chapter of the first to the Corinthians testifie that Christ gave bread to his Disciples saying He tooke bread and brake it and gave it Now the Sacrament is not given but after the consecration Christ therefore gave bread after the consecration And Saint Paul 1 to the Corinth Chap. 11. Verse 26.27 and 28. saith three severall times that we eate bread And in the 10 Chap. Verse 16. he saith that wee breake bread And in the 20 Chap. of the Acts Verse 7. it is said that the Disciples came together to breake bread On the contrary the Church of Rome teacheth that in the Eucharist no bread is eaten and that the bread is not broken but that which the Priest breakes in the Masse is the body of Christ which neverthelesse cannot be broken 8. Christ giving that bread said This is my body declaring that the bread that he gave was his body On the contrary the Romane Church teacheth that the bread is not the body of Christ But that the bread
OF it The Apostle commands us to eate OF this bread that is to say to take every one his part and portion of it and Christ saying Drinke ye all of it bids the Communicants to take their share of the cup. This manner of speaking is become absurd in the Roman Church who by this bread understand Christ himselfe For they would esteeme that man to be mad or a mocker that should say that we eate every one his portion of Christ body 17. Christ presenting the cup to his Disciples said in the present tense that it was his blood which is shed for many Where manifestly he speaketh of a Sacramentall and not of a reall effusion For our adversaries confesse that in the Masse the blood of Christ is not shed out of the body and goeth not out of the Veines He therefore speaketh of a Sacramentall effusion which is respective to the real effusion made upon the crosse We aske then whether the Priest in the Masse drinketh that blood of Christ which came out of his side and wounds upon the crosse If they answer that the Priest drinks not that blood of the Lord which issued forth of his body upon the crosse but that blood which remained in the body and is there still thereby they confesse that the Priest drinks not the same blood which Christ will have us to drink For he commands us expressly to drinke the blood shed for us But if they answer that the Priest drinketh the same blood which the Lord shed upon the crosse then they presuppose rashly and without word of God that that blood which came out of the Lords body is gotten in againe All this abuse comes for lack of considering that in the holy Supper Christs body is represented unto us and presented to our faith as suffering and broken and dying and dead for us and his blood as shed and issued out of his body Whereas on the contrary the Romane Church hath a conceit that she receive the spirituall glorious body of Christ and his blood enclosed within the body and within the veines 18. The Apostle Saint Paul 1. Cor. 1◠And Saint Luke chap. 22. record th◠Christ said This cup is the New Testame◠in my blood If by this word of cup th◠blood must be understood the sence 〈◊〉 these words shall be This blood is th◠New Testament in my blood By that meanes loe here two kinds of blood of Christ whereof the one shall be within the other 19. Christ in celebrating the holy Supper said Doe this in remembrance of me And Saint Paul hath told us here above that in earing this bread we doe shew his death On the contrary the Priest in the Masse saith that he celebrateth In the first place the remembrance of the Virgin Mary saying Communicantes memoriam venerantes in primis gloriosae semperque Virginis Mariae Communicating and solemnizing in the first place the remembrance of the glorious Virgin Mary leaving Christ behind As Gabriel Biell saith in the 32 Lesson of the Canon of the Masse First and principally the remembrance is made of the most blessed Virgin Mary because saith he she is the most safe sanctuary of our calamities and hath beene the administratrix and dispensatrix of this sacrifice and all the reason of our hope 20. In the whole institution of the Eucharist there is no mention made of the Saints neither is there any command to pray unto Saints No word of the intercession of Angels On the contrary the Priest in the Confiteor of the Masse prayes Michael the Archangel and John the Baptist and all the Saints to pray for him There are some Masses in which the Letany is rehearsed which is but a long chaine of prayers unto Saints In the Masse they blesse the Encense through the intercession of Michael the Archangell The Priest askes of God that he would be pleased to command his Angell to take the consecrated hoste and to carry it up to heaven And for an excesse of abuses at the offertory of the Masse the Priest saith he makes that oblation in honour of the Virgin Mary and of the Saints As if the holy Supper were instituted in honour of the creatures That truely is to put the creatures above Christ As when a man gives almes in Gods honour he presupposeth that God is more excellent than the Alme 21. S. John in the 13 chapter and 2 verse witnesseth that in the action o◠the holy Supper the Divel entred int◠Judas But our adversaries with mos◠of the Fathers hold that Judas was pertaker of the Eucharist with the rest o◠the Disciples They will therefore tha◠both Christ and the Divel have entre◠together into Judas So they give unto Christ a very unsutable companion and truely the Sonne of God and the Divel had been very ill lodged together 22. We agree in this point with ou◠adversaries that Christ ate and dranke with his Disciples and was partaker of the holy Sacrament He sheweth it himselfe sufficiently when after he had delivered the cup he said I will drinke no more of this fruit of the Vine Whereby it followeth that after the doctrine of the Romane Church Christ did eate himself and swallowed his owne body and soule and had his whole body in his mouth and in his stomacke By this meanes Christs passible body devoured the impassible body Whereupon it were good to know what Christs body did within the body of Christ and how Christs soule could enter into Christs body seeing that it was in already And since that that which containeth and that which is contained are severall things and that nothing containeth it selfe by this doctrine it is evident that they make Christ to have two bodies the one of which was contained within the other And since that to eat ones selfe is a more admirable thing than the Creation of the World it is not credible that Christ did eat himself without some great profit should come thereby for our salvation Yet our adversaries produce none at al. For to prop so extravagant a doctrin and which exposeth the Christian Religion to laughter our adversaries alledge a place out of S. Austin upon the 33 Psal where he saith that in this Sacrament Christ did cary himself in his own hands But Austin saith not only that he did cary himself in his own hands But he saith Ipse se portabat quodam mode cum diceret Hoc est corpus meum he did carry himself in a manner when he said This is my body So a man that carries his owne picture in his hands carries himself in a maner Even as it would be a sencelesse speech to say that the Moon is the Moon in a manner so i◠that which Christ carried in his hands was his true body it would be a foolish thing to say that it was his body in some kinde For concerning the sense of these words This is my body S. Austin expounds them plainely enough in
part of Thomas Tome III. in the Dispute 196 chap. 4. * Ego existimo verba illa Non bibam c. Christunâ— dixisse de calice sanâ— guinis sui I thinke Christ said these words I will drinke no more of this fruit of the Vine of the chalice of his blood and proveth his saying by the Fathers CHAP. VI. How much Christ is dishonoured by this Doctrine And of the character indelible And of the power of creating ones Creator THe very cauteles of the Masse doe sufficiently discover the abuse and maketh every man that loveth Christ shake with horror At the end of the old editions of the Roman Decree are added many penitentiall Canons whereof the nine and thirtieth is such * Quando mus corrodit aut comedit corpus Christi When a mouse eateth or gnaweth the body of Christ for the penance in this case lookâ— for the second distinction of the Consecration towards the end In the new Masse-Booke reviewed and amended by the Popes authority there is in the beginning a treatise of the defects that happen in the Masse where these rules are found in the third chapter †De defectibus circa Massam occu◠étibus cap. 3. §. 7. Si host a consecrata dispareat vâ—â— casie aliquo ut venlo aut miraculo velab liquo aâ—â—mali accepta acqueat repeâ—eri tunc alterra consecretur ab â—o loco incipiendo Quâ— pridie c. If the consecrated hoste vanish away by some accident as if it be carried away with the winde or by some miracle or eaten up by some beast and cannot be found then let another be consecrated beginning again about the place of the Masse Qui pridie c. And in the tenth chapter * Cap. 10. Si musca vel aranea cecîderit in calicem non fuerit Sacerdoti nausea nee ullum periculum â—â—meat sumat cum sanguâ—ne If a Flye or Spider fall into the chalice and that the Priests Stomack rise not against and feare not any danger thereby let him swallow the Flye or Spider with the blood And in the same Chapter †Cap. 10. § 11. Si in hieme congelatâ—â— sanguis in calice involvatur calix pannis calefactâ—s If in winter the blood doe freeze in the chalice let the chalice be wrapped up in hoâ— clothes Note these words If the blood doe freeze Whilest Christ is full of glory in heaven they thaw him here upon earth Let them tell us what body or what substance is frozen in the chalice For all Ice is a body But above all is to be noted that which is found in the same Chapter * Cap. 10. §. 14. Si Sacerdos evomat Eucharistiam si species integrae appareant reverenter sumantur nisi nausea siat Tunc enim species consecratae caute separentur in loto sacro reponantur If the Priest vomit up the Eucharist and that the species appeare whole they must be chewd againe with reverence unlesse the stomack should loath them For then the consecrated species must bee carefully severed and put into a sacred place and after that be cast into the reliquary or shrine wherein reliques are kept Pope Innocent the third in the fourth Booke of the Mysteries of the Masse Chapter 16 moveth a very important question He asketh that if a flux or loosenesse takes a Priest that hath nothing in his stomack but consecrated hostes what is the matter that comes out of his body Of which difficulty the Pope rids himselfe wisely saying with the Apostle Be not wiser than it behooveth but bee wise unto sobriety By these things it appeareth that God stirred up with anger against men that have rejected his word hath strucken them with giddines For who would ever have thought that Christian men would have come to that point as to worship a God which may bee stolne or carried away with the winde so that one may say God is lost A God that may be gnawed by mice and devoured by brute beasts A God that is wrapped in the middest of vomiting and spuing and that must be eaten and chewed againe A God who being fallen downe cannot rise up againe Of whom their Doctors * Vasquez in 3 partem Thamae Tomo 3. â—â—sp 191. cap. 3. Neque agere neque pati poâ—est corpus Christi prout est in hoc Sacramento corpoâ—ea actione neque passione say that under the hoste he cannot open his eyes nor stirre his hands and that he is neither lieing sitting nor standing Our Adversaries doe answer that when Mice have gnawed or carryed away the consecrated hoste or that a beaste hath devoured it Christ suffereth no paine nor hurt thereby But they cannot deny but that Christ there by is exposed to laughter and suffers a greater ignominie than that of the Crosse To be eaten by beasts and vomited up and wrapped among vomiting and spuing is a thing more shamefull than to be crucified The Turks and Pagans will say Is that the God of the Christians that could not defend himselfe against Mice and which is devoured by Dogs Certain it is that God would never make the glorious body of his Son to be subject to so many ignominies without it were very beneficiall and usefull unto the Church And yet our Adversaries cannot tell us what good it doth to our Salvation that Christ should be thus carried away by a mouse or devoured by brute beasts Cardinal Tolet the Jesuit in the second Booke of the Institution of Priests chapter 25. saith †Potest consecrare Sacerdos multos cophinos panis vini dolium The Priests can consecrate many baskets of bread and a Tunne of wine If he can consecrate one Tun he may also consecrate two yea tenne or twentie and so may turne into blood all the Wine of a Market Whereupon t is necessary to know that the Church of Rome holdeth that by conferring of the order of Priesthood an Indelible character is engraven into the Soule of the Priest So that the Pope himselfe cannot blot it out And that a Priest degraded for Heresie or other crime may consecrate and transubstantiate bread into flesh and wine into blood by vertue of that character remaining in him though the function of his office be interdicted unto him By that meanes a Priest that hath forsaken the Roman Religion yea a Priest * Vasquez Tomo Ill. in 3. parteÌ„ Thomae Disp 171. Cap. 3. Cum constet Sacerdoâ—bus coÌ„missam fuisse potestatem consecrandi ita ut licet consecrare velit in malum usum nempe pro veneficijs incantationibus consceratio corum effectum haberet Sorcerer and Magician may transubstantiate whole tuns of wine into blood and make Christs blood to be carried up and downe in pints and bottles over al the taverns tipling houses of a town which is truly to make Christ the sport of Magicians and drunkards and expose him to great ignominy By the same doctrine Christ is in
taking it figuratively For the body of Christ was not dead when he did institute this Sacrament But it is very true in the sense that we take it to wit that the bread which he did breake and give to his Disciples was the figure or remembrance of his body dead for us For we have shewed already that in the holy Supper Christs body is presented to our faith not as glorious and spirituall but as broken and dying and dead for us This is confirmed in that in the Evangelists this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth body is in most places taken for a dead body As in the 17 of Saint Luke Verse 37. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Wheresoever the body is thither will the Engles be gâ—thered together †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Mâ—tthew 27.52 * Many bodyes of Saints which slept arose And Mark 14.8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to annoint the body For the proper word in Greek for to signifie a dead body is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 T is true that in the Syriack Testament the word Peger is taken sometimes for a living body But it is not credible that Christ tooke this word in an other sense than it is taken in the Old Testament where it signifieth alwayes a dead bodie Neither is it to be omitted that Saint Paul cals oftentimes the Church Christs body Ephes 1.23 and Chapter 5.23 If then from these words This is my body they will inferre that the bread is transubstantiated into Christs body by the like reason when the Scripture saith that the Church is the body of Christ it may bee inferred that the Church is transubstantiated into Christs bodie CHAP. XII That our Adversaries to avoide a cleare and naturall figure forge a multitude of harsh and unusuaall ones and speake but in figurative tearmes And of Berengarius his confession OVr Adversaries who make a shew to be enemies to Figures forge neverthelesse a great number of absurd and violent figures and turne all into figures When Christ saith This is my body by This they understand an individuum Vagum or that which is under these species without determining any thing Others interprete the word IS by shall be or shall become For they say that the Transubstantiation is not made or effected till the words be pronounced When the Evangelists say that the Lord gave bread by this word bread they understand flesh And wee have heard them confesse that these word This cup is the New Testament in my bloeâ— are figurative By their doctrine which puts 〈◊〉 body into the cup Christ giving 〈◊〉 cup might have said This is my body and had spoken truely if wee beleeâ— them Christ called that which he dranâ— in the Eucharist the fruit of the Viâ—â— But our Adversaries by the fruit 〈◊〉 the Vine will have the blood to be understood By these words Doe this they understand Sacrifice me but the words following Doe this in remembrance of 〈◊〉 doe refute that interpretation For it 〈◊〉 impossible to Sacrifice Christ in remembrance of Christ Wee shall see anone that when iâ— the 6 of Saint John Verse 53. Chriâ—â— saith Except yee drinke my blood yee haâ—â— no life in you our adversaries least thâ—â— should be accused of taking the liâ—â— from the Lay people in depriving theâ— of the cup by the word drinking they understand eating And that wheâ— Christ saith I leave the World and am 〈◊〉 more in the world they add this taile to it to wit by my visible presence We have seene before that the Apostle saith foure several times that in the Lords Supper we breake bread and eate bread To shun the force of these words they wrest them into figures saying that it is not bread that we eate But that figuratively Christs body is called bread because it seemes to be so Which thing they know to be false for Christs body never seemed to be bread Item they say that it is called bread because it was bread before the consecration Which also is false For the Lords body was never bread To such figures Rhethorick affords no name They bring indeed for example Moses Rod which is still called a rod after it was turned into a Serpent and the water of the wedding of Cana Iohn 2. which is still called water after it was turned into wine Which are examples making against them For of that rod it is expressly said that it was turned into a Serpent Exod. 4.3 And of that water it is said in expresse termes that it was turned into wine John 2.9 But of the bread of the holy Supper it is not said that it was converted into flesh Of this Serpent one might have truly said that it was once a rod and of this wine that it was once water because it was the same matter clothed with another forme But of Christs body it cannot be sayd truely that ever it was bread The matter or substance of the body of Christ is not the matter of the bread For Christs body is not made of bread and was never bread Others say that the Apostle saith not When ye eate bread but when ye eate of this bread understanding by the pronoune This a spirituall and heavenly bread But they consider not that the Apostle in the first to the Corinthians Chapter 10 saith not THIS BREAD but the bread that we breake And Saint Luke in the 20 of the Acts 7 Verse The Disciples came together to break bread There their Philosophy fayles them They must also learne that when the Scripture taketh this word Bread in a spirituall sense it is never opposed to the cup because that when the question is of a spirituall foode to eate and to drinke are but one and the same thing But Saint Paul opposeth this bread to that cup saying Let every man eate of this bread and drinke of this â—up That if any one consider exactly all the termes which our Adversaries use in this matter hee shall perceive that they be unintelligible figures They say that the Priest breaketh the hoste and that this hoste is the body of Christ which neverthelesse cannot be broken They say they lift up God but God cannot be lifted up They say the consecrated hoste is round And that Christs body is in the consecrated hoste Whence will follow in good Logick that the body of Christ is round Which neverthelesse they doe not beleeve They grant both propositions and deny the conclusion Which is against common sense And when they speake of drinking the cup by drinking they understand a swallowing downe of flesh and bones and the Soule of Christ with his Divinity This confession of Berengarius is to be found in the 2 Distinction of the Consecration at the CanoÌ„ Ego Berengarius The Roman Councell under Nieholas the second prescribed to Berengarius a forme of abjuration of his doctrine in the most exquisite and formall tearmes that ever they could devise These tearmes are
that he protesteth to stand and keepe himselfe close to the doctrine of the Pope and Church of Rome to wit that the bread and the wine which are upon the Altar are not onely the Sacrament but also the very body and blood of Christ Words that must be taken in a quite contrary sense For the Church of Rome beleeveth not that the bread is the true body of Christ Item they make him say that Christs body is sensiblie handled by the Priest and is broken and crushed with the teeth of the faithfull But the Doctors Glosse noteth in the margent these wordes Except thou understandst aright Berengarius his words thou shalt fall into a greater herisie than Berengarius did It is the property of untruth to intangle it selfe with figures and not to understand it selfe CHAP. XIII Of the Ascension of the Lord and of his absence and of that our Adversaries say that in the Sacrament he is Sacrmentally present ABove all things the Glosses and figures of our Adversaries are intolerable when as they wrest the places of Scripture wherein mention is made of Christs Ascension and of his departure out of this world The Lord in the 12 Chapter of Saint John 8 Verse saith The poore ye have alwayes but me ye have not alwayes And in the 14 Chapter 3 Verse If I goe I will come againe speaking of his returne at the day of judgement And in the chapter 17.10 speaking of his Ascension neare at hand as if it were past he saith Now I am no more in the World Saint Peter in the third Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles saith Heaven must containe him untill the times of the restitution of all things which is the day of judgement All these words are as many lies if we beleeve the Transubstantiation For in these places Christ saith that he hath left the world and is no more in the world and that we shall not have him alwayes But if we beleeve the Transubstantiation we must say Christ hath not left the world but is much more present than he was before his ascension For then he was but in one place at once upon earth but now they will have him to be present upon a million of Altars in boxes and in bellies And for to conclude that place of Saint Peter which saith that Heaven must containe him untill the day of restitution the Latin version of the Roman Church hath put Heaven must receive him as if when S. Peter said these words Christ was not yet ascended And it is false that heaven doth receive Christ continually untill the day of Judgement The Lovain Doctors which have traÌ„slated the Bible into French have acknowledged the same wherefore they have turned faithfully WhoÌ„ heaven must contain And Emanud Sâ— the Jesuite in his Notes upon this place Recipere id est receptum continere To receive that is to say to containe him after he be received Christ then must be contained in heaven not be still upon earth They rid themselves as ill out of the other places They say that when Christ saith He leaveth the world and is no more in the world it must be understood concerning his visible presence So they make without word of God 2 sorts of Christs presence the one visible the other invisible And make Christ say I goe away but I will remaine invisibly I leave you but my body shall be alwayes with you Now in conscience could a man that had Christs body and soule in his mouth say that Christ is not present under colour that he sees him not By the same reason one may say that a man hath no soule because it is invisible and that a man hath left the towne when he lyeth hid in it What more Christ himselfe in the 13. of Saint Marke 21. verse warnes us that there will come a time in which they shall say unto us Loe here is Christ or loe he is there and forbids us to beleeve it And in the 24. chapter of Saint Matthew he addeth If any man shall say unto you he is in the closets or in the cup-boards for the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth that beleeve it not Truly he speaketh evidently of the places wherein they shall say that Christ is hidden And speaketh in the plurall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in closets as of a Christ which shall be thought to be in severall places at once But Christ refuteth plainly all these shifts and evasions of our Adversaries when as to comfort his Disciples sorrowfull for his departure he promiseth them to send them the Comforter Iohn 14.16.26 chap. 15.26 which is the Holy Ghost According to the doctrine of the Church of Rome hee should have said I goe away but that shall not hinder mee from being present in your mouths and in your stomacks and I shall 〈◊〉 more present unto you than I am now Hâ— saith not a word of all that unto them but comforting them for his departure he promiseth them his holy Spirit Saint Paul in the second to the Corinthians chap. 5.8 saith We are willing rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord. And to the Philippians chap. 1.23 My desire is to depart and to be with Christ Had this Apostle lost his wiâ—s For according to the Popish doctrine he should have said I am already with Christ I do carry him in my hands I have him in my stomacke S. Austin upon that is very expresse in his 50. Treatise upon S. John where he saith According to the Maj stie of thâ— Lord according to his unspeak â—â—â—e and inâ—isiâ—â—e grace is accomplish'd that which he said I will be with you at all times till the consummation of the world But according to his flesh which the world bath taken and is he is horn of the Virgin c. he said Ye shall not have mee alwaies And in the first Treatise upon the first of John * Ipsum jam 〈…〉 sed side contingâ—re Wee can no more handle him with our hands now that he sitteth in heaven but well may we touch him by faith He speaketh to the Priests of these times who bragge to have Christ in their hands And in the 78. Treatise upon S. John * A quibus homo abscedebat Deus non recedebat Christ was going away as being a man and withdrew not himself as he is God And in the 30 Treatise †Corpus Dominiâ—n quo resurrexit in uno loco esse oportet veritas ejus ubâ—que disâ— fusa est The Lords body in which he is risen must be in one place onely but his truth is spread every where There is in the Latin in uno loco esse oportet and not in uno loco esse potest according to the new editions falsified * Gratiaâ—nus Dist 2. de Conseâ—â— Câ—nâ—prim Iuo 2. partâ— Decreti c 18. Lombard lib. 4. Sentent Gratian Ivo Carmitensis Lombard Thomas
divide not their minde into two Adorations and worship not the body of Christ with one kinde of Adoration and the species of the bread with an other but carry their whole devotion to worship with soveraigne adoration the hoste they have before their eyes Bellarmin teacheth as much in his fourth Booke of the E charist Chapter 29. * § Sed haec Cultu latriae diciâ— mus per se proprie Christis esse adorandu eam aderaâ—â—one ad symbola 〈◊〉 â—iâ—m panis vâ—nt perâ—nere quaâ—â—nus â—ppre 〈◊〉 dunâ—ur 〈◊〉 auâ—um â—um ipso Christo quâ—m conâ—â—nent We say that Christ For se proprie is to be worshipped with the adâ—ration of Latria and that this adoration belongeth also to the signes or symboles of the bread and wine in as much as they are conceived or considered as being one with Christ himselfe whom they containe And saith it was just so that Christs garments were worshipped with the same adoration that Christ was For saith he they did not pull off his cloaths for 〈◊〉 worship him For he proposeth this for an infalliblâ— Maxime that bee that worshippeth soâ—â—thing worshippeth also all the things thâ—â— are conjâ—yned to it Bell lib. de Imaginibus cap. 25 Qui adoral ea omnia quae cum ipso conjuncta sunt That is to say that hâ— that worshippeth the Images worships also the Cobwebs that are upoâ— them And that he that worshippeth thâ— Pope worshippeth also his Breecheâ— and his shirt Hee will have then thâ— roundnesse whitenesse length breadth and taste of the hoste to be worshippeâ— with the same adoration that God iâ— worshipped with because these accident and Christ are but one Vasquez the Jesuite saith the same in his second Booke of Adoration Disp 9. Chapter 1. * Quae absolute dâ—â—â—tur adorari adorat one latriae cum tamen per accidens cii d vinitate conjunlla colantur Christs humanity saith he and the Eucharist are worshipped absolutely with the adoration of Latria albeit that being enjoyned by accident with thâ— God-head a worshippe is given to theâ— And that we may know that the accidents of the bread that is to say thâ— breadth length colour and savour of the bread are worshipped with the same adoration that Christ is worshipped he addeth * Accidentia panis vini cum existat non propria exisientâ—a sed exâ—stentia corporâ—s sanguinis Christi optâ—â—â— possiil simul sub cundem cultum adorat onis cadâ—re queadmodum humanitas Christi ejusque divinitas â—odem motu adorationis coluntur The accidents of the bread and wine because they exist not by their proper existence but by the existence of the body and blood of Christ may very well receive the same honour of adoration together with the body and blood of Christ even as Châ—sts humanitie and his Divinitie are worshipped with one and the same motion of adoration This Idolatry is prodigious by which the colour and roundnesse of the bread are worshipped with the same adoration that God is worshipped with The Aegyptians did seeme to have attained to the highest degree of Idolatry when they did worship Cats Onions and Storkes But this Idolatry in worshipping the accidents of the bread goes farre beyond them For these things they worshipped were substances and things really existing But these accidents without a subject are imaginary things and which indeed are nothing The folly of those Aegyptians would have beene much greater if they had worshipped the colour and the length and the faces or lowring of a Cat without worshipping the Cat. Adde moreover that they did not worship beasts and plants as the Soveraigne God but as having in them some sparkes of the Divinity But the Roman Church worshippeth the accidents of bread without bread with a Soveraigne adoration and which onely belongeth to God And marke the doctrine of this Jesuite who saith with approbation of the Examinators prefixed in the forefront of his booke that the accidents of the bread doe exist in Christ after the same manner as the humanitie of Christ hath no proper subsistence but subsisteth in the divine nature This truely is to unite and conjoyne the roundnesse and colour of the bread with Christ with a personall union And as errors are link'd together anâ— cleave one to an other it is certain that the accidents of the bread are noâ— more straitly conjoyned with Christ than Christ with these accidents And by consequent even as because of this imaginary union of the body of Christ with the accidents of the bread the things which befall these accidents are also attributed unto the body of Christ of which they say it is carryed and lifted up and walked up and downe and stolne away and eaten by mice and vomited up and devoured by a beast So by the same reason because of the same union they must say that the roundnesse and whitenesse of the bread are the Sonne of God and are borne of the Virgin and are just and without origiginall sinne In all this truely the Roman Church sheweth her selfe idolatrous in the last degree It is a bog or quagmire of abuses and an abyssus or a gulfe of seduction wherein Satan hath plunged men God punishing in his just anger the contempt of his word which is become an unknowne Booke among the people For it is just that those that have lost Piety should loose also the common sense CHAP. XVI Examen of the Adoration of the Sacrament by the word of God That the Ancient Christians did not worship the Sacrament IF the Scriptures had with our Adversaries any authority this controversie would soone be decided Every action that concernes Gods Service and specially Adoration is to be done in Faith and not with doubts and conjectures as Saint James saith Chapter first Let him aske in Faith nothing wavering And Saint Paul Rom. 14. saith that whatsoever is not of Faith is sinne And the same Apostle to the Hebrewes Chapter 11. It is impossible without Faith to please God Now it is impossible that the people of the Roman Church should worship the hoste of the Massâ— in faith Because God hath not commanded it in his word For as Saint Paul saith Rom. 1â— Faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word of God In generall we have the Lords commandement saying Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely shalt thou serve Hee speaketh of the Soveraigne God Creator and Governour of the World and not of a God made with words that is made of bread subject to falling to be vomited up and stolne away Certainly to worship such a god as that is to violate the Commandement of the Law which saith Thou shalt have no other God before me In vaine doe they answer that Christ ought to be worshipped since hee is God For besides that they presuppose that which is not to wit that this bread is transubstantiated into the body of Christ they declare themselves
Cardinall du Perron writing against du Plessiâ— maketh many exclamations against Origen and cals him origine of all errors and cries out Shut yâ—â— eares Christian people as if men did read with their cares What Cardinall dâ— Perron saith that Theophilus Patriarck of Alexandria did condemne Origen for speaking so is false and shall never be found Theodoret in his first Dialogue titled the Vnchangeable speaking of these words This is my body saith * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Lord hath honored the visible signes with the appellation of his body and blood not having changed their nature but having added grace 〈◊〉 nature A little before he had said The Lord gave to the signe the name of his body And in the second Dialogue tearmed the Non confuse The divine mysteries are signes of the true body And a little after he introduceth an Eutychian Heretick maintaining Transubstantiation To whom he answereth in these words Thou art oâ—â—ght by the nets that thou hast woven For even after the consecration the mysticall signes do not change their own nature * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For they remaine in their former Substance Forme and Figure And in the same Dialogue Tell me then the signes that are offered unto God what signes are they of The answer is Of the Lords body and blood In the Books of Sacraments attributed to S. Ambrose in the fourth Book cha 5. We have a clause of the publick forme used in the Eucharist in these words a Dixit Sacerdos Fac nobis hanc oblationem asscriptam rationabileÌ„ acceptabileÌ„ quod est figura corporis sanguinis Domini nostri Iesus Christi GraÌ„t that this oblation be imputed unto us as acceptable reasonable which is the FIGVRE of the body and blood of Christ Iesus our Lord. Which cannot be understood of the unconsecrated bread for it is not an acceptable oblation for our sins This clause is retained in the Masse except this word Figure which they have taken away Eusebius in his 12 Book of the Demonstration chap. 8. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We have been instructed to celebrate at the table according to the laws of the New Testament by the signes of the body and blood the remembrance of this Sacrifice And in the eight Book after he had said that Christ delivered to his Disciples the signes or symboles of his dispensation he addeth a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Commanding to celebrate the Image or figure of his own Body Euphraemius Patriarck of Antioch b Ex Bibliothe Phocii p. 415. editionis Augustanae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Christs body which the Faithfull receive loseth not its sensible substance and is not divided from intelligible grace So Baptisme being wholly made spirituall and one doth retaine the property of its sensible substance tâ— wit water and yet looseth not that which it is made This place is very forcible for he calleth the bread Christs body and acknowledges not therein any conversion of substance and teacheth that in the Eucharist there is no more conversion of substance than in Baptisme where the water remaineth always water Gregory Nazianzen in his 2. Oration of the Passeover speaketh thus of the participation of the Eucharist c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We shal indeed be partakers of the Passeover in figure though more evidently than in the old Passe over For the Passeover I dare say wâ—â— a more darke figure of a figure And the same Father in his Oration in the Praise of his Sister Gorgonia commendeth her devotion in that having received with her own hand the Sacrament she carried back home a parcell of 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. If saith he her hand had shut up us in treasure any thing of the signes or aâ—â—itypes 〈◊〉 the body or of the blood of the Lord she minded it with her teares Euphraemius Deacon of Edissa b Ad eos qui Filii Dei naturam scrutari volunt Inspice diligenter quomodo sumens in manibus paneÌ„ benedix it ac fregil in figuram immaculati corporis c. Behold â—iligently how the Lord after hee had taken â—e bread in his bands blessed it and brake it 〈◊〉 figure of his immaculat body and blessed â—e cup in figure of his precious blood and gave to his Disciples The imperfect work upon S. Matthew â—â—tributed to Chrysostome in the 11 Hoâ—ily speaking of those that imploy the â—â—cred vessels as Plates and Chalices to â—ofane uses c Si haec vasa sanctificata ad privatos usus transferre â—periculosum est in quibus non est verum corpus Christs sed â—â—sterium corporis ejus continetur quanto magis vasa corporis â—â—stri c. If it be so dangerous a thing 〈◊〉 transport to privat uses the sacred vessels â—herein Christs body is not but where the myâ—ry of his body is contained how much more â—â—e vessels of our bodies which God hath preâ—red to himse fe for to dwell in them Note â—at hee doth nor say that the body of â—hrist was not in these vessels but that it not in them that it may not be thought â—e speaketh of the vessels of Salomons â—emple The same Fathers upon the third Psalme a Dominus Iudam adhâ—buit ad câ—nviv um â—n quo corporis sangumis suâ— siguram discipulâ—s commondavâ—t tradid t. The Lord admitâ—ed Judas 〈◊〉 the banquet in whâ—ch he recommended anâ— gave to his disciples the figure of his bâ—â—â— and blood The same in his third Booke of Châ—â—stian Doctrine Chapter 16. When 〈◊〉 Lord saith b N si manducaveritis inquit carnâ—m siâ—iâ— hom nis â—iberitis sanguinem non habebi tis vitam in vobis facinus vel flag tium vâ—detur jubere Fâ—gura ergo est praecipiens passions Dominicae esse communicandum suaviter atque utiliter is memoâ—â— recondendum quòd â—aro ejus proâ—obis crucifixa vulâ—â—â— rata sit Except yee eate the flâ—sh of 〈◊〉 Sonne of man and drinke his blood ye havâ— no life in you he seemeth to command a wiâ—ked thing or haiâ—us offence It is therefore a figure that commands to communicate to the Passion of the Lord and to puâ— sweetly and profitably into our memory that his flesh was crucified and woundâ—â— for us Note that Saint Austin saith noâ— onely that these words Exce t yee eâ—â— c. are figurative But alâ—o expounâ— unto us the sense and meaning of thâ—â— figure saying that it signifieth we mâ—â— meditate with pleasure and profiâ— that Christ is dead for us Which 〈◊〉 an exposition our Adversaries approâ—â— not The same Author in the first Treatise upon the first Epistle of Saint John c Dominus consolans nos qui ipsum jam in coelo sedentem manu contrectare non possumus sed side contingere The Lord comforteth us we that can handle him no more with our hands but touch him by Faith And in the 53 Sermon of the
words of the Lord d Pene quidem Sacramentum omnes corpus ejus dicunt All almost doe call the body of Christ that which is the sacred signe of it Words that are very considerable And in the 27 Treatise upon Saint John e Illi put abant cum erogaturii corpus suii ille aâ—dixit se ascensurum in coelum utique integrumcum videritâ—s silium ho minis ascendentem ubi erat prius certe vel tunc videbitis quia non co modo quo putatis erogat corpus suum Certe vel tunc intelliget is quod ejus gratia non consumitur morsibus The Capernaites thought he should distribute his body unto them but he said unto them hee would ascend into heaven whole indeed When yee see the Sonne of man ascend where he was before certainly then at least you shall see that he giveth not his body as you esteeme Verily then shall yee understand that his grace is not consumed with biting Chiefly that place of the same Father upon the 98 Psalme seemes to me very expresse where expounding these words of the Lord Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man yee have no life in you he bringeth in the Lord speaking thus f Spirital ter intelligite quod locutus sum Non hoc corpus quod videt is manducaturi â—sâ—â—s bibituri illum songuinem quem fusuri sunt qui me cru cisigent Sacramentum aliquod vobis commondavi spiritaliter intellectum vivâ—ficabit vos Vnderstand spirituallie what I have said unto you yee shall not eate this body that you see g Qui non manet â—n christo â—u quo â—non manet Christus pro culdubio nâ—c manduâ—â—t spiritaliter earnem ejus nec bibit ejus sanguinem lcet carnalter visic biliter premat dentibus Sacramentum corporis et sanguinis Chr st nor d inke that blood wâ—ich shall bee shed by those that shall crucifie me I have commended a sacred signe unto you which being understood spiritually shall vivifie you According to our Adversaries doctrine both good and bad take the Lords body in the Eucharist For many bee partakers of the Sacrament without Faith and hypocriâ—ically Such neverthelesse doe swallow the consecrated hoste and if we beleeve our Adversaries eate truly and really the body of Christ Jesus Saint Austin impugneth that opinion and maintaineth that the wicked eate but the signes and receive not Christ In the 26 Treatise upon Saint John g Sent. 339 Quâ— discordat à Christo non carne ejus manducat nec sanguinem bibat etiamsi tantae rei Sacramentum ad judicium suae praesumtionis quotidie indifferenter accipiat Whosoever dwelleth not is Christ and in whom Christ dwelleth not for a certaine he eateth not his flesh spiritually and drinketh not his blood though he presseth carnally and visibly with his teeth the sacred signes of Christs body and blood And in the Booke of Sentences of Saint Austin collected by Prosper h Whosoever discordeth with Christ eateth not the flesh of Christ and drinketh not his blood though hee take every day indifferently the sacred signe of so great a thing to the condemnation of his owne presumption And in the 25 Chapter of the 21. Booke Of the City of God i Non dicendum cum manducare corpus Christi qui in corpore Christi non est It must not bee said that he who is not in the body of Christ eateth the body of Christ And there he bringeth in Christ saying k Qui non in me manet et in quo ego no maneo non se dicat aut existimet manducare corpus meum c. He that abideth not in me and in whom I abide not let not him say nor thinke that be eateth my body or drinketh my blood Therefore those doe not abide in Christ that are not the members of Christ Saint Hierome saith the same upon the last Chapter of Esaiah l Dum non sunt sancti corpore et spiritu non comedunt carnem Icsu neque bibunt sangumem Whilest they are not holy in body and spirit they eate not the flesh of Jesus and drinke not that blood whereof he speaketh himselfe Whosoever eateth my flesh c. Let no man wonder that I have turned this word Sacrament in Saint Austin by a sacred signe seeing that he himselfe expoundeth it so in the fifth Epistle to Marcellinus m Signa cum ad res divinas pertinent Sacramenta appellantur The signes when they belong to divine things are called Sacraments And in the tenth Booke of the City of God Chapter 5. n Sacrificium visibile est invisibilis Sacrificij Sacramentum id est sacrum signum The visible Sacrifice is a Sacrament of the invible Sacrifice that is to say a sacred signe And against the adversarie of the Law and the Prophets 2 Booke Chapter 9. Sacramenta id est sacra signa The Sacraments that is to say the sacred signes It is the definition given by Lombard in the first Distinction of the fourth Book Tit. 3. Sacramentum est sacrae rei signum Bellarmin himselfe in his first Booke of Sacraments o Sacramentum nomem genericium significat signum rei sacrie vel arcanae Chapter 7. 11. The word Sacrament signifieth a signe of a sacred or secret thing In one thing principally it appeareth how farre Saint Austin was from beleeving Transubstantiation In that in these words This is my body by this word Body he understandeth the Church At the end of Fulgentius his Workes who was Austins disciple there is a Sermon of Austins which maliciously they have plucked out of his Workes and that had been lost if Fulgentius and Beda had not preserved it Here then be the very words of Austin p Aug. â—o Serm. ad infantes Quod vidistis panis est et calix quod vobis etiam oculi â—estri reâ—untiant quod aute sides vestra â—ostulat inâ—truenda â—anis est â—orpus Christi What ye have seene is bread and wine as your eyes shew unto you but according to the instruction that your Faith demandeth the bread is the body of Christ and the Cup is his blood Bellarmin in his first Booke of the Eucharist Chapter 1. acknowledgeth that these words This bread is Christs body cannot be true if they be not taken figuratively But let us learne how Saint Austin will have the bread to be the body of Christ He saith then q Quomodo est panis corpus ejus calix vel quod habet calix quomodo est sanguis ejus Ista fraires ideo dicuntur Sacramenta quia in eis alâ—ud vidotur aliud intelligitur Quod videtur formam habet corporalem quod intelligitur fructu habet spiritalem Corpus ergo Christi sivis intelligere audi Apostolum dicentem fidelibus Vos estis corpus Christ et membra c. How is the bread his body and how is the
is it as great an absurdity by the word of Substance to understand Accidents If it may be lawfull for them to wrest the Fathers thus and when they say a thing is white understand that they mean black never will there be any thing cleare nor sure Certainely if by this word Substance the Fathers had understood the Accidents they would have said the Substances in the plurall For Accidents are many Among which our Adversaries must chuse one that may be called a Substance But Theodoret in his second Dialogue saying that the bread after the Consecration remaineth in its former substance forme and figure refuteth this evasion For hee distinguisheth expressely the Substance from the Accidents Now as this error of the bodily presence of â—hrists body under the species of the bread began to be set on broach Bertram a Priest in Charles the Bald his time about the yeare of our Lord 870. made a Book against that abuse which Book is yet extant For which cause also Bellarmin in his first Book of the Eucharist chap. 1. placeth him among the Hereticks But Bertram all his life time lived with credit and honor and was never reprooved for it CHAP. XXVII Confirmation of the same by the customes of the ancient Church THis truth is confirmed by the ancient customes different from what is done in the Masse at this day and incompatible with Transubstantiation For in the ancient Church Service was said in a known tongue Every one received the Communion in both kinds The people offered upon the table abundance of bread and wine and not round light wafers * Cypr. Serm. de Lapsis Euseb Histor lib. 7. c. 9. Theod. Histor lib. 5. cap. 18. Nazianz. Orat. de Gorgonia The people aswell men as women received the Sacrament with their hand and many carried it home a long with them * Hesychius lib. 2. in Lev. c. 8. Ivo 2 part 2 de Sacr. c. 59. Burch l. 5. c. 12. The residues of the sacred bread that remained upon the table after the Communion were either burn't or * Evagâ— l. 4 cap. 36. given unto little children coming from Schoole or carried into the Priests houses for to be eaten there Than were there no private Masses Nor no Corpus Christi day The consecrated Host was not carried in procession * Ambâ—l de Viduis Oportet eam Viduam primo carere variarum illecebris voluptatuÌ„ vitare internum corporis animiq laÌ„guoreÌ„ ut corpus sanguinem Christi ministret Ambrose in his Book of Widdows saith that the Widdowes were imployed in the administration of the Sacrament a Editionis Parisiensis anno 1624 coluÌ„ 161. Virgo postquaÌ„ coÌ„municavit reservet de ipsa coÌ„munione unde iâ—sque ad diem octavum communicet In the Roman Order which is in Bibliotheca Patrum these words are to be found Let the Virgin receive the Communion after the Masse is ended and after she hath received let her reserve of the Communion sufficiently for to communie the eight dayes together Had they then beleeved the Transubstantiation they would never have given unto maids the Sacrament to keep so long a time Certain it is the ancient Church worshipped not the Sacrament There may be found indeed some places of the Fathers that say that in the Eucharist wee worship Christ But it is one thing to worship Christ in the action of the Sacrament and another thing to worship the Sacrament The Father and the holy Ghost in the Eucharist are also worshipped In vaine do they alleadge some ancient Fathers that speak of the elevation of the Sacrament For the elevation inferreth not necessarily adoration seeing that in Moses Law the Priest * Exod. 29 24. Levitiâ— 8.27 29. Num. 5.25 waved the breast and shoulder of the offering and a handfull of the first fruits without worshipping these things Moreover that elevation was nothing like to the elevation of the Host which the Priest maketh now a dayes over his head turning his back to the people and ringing a little Bell. But then after the Priest had uncovered the bread and wine he tooke the Platter or Dish with both his hands and lift it up for to shew it unto the people and that even before the words which are called of Consecration CHA. XXVIII Explanation of the places of the Fathers that say that in the Eucharist we eate the body and blood of Christ and that the bread is changed into the body of Christ and is made Christs body Specially of Ambrose Hilary and Chrysostome That the Fathers speake of severall kinds of body and blood of Christ THe holy Scripture speaketh of two sorts of body of Christ Namely of the natural body of Christ which he took in the womb of the Virgin Mâ—ry and of his mysticall body which is the Church and of his Sacramentall or commemorative body which is the bread of the holy Supper as we have shewed already The Fathers following the stile of the Scripture besides Christs mysticall body which is the Church speak of two bodies of Christ to wit of his naturall body and of his Symbolicall and Sacramentall body of which body they speak as of a divine thing and full of Mysteries and of a Spirituall flesh which is made by the iâ—effable power of God by the meanes and for the causes which I shall relate hereafter Likewise also they make two kinds of blood of Christ the one naturall the other mysticall and Divine which we receive in the Sacrament Clemens Alexandrinus in his second Book of the Pedagogue chap. 2. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is two sorts of blood of Christ the one is his carnall blood by which we are redeemed fâ—om corruption The other is Spirituall to wit that by which we are annointed and that is to drink the blood of Jesus to be partaker of the Lords incorruption Saint Hierome upon the Epistle to the Ephesians a Ex Hieron in Epist ad Ephes caâ—â— Dist 2. de Conse Can. Dupliciter Dupliciter intelligitur caro Christivel spiritualis illa atque divima de qua ipse aâ—t Caro meaverc est cibus vel caro quae crucifixa est sanguinis qui militis effusus est lanced Christs flesh is meant or understood in two manners either that spirituall and divine flesh of which hee saith himselfe My flesh is meate indeed Or else that flesh that was crucified and that blood which was shed by the speare of the Souldier This place is alleadged in the Roman Dâ—cree in the second Distinction of the Consecration at the Camon Dupliciter And in the same Distinction at the Canon b De hac quidem hostia quae in commemorationem mirabiliter sit edere licet De illa vero quam Christus in ara crucis abtulit secundum se nulli edere licet De hac the same Father is alleadged upon Leviticus in these words It is indeed lawfull to eate of this
hoste which is made admirably in remembrance of Christ But it is not lawfull in it selfe for any one to eate of that which he offered on the Altar of the Crosse And in the same place at the Canon Corpus taken out of Saint Austin c Corpus sauguinem Christi dicimus illud quod de fructibus terrae acceptum prece mystica consecratum c. We doe call body and blood of Christ that which being taken of the fruits of the earth is consecrated by the mysticall prayer Certainely a body of Christ taken of the fruits of the earth is not the body of Christ crucified for us Tertullian in the sixth chapter of his Booke of Prayer d Panis est Sermo Dei vivi qui descâ—ndit de coelis Tum quod corpus ejus in pane censetur Hoc est corpus mâ—um The bread is the word of the living God which is descended from heaven Item the body that is holden to be in the bread This is my body Ensebius of Cesarea in his third Booke of Ecclesiasticall Divinitie Chapter 12. e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Lord spake not of the flesh which hee tooke but of his mysticall body and blood Saint Austin calleth very often that which we receive in the holy Supper the body of Christ But that we may not thinke that that which we receive by the corporall mouth is that body of the Lord which was crucified for us he bringeth in Christ saying unto us Yee shall not eate this body that you see f In Psal 98. Non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturiestis neque bibituri illis sanguinem queÌ„ fusuri sunt qui me crucifigent Sacrament um aliquod vobis coÌ„mendavi spiritualiter intellectum vivificabit vos â—nd shall not drinke the blood shed by those that shall crucifie me What then I have saith he recommended a Sacrament unâ—â— you which being taken Spiritually shall quicken and vivifie you Saint Ambrose in his Commentarie â—pon Saint Luke maketh a plaine diffeâ—ance betweene these two kinds of body of Christ expounding the words of the Lord Luke 17. Wheresoever the bodie is â—hither will the Eagles bee gathered togeâ—her First he saith that by the body may be understood the dead body of Christ and by the Eagles which are about it Mary wife to Cleophas and Mary Magdalen and Mary mother of the Lord then he addeth There is also that body â—f whom it is said My flesh is meate indeed Pope Innocent the third in the fourth Booke of the Mysteries of the Masse Chapter 36. distinguisheth in expresse tearmes these two kindes of flesh or body of Christ saying The forme of the bread comprehendeth both the one and the other flesh of Christ to wit the true and the mysticall Salmeron the Jesuite in his fifteenth Treatise of the IX Tome gathereth the same distinction of two sorts of blood of Christ out of the Booke of the Lords Supper attributed to Saint Cyprian Why saith he in the Law it was forbidden to eate blood and it is commanded in the Gospell Cyprian teacheth it excellently well in his Booke of the Lords Supper For in the abstinence of that blood is designed the Spirituall and reasonable life farre from brutish manners b Bibimus verò de Christi sanguine humane pariter ac divino ut intelligamus per ejus gustum ad eternae ac divinae vitae participium nos vocatos Now we drinke of Christs blood both of that which is humane and of that which is divine To the end we may understand that intasting of him we are called to the participation of eternall and divine life Wee have in the former Chapter alleadged Eupbraemius calling the bread of the Eucharist the body of Christ and yet saying that that body loseth not the Substance of bread And the Canon Hoc est in the second Distinction of the Consecration drawne out of Saint Austin saying that the bread which is the flesh of Christ is after its manner called the body of Christ though indeed it is the sacred signe of the body of Christ And Saint Austin The Lord made no difficultie to say This is my body when hee gave the signe of his body And Theodoret likewise saying The Lord hath given to the signe the name of his body And Origen calling the bread of the Supper a figurative body of Christ The same appeareth more cleare than the very day in that the Fathers which say that in the Eucharist we eate Christs body attribute unto this body things which cannot agree with the naturall body of Christ borne of the Virgin Mary and crucified for us Saint Cyprian c Domiunâ— corpus suiâ— paneÌ„ vocatâ— de multorâ—â— granorum adunatione congestum in his 76 Epistle saith The Lord calleth the bread his body which is made and composed of many graines And in the 63 Epistle d Nec corpus Domini potest esse sarina sola aut aqua sola insi utrumque adunatum fucrit c. The Lords body cannot be of the flower alone or of the water alone except both the one and the other be kneaded and conjoyned together Certainely this body of Christ composed of many graines and kneaded with water cannot be the body of Christ crucified for us Justin in his second Apologie saith e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Deacons doe give to every one of those that are present to participate bread and wine and water whereupon thankesgivings have beene said Then he addeth that this bread is the body of Christ But he sheweth manifestly that this bodie of Christ is not that which was crucified for us in that he saith a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is a meate wherewith ouâ— flesh and blood are fed by the transmutation He speaketh of the change made by the disgestion For our bodies are not fed of or with the body crucified for us that bodie is not changed into our flesh and blood For that Justin beleeved not the Transubstantiation he sheweth it sufficiently in the Dialogue against Tryphonius saying b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The oblation of fine flower was a figure of the bread of the Euchâ—rist which our Lord Jesus hath ordained to be made in remembrance of his Passion Ireneus in his first Booke saith the same c Euâ—n calâ—cem qui est cre tura suum corpus confirmavit ex quo nostra auget corâ—ora The Lord hath affirmed that the Cup which is a creature wherewith bee maketh our bodyes grow is his bodie Would Ireneus have lost his wit so farre as to beleeve that our bodies grow and are fed with the crucified body of the Lord and with the blood shedde upon the Crosse which did not returne into his body The same distinction of two sorts of body of Christ in the writings of the ancient Fathers appeareth in that they doe speake of the peeces of the
bodie of Christ and of the residues of the body of Christ that remaine after the Communion Which cannot agree with Christs naturall body crucified for us that cannot be broken in peeces and whereof there can be no residue Pope Gelasius in the Canon Comperimus second Distinction of the Consecration d Comperimus quod quidam sumpta taÌ„tum modo corporis sacri portione à calice sacrati cruoris abstineant We have learned that some having taken one part of the body of Christ abstaine from the cup which thing he calleth a sacriledge And Evagrius the Historian in his fourth Booke Chapter 36. e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The ancient custome of the royall City requireth that when many Peeces of the immaculate body of Christ remaine children not yet in age to be corrupted going to Schoole be called for to eate them How could one give peeces of the naturall bodie of Christ who sitteth at the right hand of God What likelihood is there to give to a troope of little children the residues of the body of Christ Would not that bee esteemed at this day in the Romane Church an horrible profanation Wherefore it is a thing very frequent in the Fathers to say that Panis est Corpus Christi The bread is Christs body And we have heard Saint Austin here above speake so Words which if they were taken or understood of the naturall body of Christ would be false For the bread is not the body that was crucified for us It is therefore unjustly done by our Adversaries to expose unto the View with great noyse and rumour some placeâ— out of the Bookes of Sacraments attributed to Saint Ambrose and out of the Booke of the Lords Supper attributed to Cyprian wherein is sayde that the bread after the words of Consecration becometh and is made Christs bodieâ— since we doe shew by so many proofâ—â— that they speake of another body that of that which was borne of the Virgin Marie and that was crucified aâ— we will shew yet more clearely hereafter For that the Author of these Bookâ— attributed to Saint Ambrose hath beleeved that after the Consecration the bread is bread still he shewes it plainly when he saith c Lib. 4. de SacrameÌ„t cap. 4. Let us therefore establisâ— this to wit how that which is bread may be Christs body And a little after a Si tanta vis in Sermone Domini Iesu ut inciperent esse quae noÌ„ erant quaÌ„to magis operatorius est ut sint quae erant et in aliud commutentur If there be such power and vertue in the word of the Lord Jesus as to make that things which were not begin to bee how much more shall he make that the things which were be and be changed into other things This excellent place which saith that the things which were are still that is to say that that which was bread is bread still is found thus alleadged by Lombard in his fourth Booke of Sentences Distinction 10. And by Thomas in the third part of his Summe question 78. Art 4. And by Gratian in the second Distinction of the Consecration at the Canon Panis est And by b Gabr. lect 40. in Can. Missae Alger de Sacram corp lib. 2. cap. 7 Ivo Car. 2. Parte cap 7. Et Iodocus Coccius Tom. 2. lib. 6. pag. 621. Gabriel Biel and Alger and Ivo Carnutensis and Jodocus Coccius and not according to the new editions of Ambrose in which these words Sint quae erant are left out Such falsifications are frequent in the new editions Some places may bee found indeed wheâ—ein some Fathers say that the bread of the Eucharist is the body of the Lord crucified for us But that must be understood after the sâ—me manner as Christ said of the bread that it was his body and that the Cup is the New Testament because it is the Sacrament or remembrance of it They doe object a place of Saint Hilarie out of his eighth Booke of the Trinitie where he saith a De veritate carnis saguinis noÌ„ relictus est ambigendi locus Nunc enim â—psius DoÌ„mi professione side nostra vere caro est vere sanguis Et hac accepta atque hausta essiciunt ut nos in Christo Christus in nobis sit Of the truth of the flesh and blood there is no doubt For at this day both by the profession of the Lord and by our Faith it is flesh indeed and blood indeed and these things taken and swallowed downe cause us to be in Christ and Christ in us First of all it is a great abuse to urge Saint Hilary who in this point of the nature of Christs body had an errour that destroyes the whole Christian Religion For b Hilar. lib. 10. de Trinitate In quem quanvis aut idlus incideret aut vulnus descenderet c. afferrent quideÌ„ haec impetuÌ„ passionis non tamen doloreÌ„ passionis inferrent ut teluÌ„ aliquod aut aquam perforans aut ignem compungens aut aëra vulnerans Et paulo post Virtus corpoâ—is sine sensu poenae vim poenae in se desaevientis excepit he teacheth that Christ in his Passion suffered no manner of paine at all and that the stripes they gave him were as if they had pierced the aire or the fire with a dart Secondly it appeareth that Hilary speaketh of the Spirituall manducation For by it alone are we in Christ and Christ in us Thirdly when Hilarie saith there remaineth no place to doubt of the truth of the flesh and blood of the Lord he doth not meane it must not be doubted but that in the Eucharist we cate truely the naturall flesh of Christ by the mouth of the body But he saith that we must not doubt but Christ had a true flesh and a true blood For he disputeth against certaine Hereticks that destroyed the truth of his human nature For as touching the Mystagogicall Catecheses attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem which are objected against us where it is sayd that we must not beleeve our senses telling us that it is bread it is certaine that those Catecheses are supposed and falsly attributed to Cyril For the Stile of them is very different from those 18 Catecheses of Cyril that precedes them which are cited by Theodoret and by Gelasius and by Damascen but these last are never alleadged by any one In the first Catechese there is an evident marke of falsity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For hee disswadeth his hearers from frequenting the Amphitheater where the Gladiators chases and combates were made against wild beasts and the Hippod omus or Circus that is to say the Parke or Place where horses races and combates were exercised For then were no such buildings nor spectacles in Jerusalem nor never were any since Jerusalem was Christian And concerning Chrysostomes hyperbolical amplifications saying that the Altar streames with
blood that wee fasten our teeth in his flesh that wee put ouâ— fingers in his wounds and suck the blood of them and that a Seraphin bringeth unto us a burning coale with a paire of tongs they bee outlashing words that savour of a declamation and which our Adversaries themselves doe not beleeve CHAP. XXIX That divers Ancient Fathers have beleeved a mysticall Union of the Godhead of Christ with the bread of the Sacrament NEverthelesse I cannot deny but that many Fathers have had an opinion which with good reason is rejected by the Roman Church of these dayes They teach that as Christs divine nature hath united it selfe personally unto his humane nature so the same divine nature by vertue of the Consecration is united to the bread of the Eucharist by an union though not personall and hypostaticall yet mysticall divine and ineffable by which the bread remaining bread is made the body of Christ For they use this comparison taken from the personall union of the two natures of Christ for to shew how the bread is the body of Christ This opinion hath no foundation in the Scripture Yet I dare say it is an errour no way prejudiciall to Christian Religion For that opinion changeth not the nature of Christ and destroyes not his humanitie Neither doth it destroy the nature of the Sacrament since they did beleeve that the bread changeth not its substance Whence also they worshipped not the Sacrament neither did fall into Idolatrie To be short it was an innocent error serving to augment and encrease the peoples respect and reverence to the holie Sacrament which for that cause they call terrible and wonderfull In the meane while we have in that a most evident proofe that these Fathers did not beleeve the Transubstantiation For as they beleeved not that by the union of Christs divinitie with his humanitie the human nature was transubstantiated or his bodie abolished so did not they beleeve that by this mysticall and divine union of the God-head of Christ with the bread the bread should be destroyed and turned into another substance By this doctrine the bread of the Eucharist is the body of Christ in two manners the one because of that mysticall union of the bread with Christ after the same sorte as Jesus Christ man is called the Son of God because of the personall union with the Sonne of God The other because this bread is the sacred signe and remembrance of Christs body as it is usual to give to the signes the name of that which they doe signifie For this second consideration they say that the bread of the Eucharist is the body which was borne of the Virgin and crucified for us For as touching the first Consideration it is certaine that this bread which they say is made Christs body by that mysticall union is another body of Christ than that which was crucified for us For to effect such a transmittation they interpose the Omnipotencie of God For it must bee a divine power for to cause that the bread remaining bread bee so straitly united to the Godhead of Christ as to become the body of Christ Now that these Fathers doe hold that this mysticall body of Christ is another body than that which was crucified for us though it be the same in signification we prooved it just now by a multitude of places of Fathers wherein they say that Christ hath two sorts of flesh and that we may very well eate of that flesh or mysticall body which is taken in the Sacrament but no manner of way eate the flesh that was crucified for us The first Father that ever made use of the personall union of the two natures of Christ for to shew how the bread is made the body of Christ not by Transubstantiation but by the mysterious union of the Godhead of Christ with the bread is Justin Martyr about the end of his second Apologie where he speaketh thus Wee doe not take these things as common bread but after the same manner as Christ our Saviour was incarnate and made flesh and blood for our salvation so we have beene taught that the meate whereon thankesgivings have been rendred by the prayer of the Word whereby our flesh is nourished by a By this transmutation hee understandeth the change of the bread which is made in the stóach for the nounishment of our bodies transmutation is the body and blood of Christ Jesus Now that Justin beleeved that this meate is bread stil and hath not lost its substance he sheweth it when hee saith that our bodies are fed with it And by that which he saith in that very place that the Deacons give to all them that are present to participate the bread and wine whereupon graces have beene said The Author likewise of the Catechesticall prayer attributed to Gregory of Nysse useth the same comparison b I shew this falsity in my book against Cardinall du Perron lib. 7. cap. 22. Namely in that he speaks of one Severus an Heritick which came above a hundred yeares after the death of this Gregory The body saith he was changed into a divine dignity by the inhabitation of the Word God With good reason then also now I beleeve that the bread sanctified by the word of God is changed into the body of God the Word If this comparison be good as the body of Christ was not transubstantiated by the inhabitation of the Godhead no more likewise is the bread transubstantiated by the consecration which is made at the Sacrament Hilary speaketh just so in the eighth Booke of the Trinity c Sivere Verbum caro factum est nos Verbum carnem cibo Dominico sumimus If the Word was truly made flesh and wee also in the meate of the Lord doe take the Word flesh Gratian in his second distinction of the Consecration d Can. hoc est Hoc est quod dicimus c. Si ut Christi persona constat ex Deo homine cum ipse Christus verus sit Deus verus sit homo alleadgeth a place of Austin drawne from the Sentences of Prosper in these words The Sacrifice of the Church is composed of two things to wit of the Sacrament and of the thing of the Sacriment hat is to say of the body of Christ after the same manner as Christs person is composed of God and man For Christ is very God and very man Ireneus hath an opinion by himselfe For he saith c Quomodo constabâ—t cis eum panem in quo gratiae actae sunt corpus esse Domini sui calicem sanguinem ejus si non ipsum fabricatoris muÌ„di filium dicunt .i. verbum ejus per quod lignuÌ„ fructâ—ficaâ— defluunt fontes dat terra primo quidâ—m foenum deinde spicas that the bread is the body of Christ because Christ is the Creator of all things esteeming that the whole world in respect of God is what the body
of man is to his Soule Which was the opinion and beleife of Plato of Cicero of Virgil and of all the Platonick Schoole that bore the sway in Ireneus his time Such was the beleife of the Author of the Booke of the Lords supper attributed to Saint Cyprian That Author speaketh thus f Panâ—s ste communis in carnem sangumem mutatus procurat vitam incrementum corporibus ideoque ex consueto rerum effectu fidei nostrae adjutamsirmit as sensibil argumento edocta est visibilibus Sacramentis inesse vitae aeternae effectum The common bread being changed into flesh and into blood bringeth â—ife and growth unto the body And therefore the infirmity of our flesh being helped by the accustomed effect is taught by a sensible proofe that in the visible Sacraments there is an effect of eternall life When he saith that the common bread is turned into flesh and into blood he doth not meane that it is turned into the flesh and blood of Christ but into our flesh and blood by disgestion for hee addeth that this bread nourisheth our bodyes and maketh them to grow and all the currant of the speech sheweth that But a little after hee addeth some wordes whereupon our Adversaries doe triumph and glory for lack of understanding what this Authors beleefe was * Panis queÌ„ Dominus discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed natura mutatus omnipotentia Verbi factus est caro Et sicut in persona Christi humanitas videbatur et latebat d vinitas ita Sacramento visibili ineffabiliter divina se infudit essentia The bread saith hee that the Lord gave to his Disciples being changed not in shew but in nature is made flesh by the omnipotency of the Word But in the words following he sheweth that this conversion of the bread into the flesh of Christ is made not by Transubstantiation but by an union of the Godhead of Christ with the bread like unto the union of Christs divine nature with his humane nature For he added immediatly after And even as in â—he person of Christ his humanity was â—eene but his divinity was hidden so the * Panis itaque hic azymus cibus verus sincerus per speciem Sacramentum nos tactu sanctificat divine essence is infused in the visible Sacrament by an unspeakable manner There is nothing more expresse nor more contrary unto Transubstantiation For according to this Authors beleefe even as Christs divine nature did not transubstantiate his Manhood but made it to be the flesh of the Son of God So the divine Essence which he saith to be infused in the bread of the Sacrament maketh it to become Christs body without being Transubstantiated Wherefore a litlte after he saith that that which we receive in the Sacrament * Caro quae VerbuÌ„ Dei Patris assuÌ„psit in utero virginali n un tate suae personae et panis qui consecratur in Ecclesia unum corpus sunt Divinit atisenim plenitudo quae fuit in illa replet et istum paâ—em is unleavened bread which sanctifieth us by touching it acknowledging that it is bread still Bellarmin in the 15 chap. of his third Book of the Eucharist alleadgeth Saint Remigius that wrote about the yeare of our Lord 520 in these words a The flesh which the Word of God the Father tooke in the Virgins wombe in unity of person and the bread that is consecrated in the Church are one and the selfe-same body For the plenitude of the divinity which was in that flesh filleth also this bread Bellarmin addeth that Haimo held the same language and that Gelasius and Theodorets words that we have alleadged above may be fitted to this opinion The Author our Adversaries alleadge with more ostentation is Damascene whom they rank among the Saints This man may be tearmed the Lombard of the Grecians because he is the first among the Grecians that handled divinity in Philosophicall tearmes And is the first that wrote for the adoration of Images Now he did write about the yeare of our Lord 740. This man in his 4 Book of the Orthodox Faith chap. 14. extendeth himselfe upon this matter and will have the bread b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be changed into the body of the Lord not by transubstantiation but by c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Assumption and union with the divinity like unto the union of Christs divinity with his humanity Because saith hee d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it is the custome to eate bread and to drink wine and water the Lord hath conjoyned his divinity to these things and hath made them to be his body and blood And a little after e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If thou inquirest in what manner that is done let it suffice thee to understand that it is done by the holy Spirit after the same manner as the Lord hath made himselfe to himselfe and in himselfe a flesh taken of the holy Mother of God by the holy Ghost And a little after he saith that the bread and wine c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the body of Christ Deified Chiefly he is very expresse in that he addeth d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The bread of the Communion is not meere bread but it is conjoyned to the Divinity But still he acknowledgeth that it is bread saying the bread is the body of Christ and calling it the bread of the Communion And a little after The loaves of proposition did figurate this bread Item The broad is the first fruits of the future bread And a little after We partake all of one bread Only he hath this of particular to himselfe that he will not have the bread to bee called the figure of Christs body rejecting that kind of speech usuall and ordinary in the Fathers that have written afore him It appeareth likewise in that he will have the Sacrament to bee honored but not to be worshipped d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let us saith he honor it with purity corporall and spiritual and will have it to be received with the hands set in forme of a Crosse For then it was not as yet the custom to chop it into the mouths of Communicants Rupertus was imbrued with the same opinion e Rupertus Tuitiensis in Exod. c. 12. Sicut Christus humanam naturaÌ„ nec mutavit nee destruxitysed assumpsit it a in Sacrameto nec destruit nec mutat sub stantiam panis et vini sèd assumit in unitatemcorporis et sâ—ngumis sui Even as Christ saith he did neither change nor destroy the humane nature but joyned himselfe unto it So in the Sacrament he neither destroyeth nor changeth the substance of the bread and wine but joyneth himselfe unto it in the unity of his body and blood For which cause also Bellarmin placeth him among the Impanators This doctrine doth no whit agree with the ubiquity For they did put this union of
Christ with the bread in the Sacrament only which bringeth no manner of change to the naturall body of Christ But these Fathers make two bodies of Christ the one his naturall body which is but in Heaven the other the bread of the Sacrament which they make to be Christs body two manner of wayes to wit because it is united to the divinitie of Christ by an union like unto the hypostaticall union of the two natures of Christ and because it is a signe figure and symbole of Christs naturall body according as the signes are wont to be called by the name of that which they doe signifie and represent Whence also they say sometimes that that bread is the body of Christ borne of the Virgin and crucified for us Whosoever shall apprehend this aright shall have a key in their hand for to enter into the knowledge and intelligence of the Fathers and for to come out of all difficulties It is the solution of the places of Cyril that are objected against us and of those and Ambrose out of the Booke of Sacraments For indeed the Author of the Books of Sacraments was one of these Impanators since that he holdeth that by the unspeakable vertue of God the bread becometh the body of Christ and yet remaines bread still as we have prooved and alleadged the forme of the service of that time where it was said * Ambros li. 4. de Sacram c. 5. Fac nobis hanc oblationem aseriptam rataÌ„ rationabilem acceptabilem quod est siguracorporis Christi That the oblation we offer is the Figure of the body of Christ And in the 4 chap Let us establish this to wit how THAT WHICH IS BREAD may be the body of Christ And a little after he saith that the bread and the wine are still what they were and yet are changed into the body and blood of the Lord. Wee must not wonder if for to work this change in the bread of the Sacrament he imployeth the Omnipotency of God and his unexpressable vertue in changing things For indeed if that union he conceiveth were true it were an unspeakable and incomprehensible work and wherein human reason is stark blind Because of this mysticall union which is neare unto the personall union Cyrill of Alexandria saith that this body of Christ received into our bodies maketh them susceptible and capable of the Resurrection Which truely is an abuse For by the same reason the participation of the Sacrament should keep us from dying The Faithfull of the Old Testament and John the Baptiste and the Theife crucified with Christ and an ininfinit number of Martyrs that were never partakers of this Sacrament are no lesse capable of the Resurrection From that impanation sprung up that custome by which in old time many particular persons carried away the Eucharist into their own houses and kept it locked up in a chest or cupboord as a Gregor Nazianz. Oratione de sorore Gorgonia Gorgonia did who was sister to Gregory Nazimzen Which sheweth on the one side that they did give unto that bread something more than to be the figure and signe of Christ body And on the other side that sheweth also that they did not beleeve the Transubstantiation For they would never have put Christs naturall body into a womans hand for to keep it locked up in a cupboord From the same opinion proceeded that which Satyrus b Ambros Oratione de obitu fratris Satyri did who was S Ambroses brother and yet unbaptized Who being upon the Sea in danger of shipwrack caused the Eucharist to be given him and hanged it about his neck and then threw himselfe into the sea for to save himselfe by swimming An evident proofe they beleeved thâ—t in this Sacrament there was some secret vertue and that neverthelesse they beleeved not this bread to be the naturall body of Christ crucified for us For they would never have given it to an unbaptized person for to hang it about his neck and cast it with him into the Sea Neither is it to bee omitted that the Fathers never speake of the species of the bread in the plurall but only in the singular because that by the spâ—cies of the bread they understand the substance of the bread which is one But our Adversaries which deprave the Fathers tearmes as well as their doctrine speak of species of the bread in the plurall because that by the species of the bread they understand accidents without a subject which are many Which is a new doctrine and a phrase or kind or speech altogether unusuall not only in Philosophers but also in the Fathers and in all Antiquity CHAP. XXX Particular opinion of Saint Austen and of Fulgentius and of Innocent the third AVsten and Fulgentius his disciple take sometimes these words This is my body in a sense patricular to themselves For besides this exposition which is very frequent in S. Austin namely that the Lord called the bread his body because it is the sigure and signe of his body in some places he will have in these words THIS is my body that by this word body the Church be understood For in his Sermon to Children which is to be found at the end of Fulgentius his Workes hee speaketh thus These things are called Sacraments because in them one thing is seene and another understood c. If then thou wilt know what the body of Christ is heare the Apostle saying Ye are the body and members of Christ And in the 26 Treatise upon S. John By this ment and by this drinke the Lord will have the fellowship of his body and of his members to bee understood to wit the holy Church of the Predestinat Pope Innocent the third holdeth the same doctrine For in his 4 Book of the mysteries of the Masse hee saith that Christ hath two bodies to wit his naturall body which he took of the Virgin and which was crucified and his mysticall body viz. the Church Then he addeth * Mysticum corpus coÌ„editur spiritualiter id est in fide sub specie panâ—s The mysticall body is eaten spiritually that is to say in faith under the species of the bread By all the premises it is plaine and evident that he who forsaking the Scriptures taketh the Fathers for his addresse or direction intangleth himselfe into marveilous difficulties and casteth himselfe into darknesse and in a labyrinth without issue And that a man must be well read in them and observe and heed them very exactly for to attaine to an indifferent knowledge of them That if any one readeth them carefully and with an unpreoccupated mind though he meets with many errors in them and small agreement among themselves Yet he shall find them so far from the doctrine of the Roman Church as the heavens are from the earth CHAP. XXXI That the Church of Rome condemning the Impanation is fallen her selfe into an error a thousand times more pernitiouâ— by Transubstantiation
the things signified That this is the sense and meaning of the Fathers when they speak thus appeareth in that they call also the Eucharist Christs death As Cyprian in his 63 Epistle * Passlo est Domiâ— sacrâ—fiâ—um quod offeâ—imus The Lords Passion is the Sacrifice wee do offer And Chrysostome in the 21 Homily upon the Acts of the Apostles a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whilest this death is a perfeciting and this dreadfull Sacrifice and these ineffable mysteries And so the Canon Hoc est in the 2 Distinâ—tion of the Consecration b Vocatur ipsa immolatio câ—â—nâ—s quae Sacerâ—dotâ—s manibus sit Chrâ—sti passio mâ—rs crucafixio non râ—â— veritate sed significante mysterio The immolation of Christs flesh which is made by the hands of the Priest is called the Passion Death and Crucifixion of Christ not according to the truth but by a significant mystery Austin in his 23 Epistle to Bonifacius Was not Christ once sacrificed in himselfe and yet hee is sacrificed to the People in a sacred signe And in his 10 Book of the City of God chap 5. c Sacrificium visibile invisibilis Sacrificâ—i Sacramentumid est sacrum signâ—m The visible Sacrifice is a Sacrament that is to say a sacred signe of the invisible Sacrifice And a little after * Illud quod ab omnibus appellatur SacrificiuÌ„ est signum veri sacrificii That which men do call Sacrifice is a signe of the rue Sacr fice Note that he saith that men do call it a Sacrifice acknowledging tacitely the holy Scripture doth not call it so Wee have then in these places of S. Austin a cleare exposicion of this place wherein he calleth the Eucharist the Sacrifice of our price The sixth Book of Apostolicall Constitutions of Clemens chap. 23 a Pro sacrificio crueÌ„to rationale incruentum ac mysticum sacrificium instituit quod in mortem Domini per symbola corporis et sangumis sui celebratur The Lord instead of a bloody Sacâ—â—fice hath instituted a reasonable and unbloody and mysticall Sacrifice which is celebrated in consideration of the Lords death by the signes of his body and blood In the 4. Book of Sacraments attributed to S. Ambrose chap. 5. wee have these words of the ancient Service b Fac nobis hanc oblationem ascriptam rationabile acceptabilem quod est sigura corporis sanguinis Domini Grant that this oblation be imputed unto us as reasonable acceptable which is the FIGVRE of the body and blood of the Lord. The succeeding ages have razed out the word Figure Procopius Gazaeus upon the 49. chap. of Genesis Christ gave to his Disciples the Image or Figure and Type of his body and blood receiving no more the bloody Sacrifices of the Law Eusebius in the 10 chapter of his first Book of the Evangelicall Demonstration a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Lord having offered a Sacrifice and an excellent victime unto his Father for the salvation of us all hath appointed us to offer continually the remembrance of it instead of a Sacrifice And in the same place b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wee have received the remembrance of this Sacrifice for to celebrate it at his own table by the signes of his Body and Blood according to the institution of the New Testament In a word the Fathers are full of such places Wherefore in the Eucharist they put no difference between the Sacrament and the Sacrifice But to speak properly there is such difference between a Sacrifice and a Sacrament as between giving and receiving For in a Sacrifice we offer unto God but in a Sacrament we receive from God The Fathers do not make this distinction For by reason the Sacrament is a signe and a figure of the Sacrifice they call the Sacrament a Sacrifice This kind of speaking to call the Lords Supper a Sacrifice had its beginning from the offerings and gifts which in old time the people offered upon the sacred table afore the Communion which gifts were commonly called Sacrifices and Oblations Cyprian in his Sermon of Almes a Locuples Dives Dominicum celebrare te credis quae sorbonum non respuis quae in DominicuÌ„ sine sacrificio venis quae partâ—m de sacrificio quod pauper obâ—ulit sumis chides a rich woman that had brought no Sacrifice and yet took her part of the Sacrifices the poor had brought And in the 21 Distinction at the Canon Cleros b Hypod acon oblatioues in â—eplo Domini 〈◊〉 sideâ—bus susâ—â—pâ—â—nt Lâ—vitis superponâ— das altari buâ—dâ—serat Let the Subdeacons in the Lords Temple receive the Oblations of the Faithfull and carry them to the Levites that they may put them upon the Altars Which manner of speech remaines yet at this day in the Masse wherein the Priest before the CoÌ„secration saith Receive Lord thiâ— immaculate Host c. as is acknowledged by Bellarmin in his first Book of the Masse ch 27. And he prooves it by Ireâ—eus who in the 4 Book chap. 32. saith we offer unto God a Sacrifice of his creatures that is to say bread and wine And that even before the Consecration In that therefore the Fathers have said nothing but what is agreeable conformable unto the Faith Yet neverthelesse the abuse that hath followed thereon a longtime after is unto us an excellent example that the safest way is to cleave to the Apostles language and not to depart from the stile of the holy Scripture THE SECOND BOOK OF The Manducation of the Bodie of Christ CHAP. I. Of two sorts of manducation of Christs flesh to wit Spirituall and Corporall and which is the best MEtaphors are similies contracted and reduced to a word So wee say feeding for teaching and to flourish for to be in prosperity and we call Pride a swelling and truth a light We say of a childes tongue that it is untied and of his wit that it is displayed These Metaphors besides the ornament have some utility For they propose an Image of the things whereof wee speake and make them more intelligible by a tacite comparison Specially it is a thing very usuall and frequent to expresse the functions and qualities of the soule by tearmes borrowed from the actions and corporall qualities So we say that Envy fretteth that love burneth that Covetousnesse is a thirst of money and that hope is a tickling or soothing The holy Scripture is full of such manner of speeches wherein nothing is more frequent than to speake of good instructions as of meats and drinks and of the Graces of God as of a water that quensheth the thirst and of the desire of these graces as of a hunger and thirst So in the 9 of Proverbes the supreame Wisedome saith Come eate of my bread and drink of the wine which I have mingled And David in the 36 Psalme saith God makes us drink in the river of his pleasures
And in the 34 Psalme O taste and see that the Lord is good And Ieremy in the 15 chap. Thy words were found and I did presently eate them And God himselfe in the 55 of Isayâ—h inviteth the thirsty to drink of the waters And that it may bee understood he speakes of a spirituall drink he addes Encline your care and your soule shall live According to this kind of speech S. Peter in his 1 Epistle chap. 2 exhorts us to desire the milk of intelligence to wit the Word of God And S. Paul in the first to the Corinthians chap. 3. saith he hath given them milk and not solid meat Christ our Lord is he that hath used very often such metaphors taken from corporall meats and drinks He saith in the 4. chap. of S. John that his meat is to do his Fathers will And in the same chap. he promiseth to give water whereof whosoever shall drink shall never thirst And in the chap. 7.37 If any man thirst let him come unto me and drink And in the 5. chapter of S. Matthew Blessed are they which doe hunger and thirst after righteousnesse With such manner of figurative speeches is woven and interlaced a great part of the 6 chap. of S. John where the Lord speaking to the Capernaites promiseth to give them the bread of Heaven and saith that his flesh is meat indeed and his blood is drink indeed Two occasions mooved him to speak so For the Jews of Capernaum making him inferior to Moses and objecting unto him as by reproach of impotency that Moses had given unto the Iews the Manna which they call the bread of Heaven the Lord from thence takes occasion to tell them he would give them another bread descended from Heaven farre better than the Manna to wit himselfe come downe from Heaven for to bee the food of soules and for to vivifie them The other cause that mooved him to speak in figured tearmes is that he was speaking unto ungratefull and rebellious Iews â—o whom S. Maâ—thâ—w saith he spake not wiâ—h â—t a parâ—ble Matth. 13.34 Here our Adversaries acknowledge with us that there is a manner of eating the body of Christ which is spirituall and which is done not by the corporall moâ—th but by the Faith in Christ Iesus in whom we find our life and spirituall food The Councell of Trente in the XIII Session chap. 8. teaches the same saying Some eate this bread only spiritually and by a lively Faith But besides this spirituall manducation the Church of Rome forgeth to her selfe a corporall manducation whereby the Faithfull in the Eucharist do chew and eate with their very teeth the body of our Saviour Christ and take it with the corporall mouth and make him to enter into their stomacks and do call this a reall and true manducation for to oppose it to the spirituall manducation whereof they speake very often with contempt as of a picture and of a thing which consists only in imagination The Councell of Trente intimates so much tacitely saying there be some that eate this bread only spiritually as if it were a small thing in comparison of the reall eating of it by the mouth of the body Yet neverthelesse when wee presse them a little they are forced to avow that the spirituall manducation is a great deale better and that the corporall manducation which they maintaine and defend so stiflly and with so much ardour is a small thing in regard of the spirituall For they confesse that many are saved without partaking of the Eucharist but that none are saved without beleeving in Christ And that many eate the Sacrament which neverthelesse do perish eternally but that whosoever eateth Christs flesh spiritually and with true Faith shall have eternall salvation according to the Lords saying in the third chap. of S. John that whosoever beleeveth on him shall not perish but have eternall life Which is more our Adversaries do acknowledge with us that the manducation of the Sacrament without the spirituall manducation by Faith is not only unprofitable but even turnes into condemnation and that it is profitable and usefull but for and because of the spirituall manducation But the spirituall manducation by it selfe alone and without the corporall manducation leaves not to be profitable and alwayes necessary to salvation The manducation of the Sacrament by the mouth of the body is common both to good and bad and hypocrites partake thereof as well as the true Faithfull yea our Adversaries hold that beasts may eate Christs body and that Mice do carry away sometimes the body of the Lord But the spirituall manducation is proper and peculiar to Gods Children and none but the true Faithfull can be partakers thereof Christ in the 15 of S. Matthew saith that which goeth into the mouth defileth not a man whence follows that neither can it sanctifie a man In this S. Austin is far from that language which the Roman Church holdeth now a dayes who acknowledgeth no other true and reall manducation of Christs body than that which is made by the bodily mouth in the Eucharist For this holy man on the contrary holdeth that there is no other true and reall manducation of Christs body but the spirituall and that that which is done in the Sacrament by the mouth of the body is not a true manducation He teacheth it in his 21 book of the City of God chap. 25. a Dominus ostendit quid sit non Sacramento tenus sed 〈◊〉 veracorpus Christi manducare The Lord saith he sheweth what it is to eate the body of Christ not in Sacrament only but in truth And in the same place b Non solo SacrameÌ„to sed re veâ—â— manduâ—â—verunt corpus Christi They have eaten the body of Christ not only in Sacrament but also truely and indeed To this holy Doctor Thomas joynes himselfe in this point in his 7 lesson upon the 6 of S. John where speaking of him that eateth spiritually the body of Christ he saith c Hic est ille qui non Sacramentalâ—â—er tantum sed re verâ— corpus Christ manduâ—at It is that man that eateth the body of Christ not only Sacramentally but also in truth CHAP. II. That in the 6 Chapter of S. Iohn the Lord speakes not of the Sacrament of the Eucharist nor of the manducation of his flesh by the mouth of the body BY the corporall manducation wee understand the manducation of the bread and wine which Christ hath honored with the title of his body and blood because they are the Sacrament and remembrance of the same But our Adversaries pretend to eate really the body of Christ with their mouth and to make him passe into their stomach and for to prop this so grosse and Capernaitish manducation they alleadge the sixth of Saint Iohn where Christ saith that he is the bread come downe from Heaven and promiseth to give his flesh to eate 1. For to beleeve that a man must of
are truly the plague and contagion of the mind All that in figurative tearmes and yet true and wherein the word true excludes not the figure 6. What they do adde is not a whit better Christ say they used an oath saying Verily verily I say unto you Except ye eate the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you But it is not convenient say they to use figures in an oath What will they say then to these places Verily verily I say unto you that he that entreth not by the doore into the sheepfold the same is a theife and a robber Iohn 10.1 And a little after Verily verily I say unto you that I am the doore of the sheep And in S. Matth. 18.18 Verily I say unto you that whatsoever ye shal binde on earth shall be bound in Heaven And Iohn 3.5 Verily verily I say unto you Except a man be borne of the water and of the spirit c. Where we have the same oath with figurative words What more the same verse which they alleadge Verily verily I say unto you Except ye eaâ—e my flesh and drink my blood ye have no life in you is the same verse in which they will have drinking to signifie eating And in the same chap. ver 32. Christ calleth himselfe the true bread wherein our Adversaâ—ies do acknowledge a figure To let passe that the word Amen is not an oath but a simple and strong assirmation CHAP. VI. Testimonies of the Fathers IT is good upon this point to heare the ancient Fathers S. Austin shal march in the fore front In his Book of Christian Doctrine chap. 16. * Nisi manducaver it is inquit carnem filii hominis c sacinus vel slagitium videtur juhere Figura ergo est praecipiens passioni Dominâ— esse communicandum suaviter at que utilter recondendum in memoria quodpro nobis caro ejus crucifâ—a a el vul nerata sit When the Lord saith Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood yee have no life in your selves it seemes that he commands some great crime or haynous offence It is then a figure that commandes to communicate unto the Lords Pâ—ssion and sweetly and profitably to put in remembrance that Christs flesh was crucified and wounded for us Our Adversaries to cleare themselves and avoyd the force of this place do make long discourses and sinde there are figures in these words Except yee eate c. To wit that in the Eucharist Christs body is not eaten by peece-meales as the flesh of the Shambles But they come not neare the point For Saint Austin saith not onely that it is a figure but he declares also how that figure is to be taken and expounded to wit that to eate Christs flesh is to meditare and call to remembrance with delight that Christ his flesh was crucified for us Which is an exposition our Adversaries doe not allow The same Father upon the 98 Psalme Vnder stand spiritually whâ—t I have said unto you Yee shall not eate this body that ye see and shall not drinke that blood that shall be shed by those that shall crucifie mâ— I have commended unto you a sacred figne which being under slood spiritually shall quicken and vivisie you We have in this Father a long exposition of the sixth Chapter of Saint John in the 25.26 27 Treatise upon Saint John In the 25 Tractaâ— he saith a Vi quid paras detâ—s el vetrem crede el maduâ—asti This viz. to beleeve is to eate the meate that perisheth not Why doest that make ready thy teeth and thy belly Beleeve and thou hast eaten And in the 26 Treatise b Credere in eum hoc est manducare panem vivuÌ„ Quâ— credit iâ— cuÌ„ manducal invâ—sibiliter sagâ—natur quia el invisibiliter renascitur To beleeve in him is to eate the living bread He that beleeves in him eateth him he is fed invisibly because he is regenerated invisibly And in the same place c HuÌ„c it aque cibuÌ„ et pot 〈◊〉 societatem vult intellâ—â—i corporâ—â— et membrorum suâ—â—um quod est sanila Ecclesia in praedestinatis c. By this meate and drinke Christ will have to be understood the society of his body and members which is the Church of the Predestinate This Father was so far from beleeving that Christ was eaten even by the mouth of the body that by this meate he will have the Church to be understood Whence also he addeth d Hoeveraciter non praestat nisi iste cibus potus qui cos aÌ„ quibus sumitur immortales incorruptibiles sacit iâ— societas ipsa Sanctorum c. This meate and drinke which makes such as doe take it immortall and incorruptible is the fellowshippe of Saints where there shall bee peace and perfect unitie And in the same place e Hoc est ergo manduâ—â—â—al lamescam bâ—bere ill â—mpotumâ—â— Câ—â—â—stoâ—â—â—â— manere ilum manâ—â—ntâ—â—in se habere de per haeâ— qui non maâ—â— in Chrisio in quâ— nor manâ—â— Chrisia in quo nor manâ— Châ—â—slâ—â— procâ—â—dnâ—no nec manducat spiratalâ—ter â—â—nem â—jus aâ—c bâ—hâ—â— ejus sâ—nguâ—nâ—n luet carnalaeâ— â—â—silâ—luâ—â— prâ—â—â—â— doelâ—bus Sacraâ—â—â—â— isâ—â—â— corpoâ— is sangâ—â—â—â—â— Châ—â—sâ—i That therefore is to eate this meate and to drinke this drinke to dwell in Christ and to have him dwelling in us And therefore he that dwelleth not in Christ and in whom Christ dwelleth not doublesse he eates not spiritually his flesh and drinkes not his blood how be it that carnally and visibly he presfeth with his teeth the sacred signe of Christs body and blood In summe in three long Treatises containing many pages wherein this good Doctor expoundeth the sixth Chapter of Saint John there is not one word of eating by the mouth of the body the Lords flesh crucified for us Which exposition was so disliked by Cardinall du Perron that he speaketh contemptibly of these Tractates of Saint Austin upon Saint John f In his Booke against the King of Great Britaine In the Treatise of the Eucharist saying that they be popular Sermons made before all kindes of persons to whom he would not declare openly the Churches beleife Tertullian in the 37 Chapter of his Booke of the Resurrection expounding these words The flesh profiteth nothing The sense saith hee must bee addressed according to the subject whereof he speaketh g Quia durum intolerabilem existimaverunt sermonem ejus quasi vere carnem suam illis edendam determâ—nasset ut in spiritu dispone ret statum salutis oraemisit Spiritus est quâ— vivificat Tum add t Caro non prodeâ—t quiâ—quam ad vivificandum sâ—ili et For because they esteemed his words to be harsh and intolerable as though he had determined to give them truely his flesh to eate that he might render spirituall the state of salvation he
said before It is the spirit that quickneth Then he addeth The flesh profiteth nothing to wit for to vivifie And there againe h Quia sermo caro câ—at factus proinde m causam vitae appetendus devorâ—ndâ—s audau et â—uminandus intellectu et fide digerendus The word was made flesh and by consequent for to have life it must be desired and devoured by the eare and ruminated by the understanding and disgested by faith And a little after The Lord had a little afore declared that his flesh is the heavenly bread i Vrgens usquequaque per allegoriaÌ„ necessarioruÌ„ pabuloruÌ„ memoriam PaetruÌ„ c. urging altogether by allegory taken from necessary meates the remembrance of the Fathers Clemens Alexandrinus in his second Booke De Pedagogo Chapter 6. k Hee said eate my flesh and drinke my blood propoundiog by an allegoric the evidence of the faith and the drinke of the promise And a little after l Si secundum literam sequeris hoc ipsâ—ra quod â—â—â—â—um est Nisi manducaveritis carnem meam et biberitis sangutaâ—â—â—â—um hoec litera occid t. Hee calleth the holy Spirit flesh by aâ—â—egory For the flesh was created by him and the blood signifies the Word Origene upon the Leviticus in the seventh Booke n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Know that these things writen in the divine volumes are figures and understand them as spirituall and not as carnall For if you receive them as carnall they hurt you in stead of nourrishing you For in the Gospells there is a letter which killeth him that observes not the things that are spoken spiritually m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For if thou takest according to the letter that which is said Except ye eate my flesh and drinke my blood that letter killeth The Commentary upon the Psalmes attributed to Saint Hierome upon the 44 Psalme n Quando dicâ—t Qui non manducaverit carnem meam et biberit sanguinem me um licet in mysterâ—o possit intel ligi tamen veriùs corpus Christi et sanguis ejus sermo Scripturarum est When the Lord saith He that eateth not my flesh c. though that may be understood in mysterie yet to speake more truely the body and blood of Christ is the word of the Scriptures and the heavenly doctrine And a little after o Corpus et sanguis ejus in auribus nostris fund tur The flesh and blood of Christ is powred into our eares It is true that some places may bee found in ancient Fathers that apply and fit the words of the sixth Chapter of Saint John to the Eucharist because the manducation of the Sacrament serves to helpe the spirituall manducation and there is some analogie betweene these two Adde moreover that we have proved already by a multitude of places of Ancient Fathers that when they say that in the Eucharist wee eate the flesh or the body of Christ they meane to speake of another flesh and another bodie than that which was crucified for us which is called Christs bodie because of the mysticall union of the bread with Christ and because the signes take the name of the things signified Vpon this the words of Pope Pius the second are notable in his 130 Epistle p Sed nec â—overi debetis quod nonnulli Doctores de communione Sacramentali loquentes ill amque populo suadentes Iohannis verba recipiunt Neque enim propterca illius loci vel talis verns est es proprius intellectus sed ex quadam similitudiâ—e consonantique ratione trahitur inde magis sensus quà m ducitur c. Yee must not wonder saith he if some Doctors speaking of the Sacramentall communion and counselling it unto the People doe imploy Saint John his words For it doth not follow from thence that it bee the true and proper sense of that place but by some resemblance and agreeable reason this sense is rather drawne than led And it is lawfull for the Doctors speaking after the manner of Orators to use sometimes figures and translations so that often times speaking of the signe they passe vnto the thing signified CHAP. VII Impiety of Salmeron the Jesuite and of Peter Charron And of Bellarmins foure men inclosed in one sute of clothes That by this doctrine Christ hath not a true body in the Sacrament Superstition and Atheisme are verie neere neighbours and the one leadeth unto the other For frantick superstition intangles the minde with extravagant conceits that expose Religion to laughter and make men to thinke that Religion is a shop of fables and a meere imagination Whence it comes to passe that those that take upon them to defend Superstition let goe very often certaine words of impietie whereby they profane the mysteries and scoffe at their owne Religion under colour of defending it Salmeron the Jesuite and Doctor Charron gives us an example thereof This Jesuite in the IX Tome and 26 Treatise for to represent the manner and the end for which Christ gives us his flesh to eate Sub finem Tractatus saith that Christ hath done as men doe who for to kindle and inflame a woman with love doe give her an amorous potion or morsell and that just so Christ in the Eucharist gives to his Church Panis bucellam sanctè benedictam incantatam a morsell of bread holily blessed and INCHANTED for to transport her with his love Charron hath followed him but with an addition that declares what are the ingredients of those philters or amorous potions to wit that there enters in them something of the substance of the Lover which substance is a thing not fit to be named In his eighth Discourse of the Eucharist after hee hath said that God comes downe in the forme of bread and wine and that to dance for to serue God is lesse strange then what is done in the Masse a little after he declares how Christ communitates himselfe unto men in the Eucharist to wit that he allures and intices them with a dainty and delicious bit Love saith he is so ingenious and inventive that for to win and allure the heart and will of others it hath found out a device to imploy inchanted morsels philters and amorous potious and to make them to be taken and drunke by those of whom one desires to bee loved in which morsells or potions enters some thing of the Lover or Suitor Thus it seemes that God for to draw and allure unto himselfe the heart and love of the Church would present a bit or potion made of his substance in this Sacrament the philter and amorous drinke of all Christians the dainty and delicious bit for to draw and allure them unto himselfe Doubtlesse this man jeasted and intended to make the world laugh for he could not expect that men should beleeve him I know not whither Bellarmin did mock or jeast Bellar. lib. 3. de Euchar cap 7 〈◊〉 ad tertiuÌ„ Potest
fieâ—i ut redigatur ad locum unitatis â—t a ut quatuor homines occupent locum unius hominis when for to prove that a body may be in severall places at once hee saith that it is possible that foure men hold no more place than one of the foure alone and that all foure fill up but one place Take me a man clothed with a sute of clothes that sits close and is made just to his body Bellarmin saith it is possible for these foure men to be contained in the same sute of clothes without being made larger and the men never a whit the lesse If that be possible for foure it is also possible for ten yea for a hundred yea for a thousand so that all the men of the World shall be contained in a single doublet But if of these foure men in this little doublet one be sitting the other lying and the other standing If one of-them embrace the other and by consequent is out of the other they shall not be in one and the same place If they speake together and looke one upon another the one shall be the object of the others eyes and therefore shall not bee in one and the selfe same place Truly I thinke this Jesuite propounding such things and shutting up a whole Common-wealth in a doublet had a minde to deride his owne Religion For by the same reason a man may have both his eyes in one place and not different of sitnation Bellar. lib. 1. de Euchar c. 2. § Tertia Christus in Eucharistia non habet modum existendâ— corporum sed potius spiritâ—uÌ„ cum sit totus in qualibeâ— parte By this meanes a man shall have two eyes and shall have but one And the parts of an humane body shall not be distinct and the one shall not be out of the other This our Adversaries doe by their Transubstantiation as Bellarmin acknowledgeth saying that in the Eucharist Christ doth not exist after the manner of bodies but rather after the manner of Spirits since hee is whole in everie part It is false likewise that according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome Christs body be in the Eucharist after the manner of Spirits For when an Angell is present in any place he is not present in a thousand others severall places and is not far from himselfe and divided from himselfe aâ— they will have Christs body to bee in a million of severall places at one and the same time The same Jesuite in the third Booke and fifth chapter saith * §. Ad haec Substantia fius quanti â—ate caâ—o dâ—ci non potese that a Substance without qantity cannot bee tearmed flesh Whereupon it followes that Christs body under the Host is not flesh for there is no quantity since it is whole under every point that hath no quantity Besides that the quantity of a body is a continued quantity But Christs body in the Host is not one in continuity with that which is in Heaven sitting at the right hand of God the Father since hee is farre and remote from it Againe he saith in the same place * Quid est corpus nisi extentâ—o 〈◊〉 longitudinem latitudinem prosunditatâ—m That a body is nothing else but an extension in length breath and depth Therefore in the Sacrament there is no true body of Christ since it hath no extension no length breadth and depth As he saith himselfe in the second chapter of his first Book Christs body in the Eucharist hath no extension I have wondred many times seeing that our Adversaries hold that Christ municants untill the species be destroyed and consumed by the disgestion why they do not give them hard bread and not of easie disgestion that they might have Christ in them a longer time rather then to give them such light Hosts or wafers which are presently turned into a Chylus and disgested in an instant CHAP. VIII Of the progresse of this abuse and by what meanes Satan hath established the Transubstantiation UPon this matter the opinions of men began to varie in the eight Age wherein the controversie touching the adoration of Images was in its hight and force For Satan at the same time did labour and busie himselfe to introduce and bring into the Church these two sorts of Idolatry In the yeere of our Lord 754 the Emperor Constantin son to Lisaurus called a Councell of his whole Empire at Constantinople where 330 Bishops were present that condemned the adoration of Images Among other reasons that they bring they exhort the people to be contented with those Images that Christ had instituted having given in the holy Supper the bread and wine for Images and Figures of his body and blood And speaking of the Eucharisticall bread they say * Ecce vivificantis illâ—â—s corporâ—â—s Imaginem Behold the image of this quickning body that is honorably presented And a little after The Lord commanded to set upon the table that image altogether chosen to wit the substance of the bread least Idolatry should creep in if it were represented in an humane forme But few yeares after the Empire being fallen into the hands of Irenea an Idolatrous woman and who did put out the eyes of her own son and ravished the Empire from him this monster called another Councell at Nice in the year 787. where she caused Images to be re-established and the worshipping of them to be commanded under paine of a curse There likewise were condemned as abhominable these foresaid clauses of the former Councell whereby the bread and wine are called Images of the Lords body and blood And it is the same Councell that declares that Images are equivalent and of as much worth as the Gospell and that an Image is better than Prayer And that Angels are corporall And that he that hath the least doubt whither Images must bee worshipped is accursed For certainly the spirit of Satan reigned in that pernicious Councell Wherefore also Charles the Great who lived then called another Councell at Franâ—kford anno Domini 794 in which that Councell of Nice was condemned as erroneous by a generall consent notwithstanding that Pope Adrian had approved that Councell and made a Treatise in defense of it Whilest Satan bestirred himselfe thus in the East parts the Roman Bishops on their side did labour in the West parts For they did well perceive that these two things to wit the adoration of the Sacrament and the adoration of Images would be of great use and would serve much for the strengthning of their Empire and encreasing of the dignity of the Romish Clergy For the Pope taking out of the way the holy Scriptures from the eyes of the People hatâ—â—given them Images which they call Ignorant mens Books busying the eyes of the people whilest he conveyed away the Word of God from them And the opinioÌ„ of the real presence of Christs body in the Eucharist exalts the dignity and power of Priests so
far as to be able to make God with words and to have Christ in their own power This abuse beginning to creepe in France King Charles the Bald about the yeere 870 made a commandement unto one Bertram a Priest and as learned a man as these times did affoord to compose and write a Book of this matter which Book we have yet whole and â—xtant at this day wherein hee maintaines the true doctrine and withstands stoutly and vigourously that opinion of the reall presence of the body of Christ under the species of the bread For of Transubstantiation there was yet no speech of it For which cause also Bellarmin in his first Book of tee Sacrament of the Eucharist first chap. puts this Bertram amongst the Hereticks Who not withstanding in his time lived with honor and was neither troubled nor received any rebuke or reprehension upon this subject Of the same opinion were Iohn Scotus and Drutmarus and others of the same time And I make no doubt but many others with them have defended the same cause in writing But the following ages in which error prevailed have abolished their writings and it is marvel how this Book of Bertram could escape thus The tenth and eleventh Ages are the Ages wherein this error did strengthen it selfe most in which neverthelesse God left not himselfe without testimony For Bruno Bishop of Angiers and after him but more vigorously Berengarius his Arch-Deacon taught and maintained openly that the bread and wine of the Eucharist were not the body of Christ but the figure and remembrance of it * Sigebert ad annum 1051. This Berangarius began to shew himselfe about the yeare of our Lord 1050. Against whom Pope Victorius 2. caused a Councel to be gathered at Tours about the yeare 1055 and foure yeeres after Nicholas II. cited him to Rome to the Councel assembled for that effect where Berengarius was forced to condemn his own doctrine submit himself to the Popes wil. By the reading of that Councel it appeares that â—here were in it many others of the same opinion of Berengarius And Leo * Leo Hostiensis Chrâ— Cassinensi li. 3. c. 35. E que cum nullus valeret resistere Alberiâ—us â—deÌ„ evoâ—ntur Hostiensis recordeth that none of those that were there present could resist Berengarius The forme of the abjuration prescribed unto him is to be found in the Collections of the Decrees made by Ivo Carnutensis and by Gratian which forme is set down in absurde tearmes and which the Church of Rome her selfe beleeves not For they make him say a Can. Ego Berengar Dist 2. de consecr that the bread is the true body of Christ and that Christs body is truely and sensibly handled and bruised by the teeth of the Faithfull But Berengarius being rid out of the hands of that Councell and returned back into France protested against the violence offered unto him and continued to teach the same doctrine till the yeere 1088. in which he died Upon his tombe Hildebertus * Hild. Epitaphio Berengar apud Malmesburiensem Quem modo miratur semper mirabilâ—ter orbis Ilâ—e Berengarius non obiturus obit Quem sacrae fidei fastigia summa tenentem c. Vide Baron ad ann 1088. § 21. who after was Bishop of Mans made an honorable Epitaphe wherein he tearmes him the Prop and Support of the Church the hope and the glory of the Clergy And France Germany Italy and England were full of people that embraced his doctrine as William Malmesbury testifies in the 3. Book of his English Historie All France saith hee was full of his doctrine And Matthew of Westminstâ—r in the year 1087 * Eodem tempore Berengarius Turonensis in haereticam lapsus pravitatem omnes Gallos Italos Anglos suis jam pene corruperat pravitatibus Berengarius of Tours being fallen into heresie had corrupted by his depravations almost all the French Italians and English Platina in the life of John XV. speaks thus of Berengarius It is certain that Odius Bishop of Clugni and Berengarius of Tours men famous and renowned for doctrine and holinesse were in great esteeme in that time Adde to this that Berengarius distributed all his meanes to the poore and betooke himselfe to get his living with the labour of his hands * Guit alias Berengarius istevir bonus plenes eleemosynis et humilitate magnorum possessioneÌ„ qui omnia â—â—usiâ—spauperum â—dispersit c. Antoninus Arch-Bishop of Florence whom the Pope hath canonized and made a Saint gives him this testimony in the 2 Tome of his Chronicles Tit. 16 § 20. This Berengarius was otherwise a good man full of Almes deeds and humility and having great possessions and riches which hee distributed to the poore and would have no woman to come before his eyes About the latter end of Berengarius his life lived Gregory the seventh who entred into the Papacy in the yeare of our Lord 1073. called Hildebrand before he was Pope This Gregory was suspected to incline to Berengarius his opinion Sigonius in his 9 Book of the reigne of Italy in the yeare 1080 recordeth that the Bishops of Germany assembled at Brixina in Bavaria did call this Gregory Vâ—terem haeretici Berengariâ— discipulum an old disciple of Berengarius the heretick accusing him of calling into question the Apostolicall Faith touching the body and blood of the Lord. And this agrees with Cardinall Benno Arch-Priest of the Cardinals who was very inward and familiar with the said Gregory and who wrote his life wherein hee saith that Gregory appointed a fast to three Cardinals to the end God might shew whither of the two to wit Berengarius of the Church of Rome had the rightest opinion And there he relates that John Bishop of Port in a Sermon at S. Peters Church did declare in presence both of Clergy and People that Gregory for to obtaine some divine answer had in the presence of the Cardinals cast the holy Sacrament into the fire Berengarius being dead he had many successors that maintained the same doctrine even to the time of Petruâ— de Valdo of the City of Lions whose disciples were named by their enemies Valdenses and Albigenses Of whose Religion and Confession of Faith conformable to ours Fasciculus rerum expetâ—ndaruÌ„ fol. 95. Indocus Câ—â—cius Tom. H. lib. 6. de Euchar fol. 602. hath been spoken before in the 21 chapter of the first Book and shewed that their Churches remaine even unto our times Furthermore John Wicklâ—f in England in the yeere 1390. taught the same Of whose doctrine contained in eighteen Articles here is the first That the substance of the bread remaines after the Consecration and ceases not to bee bread Against the Faithfull that professed this doctrine the Pope stirred up Kings and Princes and caused an incredible butchery to bee made of them preaching the Croisadoe against them whereby hee gave the same spirituall graces unto those that should
massacre them as to those that went into Syria against the Sarasens for to reconquer Christs Sepulcher to whom he gave the remission of all their sins and a degree of glory above the ordinary as may bee seene in the Bull of Innocent the third placed at the end of the Councell of Lateran The Earle of Montfort having with him one Dominicke author of the Order of the Jacobins with an army of these crossed ones did massacre in a few moneths above two hundred thousand of them And for to strengthen and fortifie this abuse there was no speeche in those times but of miracles coyned of purpose tending to the worshipping of Images and establishing of the reall presence of Christs body in the Eucharist They gave out to the people that such an Image had sweated blood that another had nodded his head That a woodden Crucifix prickt in the side had cast blood This fable is recited by Fulgoslib 1. c. 6. And by Nauclerus Gener. 44 That to an Image of the Virgin Maries brought from Damascus breasts of flesh were grown upon the wood That in such a place the Host had appeared in the forme of a child and an Angell by it that did hacke him to peeces That an Hoste pricked by a Jew had gushed out blood and being cast into a great cauldron or kittle was turned into a man as is to be seene yet at this day in Paris represented upon the forefront or porche of the Church of the Billetes The life of Saint Anthonie of Padoua saith that he presented the consecrated Hoste to an Asse which presently left eating of his Oates and worshipped the Hoste a Albertu Krantzius Metropol lib. 1. ca. 9. Wedekindus a Saxon Prince saw a child thrust into the mouth of the Communicants b Paschasius Rathertus de corpore sangnine Domini c. 14. Guil. Mal. mesbur l. 3. cap 27. An Angell did present Christ in the Masse unto a Priest called Plegâ—ls in the shape or forme of a childe which he kissed and imbraced with great courage 〈◊〉 A little Jewish boy comming by chance into the Church as he was playing saw upon the Altar a little boy that was minced and cut into small peeces and thrust by small lumps into the mouths of the Communicants Thomas Cantipratensis in his second Booke of Miracles Chapter 40 saith that at Doway in the yeare 1260. the consecrated host being fallen to the ground rised up againe of it selfe and pearched it selfe upon the cloth wherewith the Priest did wipe his hands in the shape or forme of a fine little boy who instantly became a tall man having a crowne of thornes upon his head and two drops of blood running downe from his forehead on both sides of his nose Jodoeus Coccius collected about one hundred of such miracles Iodoeus Coccius Thesaur Tom. II. lib. 6. de Eucharistia For in Berengarius his time such miracles were very rise and frequent Matthew Paris an English Historian in the yeare of the Lord 1247 relates that the Templers of the holy land sent to Henry the third King of England a little Christall bottle full of the true blood of our Saviour Christ that he shed upon the Crosse which Cristall bottle that silly King carried upon his nose to Westminster Church in Procession a foot clothed with an old sleâ—velesse gowne Salmeron the Jesuite in the XI Tome and fifth Treatise page 35. saith that at Rome in the Church of Lateran there is some of Christs blood kept Item in the Church of Saint Maximin at Rome which Marie Magdalen gathered up at the foote of the Crosse There was also at Rochelle some kept as the same Jesuite saith in the same place Sigonius in his fourth Booke of the reigne of Italy * Forte saÌ„guinis ex imagine crucâ—fiâ—â— Salvatoris in syria effusi portio delata MaÌ„tuam fuerat c. Carolus Leonem Pontisicem per literas obsecravit ut accurate horum miraculâ—rum vâ—ritatem vellet explorare compertam sibi significare Ob id Leo Roma â—gâ—â—ssâ—s Mantuam venâ—t re cognâ—ta ad C roâ—tum ser psit saith that in the yeare 804. was brought out of Syria to Mantua a portion of the blood that ran out of the Image of a Crucifix which did many miracles And that the fame of it being come to Charles the Great he intreated by letters Pope Leo to enquire of the truth of the matter And that the said Pope having knowne and perceived the truth of the thing wrote to Charle-maine touching the same And in the eighth Booke in the yeare 1048. he saith that the inhabitants of Mantua having forgotten this blood and knowing no more what it was this blood beganne againe to doe miracles Vasquez the Jesuite upon the 76 question of the third Part of Thâ—mas * Art 8. saith that yet at this day there is in Spaine some of Christs blood kept in Reliques Thus the darknesse grew thicke and the mysterie of iniquity strengthened it selfe dayly more and more the kings having no knowledge at all of the holy Scripture and trembling under the Popes thunderbolts and excommunications and powring abundance of wealth and riches into the bosome of the Clergie for the easing of their soules after death And for a full measure of mischiefe new Orders of Mendicant Friers did spring up namely the Franciscans and Dominicans whereof Francis Assisias in Italy and Dominick Calarogensis in Spaine were the first Founders in the yeare of our Lord 1216. and 1223. An incredible multitude of these Monks were dilated and spâ—ead over all the regions of the Popes Empire who made use of them as of so many torches and trumpets for to provoke and encourage Princes to the persecution of the faithfull And it was the said Monks that hâ—ve coyned and forged the Schoole Divinity all bristled with pricks and twisted about with subtilties much like unto the Cray-fish in which there is much picking but little to eate It is from this Divinity that suttle distinctions are drawne wherewith they cover themselves against the truth Aâ—istotle is alleadged there a great deale oftner than the Apostle Saint Paul Thus it behooved the mysterie of iniquitie should advance it selfe At the birth of these begging Friers Innocent the third in the yeare 1215. called a Councell at Rome in the Lateran Church in which the word of Transubstantiation not as yet received by any definition in the Roman Church was established by an expresse Canon and authority of Councell CHAP. IX Of the Judgement which the Doctors of the Romane Church doe make touching the apparitions whereby a little Child or a morsell of flesh hath appeared at the Masse in the hands of the Priest and touching Christs blood that is kept in Reliques A Long time hath beene that if one had doubted that a childe or a pâ—â—ce of flâ—sh that had appeared in a Priâ—stâ— hand were not truely Christ and that Christs blood that was kept in
reliques was not truely his blood it would have beene an heresie deserving the fire and a manifest impiety The People did flock together for to worship this blood Therefore Guitmondus in his third booke of the Sacrament and Paschasius in his Booke of the body and blood of the Lord Chapter 14. and Iâ—docus Câ—câ—ius in his Collection of the places of the Fathers and many others doe make use of these miraculous apparitions for to prove Christs reall presence in the Eucharist Thomas Aquinas a Thom 3. part q. 76. Art 8. Tali apparitione facta eadem reverentia exhibetur eâ— quod apparet quae etiam primo exhibebatur quod quidem non sieret si vâ—re non esset ibi Christuâ— cu reverentiam latria exhibemus in the third part of his Summe question 76. Art 8. findes himselfe mightily pestred upon this point For though hee teacheth that that which appeareth thus miraculously ought to bee worshipped with the adoration of Latria as Christ and that Christ is there present yet withall hee esteemes that sometimes these apparitions are not true but onely in appearance especially when the same thing appeares but to some and not to all For which cause C jetan in his Annotations upon this place of Aâ—uinas departes from his opinion touching the Adoration b Cajetan in Notis Si quaeratur qua adoratione venerandus esset hujusmadi sanguis miraculosus dicendum â—dâ—m esse judicium de â—pso de veste Christi and will have this blood or flesh that appeares sometimes in the Massâ— to be worshiâ—ped not as Christ but as Christs garment which is an inferiour adoration But the Jesuite Vasquez goes more plainely to worke in his 193 Disput here bee his words c Vasquez in 76. q. tertiae par Thomae artic 8. Disp 193. cap. 2. Respondeo neque apparere carnem Christi neque alterius quae re vera caro sit sed carnis solum essigiem ut dixit S. Thomas c. Quod a. simplices decipiantur et credant ibi esse carnem Christi divisibili et cruento modo parum refert haec enim deceptio instructione vera Doctorum corrigenda est I answer that that which appeares is not the flesh of Christ nor of any other that bee truely flesh but that it is onely an effigies or appearance of flesh as Saint Thomas saith And as touching the simple that are deceived and beleeve that Christs flesh is there in a manner diâ—isible and bloody it matters not much For that deception ought to bee corrected by the true instruction of the Doctors Gabriel Biel a famous Doctor in his 51 Lesson upon the Canon of the d Potest fieri divina permissione illusione daemonis ad decipiendum incautos Masse goes further and saith that such appariritions of flesh and blood may bee done by illusion of the divell for to deceive the simple God permitting it thus And he brings an example of it To wit that in the Countrey of Thuringe in the City of Ysennae in a Convent of Minorite Friers e Apparuit quidam in specie Angell particulam apparenter porrigens Apparuit stultus ora sumens de manu porrigentis apparentem bostiae particulam et continuo à diabolo obsessus est et graviter vexatus a certaine man in the likenesse of an Angel appeared to a Lay Brother preparing himselfe to the communion who chopt into his mouth peece of flesh which so soone 〈◊〉 hee had swallowed he was posseâ—â—â—â— and grievously tormented by the devill And truely those that esteeme that Christ appeareth truely upon the Altar in the forme of a childe or of a peece of flesh and worship it are very much puzled For the Roman Church doth acknowledge but two sorts of Christs reall presence the one naturall and visible after which he conversed with his Disciples here on earth the other Sacramentall under the accidents of bread But when these things doe appeare yea if ever they doe appeare Christ is neither present in the one nor in the other manner For he appeares neither under his owne proper accidents nor under the accidents of the bread And it shall behoove one to beleeve that Christ is a child upon the Altar Or that a perfect man is under the accidents of a child That if it be onely a peece of flesh we aske whether this peece of flesh be whole Christ Or if it be but a part of his body whether this portion or peece of fl sh was taken out of the Arme or out of the Legge These things serve to make us to know how powerfull â—e seduction of Sathan hath beene and with â—ow much horrible darknesse he did envelope 〈◊〉 in the Ages wherin this monster of Transubstantiation was formed This latter age hath beene ashamed of it for now we see no more the People run to Mantua or to the Billettes Church at Paris for to worship the flesh and the blood of Christ that are there kept in reliques The French Pilgrimâ— passing by Mantua for to goe to Rome stay there no more They passe the Pyrenean Mountaines for to visit the supposed reliques of Saint James but doe not goe into those places of Spaine where Christs blood is kept That blood of Christ sent from Syria to King Henry the third of England whereof I have spoken in the former Chapter that putrified in a few dayes lost instantly its credit and there was no more speech of it CHAP. X. OF the corruption of the Papall Sea in the Ages wherein this errour was most advanced IN the Eighth and Ninth Ages were cast the first foundations of Transubstantiation neverthelesse it was not yet then establish d by Lawes and I cannot finde that ever any man was molested for that subj ct But in the Tenth and Eleventh Ages the Popes laboured to hatch that monster and to establish it with authoritie But God branded these two ages with infamous blemishes and disgraces For as vices agree well with errors the Popes of those times led such an infamous life that hardly the like is to be found in all Pagan histories and that Chaire was filled with horrible confusions Since Pope Formosus who in the yeare 890. attained to the Popedome by violating the oath hee had taken never to accept of it and whose dead body was dragged ignominiously up and downe the City of Rome and cast into the Tiber by his Successors For the space of a hundred and fifty yeares yea of two hundred yeares we see nothing in histories but of Popes murtherers Popes Adulterers necromanticall Popes perjured Popes Popes intruded by force or by money creatures of the Earles of Toscane that werer then powerfull in Italie and of the harlot Theodora and of her daughters Marozia and Theodora that reigned a long time in Rome and made and unmade Popes at their pleasure Of which time the Carmelite Frier Author of Fasciulus Temporum makes this lamentation f Heu heu
the Councell of Constance Sess XV. Artic. 19. Dixerant se audivisse quod Iohannes Hus dixisset quod indulgentiae Papae â—ipâ—scopi noÌ„ valent nisi Deus indulgeat in the fifteenth Session To whom also they did impute things farre from his beleefe Some witnesses presented themselves that testified they had heard him say That the Pardons of the Pope and of the Bishop are nothing worth unlesse God doe forgive That was one of the crimes for which he was burned For that venerable Councell hath judged that the Pope may forgive sinnes whether God will or no and that Gods consent is not necessarily required for to make that the Popes and Bishops Indulgences be of force and validity This newes of John Huz his death and of Hierome of Prague brought into Bohemia did pierce the heart of the Bohemians that were called Hussites with exceeding griefe Histor Bohemicae cap. 56. The King seeing their number encrease dayly more and more granted them Churches in Prague for their meetings Aeneas Sylvius saith that the people mooved with anger pulled downe some Monasteries and Churches both within and without the City Namely neere Tabor where thirty thousand persons did celebrate in the middest of a field the holy Communion under both kindes The King Wencestaus being dead the Kingdome of Bohemia fell to Sigismund his brother Emperor and King of Hungaria Whereupon great feare did seise the people of Bohemia because of his great power and that against his oath and violating the safe conduct he had given to John Hux and to Hierome of Prague he caused them to be burned at Constance But a Bohemian Gentleman called Zisca that had lost an eye in the warres a man incomparable for vigour of body and minde exhorted them not to be disscouraged And it fell out at the same time that Sigismund under tooke warre against the Turke in Hungaria with an indifferent bad successe That gave leasure to the people order their businesses The Queene widdow to Wenceslaus levied some troopes for to fall upon this people and hinder their encreasing Sigismund sent Lievtenants to governe the Country and set things into good order againe in whose hands Zisca did surrender and remit Pelzina and Plesta Cap. 39. and other places whereof he had gotten possession For his desire was to obey the Emperour and he sought all meanes to give him content But there came Letters from the Emperour whereby he did declare that his will and pleasure was that the Churches granted to the Bohemians called Hussites should bee taken from them and their Religion interdicted And they had good advice that Sigismonds intention was to destroy them Whereat the People being afraid looked for nothing but for a totall ruine and their enemies being become more vigorous beganne to oppresse them Which things moved Zisca to take Armes and thinke upon his defence With a few forces bee obtained many victories against the Queene having none but foote forces of small experience and little exercised in warre Then came Sigismond into Bohemia with a mighty Armie resolved to destroy this people Besieged Prague wherein Zisea was who in many sallies defeated the most part of Sigismonds armie made him raise the Siege and tooke many townes by the verie terrour of his name As hee was besieging Vissegrad the Emperour came at unawares for to make him raise the siege having with him thirtie thousand Horse and all the Nobility of Mordvia But Zisea defeated him and obtained upon him a great victorie And a little after Sigismond having for the third time prepared a mightie Armie lost a third Battell by which he was constrained to leave Bohemia full of shame and confusion A little after Zisea besieging a towne Cap. 44. received a shot of an arrow in the eye so that of blinde of an eye as hee was hee became blinde of both But that hindred him not from leading and conducting his troopes and giving many combates being victorious every where But the Emperour being irritated and angrie came backe againe into Bohemia bringing along with him two powerfull Armies the one out of Germanie and the other out of Hungaria which like an overflowing torrent overwhelmed all Bohemia Tooke some townes and made great ravage But Zisea though blinde and having but a few men drew directly towards the Emperours Armie and defeated him with a great defeat tooke Bag and Baggage and all things belonging to the Armie and pursued him a whole dayes Journey Pio a Florentine had brought out of Hungaria fifteene thousand horse who passing upon a frozen River for to save themselves the Ice breaking under them were all drowned in the River Furthermore Zisca with his victorious Armie went out of Bohemia and entred into Moravia and passed into Austria and came to succour the faithfull that were oppressed there To him did adjoyne himselfe a Moravian gentleman named Procopius exceeding valiant and an imitator of the vertue of Zisea who caused the Emperour Sigismund to raise the siege before Juâ—emberg in Moravia which he had besieged A great Battell was given betweene Zisea and the Emperours troupes neare Ausck upon the River of Elbe where a great quantity of the Germane Centry were killed on the Emperours side Who pulled downe and confounded with so many losses resolved at last to seeke after Zisca his love and friendship promising him the Generall Lievetenancy of the whole Kingdome and all kinde of Advantages Zisea gave eare thereunto and took his journey for to goe meet the Emperour but hee fell sicke by the way and dyed being very old and blinde Aeneas Sylvius saith that when hee was a dying he gave counsell to his people to make a Drumme of his skinne after his death Cap. 46. assuring them that at the sound of that Drumme his enemies would flie away Zisea being dead Procopius succeeded him in the conduct of a part of the troopes against whom Pope Martin the fifth set all Germanic in Armes and sent into Bohemia three mighty Armies commanded by the Dukes of Saxe the Marquesse of Brandenbourg and the Arch-Bishop of Trivers These three Armies joyned themselves together But so soone as the Bohemians did appeare such terrour and feare seised upon the Imperiall Armies that they presently fled without staying for the enemie forsaking all their baggage and munitions of warre But the Cardinal Julian sent by the Pope stirred up the Emperour Sigismond to make a greater effort than any of the former Aeneas Sylvius saith there was in his Armie forty thousand Horse besides the Foot This Cardinall entred into Bohemia where hee committed many unheard off cruelties killing both women and children But at the very first noyse and rumour that came of the Bohemians approach such a terrible feare tooke this huge Armie that every one threw his armes downe for to fly away more nimbly and left their carriage and munitions of warre to the enemy The Cardinall having escaped this danger came to Basile for to preside at the Councell that the Pope Eugenius the fourth had assembled there in the yeare of our Lord 1431. Now we have made this recitall not for to approve Zisea his actions nor the commotions of peoples taking armes against their Sovaraigne for to avoide persecution and Martyrdom For the truth of the Gospell is not established by these meanes Christ Jesus calleth us to beare the crosse after him The blood of Martyrs hath more efficacy for to encrease the Church and spread the doctrin of the Gospell than Battels But I have represented this history for to be an example of Gods justice punishing the disloyalty of Sigismond who against his faith and promise burned alive two faithfull Martyrs God having made use of weake and contemptible persons for to make him lose above two hundred thousand men and cover him with shame and confusion CHAP. XII The Confession of Cyril Patriarch of Constantinople now living touching the Sacrament of the Eucharist THis Prelate in the seventeenth Article of his Confession altogether conformable to the Doctrine of our Churches after he hath recited the Institution of the holy Supper as it is found in the Gospell addeth That is the simple true and lawfull Institution of this admirable Sacrament in the administration whereof wee doe confesse and beleeve the true and firme presence of the Lord Christ Jesus Yet that presence which faith offereth and makes present unto us but not that which Transubstantiation vainely invented doth teach For wee beleeve that the faithfull in the holy Supper doe eate the body of Christ Jesus our Lord not incrushing and breaking it sensibly and destroying it with our teeth in the participation But in partaking thereof by the sense of the soule For the body of Christ is not that which is taken and seene in the Sacrament with the eyes but that which Faith having taken spiritually makes it present and communicates it unto us Therefore it is 〈◊〉 that we eate it and are made partakers of it if we doe beleeve But if we beleeve not we fall away from all the benefit of the Sacrament By the same reason we beleeve that to drinke the Cup in the Sacrament is to drinke indeed the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ after the same manner as hath been said concerning the body For the Law-giver made the same commandement touching his blood as he did touching his body Which precept must not be mutilated according to every ones fancie and humour But the tradition that hath beene prescribed unto us must be kept sound and entire When therefore in the Sacrament wee have partaked worthily and communicated intirely with the body and blood of Christ we make this profession that we are already reconciled and united to our head and made one and the selfe same body with a firme hope that wee shall be his coheires in his Kingdome Here is the Originall in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 FINIS