a Genes 14. 18. hee brought forth bread and wine and that as Ambrose and Hierome say out of the Hebrew writers b Ambros ad Hebr. cap. 7. Hieron ad Euagr Nec mirum si Melchâ—zedec victori Abraham obuiam processerit in reseâ—â—ion em tam ipsius quam pugnatorum eius panesâ—â—mumque protulerit For the refreshing of him and his souldiers in which meaning c Ioseph Anâ—iq Iudaic. l. 1. â— 11. Milites Iosephus namely Abrahami hospitalitèr habuit nihil â—is ad victum decsse passus doth vnderstand it And if M. Bishop will needes haue it translated by the word of offering as his fellowes are wont greatly to wrangle to that intent yet Ambrose so also applyeth it that d Ambros de Sacram. l. 4. c. 3. Occurrit illi Melâ—lnsedec Sacâ—rdos â—btulit ei paâ—â—e vinii he offered to Abraham bread and wine thereby excluding all necessity of construction of sacrifice to God But if yet we shall perforce take it of offering to God we conceiue of it according to that which Cyprian saith thatâ— e Cyprian l. 2. Ep. 3. Domiâ—uâ— noster Iesus Christus Sacrificium Dâ—o Patri obtulit obtulit hoc idâ—m quod Melchisedec obtulâ—rat id est panem vinii suâ—â— scilicet corpus sanguineÌ„ our Lord Iesus Christ offering a sacrifice to God the Father offered the very same that Melchisedec had offered that is bread and wine euen his owne body and bloud If the sacrifice of Christ and Melchisedecke be the very same and Melchisedecke also offered the body and bloud of Christ as these words import then cannot our sacrifice be a true and real sacrifice of Christs body and bloud because Melchisedecks was not so Christ as yet not hauing taken his body and bloud and therefore must both that and this be vnderstood to be only the mysterie and signification thereof And this interpretation of the sacrifice on both sides Hierome confirmeth when of our Sauiour Christs institution of the Sacrament he saith f Hieron in Mat. 26. Assumit panem ad verum Paschae traÌ„sgreditur Sacramentum vâ— quomodo in praefiguratione eius Melchisedec suÌ„mi Dei Sacerdos panem vinii offerens fecerat ipse quoque veritatem sui corpâ—ris sanguiniâ— repraesentaret Christ taketh bread and goeth to the true Sacrament of the Passeouer that as Melchisedec the Priest of the high God in prefiguring of him offering bread and wine had done so he himselfe also might represent the truth of his body and bloud There is therefore both in the one and in the other not the very truth of the body and bloud of Christ but only a representation of the truth thereof euen as Chrysostome on the one side expresseth when he saith that g Chrys Op. imperfec hom 11 Haec vasa sactificata inquibus non â—st verii coâ—pus Christi sed mysterium corporis eius continetur in the holy vessels is contained not the true body of Christ but the mysterie of his body And vnlesse it be thus it cannot stand which Ambrose concerning this offering of Melchisedec saith that h Ambros de Sacram. l. 4. c. 3. Intellige Sacramenta quâ— accipis anteriâ—ra esse quà m sint Moysi Sacramenta c. the Sacraments which we receiue are more ancient then the Sacraments of Moses for how can that be if our Sacraments be truly and really the body and bloud of Christ which Melchisedecks were not Againe where God by Malachy saith i Mat. 1. 11. In euery place incense shall be offered vnto me and a pure offering whose eyes are so sharpe as that in those words he can discerne the Popish sacrifice of the Masse We reade here of incense and a pure offering but this roome is too little for the building of so large a house their Masse cannot stand within the compasse of this ground And when we consider how the Fathers expound the same Tertullian one where generally of k Tertul. adu ludaeos Desacrisicijs spiritualibus addit dicens In omni loco sacrificia munda offerâ—tur spirituall sacrifices another where of l Idem cont Marc. l. 4. Sacrificium mundum scilicet simplex oratio de conscientia pura sincere prayer out of a pure censcience Hierome of m Hieron in Zacha. c 8. Sacrificium mundum nequaquam in victimis veteris Testamenti sed in sanctuate Euangelica puritatis the sanctity and holinesse of Euangelicall purity Eusebius of n Euseb de demonstrat Euang lib. 1. c 6. Sacrificium quod appellaturpurum facimus per puras actiones pure and godly doings Austin of o Aug. cont lit Petil. l. 2. c. 86. Viuum Sacrificium de quo dictum est Immola Deo sacrificium laudis the liuely sacrifices of praise and thanks-giuing Theodoret of p Theodoret. in Mal. c. 1. Debitum honorem praestabuÌ„t accomodatum cultum adhibebunt the due honour and conuenient worship of God exemplifying the same by the words of Christ q John 4. 23. The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth and by the words of the Apostle r 1. Tim. 2. 8. Let men pray euery where lifting vp pure hands without wrath or doubting and Hierome by the words of the Psalme Å¿ Psal 141. 2. Let my prayer be set forth in thy sight as the incense and the lifting vp of my hands as an euening sacrifice these things I say considered may we not be thought to be out of our wits if we shall beleeue them that the place must needes be vnderstood of their monstrous sacrifice That Manna was a type of the body of Christ no Christian man doubteth but that it was a type of Christs body as really in the Sacrament no wise man beleeueth and the reason wherby t Answere to M. Perkins Aduertisement sect 56. See the Confutation elsewhere he goeth about to proue it is there declared to be vaine So haue I also u Of Traditions sect 21. formerly shewed that the example of the high Priest amongst the Iewes giueth no manner warrant to the supreme authority of one head ouer the whole Christian Church that the high Priest amongst the Iewes had no such supremacy as they claime to the Pope that reason teacheth such a supremacy to be the manifest and certaine danger of the Church and experience hath found it to be the very ruine and desolation thereof As for their according with the Iewish ceremonies in consecrating of Priests and hallowing of Churches and Altars and Vestments c. it is a slender proofe for the finding of their religion amongst the Iewes because they haue borrowed many ceremonies from the Pagans also and yet they will not say that their religion was amongst the Pagans Their emuâ—aâ—â—on of those ceremonies we iustly cry out against as preposterous and absurd because they being as M. Bishop saith types and figures of the law of
from that imputation Well and what of that Marry Chrysostome and Hierome do argue saith he that euen so in the law of grace men infected with the soules leprosie are either to be bound and declared obstinate by the Priest if they will not repent or repenting and confessing the same are to be cleansed therefrom by the Priests absolution First Chrysostome in the place by him alleaged saith nothing either of confession or absolution but noting by occasion what grace is administred by Priests in baptisme that u Chrysost de Sacerdot lib. 3. Authores nobis sunt natiuitatis eius quam à Deo habemus c. atque adeò adoptionis eius qua nos per gratiam silij Dei sumus effecti Corporiâ— lepram purgare seu verius dicam haud purgare quidem sed purgatos probaâ—e Iudaeorum Sacerdotibus solis licebat c. At verò nostris Sacerdotibus non corporis lepram verum animae sordes non dico purgatas probare sed purgare prorsus concessum est they are as he speaketh authours of our new birth and of that adoption whereby we are made the sonnes of God he addeth further thereof thus Only the Priests of the Iewes might purge the leprosie of the body or so speake more truly not purge it but giue warrant of them that were purged but to our Priests it is granted I will not say to approue such as are purged but to purge not the leprosie of the body but the vncleannesse of the soule This the Priest doth sacramentally and ministerially in baptisme when he x Acts 2. 38. baptizeth in the name of the Lord Iesus Christ to the remission of sinnes and what is this to M. Bishops turne As little is there in the words of Hierome who saith that y Hieron in Mat. c. 16. Quomodo ibi Sacerdoâ— facit leprosum mundâ— vel immundum non quò Sacerdotes leprosos faciant immundos sed quò habeant notitiam leprosi vel non leprosi possint discernere qui mundus quiuè immundus fit sic hic alligat vel soluit Episcopus Presbyter noÌ„â—os qui insontes sunt vel nâ—xij sed pro â—fficio suo cum peccatorum audierit varietates scit qui ligandus sit qui soluendus as the Priest in Moses law did make the leaper cleane or vncleane not for that he did so indeede but only tooke notice who was a leaper and who was not and did discerne betwixt the cleanâ— and the vncleane so here the Bishop or Priest doth binde or loose not binde them which are innocent or loose the guilty but when according to his office he heareth the variety of sinnes he knoweth who is to be bound and who to be loosed We see here the office and duty of the Priest to discerne betwixt man and man to acquit the innocent to bind the guilty by the publike censure of the Church to decide who is to be holden for loosed with God who for bound all which belong to the outward and publike discipline and gouernement of the Church but as for auricular confession or priuate absolution and pâ—nance thereto appertayning there is not so much as one word spoken thereof It is plainly here to be seene why M. Bishop quoted the authours only but did not set downe their wordes because the Reader would haue discerned his folly that would set downe such impertinent stuffe nothing at all concerning the point in hand Yet he hopeth that he hath said that that may suffice for answere to my particulars whereas he hath brought no tollerable proofe or probability for any one particular and therefore leaueth vs to resolue that none of those points of religion by me mentioned were euer knowen to the old Fathers W. BISHOP §. 4. I Might easily adde how the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ vnder the formes of bread and wine were both prefigured by Melchisedechs Host in bread and Genes 14. wine and fore-told by the Prophet Malachy and what a Malach. 1. liuely type Manna that Angelicall and delicate foode was of Christs body in the Sacrament And how the supreme authority of one headouer all the whole Church and that to belong to a Bishop and not to the lay Magistrate was not obscurely shadowed but liuely represented by the Soueraigne power that the high Priest of the old Testament had ouer all the rest To determine and end all doubts Deuter. 17. and controuersies arising about any hard point of the law As for consecrating of Priests and hallowing of Churches and Altars with all Vestiments and Ornaments thereunto appertaining and for the seuerall feasts and fasts there is so great resemblance betweene them and vs that Protestants commonly cry out against vs for the ouer great affinity that is betwixt the old law and our religion But as they are to be reproued of indiscreet zeale against the rites of Moyses law which were of God and good for the time and most of them figures and types of the law of grace according to that of the Apostle All 1. Cor. 10. things chanced to them in figure and were written for our correction and instruction so on the other side some strange defluxion and dâ—stillation of corrupt humours maruailously darkned M. Abbots sore eyes that he could not discerne nor find in the whole law of Moises any one shadow of that which we now practise May not these worthy words which S. Paul pronounced of the blinded Iewes in his time be verified of him Their senses 2. Cor. 3. were dulled vntill this day when Moyses is read a veile is put vpon their heart that is they reading and hearing the law of Moyses doe no more vnderstand it then doth a man hoodded or that hath a veile before his eyes see what is before him or else M. Abbot reading the old Testament could not choose but haue seene much of our religion and many articles of our faith there recorded And albeit we teach most mysteries of our faith to haue beene in the law of Moyses prefigured and foretold yet is it very absurd to say as M. Abbot doth that we beleeue no more articles of faith then they did for we were by the Sonne of God our blessed Sauiour giuen to vnderstand many high points of beliefe which were not reueiled vnto them as hath beene before declared R. ABBOT ANd I might as easily answere that the Popish Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ as they call it vnder the formes of bread and wine is an absurd nouelty neither prefigured by Melchizedecke nor fore-told by Malachy the Prophet nor euer knowen to any ancient Father of the Christian Church Strange it is that a reall propitiatory sacrifice of Christs body and bloud vnder the formes of bread and wine should bee deriued from Melchizedecke with whom we see no token or semblance thereof of whom it is not said that he offered bread and wine but only that
Iewish Church before receiued not But let him report my wordes as he findeth them and then they shall stand good that Christ taught no other but the same faith and religion that was deliuered by Moses and the Prophets to the former Church which is not hindered by that he instituted new Sacraments because I haue already shewed that in diuersity of Sacraments there is still the same faith Which how handsomely he hath confuted hath before appeared and I suppose by that time he hath further considered of the matter he will finde cause to seeke for a better confutation But yet taking it vpon him that he hath confuted me he goeth on saying And here I adde that then Christians may haue many wiues togither as the Iewes had and may giue their wiues vpon any displeasure a libâ—ll of diuorce Where we may well thinke that he was scant in the right that tooke the lawfulnesse of many wiues and the giuing of a bill of diuorce to a wife to haue beene matters of the Iewes faith and religion towards God I haue cited Leo Bishop of Rome saying that h §. 2. of this Chapter the faith whereby we liue hath neuer differed in any age and will M. Bishop inferre against him as he doth against me that Christians then may haue many wiues and husbands may vpon euery displeasure giue their wiues a bill of diuorcement to put them away as it was amongst the Iewes Did not his discretion serue him to put difference betwixt matters of faith and of manners betwixt articles of religion and offices of conuersation Faith and religion import that deuotion seruice which is immediately performed to God and what letteth but that in their lawfulnesse of many wiues they might yeeld to God the same deuotion that we doe and we in single marriage the same that they But haply somewhat it was that he aimed at which his troubled head serued him not to expresse I said in my answere as touching those Fathers of the old Testament According to the approued example of their life we also teach men to liue Now I imagine hereof it is that he meant to say that then Christians may haue many wiues and at their pleasure giue their wiues libels of diuorce If this were his meaning he should haue bethought himselfe where their example in these things is found any where to haue beene approued because I made mention only of approued example For our parts we hold plurality of wiues in those times to haue beene permitted but not approued tolerated by dispensation as i Gregor exposit in 1. Reg. c. 2 l. 2. Quaedam in sacra Scriptura inuenâ—untur praecepta quae dispensatâ—oâ—â— qâ—idâ—m Dâ—â— praecepta sâ—nt sed non amore Deâ— Gregory saith some things were of old but not warranted by institution And of that dispensation the same Gregory taketh an example of the Iewes giuing a bill of diuorce concerning which we see how the Pharisees alleage in the Gospell not that God ordained it but only that Moses so commanded or rather suffered and the reason thereof giuen k Mat. 19 78. because of the hardnesse of their hearts and therefore we hope M. Bishop vpon better aduice will not of vnity of faith conclude any more that it should now be lawfull for vs to doe the same As for the iudiciall law of the Iewes it is wholly without the occasion and compasse of my speech and briefly I answere him that though there be the same faith and the same rules of duty and conuersation yet it doth not therefore follow that censures and punishments or trials and legall proceedings must be the same In a word whatsoeuer the Apostles decreed in their Councell at Hierusalem for the abrogating of the law we acknowledge and obey and that more faithfully then the Papists doe who as M. Bishop confesseth doe hold it their grace still to hold a conformity with the ceremonies of the law Yet againe if the Apostles saith he were simply and nakedly to preach to the Gentiles the law of Moses he should say without ambiguity the faith and religion of the Patriarchs and Prophets stript of types and shadowes why then were they commanded to preach vnto them the sacraments of Baptisme and of the Supper of the Lord An idle question and it is already answered that in deliuering other Sacraments they taught no other but the same doctrine and faith The Sacraments are water in Baptisme bread and wine in the Lords Supper different from those of old The doctrine of faith is the death of Christ and shedding of his bloud for the cleansing of our soules and remission of our sinnes which was the same in all the Sacrifices and Sacraments of the Church since the world beganne And this one doctrine I said the Apostles by the commandement of Christ so taught as that they added nothing of their owne This saith M. Bishop is very false for many things were left by our Sauiour to their disposition Now thou must vnderstand gentle Reader that I vsed not those wordes as mine owne but did set them downe in a distinct letter quoting Tertullian in the margent as the authour of them The whole passage of those words shall giue some light to the matter here in hand l Tertul. de Praescript Nobis nihil ex nostro arbitrio indulgere licet sed ne eligere quod aliquis de arbitrio suo induxerit Apostolos Domini habemuâ— authores qui nec ipsi quicquam ex suo arbitrio quod inducerent clegerunt sed acceptam à Christo disciplinam fidelitèr nationibus adsignauerunt We may not saith he giue our selues liberty of any thing at our owne discretion nor make choise of any thing which any other man hath brought in of his owne minde We haue the Apostles of the Lord for our leaders who did not of their owne will or discretion make choise of any thing to bring in but the doctrine which they receiued of Christ they faithfully deliuered to the nations Here then M. Bishop giueth Tertullian the lye and telleth him that it is false which he saith dissembling in the meane time the sight of Tertullians name and making shew as if he spake it to me only Thou art now at thy choise gentle Reader whâ—ther thou wilt rather beleeue Tertullian or M. Bishop If thou wilt rather beleeue Tertullian in a worke generally approued then thou must say as we say that the Apostles added nothing of their owne but taught only what they receiued of Christ according to the commission giuen vnto them m Mat. 28 20. Teaching them to obserue whatsoeuer things I haue commanded you But to shew that our Sauiour left many things to the disposition of the Apostles he alleageth those wordes of St. Paul n 1. Cor. 11. 34. Other things I will dispose or set in order when I come Where I would pray him to tell vs in good sadnesse whether the meaning of those wordes be I