in the ghospell off S. Ihon. Who eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hathe life euerlasting Caluin in his institutions and in his coÌ„mentaries vpon that place teacheth thus Who eateth the bread at the communion he receaueth a cundyte pipe by the whiche life is deriued vnto him Marke I beseche you Christen readers howe he hathe altered the wordes of oure Sauiour Where Christ saith Who eateth my flesh Caluin saithe who eateth the bread at the communion and where Christ saithe he hathe life euer lasting Caluin saithe he hathe a cundyte pipe by the whiche life is deriued calling the blessed fleshe of oure Sauiour one person with the godhead a coundyt pype or instrument by the whiche life is deriued from god the Father For that is his meaning as you shall see more plainely hereafter when I come to his heresies attributing life not to the fleshe of Christ as Christ him selfe dothe but to the Father in whom he teacheth life to remaine principally as you shall anon see But nowe to an other proposition Christ saithe I am the resurrection and the life Caluin saythe in his commentaries vpon the sixte off Ihon The Son is as a riuer by the whiche the life abiding in the father is deriued vnto vs. Here again Christ speaking as god and man saith him selfe to be the life For as the general councell of Ephesus charely warneth vs the wordes of the ghospell are all waies to be attributed to Christe as to one person thoughe consisting of two natures â–ª Caluin saithe the life to remaine in the father Where blasphemousely he excludeth Christ making him as a riuer or meanes by the whiche life is deriued vnto vs. But of this we shall haue more occasion to speake hereafter Oure Sauiour after he had sayde in the sixte off Ihon my fleshe is meate in dede and my bloud is drinke in dede expounding those his wordes vnto the carnall Iewes thinking he had meaned his fleshe and bloud after the bare nature of man saithe thus The wordes which I spake vnto you are Spirit and life geuing vs to vnderstande as the lerned Father Cirillus noteth that he spake of his fleshe and blood inseparably annexed to the godhead and one person with the same Nowe Caluin in his institutions affirmeth that by the Spirit of Christe his fleshe is deriued vnto vs and made our foode In the whiche doctrine he separateth the Spirit of Christe from his blessed fleshe geuing vs the one without the other whereas Christ him selfe aboue affirmed that he meaned his fleshe coupled and vnited to the Spirit sayeng the wordes whiche I spake vnto you to witt of my flesh and blood are Spirit and life that is not bare flesh but endued with my Spirit the godhead it selfe nor to be deriued vnto vs by the Spirit as separated from the fleshe or as a cundit pype to conducte the fleshe vnto vs whiche Caluin in his institutions saythe as you haue heard before but to be geuen vnto vs with the Spirit and deite of oure Sauiour iointly and inseparably as they are in him one person and one Christ. Thus you see howe he correcteth and altereth the wordes off oure Sauiour at his pleasure Againe whereas Christe saythe in S. Ihon He that eateth my fleshe and drinketh my bloud hathe life euerlasting promising vs by eating to haue life Caluin correcting the sayeng of oure Sauiour in his commentaries vpon S. Ihon where Christe promiseth life and resurrection by the eating of his fleshe and drinking of his bloud he saythe Christ speaketh not here of the Supper but of the perpetuall communion of him which we haue beside the vse of the Supper And yet that ye maye not thinke he meaneth of any other communion naming the perpetuall communion then the very same whiche we haue in the celebration of oure lordes Supper in fewe wordes after he addeth thus muche And yet I confesse that nothinge is here spoken whiche is not also figured and truly exhibited vnto vs in the Supper Thus he maketh him selfe as sure off Christe withoute the receauing of this blessed Sacrament as when he receaueth it whiche by the coÌ„ference of an other place of holy Scripture you shall see yet ones again S. Paule saieth The bread whiche we breake is the participation of the body of our Lorde whereby we lerne in this blessed SacrameÌ„t to receaue the body of Christ. Caluin teacheth vs without the blessed sacrameÌ„t to receaue it For in his resolutioÌ„s vpoÌ„ the sacrameÌ„ts he hathe these wordes Right as the infidell by the vse of the Sacraments receaueth no more profit thereby theÌ„ if he vsed theÌ„ not eueÌ„ so the verite figured in the sacraments is coÌ„municated to the faitheful and beleuers thoughe not receauing the signes or sacrameÌ„ts By this rule we receaue Christ in the supper which before hath bâ—n geueÌ„ vnto vs and dwelleth in vs perpetually And in the .9 article of the same worke he saythe that such as haue before receaued Christ receauing the Sacrament do renewe and continew that which they had before receaued By this his doctrine you see he correcteth the wordes of Christe teaching vs to receaue him by eating his fleshe and drinking his blood And the wordes of S. Paule sayeng the bread to be the participation of our Lordes body by whiche worde he meaneth the blessed Sacrament naming it so of that which it was before as the serpent was called Moyses rodd and the wine water in Cana Galilea S. Paul sayth Who so euer eateth the bread and drinketh the cuppe of the Lord vnworthely he eateth and drinketh his owne daÌ„nation geuing vs to vnderstaÌ„de that at the receauing of the blessed sacrameÌ„t we receaue other life by the worthy receauing other daÌ„nation by the vnworthy Now the doctrine of Caluin directly repugneth For thus he writeth in his resolutioÌ„s vpoÌ„ the sacrameÌ„ts Farder saith he the profit which we receaue at the sacrameÌ„ts ought not to be restrained to the time we receaue theÌ„ as if that the visible signe as soone as it is geueÌ„ vs should bringe vs forthewith the grace of god It may happen that the receite of the sacrament which in the acte profited nothing through our defaulte or slacknes maie afterward bring forth better fruict Thus farre Caluin CoÌ„sider nowe if this doctrine be not cleane coÌ„trary to the meaning of S. Paul For if as S. Paul saith receauing the sacrameÌ„t vnworthely we receaue our own daÌ„nation why also in receauing it worthely receaue we not withal incontinently the grace and vertu thereof Againe if by our defaulte it worketh vs daÌ„nation as the Apostle saith howe caÌ„ it afterwarde auaile vs as Caluin teacheth Thirdly if at the receite of the sacrameÌ„t we receaue nothing what shall the bread that Caluin imagineth alone signifie shall it signifie that by eating it we receaue no profit thereby In good sothe it will signifie vnto vs that Caluin mocketh with God and
Augustin when they sayde that the worde Catholike was not ment of the societe and communioÌ„ of the whole worlde but in obseruing of al gods commaundements and all his sacraments Thirdly the protestants of Lunneburg and of the Lantgraues dominions were offended with the Saxons in the publishing of their coÌ„fession bicause they yelded to much to the Catholikes in the question of ecclesiasticall iurisdiction and authorite off bishops whereupon Melanchthon was expresly commaunded to yeld no farder Fourthly whereas in that confession presented to the Emperour in the yeare 1530. in the tenth article we reade this They teache that the true body and bloud of Christ is truly present in the Supper vnder the formes of bread and wine the next yere after the same Confession being printed at VVittenberg they frame the same article after an other sorte and write That the body and bloud of Christ are truly present and distribued to those which receiue in the supper By the which addition they exclude all reseruation of the blessed Sacrament for the sicke and tie Christ to the pleasure of the receiuers But in the yeare 1540. wading furder in the moire of heresy they make that same article yet fouler For this they saie That with the breade and the wine the body and bloud of Christ is truly exhibited to those whiche receiue in the Lordes Supper Thus lo at the length this monster of Luther was brought to perfection I meane his proper heresy about the SacrameÌ„t But what Doth all the brotherhood of that Confession staye here Nay the zelous Lutherans denie it and complaine of it For from this their Confession Brentius and the Masters of WitteÌ„berg in their conference helde at Wormes in the yeare 1557. haue departed openly yelding to the heresies of Zuinglius and Osiander directly repugning to that ConfessioÌ„ as Nicolaus Amsdorffius a zelous Lutheran chargeth them in open writing His wordes you may reade in the beginning of the thirde parte of this booke Thus you maye see howe the sprit of Melanchthon and his felowes agree with the doinges and behauiour of olde heretikes And although Philip Melanchthon at the first visitation of the protestants in Germany was praysed for his modesty and meakenes yet afterwarde as he grewe in heresy so did he in malice and cruelty The thrusting in of OsiaÌ„der in to Prussia procured by him displacing Morlinus by force his open writing against the visitatioÌ„ of Bauaria his bitter and dispiteous inuectiues againste the lerned vertuous and Noble man Fridericus Staphylus hath sufficiently declared to all the worlde that as good men eunt de virtute in virtutem encrease and go forward in vertu so he proceded in mischefe and malice of harte as the property of heretikes hathe allwaies ben Illyriâ—us and other zelous Lutherans ceased not daily while he liued to entwit this vnto him And I haue here recited onely for the intent God is my witnes that his credit hereafter may be the lesse amonge suche as by his hereticall ciuilite haue ben deceaued and trained into heresies from the vnite of Christes churche where only saluation is to be hoped for For that is the body off Christ as S. Paule saieth and the piller of truthe and as S. Augustin writeth Whosoeuer beleueth that Christe Iesus is come in to fleshe and in the same fleshe hathe suffred for vs hath risen again and is ascended vp and that he is the son of God God with God and one with the father by whom al was made and yet do so dissent from his body which is the church that they do not communicat with all the whole corps of Christendome certain it is that they are not in the Catholike churche What Christen maÌ„ therefore is there so destitut of the grace of God and all good reason that will hazarde his soule to folowe that guide which woteth not him selfe which waie to walcke or to lerne a newe belefe contrary to all Christendome beside that nowe is and euer hathe ben of suche a Master as knoweth not him felfe what he may saie and was euen to his deathe but a lerner and scholer For then onely began he to professe him selfe a Caluiniste and a Sacramentary hauing all his life time before taught and deceaued a number after the trade of Luther And howe can his scholers be assured that theÌ„ he founde out the truthe We will therefore nowe come to Caluin him selfe to whom Melanchthon hathe yelded and see whether he be a ghospeller worthy to be folowed againste the vniforme consent of Christes churche Perusing diligently the doctrine of Iohn Caluin in his Institutions commentaries vppon the holy Scripture his resolutions vppon the Sacraments and other his workes touching his doctrine of the blesâ—ed Sacrament of the aultar whiche he allwaies termeth the Supper off the Lorde and recording with my self howe the greatest swaye of the lost flock of our time forsaking Christ the heauenly shepearde and his vicar here on earthe haue folowed more that wolfe of Geneua Iohn Caluin then the foxes of Germany Luther Melanchthon Osiander and other truly I bothe lamented much the losse of so many ChristeÌ„ soules straiyng after so perilous a guide and maruailed yet more at the blindnes of our wicked time that would be so soone lead out of the highe waie of Christes churche wherein onely saluation is to be sought and folow the trade of such a doctour or Master which like a madde will full man being out off the waie runneth vpp and downe among the bushes and briers this waie and that waie seking of purpose any waye rather then he will take the common highe beaten waie that all Christen people haue walked in I saie this good Readers not as enemy to the man whom thanked be God I neuer sawe nor heard but as finding him such in his writings as I haue saied and intending by Gods helpe to sett him so before your eyes that yow shall also saie and iudge no lesse of him then I do vnlesse you are which God forbidde of the number of those obstinat Iewes who seying would not see and hearing woulde not heare I trust rather in allmighty God that no man hath so pinned his soule to Caluins doctrine but that he will yelde to the expresse worde off holy Scripture and euident reason when he shall see the same doctryne to fight directly against them bothe And first we wil coÌ„sidre how is doctrine fighteth against euideÌ„t reason which by two maner of waies we will declare you First by certain of his propositions importing absurde consequences and impossibilites nexte by clere and most euident contradictions of his owne saiengs wherby not onely the faithfull Catholike but the deceiued protestant may euidently iudge and pronounce that this mans doctrine can not be of god and his holy Spirit which is the Spirit of truthe and vnite but is of the diuel and his wicked sprit which is the sprit of falshood and
bloud And after he concludeth thus I saie therefore that in the mistery of the Supper by the signes of bread and wine Christ is geuen vnto vs truly yea his body and bloud to the entēt that first we maie be made one body with him then being made partakeners of his substaunce we maie also receaue the vertu thereof for the enioieng of all his benefits All this he saieth against thē which acknowledging a certain communiō with Christ in this Sacramēt make vs onely partakners of the Spirit of Christe as in his wordes somewhat before he expresseth Woulde a man desire any more Catholike doctrine then this is truly it semeth no. But you shall see within fewe lines he marreth all that he made before For when he cometh to declare after what maner we receaue the body and bloud of Christ for by euidence of scripture he was forced to confesse that we receaue it thē lo he stretcheth him selfe and calleth his wittes aboute him how he may defeat the real presēce of Christes body and bloud He graunteth we do truly and as he writeth vpon S. Paule really receaue the body and bloud of Christe But he will not haue it as the church teacheth really present Howe then shall we really receaue Christ We nede not saieth Caluin imagin any presence of place to receaue Christ by Howe then This benefit saith he Christ geueth vs by his Spirit By ▪ the Spirit of Christ we are coupled and ioyned to Christ. and the Spirit of Christ is as a certaine cundite pipe by the whiche whatsoeuer Christ is and hathe is deriued vnto vs. for if we see the Son shining on the earthe with his beames for the engendring and quickening of thinges geue as thoughe it were his substaunce vnto the earthe why should the Spirit of Christ be inferiour or of lesse force then the shining downe the son for conuaying vnto vs the communion of Christ his fleshe and bloud Wherefore scripture speaking of our partaking with Christe referreth the whole power thereof vnto the spirit One place shal suffise for all For S. Paule writing to the Romanes in the eight chapter teacheth that Christ dwelleth no otherwise in vs then by his Spirit Whereby yet he taketh not a waie the communiō of fleshe and bloud that we nowe speake of but teacheth vs that by the onely spirit we possesse whole Christ and haue him dwelling in vs. These lo hetherto are the wordes of Caluin euen as they lie in his Institutiōs the 18. chapper The effect of his whole tale is this That by the Spirit of Christ onely we receaue the body and bloud of Christ. And is not this cleane repugnant to that he saide before blaming them whiche taught that in this Sacrament we were partakners of Christ in Spirit onely For howe receaue we the body and bloud of Christe by the Spirit of Christ onely but spiritually only The fleshe and bloud of Christ are no spirituall thinges Valentinus and Marcion were condemned for suche doctrine Howe then receaue we thinges of a corporall substaunce not mere spirituall onely by the Spirit This is a mere imagination of Caluin as we haue before declared you No scripture termeth the Spirit of Christ a cundite pipe No scripture telleth vs that the Spirit of Christ cōuaieth vs his fleshe and bloude It is beside scripture and against all reason and therefore not to be admitted by the only warrant of Caluins mouthe We must not leaue the doctrine of the churche though it had no reason to defend it for the bare assertion of Caluin being against all reason For this is against all reason that we should really eate the body and drinke the bloud of Christ being not really present though Caluin to sett a gaie colour on the matter attributeth this straunge meanes and order to the operation of the Spirit of Christ God him selfe For as we haue before proued god him selfe worketh no contradiction as it is to receaue that which is not present to be receaued Therefore notwithstanding all the shiftes that Caluin maketh it is no real communion of Christ his body and bloud that he teacheth as he would it should seme to be but a mere spirituall which before he blamed As touching the Son if Caluin speake like a philosopher it is no body mixte and made of the elemēts as the natural flesh and bloud of Christ is but a pure simple and celestial body and so we graunte the substaūce thereof is deriued to the earth by the shining thereof For that substaunce is a lightsom and shining substaunce and differeth no whit from the light and clerenes thereof Now Christ toke very fleshe in all conditiōs like to our flesh except the corruptiō that sinne bringeth This fleshe of Christ is so endued with diuinite that it loseth not his natural substaūce Therefore the substaūce of the Sō and the substaūce of Christ his body are thinges farre differēt Againe if the substaūce of the son quickeneth the earth that substaūce is really present with the earthe By this reason therefore Christ also should be really present with vs feding vs with his substaunce Which we do confesse but Caluin denieth How thē dothe that similitude make for him Truly nothing Farder ▪ The Son by the meanes of his shining saieth Caluin geueth his substaunce to the earthe and so Christ by the meanes of his Spirit geueth vs the communion of his flesh and bloud Marke that Caluin saieth the communion of the fleshe not the fleshe it selfe to be deriued vnto vs. For by the communion of the fleshe of Christ he meaneth as vpon S. Paule h◠writeth Vim ex Christi carne viuificā a certain quickening power oute of Christ his fleshe Nowe this quickening power of Christ his flesh is not the fleshe of Christ it selfe VVhich by Caluins doctrine in his institutions of it felfe is not quickening or geuing life But it is the Spirit onely of Christ which geueth life and quickeneth saieth he Lo then againe you see notwithstanding all his faire wordes before his doctrine is nowe that we haue but a spirituall foode onely in this sacrament conuayed vnto vs by the Spirit as the son by his shininge conuaieth his substaunce vnto the earthe Is not this ones againe a plaine contradiction to that whiche he wrote before blaming those that make vs partakners of Christ in Spirit onely is not his doctrine the very same is not the communion that he imagineth to be conuaied vnto vs a spirituall thing dothe he not call it a certain quickening vertu oute off Christ his fleshe this quickening vertu is it not by the doctrine of Caluin a mere spirituall thinge seing that he teacheth blasphemousely with the olde heretike Nestorius that the flesh of Christ notwithstanding it is Propria Verbi one person with the Son of God is not of it selfe quickening I trust you see nowe euidently that though Caluin write we receaue truly and really the
had for the blessed fleshe and precious bloud of oure Sauiour pronounced to be in this most dreadfull mystery by the mouthe off Christ him selfe substituted materiall bread and wine and yet to make a coulour of holynes as the woÌ„te of the deuill is had tolde vs that he separated not the verite from the figure Christ from the bread fearing lest perhaps by this tale some scrupulous sacramentary would haue worshipped the verite not separated from the figure to witt Christe ioyned with the bread he turneth his tale and telleth them at the ende of his talke whiche he thought shoulde beste sticke by the readers that the sacrament is but a signe and hathe not the thinge or verite of the signe included in it Nether dothe he coÌ„ceale his wicked purpose but boldely vttereth it euen straight saieng they that worship in the Sacrament Christ make an idoll of it I haue lo discouered vnto you good readers the wicked deuise of this proctour of the deuill Ihon Caluin stoppe your eares at the wiâ—ked enchantmeÌ„ts of this flattering Circé and harken rather to the doctrine of that holy and lerned Father of the Church S. Augustin who speaking of the worshipping off Christe in this blessed Sacrament saieth Non solum non peccatur adorando sed peccatur non adorando that is VVe do not onely not sinne or offend in adoring it but we do sinne if we do not adore it Lo this lerned Father feareth no idolatry in adoration of the Sacrament but pronouÌ„ceth it a sinne not to adore it wherein he declareth the doctrine and belefe of Christ his churche at that time and he spake these wordes in pulpit preaching to his people and expounding them the worde of God Nowe this cursed caitif Caluin bereueth oure blessed Sauiour of his due honour and telleth vs we make him an idoll well the deuill yet hath gotte small worship at his proctours hande here making him to speake suche contradictions as shal worke at the length I truste in god his vtter confusion and all enemies of gods honour And therefore we will yet discouer you more of his contradictions and sory lessons lerned of his master the deuill the spirit of dissension and contrariete In the thirtenth article of his resolutions he saieth the sacrament is an instrument by the whiche god worketh If the sacrament be an instrument whereby Christ worketh howe is it a figure of Christ as these Sacramentaries will haue it onely to be who euer heard that the figure of the workeman as a figure were his Instrument or the instrument his figure Is not this doctrine a mere confusion and contradiction The truthe is that bread is nether the figure of Christ nor the instrumeÌ„t whereby he worketh No scripture saieth so The churche neuer taught so No reason persuadeth so It is but a dreame off Caluin In the fiftenth article he saieth the Sacrament doth warrant vs Christ. In the tenth he sayed it was but a bare signe and that we shoulde not regarde it Beleue nowe whether parte ye liste Truly bothe can not be true In the sixtenth article he sayeth the sacrament warraÌ„teth Christ onely in the elected and predestiant In the .18 article he saieth that in the sacrament Christ is offred aequally vnto all and that the promis of god is not weakened by the incredulite of men If the sacrament warranteth and confirmeth Christ onely in the elected is not the promis or verite of god promised in the sacrament weakened by the incredulite of men for they by theyr incredulite saieth Caluin can not receaue Christ which is the substaunce of the sacrameÌ„t and that which Crist promiseth You see his constancy and agrement Is not this a worthy guide for a man to builde his faith vpon and forsake his former belefe In the twentith article he saieth it maye happeÌ„ that the vse of the Supper which profited vs nothinge in the acte or doing of it bicause of oure negligence or slacknes maye afterwarde bringe forthe better frute This point lo is contrary to all his doctrine in his institutions and coÌ„mentaries vpon holy scripture where he teacheth the effect of the Sacrament that god fedeth vs not with bare signes that he geueth life withall thath oure soules are fedde with Christ truly and really For nowe a man maye receaue the Sacrament and lacke all this He maye I saie receaue it well and worthely and haue none of all these For if the vnworthy receauer receaueth forthewith his damnation as S. Paule saieth Caluin can not meane this of the vnworthy receauer especially saying withall that it may afterwarde bringe forthe better frute whiche to the vnworthy receauer it can not do In the sixe and twentith article he saieth we muste not tye Christe to the bread and to the wine and yet in the ninthe article he him selfe tieth Christ thereto For he sayeth Nous ne separons pas la verite d'auec les figures we separat not the verite from the figures If Caluin do not separat Christ whiche is the verite from the figures of bread and wine dothe he not couple and tye Christ thereunto Truly the Sacramentaries and Lutherans bothe do it making the bread and the wine to remaine The Catholike churche dothe not beleuing that the coÌ„secrated and blessed bread is no more bread but as Christ saieth His body and the the wine his blode Lo you haue good readers a number of contradictions gathered oute of this small treatise of Caluin wherein yet according to the title thereof he minded to geue the worlde a full and perfit resolution of the Sacraments But whiles he laboureth to vtter his heresy vnder coulour of some Christianite and to persuade his falshood vnder the cloke of some truth he is miserably driueÌ„ to tell contrary tales to saie one thinge and thinke an other brefely to confounde him selfe with his owne wordes For what better reason may possibly be founde to discouer false forged doctrine of an heretike then to trippe him in his talke and take him in contradiction Nothing can more discredit the Author of a secte or declare more his wicked pretence then to espie diuersite of doctrine and variaunce of opinions in him nor neuer I thinke appeared it better in any heretike except allwaies that fonde frere Martin Luther them in Ihon Caluin And yet this is he vpon whose onely warrant and worde diuers deceaued persons haue hazarded their soules and loste their life I beseche god geue the remnant grace to see knowe and deteste from henceforthe suche a teacher as you see nowe Caluin is Diuers other contradictions might be gathered oute of this mans doctrine touching this blessed Sacrament if we listed to scanne eche of his propositions and saiengs But bicause I haue ben ouer longe allready and yet in so good a purpose me thinketh I can neuer be longe inough I wil nowe passe to the repugnaunce in his doctrine against holy scripture Our Sauiour sayth
vtterly detesting all sectes and heresies becometh a right good Catholike And surely so it happeneth that who so ones departeth from the church if he entre but a litle with other heresies he is accompted an heretike of the heretikes them selues From the which our Lorde of his tender mercy preserue vs alwaies Amen Our forefathers the auncient Germans were euer accompted men of grauite constancie and of a setled iudgement not light brayned inconstant or wauering with euery wind as peraduenture some other countres were noted for For lightnes in dede in men of wisedome is a greate blotte But what can be more light or more vaine then to beleue euery light person without any sure grounde of his doctrine He that beleueth quickely saith the wise man is light of hart These preachers and newe ghospellers that nowe a daies runne from countre to countre be vile vagabondes light and wilde persones men of no grauite nor whorthy of any authorite And that their outewarde behauiour declareth Their bearde they let growe only vppon the vpper lippe like the Turkes their cotes be cut shorte at the buttokes with large wide sleues as the sergents or catchepolles in times past were wont to haue and thus like frogges they leape in to the pulpit crieng and creking there Our Confession of Auspurg is grounded vppon the writings of the Apostles and Prophets and hathe endured these thirty yeares Beholde good Catholike reader a wonderous matter The Confession of Augspurg is thirty yeares olde Is not this a maruailous loÌ„ge continaunce and yet these felowes will not be a knowen that our Catholike religion hath continued these thousand fyue hundred yeares and aboue twise their thirty without breache or interruption Nowe where they bable that their Confession is grounded vppon the writings of the Apostles and Prophets doth not euery secte and euery heretike crake the same Do not the Anabaptistes crie it is writen in the xxvj of Marke He that will not beleue shall be condemned But children haue no faith and can not beleue ergo they can not be saued nor ought not be baptised â—Like wise the ZuingliaÌ„s crie they not that it is writeÌ„ in the vj. of Ihon. The flesh profiteth nothing and therefore they will haue it but bread in the Sacrament Againe the scholers of Osiander alleage they not the saying of the prophet the 23. of Ieremie Iehouah is our iustice Who can denie but all these allegations be the writinges of the Apostles and prophets why theÌ„ do the LutheraÌ„s abhorre the Anabaptistes why condeÌ„ne they Osiander and his felowes why doth Luther call Zuinglius an heretike Do not they crie that their doctrine as well as the other crie that their Confession is grounded vpon the writings of the Apostles and prophets yes they crie truly so euen as lowde and as truly as the Lutherans What theÌ„ lacketh in this matter Truly not who alleageth Scripture for that euery heretike doth but who can proue his doctrine in dede not only in wordes by Scripture For who caÌ„ abide the preacher be he neuer so Catholike that crieth only that his doctrine is grounded vppon the writings of the Apostles and Prophets It is not sufficient to alleage and hudle vp many places of scripture which the heretikes do as roundely as the Catholikes but you must by good reason and sure grouÌ„de proue that those your places be well and duly alleaged and expounded But by what grouÌ„de and reason may this be proued By thre maners of waies First the teacher of any doctrine or preacher ought to proue and euidently declare that his doctrine or interpretation of holy Sripture is Catholike deriued from the Apostles receaued through out whole Christendom and continued vnto our time Secondarely that all the ordre maner and disposition of the church of Christ in the newe lawe was figured and shadowed by other obseruaunces and doings in the olde lawe Thirdly that euery principall article of our Catholike religion hath beÌ„ confirmed with some miracle whereby the verite of it hathe vnuincibly ben warranted As for example Amonge vs Catholikes it is a sure and vndoubted point in our religion that in the blessed Sacrament of the aultar vnder one kinde the whole and perfit body of Christe is contained as well as vnder bothe This point we first proue by the expresse worde of God vttered by the Apostle saying that Christ can not be diuided Nowe that this saying of the Apostle is well applied to the one kinde of bread in the Sacrament the common practise of Christes Catholike churche these many hundred yeares dothe abundantly witnesse Againe it is proued by an euident figure of the olde lawe For we reade in Moyses that although some gathered more some lesse of Manna which vndoubtedly as S. Paule witnesseth was the figure of our Lordes supper yet he that gathered lesse had as much as he that gathered more So Hilarius pope of Rome decreeth saying Where parte of the body is there is the whole for the like is in the body of our Lorde that was in Manna that figured it For not the visible quantite is to be considered in this misterie but the spirituall efficacie and vertu of the Sacrament Last of all this hath ben confirmed by so sundry and strauÌ„ge miracles wrought from God that who so hath any sparckle of Christen faith remaining in him can neuer doubt but that the body of Christ is as well vnder one kinde as vnder bothe The stories of the Iewes may testifie clerely this matter which happened in diuers places as at Passau Breslau Regenspurg and Tekendorph in Bauaria in the yeare of our Lorde 1337. and afterward at Berlin in the Marchise of Brandeburg in the yere 1512. and now lately in Pole in the dyocese of the Archebishop of Gnesna In whiche all places it hathe ben seen that out of the Hoste of our Lordes body foined in with daggers by the Iewes bloud hath gushed out and many other miracles haue befallen The which all surely almightie God of his mercie hath wrought for the confirmation of his churche in this article that vnder the forme of bread is fully contained his precious body and bloud and for the conuicting also of the damnable heresie of the Maniches who aboue a thousand yeares agone affirmed that vnder the forme of bread was the body without bloud This I haue brought in for an example to show howe the Catholike doctours are able to proue euery article of Catholike religioÌ„ That is by the Catholike vniuersal and receaued expositioÌ„ of holy scripture by the figures and shadowes of the olde lawe by the operation of miracles Surely who can thus proue his doctrine he may boldely saie that it is grounded vppon the writings of the Apostles and prophets Nowe if the Confessionistes speake as they think when they saie their doctrine is grounded vppon the Apostles and prophets and that they will proue it to be so in
Smidelin a trim pacifier doth he not by good reason reconcile these protestants together In the booke against my table he raileth and saith he must nedes be a wicked person which woulde saye that amonge the Swinglians were eight diuers and seuerall opinions and who is so blinde that seeth not Luther him selfe in his wordes aboue alleaged to recite eight contrary opinions of the Swinglians It foloweth then by the iudgement and sentence of Doctor Smidelinus that Luther is a wicked and pernicious felowe Surely very well and as it should be for such honour vse kinde scholers to geue to their masters But truly they are bothe vsed according to their deserts while the Master proueth his scholer a liar and the scholer proueth his Master a knaue and nowe it happeneth as we commonly see of a frowarde curre a peuish whelp But what will Smidelin saie if that amonge the Lutherans them selues be sacramentary sectes and schismes and that not a fewe This present yeare 1560. in the seconde of Octobre was printed at Heidelberg the iudgement of Philip Melanchthon touching the Supper of our Lorde dedicated to the honourable prince Electour CouÌ„te palatin of the Rhene where he writeth thus It is not hard but somewhat dangerous to awnswer yet I will declare that debate and controuersie which happened at Heidelberg and admonish men as much as I may at this time I will also praie vnto Christ our Lorde that it will please him prosperously to directe these our aduises and their doinges Greate and greuous coÌ„tentions shal vndoubtedly arise in the worlde vpon the Controuersie of our Lordes supper for the worlde must nedes be punished for their idolatry and other hainous offenses Let vs then praie that the Son of God teache vs and direct vs. But seing that many are yet in many places feble in the faith and not well instructed in this doctrine off the church but rather nouseled in many errours it is mete that first we take order for such I like ther fore very well the aduise of the most honourable prince Electour that all such as contend of the Supper of the Lorde be put to sileÌ„ce lest dissensioÌ„ and variaunce arise in the church yet tendre and weake whereby the febleiÌ„ faith might perhaps be seduced and disquieted And I would wish also that the contentious persons on bothe sides were some other where VVhich being seÌ„t awaie the rest might agree into some forme of wordes And in this controuersie me thinketh it were best to kepe the wordes of S. Paule The bread which we breake is the participation of Christ his body much also must be saide of the frute of the Supper to stirre vp men more to loue this pleadge and the oftener to vse it Againe the worde Participation is to be declared and expounded For S. Paule saith not as the papistes do that the nature of bread is chaunged nor that the bread is the substaÌ„tiall body of Christ as the ministers of Bremesaie Nor as Heshusious saith that bread is the true body of Christ but that it is a participation or communion that is by the which we are coupled and made one with the body off Christ. VVhich copulation and making of one consisteth in the vse not without it imagining that mise could knawe that bread The papistes and such as are like them to earnestly contend that the body of Christ is vnder the forme of bread or included in the bread beside the vse and when it is not receaued they wil haue it adored also as Doctor Morlin of Bruns wicke saith Thou must not saie Mum. Mum But what is that which the priest hath in his handes Sarcerius would haue all the parcels that sal doune to be gathered vp and to be burned together with the earth on which it fell Two yeres past wheÌ„ we were at wormes a quaestioÌ„ was asked vs out of the Courte whether the body of Christ passed downe in to the bely and so forthe Such absurde questions ought not to be moued better it is that the forme of S. Paules wordes be kept and that men be well instructed of the vse and frute of this Sacrament The forme of wordes of the Supper ye may see in the ordinatioÌ„ of the church of the Megapolians where also aduertisement is geueÌ„ of the frute thereoff The Son off God in the ministery of the ghospell is present and worketh also in those that beleue But he is present not for cause of the bread but for mans sake as he saith him selfe Tary in me and I in you I in my father and you in me and I in you And with this true Comfortes he maketh vs his membres and testifieth that he wil raise vp and quicken our bodies Thus do olde writers expounde the Supper of the Lorde but some terme this true and plaine doctrine buskins or showes mete for euery foote and will haue that the body is in the bread or in the forme of bread as though the Sacrament were made for the breads sake or to be adored papistically Then other imagin that the body should be enclosed in the breade some will haue it euery where and in all places Melanchthon dalieth here at his pleasure but all holy fathers and olde writers haue continually hitherto taught the conuersion transmutatioÌ„ and chaunging of the creature of bread in to the body of oure Lorde that we may truly say with Christ This is my body Heshusius saith he can not agree with Origen terming the bread and wine the signes of the the body and bloud So he reiecteth Clemens Alexandrinus ready to do the like to Augustin Ambrose Prosper Dyonisius Tertullian Bede Basill and Gregory Nazianzen which calleth the body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Theodoret which writeth that the nature of bread remaineth Is theÌ„ the authorite of Heshusius so great that we will rather bâ—leue him theÌ„ the olde writers which testifie clerely that the church in their time had no adoration nor no such doctrine as the papistes no we teache For seing these are newe and straunge in the church we doubt whether it be conuenient to bring in newe doctrine in the church And I am not ignoraÌ„t that many alleage forged bookes vnder the name of olde writers but let the lerned iudge hereof I will not make any longe debate of this matter presently nor entre to dispute with contentious men defending the idolatry and robberies of their forefathers VVhose tyranny and cruell persecutions I feele also I thought good only to declare my minde herein what were best to be done in respect of our weake and tender church Therefore I am still of that minde that bothe partes be put to silence and that one forme of wordes be vsed VVhich if some like not and will not therefore come vnto the Sacrament they may be permitted to do as they see good so that yet they styrre vp no dissension amonge the
people This much Melanchthon who although he would neuer before this time openly in writing professe his minde of the Sacrament yet he allwaies tolde his familiar frendes and men of worship that in this point he condemned Luther and claue vnto Swinglius correcting yet a litle his opinion For where as Swinglius saide This signifieth my body he will haue it saied This is the participation of my body which newe interpretation is plainely a newe Sacramentary heresie and neuer heard of amonge the rest of the Swinglians And to maintaine this his proper and newe heresie he vseth two pointes of sutteltie and falshood first when he saith the holy fathers taught no conuersion or transsubstantiation of the bread which is a very impudent and lowde lie For the conuersion of the bread and reall presence of Christ his true body and bloud in the Sacrament may euidently be proued out of all the fathers aboue named and many mo and the contrary opinion clerely condemned Secondarely whē he rebuketh his owne scholers and chargeth them with fiue other Sacramentarie heresies For he saith some be of Heshusius minde some of Sarcerius some other folowe the ministers of Breme and some Ioachimus Morlinus then he alleageth other whose opinion is that Christ his body may be in euery place These fiue heresies which as Melāchthon testifieth are amonge the Lutherans and the other eight which Luther showeth to be amonge the Swingliās make all together thirten heresies which al noweadaies vpon the Sacramēt only are folowed professed and defended amonge the protestants Here againe we may consider the honesty and truthe of M. Doctor Smidelin which is not ashamed to terme such open schismes manifest to al the worlde a sure and certain agremēt of Catholike religion who beside all this knoweth well inough what agreate and vehement altercation there was this present yeare 1560 at Heidelberg amonge the diuines and ministres there touching only this point of the blessed Sacramēt of the which matter Guilelmus Klebicius of Brandeburg hath writen very bitterly and sharpely And this much hitherto of the dissension amonge the protestants touching only the point of the blessed Sacrament The dissension and variaunce of the Lutherans touching the doctrine of Penaunce I haue noted before in a litle booke For some of them put two some thre partes of penaunce But doctor Smidelin will accorde all this discorde with a worde saing it is all one to put two or thre partes of penaunce As though that al other Superintendents and ministres of Luthers secte ought to couche and obey the pontificall authorite of Doctor Smidelin taking vppon him like a pope of protestants But Illyricus will not abide that persuading him selfe that he is of as good mettall to make a Lutheran pope as any other is and therefore he will not graunte to the Masters of Wittenberg no nor to his owne Master Luther to define diuide and determinat the ghospell at their pleasur For in the booke which he intituled An information vpon certain articles of Christen religion he writeth in this sort But not so much he meaning Melanchthon as his proctours do exasperat this matter although they agree not amōg them selues for one interpreteth the matter after one sorte and the other after an other as it happeneth in euill causes One saieh that the worde Penaunce signifieth only sorowe or contrition an other that it signifieth contrition and faithe with al. One saith that the ghospell preacheth repentaunce of one sinne only as of infidelite an other saith of all sinnes Some imagin this glose that the ghospell preacheth repentaunce vnproperly vndirectly and by occasion only some saie that consequently it preacheth repentaunce An other saithe by a figure of contrariete the fourth saith after a sorte and in some point The fift saith it doth but argue mens incredulite or slacknes of belefe The sixt saieth that it reiecteth the small faithe The seuenth saith that it preacheth repentaunce not principally Thus they disagree amonge thē selues no lesse then the Sacramentaries or Babylonians or those builders of idols that Esaie speaketh of where one thinketh to holde vp the idoll with glue another with nailes and the third with chaines But all these gloses bothe destroy them selues one another and the definition also Thus farre Illyricus Doth not Illyricus affirme here that Melanchthons diuines varie one from an other and sett vp seuen sondry opinions neuer a true and all repugnant one with an other no lesse then the sectes of the Sacramentaries and that they agree as the builders of the towre of Babilon in olde time Saithe not directly all this Illyricus And what saieth Smidelinus VVe in the principall articles and grounde of our doctrine do not vary Which if it be true then must we saie that the doctrine of penaunce and of the Sacrament of the aultar appertaine not to the grounde of Christen religion nor are not necessary articles of the same For Smidelin in his litle booke whiche he set forth against me standeth stiffe in this minde That it forceth not whether two or thre partes of penaunce be taught nor skilleth any whit whether you beleue vprightly or embrace that seuenfolde heresie contrary in it selfe in the matter of penaunce Againe in his booke against my table writing of the altercations betwene the Illyricans and the Adiaphoristes he saith Although one write bitterly against the other yet in their churches there is no alteration of doctrine but they professe and teache the pure doctrine of the ghospell in perfit agrement with vs and them selues euen as before this altercation beganne Howe soūdeth thinke you these wordes of Smidelin with the saieng of Illyricus In like maner doth he defend Andreas Musculus For where I write that he teacheth the Godhead of Christ to haue as well died in the Crosse as the māhood Smidelin goeth about to purge him in these wordes I haue vnderstode nowe that Staphylus dothe iniuriously slaunder Andreas Musculus For Musculus in open writing published and printed hathe purged him self against Staphylus Thus saithe Smidelin It is the nature and custome of all heretikes not to continew longe in one minde But to denie to morowe which they saide to daie So dothe Musculus And although Smidelin as he confesseth him selfe be vtterly ignorant of the debate betwene Musculus and Stācarus wherein those wordes be vttered yet he sticketh not to write that I slaunder Musculus Truly bicause he would be counted a common pacifier of all contentions a physician for all sores and a reconciler of all vnruly heresies But what will bothe Musculus and Smidelin saie vnto me if I bring their owne brethern and felowe heretikes witnesses against them The Lutheran churches of Pole sent to the vniuersite of Lausana for the determination of this matter betwene Musculus and Stancarus and the doctours of Lausana sent them this awnswer Although well beloued brethern we can neuer saie inough
and no where els Thus much S. Augustin But what nede we be longe in these olde and auncient heresies whereas alas euen nowe presently in our dere countre of Germany such a plentyfull broode of heresies groweth and increaseth for howe sondry and howe diuers sectes hath that only braine of Ihon Hus begotte Some of them are called Fratres VValdenses some Thaborite some Picardi and some Grubenheimeri with diuers other names which were here tedious to recite For amonge those wiche nowe call them selues ghospellers spronge vp of the sede off Luther there are alas so many factions so diuers sectes so soundry heresies that they can scant be numbred Yea and many more as Gallus writeth hange yet in the penne but I wil somewhat shake the pen to see whether any will fall out Truly this is most euident Suche an archeheretike as in our daies Martin Luther hath ben neuer yet was seene in the churche and therefore God neuer so declared his wrath in this our miserable time Yet God of his mercie hathe geuen vs clere tokens and sure arguments to knowe and espie out this heresie suffring such straunge dissensions and horrible schismes to come to light and that so clerely and manifestly that euery man may easely perceaue and surely pronounce that euen as God is the author of peace and vnite so the deuill hath ben the father inuenter and setter forthe of all this Lutheran discorde and contentious doctrine If therefore any good Christen man desirous to saue one coueteth euidently to see and behold what and howe greate the schismes and factions of these Lutherans are all chalenging to them selues the truthe and light of the ghospel let him reade and peruse this table of sectes that foloweth which I sett forthe before in latin but nowe haue augmented it in my mother tongue for my dere countremens sake THE GENEALOGIE POSTERITE AND SVCCESSION OF MARTIN LVTHER THE FIFte Euangeliste NOthing is more naturall saithe the philosopher Aristotle then that euery thing bring forthe his like and that not only bicause the nature of thinges should not be confounded wherefore the lyon bringeth forth a lyon and the man engendreth man and as the Poet saithe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The rocke Scylla bringeth forthe no rose but also to the entent that euery kinde by it selfe should be like in maners and disposition wherefore of the valiaunt father cometh not lightely a cowardly sonne nor as the poet Euripedes saythe Of an vnthrifty father cometh a wise childe This then being a constant and perpetuall lawe of nature it hath pleased God by cōsideratiō of the natural course and issue of temporall thinges as if it were by a similitude to leade vs to the knowleadge of spirituall matters as for example to knowe and discerne the true prophets of God which are the right and naturall broode of the church frō the false prophets and preachers which are as monstres or euill begotten children in the churche therefore he saithe By their frutes you shall knowe them and why by their frutes Bicause of thornes no man gathereth grapes nor figges of brambles And this it is which is commonly saied euery thing foloweth his kinde What a prophet Luther was his broode and issue hath well declared For as soone as Luther pricked first with desire of promotion and praise was strait enflamed with the firy lustes of the flesh and that to accomplishe this matter Luther the false prophet and that seuenheaded beste whereof the Apocalipse speaketh were ioyned together the olde Dragō the deuill geuing her to wife incontinently these three vncleane sprits of the Confessionistes of the Sacramentaries and of the Anabaptistes creped out of their mouth like frogges And although these thre vncleane sprits like the foxes of the Philistians beare their heades farre a sonder and distant yet they are so tied together by the tayles to burne vpp the corne of Christes churche that nowe in all Europe no heresie can be founde which hath not the marke either of the Confessionistes or of the Sacramentaries or of the Anabaptistes That you maie if ye liste euidently knowe to which of these sprits euery heresie is bounde And to the entent you maie espie of out euery and singular markes of these vncleane sprits note what foloweth God punisheth the worlde for sinne with seuen principall plages But those especially he vttereth in thre elements in water in ayre and in fyre For as it is writen Loke wherewithall a man sinneth by the same he shall be punished This also in an other place is notised For there are three that beare recorde in heauen the father the worde and the holy ghost and these thre are one And there are three which beare recorde in earth The Spirit and water and bloud and these three are one This latter kinde of bearing recorde Christ him selfe instituted and confirmed in earth especially hāging for vs on the Crosse where he shed water and bloud out of his side and yelded vp his Spirit into the handes of the father And as Eue was made oute of the ribbe and side of Adam so vndoubtedly the church toke his roote and beginning of the side of Christ as the Councell of Vienna lernedly expoundeth it For the church by thre Sacramēts is specially holden by baptim the Sacrament of the aultar and by Penaunce The seale of baptim is water The mistery of the blessed Sacrament is bloude off wine which is of the ayre The holy Spirit which Christ inspired to his Apostles gaue the kayes of the church in penaunce And the token of it appeared fire in the mouthe of the Apostles Nowe these three maner of bearing recorde in earth which Christ hath instituted and by the which the churche is vpholden are al at this present profaned brokē and corrupted The Anabaptistes haue corrupted the water of baptim The Sacramētaries haue profaned the bloud of our Lorde The Confessionistes haue broken the kaies of the churche And these hainous crimes haue partly already ben punished but the ende is not yet come bicause the profanation corruption and breache of these holy institutions cease not yet Let him beware that vnderstandeth Let him flie that can escape Let him shake of the duste of these heresies that feareth the wrath of God But nowe to the table THE TABLE OF LVTHERS OFSPRING THe Dragon the Beste the false prophet mencioned in the Apocalypse Martin Luther the fifte euangelist out of whom proceded principally thre vncleane sprits In the yeare of our Lorde 1517. vpon S. Martins eue to wit the Anabaptistes the Sacramentaries and the Confessionistes whiche are commonly called protestant preachers The first vncleane sprit or tode Muntzerus and Bernard Rotman son of Luther and father of the Anabaptistes began in the yeare of our Lorde 1514. out of these proceded Muntzerans whiche are named of Thomas Muntzer for when that mā read in the bookes of Luther De captiuitate Babylonica and contra duo mandata
the worlde and that in eating the bread we eate nothing els â–ª And truly if you remembre his doctrine before yow see he meaneth nought ells S. Paule speaking of our Lordes body and bloud geuen vs in the blessed sacrament saithe thus He that eateth and drinketh vnworthely eateth and drinketh his owne damnation not discerning the body of oure Lorde Caluin in his coÌ„mentaries vppoÌ„ this place saithe That the wicked person therefore eateth vnworthely bicause he refuseth the body of our Lorde offred vnto him eating thereby the onely signe to wit bare bared Marke the differeÌ„ce of S. Paules doctrine and Caluins imagination For howe dothe the wicked eate the body and therewith his daÌ„nation whiche S. Paule teacheth iff he eate but bread and refuse the body which Caluin imagineth I will graunte who refuseth Christ refuseth life and thereby worketh his owne damnation But this is not to eate his damnation in such sorte as S. Paule speaketh there Our Sauiour in the sixte of Ihon saithe Your fathers did eate Manna in the desert and are dead This is that bread whiche cometh downe from heauen that a man maye eate thereof and not die Caluin in his commentaries vpoÌ„ the first to the CorinthiaÌ„s the tenth chapter teacheth that the Iewes eating MaÌ„na did eate the very body of Christ spiritually as we do and receaued the same effect by eating the Manna as we do by the communion He laboureth muche in that place to proue this fonde doctrine and forgeth a sory shifte to auoide these wordes of our Sauiour in S. Ihon. Christ saythe he hauing to do with the Iewes preferring Moyses before him in his answer to them expounded not what Manna signified but letting all other thinges passe framed them an answer mete for their capacite speaking not according to the nature of the thinge but according to the meaning and sâ—ns of the hearers Thus muche Caluin But beholde I beseche you the sophistry of this wily heretike He woulde make vs beleue that Christ in S. IhoÌ„ plaied the RhetoriciaÌ„s part and withall is not afeared to make our Sauiour O blasphemous Sacramentary a lyar For Christe saithe plainely That the Iewes eating Manna died for not by eating Manna but by beleuing in the Messias to come they were fedde of Christ But the bread which he would geue shoulde be life euerlasting to those whiche eate off it Iff nowe as Caluin saithe the eating of Manna serued their turne no lesse then the bread of life Christ him selfe serued oures to witt that they receaued also the bread of life spiritually in eating Manna as we do in eating the blessed Sacrament then were not that sayieng off Christe true nor his comparison good preferring the bread of life which he would geue vs before the Manna of the Iewes For their Manna as Caluin saithe was bread of life to them then was it not inferiour to that whiche Christe woulde geue but all one and the same But nowe to an other Our Sauiour in S. Ihon hath these wordes Who eateth my fleshe and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him Caluin correcteth these wordes in his doctrine of the Supper and maketh this proposition Who beleueth in the death and resurrectioÌ„ of Christ the coÌ„munion of his flesh is deriued vnto him by the vertu of his holy Spirit First in this doctrine where Christ biddeth vs eate his flesh and so promiseth him selfe to dwel with vs and in vs Caluin biddeth vs beleue in Christ his death saieng thereby we eate his flesh and theÌ„ in stede of Christ God and maÌ„ abiding in vs which our Sauiour in this most holy SacrameÌ„t promiseth and no doubt perfourmeth vnto vs Caluin warraÌ„teth vs of a certain coÌ„munioÌ„ of the flesh remaining only in heaueÌ„ which shal be deriued he sayeth by the Spirit off Christ vnto vs. This is lo not to haue God and man Christ him selfe abiding in vs which bicause Christ promiseth vs we must vndoubtedly beleue so but to haue him onely spiritually abiding in vs to witt coming to vs onely by spirit and abiding onely in heauen by fleshe How false and howe farre disagreble with the wordes of our Sauiour this doctrine of Caluin is we haue in his absurdites and contradictions declared Presently it suffiseth to knowe that he dothe bothe in termes and in sense comptroll and alter the wordes and meaning of oure Sauiour S. Paule writing to the Corinthians of the due accesse and reuerence of this blessed Sacrament saith Let euery maÌ„ trie him selfe and so eate of this bread Caluin in his Institutions and vpon the sixte of Ihon teacheth that by beleuing we eate Christ. Nowe seing that no man trieth him selfe but first he beleueth and in beleuing we eate Christ then before we trie oure selues we do eate contrary to the expresse wordes off the Apostle bidding vs first to trie our selues and so to eate of this bread of life And truly according to the doctrine of Caluin as you haue sene before beleuing in Christes deathe and resurrection we eate and receaue the body and bloud off Christ allwaies no lesse then in the vse of the Supper or communion Which excludeth all triall of our selues required by S. Paul For the maintenance of this wicked Sacramentary doctrine Caluin abuseth and turneth from their right vnderstanding not onely suche places of holy scripture as directly make against him as you haue hetherto partly sene but also suche as by any consequence of reason might seme to hinder the course of his wicked doctrine For example I will pnt you in minde of one or two Whereas it is writen in S. Ihon that Christ entred where his disciples were the doores being shutt bicause this miracle might importe to the body of oure Sauiour a possibilite of being in sundry places at ones and so destroy the false grounde of these sacramentaries tying Christ to the right hande of his Father Caluin in his institutions saithe that Christ entred not the dores being shutt but that the dores opened of them selues Otherwhere he writeth that an erthequake was made and so the dores opened Brefely he inuenteth what shifte he maie rather them he will yelde to the truthe of the churche With like confidence this presumptuous SacrameÌ„tary Ihon Caluin peruerteth by false traÌ„slatioÌ„ the wordes of holy scripture in the prouerbes of SalomoÌ„ coÌ„taining a clere prophecy of this blessed sacrameÌ„t We alleaged you the place before and after what sort it was by him corrupted If we would in other pointes and articles of the Catholike faith by him denied and impugned vse the like diligence we could be as loÌ„ge in the retical and setting forthe of theÌ„ as he is in the whole corps of his workes where such doctrine is taught But nowe I will procede to the other partes of oure promis touching this one article and after saie somewhat of some other point of his doctrine Oure Lorde in holy scripture by the mouthe off his prophet
thinge In the same place not many lines after thus he concludeth his doctrine of the B. Sacrament I saye therefore the holy mistery of the Supper consisteth of two thinges to witt the earthly signes setting before oure eyes according to oure caepacite the inuisible thinges and the Spirituall verite figured and exhibited by the signes The matter also of this spirituall verite he expoundeth him selfe to be Christ with his deathe and resurrection And in an other place of his workes writing against the councell of Trent thus he speaketh The bread remaineth bread terrestriall and corruptible but the celestiall body of Christe is ioyned thereunto and hereof saithe he by the authorite of Ireneus this mystery consisteth of two thinges the one terrestriall and of earthe the other celestial and of heaueÌ„ to witt the celestiall body off Christ and the materiall bread of earthe Hetherto you see Caluin in the blessed SacrameÌ„t to acknowledg no other body of Christ then Spirituall and celestiall euen as the heretike Valentinus did and to coulour his doctrine also by the authorite off Ireneus Now you shall vnderstande that Ireneus writing against the foresaide heresy of Valentinus for the confutation thereof amonge other arguments vseth the common belefe of the Catholike churche touching this blessed Sacrament Oure doctrine saith he is conformable to the Eucharistie terming so this blessed Sacrament and the Eucharistie confirmeth our doctrine for we offer vnto god that whiche are his owne declaring accordingly the vnite and coniunction of the fleshe and of the Spirit For as the material bread receauing the inuocation of god is no more common bread but the Eucharistie coÌ„sisting of two thinges the one of earth the other of heauen so oure bodies receauing the Eucharistie are no more corruptible but haue certain hâ—pe of resurrection Thus farre Ireneus In the whiche wordes against Valentinus he affirmeth that the Sacrament containeth Christ him selfe whiche consisteth of two thinges or natures being one person to witt of earthely fleshe taken of the virgin and of the celestiall godhead descending from heauen Nowe Caluin bicause he will denie the reall presence of Christes flesh in the Sacrament imagineth the celestiall body of Christ withoute flesh to be ioyned with the material bread as Valentinus the heretike dyd abusing also to that purpose this very place of Ireneus wherein he showeth him selfe other very ignorant of Ireneus meaning and disputation in that place or very malicious in deprauing it after his owne brainesicke fantasie For S. Irene directly reproueth the opinion of Valentinus denieng the incarnation of Christ and his true fleshe bicause in the Sacrament we receaue his true and naturall fleshe and therefore a fewe lines before he saythe Quomodo constabit eis cae Howe wil they be assured that the same consecrated bread is the body of their lorde and the cuppe of his bloud if they denie it to be the Son of god maker of the worlde Doth not here that holy Martyr and lerned Father proue the very flesh and naturall body of Christe against that heretike vpon the grounde of oure belefe touching the reall presence of Christ him selfe in the Sacrament Doth not Caluin taking awaie this grounde of oure belefe and denieng the reall presence of Christes flesh in the Sacrament leauing vs onely a spirituall verite consequently allowe the heresy of Valentinus Againe Valentinus denied the resurrection of oure bodies Ireneus proueth it vnto him by the doctrine of the Sacrament saieng in the same place aboue alleaged Howe dare they saie that oure flesh shall come to corruption and not receaue life which is fedd with the body and bloud of oure lorde Nowe Caluin in his Catechisme in his Institutions and euery where teacheth that oure soule not the body eateth the body of Christ really and truly but not corporally and is nourished there with in hope of life euerlasting Doth not this his doctrine graunting that celestiall foode and onely warrant of oure resurrection to the soule destroie the resurrection of the body as Valentinus the heretike dyd Is he not ones again most manifestly fallen into brokeÌ„ pudles of olde condeÌ„ned heresies Our Sauiour saith Onles you eate my flesh and drinke my bloud you shall haue no life in you he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath life and I wil raise him vp againe in the later daie Nowe if the soule onely eateth this heauenly foode as Caluin teacheth the soule onely shall haue life and be raised vp at the later daye For the onely warrant of resurrection is the participation of the flesh and bloud of Christe For thoughe the bodies of infidels of heretikes and of euill Christians shall arise again yet they shall not arise to life nor in suche maner of resurrection as oure Sauiour meaneth whiche is as his blessed Apostle S. Paule teacheth vs to put on immortalite to be made incorruptible and to be glorified For so shal onely the true beleuers in Iesus Christ and partakners of this holy sacrameÌ„t arise As for infaÌ„ts baptised though they receaue not sacrameÌ„tally the flesh and bloud of Christ yet euen as by the faithe of holy church they beleue and are accoÌ„pted to haue faithe so by the communion of Saintes and societe of the Catholike churche they are incorporated to oure Sauiour and assured of their resurrection It wil peradueÌ„ture seme impossible to the fauourers of Caluins doctrine and prisers of his ghospell that he should euer meane any such hainous doctrine as this is Verely what he thought in conscieÌ„ce we wil not iudge but what his writings declareâ— him to be you see I thinke euidently In his Cathechisme labouring to wipe awaie this suspicioÌ„ froÌ„ him he saieth he hathe a witnes and a warrant of the resurrection of his body and of the saluatioÌ„ thereof in that he eateth the signe of life But I praie you could he more manifestly denie the saluation of the body then to attribut it to that thinge whiche can not geue it For what auaileth it for the assurance of life to eate as he saithe the signe of life whiche is nought els but a morcell of bread Where findeth he suche assuraÌ„ce of life in holy scripture What scripture telleth him that by eating the signe of life his body shal rise to incoruption Christ promiseth vs life and resurrectioÌ„ by eating his fleshe and drinking his bloud Is the flesh and bloud of Christe a signe of life Is he not the true bread of life Is not his holy fleshe vnited to the godhead and made one person with god true quickening fleshe and geuing life Surely this doctrine off Caluin vtterly ouerthroweth the resurrection of oure bodies Peter Richier a frenche ghospeller Caluins scholer denieth this fonde doctrine of his Master to witt that by eating the signe of life the body should be assured of resurrection and imagineth an other shifte that the soule being raised spiritually by eating the body of Christe shall
the Iewes were as verely and as truly baptised in the clowde vnder Moyses whiche Caluin most impudently affirmeth as we are in the fonte vnder Christ and his minister why were they baptised againe of S. Ihon or of the Apostles when they came to the faithe of Christ What a numbre of baptims dothe Caluin teache vs beside the one onely baptim of Christ whiche the Catholike church hathe lerned in holy scripture Circuncision the clowde the sea the baptim of S. Ihon and al these the very same and of the selfe same effect and force as the baptim of Christ. Is not Caluin trowe ye a ioyly Anabaptiste Nay dothe he not farre passe the Anabaptistes They go aboute to repete one twise Caluin maketh vs fyue for one off the which euery Christned Iewe by his doctrine hathe foure and euery vnchristened Iewe hathe three I woulde nowe passe from his heresies to his contradictions But I muste nedes put you in minde off one ioyly tricke of Caluin which he practised in the planting of this heresy In his commentaries vpon S Paule where he teacheth this doctrine after longe labour and strife seing he coulde bringe forthe no true childe but that it proued to a mōster and ougle vnnatural thinge and perceauing one foule faute in it which he thought most of all those of his generatiō would abhorre he goeth aboute to cloke it and colour it as wel as he maie The greate faute that he espied him selfe in this doctrine is that it had no expresse scripture for it You shall heare him finde the faute and see howe he will remedy it These be his wordes Sed rursum obijcitur nullum de his verbum extare I d ego fateor sed neque dubium hoc est quin Deus spiritu suo defectum externae praedicationis suppleuerit that is But they will obiecte againe That there is no worde extant hereof That do I confesse but it is not to be doubted but that God by his Spirit hath supplied the lacke of external preaching Lo Caluin nowe is glad to runne to the refuge of the holy ghoste for his doctrine whē scripture faileth him But when the Catholike churche directed allwaies and assisted by the holy ghoste teacheth vs any thinge that is not expressed in holy scripture Caluin can not abide it Hereupon in his Institutiōs he raileth at the adoratiō of Christ in the blessed sacrament bicause in holy scripture saieth he Nulla eius mentio ostendi potest quae tamen non fuisset pretermissa si deo accepta foret that is No mentiō there of cā be showed which notwithstāding had not bē omitted if it had liked god And in the matter of reseruatiō though he graūt that the primitiue church vsed it yet bicause it is not expressed in scripture he wil none of it Thus whē it pleaseth Caluin scripture is requisit and whē it pleaseth him not scripture may be lacked and the spirit of god maie supplie it In like maner though he crie vpō scripture alwaies and as we noted you before oute of his Institutitiōs wil not allow the church no farder thē she bringeth expresse scripture for her yet not only in this place he teacheth beside scripture and cōfesseth it to but also in many other places In the matter of the blessed sacrament of the aultar you haue sene in howe many and sundry pointes his doctrine repugneth to holy scripture while he laboureth to persuade men that to be but bread and wine which oure Sauiour pronounced to be his body and bloud It cometh nowe to my minde howe impudenly he shifteth awaie the authorite of expresse scripture where with he sawe him selfe pressed You shall heare his wordes In his Institutions the 18. chapter thus he writeth Vtcunque verborū Christi tangi se religione quiritentur quo minus figuraté intelligere ausint que sunt tam aperté dicta non est tamen hic satis iustus praetextus cur omnes quae contra obijciuntnr rationes ita respuāt that is Howesoeuer they crie and cōplaine that for the reuerence of Christ his wordes they dare not take it for a figure which was so plainly spoken yet this is no sufficient pretēce why they shuld refuse al such reasons as we bringe against thē This he writeth against the Lutherās which will not go frō the real presence of Christ in the Sacramēt And see we not here the vncredible arrogancy of this proude heretike Doth he not showe him felfe to be a very Antichriste For what can Antichriste require more off men then to haue the expresse wordes of Christ yelde to suche reasons as he will obiect against And dothe not Caluin require the very same Doth he not bidd the Lutherans beleue his reasons against the expresse wordes of Christ And where as the Lutheran alleageth that bicause the wordes of Christ are plaine saieng This is my body he can not be brought to make it a figure as Caluin dothe what other shifte hathe Caluin then to saie that this is no sufficient pretence why they shoulde refuse his reasons for the contrary Which is as much to saie Though Christ speake plainely yet you must harken also what we can saie against it and ye must geue eare to suche reasons as we can laie against him and then folowe my reasō what soeuer Christe or the ghospel telleth you Nowe what cā Antichriste require more Verely as S. Iohn saied of the heretikes of his time Antichristi multi sunt there are many Antichristes so may we most truly say of our time there are many Antichristes but none a more righter Antichrist thē this heretike Calui You haue sene good readers what heresies and howe diuers Caluin hathe partely renewed partly forged of his owne in his doctrine aboute these two Sacraments which onely he acknowleadgeth and taketh for Sacraments If we woulde vse the like diligence in other points of his doctrine we coulde be longe and should be I feare tedious And truly it were to be wished that neither the heresies of this man neither any heresie at all were knowen to the common and vnlerned people But bicause this suttle heretike hathe so wined him selfe in to mens hartes that he hathe trained them not onely from the Catholike churche of Christ but also from the Lutherās and Melanchthonistes which before bore all the swaie of this new gospell I thought good to discouer his heresies and other abominable doctrine aboute these two Sacraments as two of the waightiest articles nowe in controuersy and most of all other touching oure saluation to the entent that not onely the Catholikes and suche as god of his goodnes hathe hetherto staied in the faithe of the churche may as they do vtterly abhorre his doctrine neither yelde by the wickednes of the time to any one point thereof but also oure dere deceiued countremen that so gladly reade his workes and so gredely deuoure his diue lish doctrine maye lerne of