be Our Sauiour had formerly discoursed of eating his flesh and drinking his blood His very Disciples supposing as you doe that he meant they should eate his Flesh as they did the Fishes or vsed to eate the Paschall Lambe were here it offended Our Sauiour vnderstanding this their scandall replyeth in these words according to your Latin Authenticall edition Hoe vos scandalisat spiritus est qui viuificat caro non prodest quicquam verba quae ego locotus sum vobis spiritus vitasunt You remember an allegation you brought out of S. Paul If these things be hidden they are hidden vnto those that perish I put it to you if this be obscure it is obscure to him that will not see or to him who iustly God hath abandoned and giuen ouer Nothing can be more direct and plaine then that our Sauiour telleth them his speech of eating his flesh was Sacramentall not carnally but spiritually to be vnderstood This is it saith Chrysostome which he meaneth You must conceiue of me spiritually For he that taketh this carnally is not benefitted thereby nor getteth any good therewith It was a carnall thought to make a doubt in what sort he came downe from heauen And to suppose him the sonne of Ioseph And to dispute how can he giue vs his flesh to eate All these were carnall thoughts which must be mystically and spiritually vnderstood The words that I speake vnto you are spirit and life that is are diuine and spirituall hauing nothing carnall not any inference or consequence naturall But are freed from all such necessity as this surpassing legal tyes and conditions below conteining another sense and meaning then is literally set downe If this be not an important passage goe gagge Saint Chrysostome and other ancient Fathers that put this saying into the Protestants mouths as plaine a text of Scripture as in the beginning God made heauen and earth Plaine or obscure yet to no purpose For it affirmeth nothing lesse then that which they pretend to prooue thereby And what is that are you aware of it That the flesh of Christ profiteth nothing It is plaine the flesh profiteth nothing It is plaine the passage is of Christs flesh Therefore the flesh of Christ profiteth nothing This you say is absurd And so say I nay I adde this is impious For his Flesh is life and giueth life and therefore nothing profiteth so much as that If the passage be not of Christs flesh of what is it can you tell I beleeue you cannot But your instructors can tell you they would haue it taken that Carnalis intelligentia non prodest Good And so say I. But Intelligentia cuius of a certaine indiuiduum vagum abstrahendo from all subiect or obiect whatsoeuer Idle and absurd But Carnalis intelligentia of that which must bee taken spiritually And so of this place and principally and primarily of this place as giuing occasion vnto this Axiome of our Sauiour The flesh profiteth not This is not vrged by Peter Martyr or any Protestant against Hoc est corpus meum This is my body but against This is my body by this means This way that is by Transubstantiation Which is carnally to take that which was spoken and intended spiritually onely It is easily granted you by the Protestant and you might haue made your friends of this aduice that way That it is doubtlesse better to explicate an obscure passage by one that is cleere then one that is cleere by a passage obscure For reason it selfe and commonsense will dictate this that the proofe must be more euident then the thing prooued The epexegesis more manifest then that which is explaned The Protestants obserue this course they say You in this so small a Pamphlet as I haue let you see are culpable that way more then once It is much more cleere and euident what our Sauiour meaneth by Flesh and Spirit Then how This can be my body Sic etiamsi carnem ait nihil prodesse ex materia dicti dirigendus est sensus Nam quia durum intolerabilem existimauerunt sermonem eius quasi verè carnem suam illis edendam determinasset vt in spiritu disponeret statum salutis praemisit spiritus est qui viuificat Atque ita subiunxit caro nihil prodest ad viuificandum scilicet Tertul. de Resur cap. 37. Intanglements and obscurities in this place if there be any proceede from your glosses not the places nor yet the Resolutions of antiquity Were your rule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That one text shold giue place to many rather then many vnto one or fewer yet apply that rule you may where it will or neede be fitted here no neede of any such aduise at all where Alterius sic alter poscit opem locus conspirat amicé The fourth will hardly come vnder the title of aduice it is rather a vaunt at most and best an Information what is obserued in the Gagge concerning texts out of Scriptures Apocryphall to make good the assertions against the Protestants The man supposed exception would sometime be put in against some of his witnesses though for my part I haue passed them all without putting backe any as homines legales to say what they could for he knew well enough they were exceptiue and not passeable in strict tearmes and iust exception Therfore to preuent what he feared their credit is salued as much as may be that is they are brought in as o in cypher to enhaunce the number onely so as they with others may make vp a tallie Others beside them passe currant and with weight They without others carry no credit Know saith he that to preuent this obiection viz. that the testimonies are authenticall no such scriptures as they call and haue prooued and will maintaine to be Apocrypha are here produced but still they goe accompanyed with others that are Canonicall by their owne confession Which I grant is obserued for the most part at least Nor will we refuse a testimony of Aristotle or Demosthenes that agreeth with and commeth in with subordinate dependance vpon Scripture Where Scripture is apparant and consent incident and manifest But non feremus as in the point of Purgatory is obtruded a plainer and more obuious place of Toby to interlope betwixt two Canonicall Texts the hardest two in Saint Paul and all agree in one as well as harpe and harrow nor any correspondency in the vinculo communi as is pretended to make vtraque vnum and all speake for that which is farre enough from all or any state of Purgatory after death The second branch of your fourth point I mislike not at all for the matter of it Scripture is not in the words but in the sense and meaning of the words that is in the notions and intents of the Spirit of the highest intimated vnder the couert of words There are moe things then words to expresse those things by Hence doubts and ambiguities doe
should I that cannot tell how who can doo it my body is nourished by the ordinary meat and drink I take yet is that familiar and in vse euery day When Christ gaue it he said This is my body Saint Paul repeating the Institution saith This is my body It was neuer denied to bee his body it is affitmed still to be his body Mad Papist that imputest to poor Protestants an Idoll a Chimaera of thy owne brain that The bread is but a figure and no more of Christs body Protestants say it not they neuer said it As commonly it happeneth that all Reformations or Innouations are vpon and into extremes so some happely haue that departed long since from the Church of Rome But what is that to our Church that publiquely priuately all and som directly maintains the clean contrary Your great Aduiser C. W. B. hath said enough could he see what himself hath said or you vnderstand what hee alledgeth to stop the mouth of such Gabblers as you and he for euer in the coÌ„trary assertions of the Protestants But the diuell bred you in a Faction and brought you vp in a Faction and sent you abroad to do him seruice in maintaining a Faction otherwise acknowledge there is there need bee no difference in the point of reall presence See your Fathers if I doo I shall doo more than you haue done for I auow it you neuer read Ignatius for this Read that Epistle ouer vnto the Smyrneans and see if you finde any such thing there if you doo then trust not mee again if you doo not what descrueth that impudent imposture S. Ignat. in his Epist ad Smyr But I can shew you better euidence for Bread and Wine out of Ignatius pag. 125. edit Paus Maestrei The flesh of our Lord Iesus Christ is one His Bloud one which was shed for vs also one Bread was broken for all one Cup distributed vnto all Bread and Wine after consecration Both distributed to all against your halfe Communion And againe pag. 261. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Breaking one Bread which is the medicine procuring Immortality Thus I finde nothing in Ignatius for you this I haue and happly more could against you were I desirous with you to maintaine a faction Iustin Martyrs testimony I acknowledge in the end of his Apologie and willingly make his words our owne For wee doe not receiue these things as common Bread or common Drink but euen as our Lord Sauiour Iesus Christ by the Word of God becomming flesh had flesh bloud for our sakes so are we taught that the food which was blessed by him in the Word and Prayer through which food beeing altered and changed our flesh and bloud is sustained becommeth the flesh and bloud of him that Iesus who took our flesh in his Incarnation Thus that antient Father not fully represented by your director who saith not any thing that Protestants deny For they confesse They eat the flesh of the Sonne of God and drink his bloud they are one with him and hee with them but commeth not home to the Papists Resolution that wee eate it and drink it by Transubstantiation but the contrary for but foure lines before hee calleth it Bread and Wine after Consecration Those saith hee whom wee call Deacons doe giue to euery one that is there present part of the Bread Wine and Water consecrated Saint Cyprian Serm. 5. de lapsis Now good Sir Gagger can you tell how many Sermons de lapsis Saint Cyprian wrote ignorant Asse and yet bold Bayard Saint Cyprian wrote no Sermons de lapsis hee wrote a booke de lapsis diuided into sections by some or other But Reader see the audacious Dunsery of this Ignaro C. W. B. had in his Catalogue of the Fathers of the third Age for transubstantiation cited Cyprian thus Ser. 5 de lapsis for Sect. 5. de lapsis vnlesse he also took his Authors by tale vpon trust and Ser. de coena Domini This blunderer stumbled vpon the first false or true to purpose or not all was one to him and set it downe the second quotation hee left out yet that is it which hee should haue taken for in the first Sect. 5. de lapsis there is nothing in the second Ser. decoena Domini as he will haue it though it bee no Sermon Sect. 6. there is thus The Bread which our Lord reached vnto his Disciples beeing changed not in appearance but in Nature by the omnipotency of the Word is made flesh Saint Cyprian said as much as this once or twice before No man denyeth a change an alteration a transmutation a transelementation as they speake no man otherwise beleeueth but that the naturall condition of the Bread consecrated is otherwise then it was beeing disposed and vsed to that holy vse of imparting Christ vnto the Communicants Stay heere be contented with That it is and doe not seeke nor define How it is so and we shall not contest or contend with you Hoc Sacramentum aliquando corpus suum aliquando carnem sanguinem aliquando panem Christus appellat portionem vitae aeternae cuius secundum haec visibiâ—ia corporali communicauit Naturâ— Panis iste communis in carnem et sanguinem mutatus procurat vitam et incrementum corporibus ideoque ex consueto rerum effectu fidei nostrae adiuta infirmitas sensibili argumento edocta est visibilibus sacramentis inesse vitae aeternae effectum et non tam corporali quà m spirituali transitione Christo nos vniri Thus the same Saint Cyprian so we we confesse it we beleeue it we cannot comprehend it Saint Ambrose saith no more then wee will subscribe Lib. 4. de sacramentis Before consecration it was Bread common ordinary meere Bread but after consecration it becommeth the flesh of Christ because then the Sacrament is consummate But doth Saint Ambrose tell you how it is so made That I finde not that I expect that I must finde or I finde nothing to your purpose One Father yet you adde Saint Remigius saith but you cannot tell where your Director told you it was in his comments vpon the 10. Chap. 1. ad Corinth The flesh which the Word of God took in the Virgins wombe and the Bread consecrated in the Church are the same body And yet beeing consecrated he calleth it Bread How can your Saint Remigius make that good Hee should haue said for doubtlesse hee meant so The Bread which was beeing consecrated in the Church is transubstantiated into that flesh which the Word of God took in the Virgins womb and becom the same body This Remigius saith not a great signe hee meant not And indeed hee did not meane it hee goeth no further then Reality he determineth not modum praesentiae at all And yet this Remigius is not peraduenture the man you would haue him namely Saint Remigius Archbishop of Rhemes who conuerted King Clouis of France to the Christian Faith who liued within 500
faciunt quod secus Christus c. The Cup of the Lord communicated to the Laity And again Quomodo possumus propter Christum sanguinem fundere qui sanguinem Christi erubescimus bibere By which reason of Saint Cyprian no Roman Lay-Catholique can shead his bloud for Christ that neuer drank the bloud of Christ Which argument he vseth in another place Epist 54. Sect. 2. With what ground can we teach or exhort them to shead their owne bloudin confessing the Name of Christ if putting them forth vpon that seruice wee denie them the bloud of Christ or how can wee dispose and fit them to drink the cup of Martyrdome vnlesse wee first admit them to their right of communication in drinking the Lords cup in the Church Let our good Catholiques answer this who so punctually forsooth and precisely follow the steps of Antiquity without any swaruing These are all within 300 yeers after Christ and all expresse for the Cup. Athanasius in his second Apologie being accused for breaking a Chalice writeth thus What manner of cup or when or where was it broken In euery house in euery shop there are many pots any which if a man break hee committeth not sacriledge But if any man willingly break the sacred chalice he committeth sacriledge but that chalice is no where but where there is a lawfull Bishop This is the vse destined to that chalice none other wherein you according to institution do drink vnto and before the Laity This was the custome in Athanasius time this in all the Fathers times as I could deduct almost out of euery one This is euery where the custome in all the world vnto this day but in the Roman exorbitant Church as Cassander saith and was not quite abolished in that Church till about 1300 yeeres after Christ and by much art colluding and fine forgery was retained from being cast out of that Church in the late Conuenticle of Trent onely kept-in for a faction but mightily opposed by learned honest and conscionable Catholiques For why who can alter Christ's Institution who dare change that which he hath ordained Sacrificium verum plenum tune offert in Ecclesia Deo Patri si sic incipiat offerre secundùm quod ipsum Christum videat obtulisse saith Saint Cyprian But saith he again and we knowe it is true Constat Dominum obtulisse calicem in commemorationem Passionis Et quia Passionis eius mentionem in sacrificijs omnibus facimâ—â— nihil aliud quà m quod ille fecit facere debemus Why Because otherwise wee offer not the Sacrifice as wee should Nec sacrificium Dominicum legitima sanctificatione celebramus nisi oblatio et sacrificium nostrum responderit Passioni and that cannot be without powring out of wine that representeth the sheading of his bloud But your Church hath altred it presumptuously done Who gaue your Church such authority Heare Saint Cyprian again Quare si solus Christus audiendus est non debemus attendere quid alius ante nos faciendum putauerit sed quid qui ante omnes est Christus prior fecerit Neque enim hominis consuetudinem sequi oportet sed Dei veritatem Nam si Iesus Christus Dominus Deus noster ipse est summus Sacerdos Dei Patris sacrificium Patri seipsum primus obtulit hoc fieri in sui commemorationem praecepit vtique ille sacerdos vice Christi verè fungitur qui id quod Christus fecit imitatur sacrificium verum ac plenum tunc offert in Ecclesia Deo Patri si sic incipiat offerre secundùm quod ipsum Christum videat obtulisse You doo not this therefore in Saint Cyprian's iudgement your sacrifice is neither full nor true Much more in that Epistle Saint Cyprian hath and also elsewhere vnto the purpose But you haue Scriptures for the nonce expresly in our Bibles contrary to that we teach and practice to iustifie what you practise and teach touching this sacriledge and perfidiousnesse in altering Christs institution Maruell you should haue Scripture against Scripture Christs institution beeing so direct for Drink you all Produce your Scriptures Ioh. 6. 51. If any man eat of this Bread hee shall liue for euer And the Bread which I will giue is my flesh Heere is eating of Bread and that same Bread Christs flesh but heere is no such matter as wee ought to receiue Bread onely or that Bread alone sufficeth Yes for Lo euerlasting life attributed by our Lord himselfe to eating onely vnder one kinde I grant for doe they in your countrey vse to eat vnder two kindes Is Wine eaten with spoones there I haue heard of communicating and receiuing vnder one kinde but neuer till now heard talke of eating vnder one kinde Goe learne to speake and then write In the Interim I take your meaning Christ that mentioneth onely eating doth not exclude drinking doth not say nor meane eating onely sufficeth Bread is not exclusiue heere no more then where our Sauiour went to eat Bread with a Pharise at which time in your Learning and Logick he did not drink all dinner-time or supper-time because he went onely to eat Bread But Sir your wisdome must knowe that hee which eateth Bread according to the Scripture phrase drinketh also Bread importing necessaries for mans life and to eat Bread is both to eat and drink as to eat his Body is as well to drink his bloud So anon the same Euangelist Vnlesse you eat the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his bloud you shall not haue life in you Lo heere euerlasting life not had without drinking Looke you to this if you looke to haue euerlasting life Iohn 4. 14. Christ promiseth Water to drink of which water whoso tasteth shall thirst no more therefore say you He promised no Wine therefore say I By your reason hee gaue not Bread Therefore if needs you will haue one kinde and no more haue it in Wine not Bread Againe hee telleth his Disciples else-where that hee would drink no more of the fruit of the vine vntill hee drink it new in the Kingdome of God hee maketh no mention of any Bread Therefore in Heauen belike Wine is drink and onely Wine drunk but they eat no Bread there And yet wee read of Angels food which I can tell you who take it literally I might say our Sauiour speaketh heere of Bread and not of Wine in regard of that fore-going occasion which was the first motiue vnto this his Discourse namely his miraculous feeding 5000 men with fiue loaues so that hee kept him to the Subiect and occasion But this wise mans obseruation is cleane cashierd by our Sauiours Epexegesis afterward ver 53 54. hee plainely and expresly maketh it plaine that hee meant not to exclude bloud speaking of flesh nor shut out Wine where he mentioned Bread Euerlasting life to returne your owne words vpon your self is attributed by our Lord not to eating onely vnder one but both kinds Except you eat the flesh
gallowes for their sinnes nor of Martyrs that shed their bloud for Iesus Talk not then of Reliques and keeping of them but shew vs the Reliques true ones indeed and then blame vs if wee respect them not as Augustine or Ambrose or any antient Fathers did See your Fathers I need not I haue seene them often before euer I saw C. W. B. your good Benefactor whose scroles you haue filched euery where yet lest it bee thought there is some stuffe to bee seene which wee dare not set out to view the Reader shall see them if hee will bee so idle and haue so much leasure Eusebius in the seauenth booke and fifteenth Chapter relateth that the chaire of Saint Iames brother to our Lord and first Bishop of Ierusalem was kept preserued by his successors And what if Eusebius write thus it is no such great wonder for a chaire to last 300 yeeres in keeping of it I know no hurt or impiety as I doe in your Lipsanolatria For Eusebius doth not say that they worshipped it or that any vertue went out of it Though if you haue read the place as I thinke you neuer did you may remember that Eusebius there saith It was a custome taken vp from the Pagans as it was indeed and can demonstrate if need be But I take no exception at that originall as you would doe with vs for much lesse aduantage Onely this I adde It was no bone or Relique of Saint nor had any vertue issuing from it and therefore not to bee remembred heere Athanasius in the life of Saint Antony hath many passages the work is of some reasonable length Now what shall we see therein or whereabout you know not for C. W. B. did not informe you and you poore man are not so well prouided at home But well fare Bellarmine who would haue told you had you consulted him Hee doth informe vs who otherwise mought haue sought a needle in a bottle of hay and haue giuen the hay to this beast for prouender Saint Antony dying bequeathed his cloake vnto a friend the Legate accepteth it very kindely an example of kindnes giuen and taken no more If Saint Antony could haue giuen more he would haue done it had hee giuen lesse the Party would haue taken it It is not said He receiued it so as hee layd it vp kept it amongst his Iewels and plate Which if he did what is that to Protestants not adoring reliques did the man make an Idoll of his cloke did there any vertue come from that cloke If I knew you were acquainted with you I would bequeath a Cockscombe to you and you would lay it vp happly for a Relique for such fooles to adore Saint Basil in Psal 115. what doth hee say You know not for you were not told Let me help you Vpon those words Right deare in the sight of the Lord is the death of his Saints he dilateth touching the Persons and Passions of blessed Martyrs preferreth them before Garlands Iewels and precious stones opposeth the state of the time of Grace vnto that of the Lawe Then it was not lawfull to touch a dead body but hee that touched it was vncleane But now saith hee Hee that toucheth the bones of a Martyr somewhat partaketh of sanctifying power by that Grace which assisteth the body This was true in those times but those Martyrs are not those bodies are gone that grace is neither diffused nor effused at this day It was of that grace which then wrought wonders now no where to bee found your pretended Martyrs are scarce Christians some few good Christians your relicks impostures your miracles iuggling tricks lewd lies and forgeries Prooue them otherwise wee will doe as they did and giue them the respect Saint Basil did So wee answer you for Chrysostome and for Ambrose let the case bee the same which then it was our affections euery way shal be the same with theirs But those daies are done those Worthies gone impostors are euery where in euery corner In regard of these Iugglers and not with reference to the Heroick times I say with Tatian If God had made them hee speaketh of charmes and amulets to the purpose that men employ them hee should haue beene the Author of some euill But all things that God made were very good the diuell in his insolency rioting vpon them hath conuerted them vnto all purposes From him came first this euill custome with you in adoring you cannot tell what it neuer was the worke of the Perfect God For how is it or can it bee that while I liue I doe no hurt but beeing dead some piece some relique of my selfe without sense or feeling which can doe nothing which serueth not at all no more then I doe should operate or effect any thing How can hee that hath beene hanged himselfe possibly saue another from the gallowes or how can a bone of him that died of a fearfull disease deliuer another from the same Sir I beleeue Tatianus did prophecy so long agoe so graphicially doth he describe the impostures of your Romish Mountebanks in applying the Reliques and â—owzie fragments of Knaues Rake-hels and Traitors vnto I know not what wonder-working tricks of Leiger-de-maine XXXII That the Creatures cannot be sanctified or made more holy then they are already by their owne nature VNtill I had read ouer the whole passage and came at last to holy bread holy water holy ashes and the like trash and Mountebank wares I marueiled I confesse what this man meant by his position The Creature caÌ„not be sanctified c. For I know no Protestant but willingly acknowledgeth the Separation and Sanctification of the creature vnto diuine religious and holy vses I was sure our Church maintained and many waies practised the contrary there I found my error and so perceiued what the foole meant and whither the blind Buzzard did direct his groping that made boyes to laugh and hooâ— at him That the Creatures of God are good we beleeue as proceeding from a totall cause absolutely good that nothing ought to be refused as 1. Tim. 4. 4. if it be receiued with Thanksgiuing you rather deny then wee That the Word of God and Prayer doth sanctifie the creature to the seueral vses we profess willingly and practise it accordingly in all our courses Mat. 23. 17. we read subscribe that the Temple the seat of Gods Presence the House for his Seruice sanctified the gold employed in the Temple as beeing put vnto a religious vse That the Altar did sanctifie the Sacrifices offred vpon the Altar But if the Calues of Bethel had been placed in the Temple had they been sanctified vnto God by beeing in the Temple The Altar doth sanctifie the gift but so that it bee a gift for the Altar If a Dogge or a Cat were offred there it would bee no more holy or sanctified then the abomination was of desolation which was set vp in the Holy Place It is not the place that
yeeres after Christ though he died about 544. This man wrot nothing that I can heare of eyther in Sidonius who liued at that time or Hinckmarus or Flodoard or Sixtus Senensis or Bellarmine or Chesneu or any other Hee that wrote the notes vpon Saint Paul's Epistles taught indeed at Rhemes as appeareth by Flodoard and thence grew the error I suppose of those who took him for Saint Remigius Bishop of Rhemes but hee is called Remigius Antisiadorensis because hee was borne at Auxerre Of him we read in Sixtus Senensis that hee wrote on Saint Paul's Epistles He is of a much later date liuing vnder Charles the bald about 880. Howsoeuer we are not touched by him or any of the rest for wee neither beleeue nor say that the Bread of the Supper is but a bare figure of the body of Christ not his Body we professe wee receiue the Lords Body and drink his bloud in commemoration of his Death and Passion as hee hath appointed If you say otherwise we haue done with you XXXVI That wee ought to receiue in both kindes and that one alone sufficeth not WEE ought so indeed nor is it sufficient to administer the Communion as the Romanists now doe vnder one kinde This is the authorized and receiued and iustifiable Doctrine and Orthodox practice of the Church of England Artic. 30. thus we reade The Cup of the Lord is not to bee denied vnto the Lay-people For both the parts of the Lords Sacrament by Christs ordinance and commandement ought to be ministred to all Christian men alike And in the Communion book it is expresly said That the chiefe minister if there bee moe present as it often hapneth in Colledges especially and Cathedrall Churches shall receiue it first himself and then deliuer it to other Ministers and so to the People in both kindes This is our practice and our profession for which I ioyne issue with all Papists liuing that it is the prime originall institution of our Sauiour which giueth Birth and Beeing to a Sacrament that it is Sacriledge to alter it therefrom that it neuer was otherwise vsed in the Church of God for aboue 1000 yeeres after Christ Let all the Papists liuing prooue the contrary and I will subscribe to all Popery As for this poore fellow hee can say no more then hee findeth ready to hand or is put into his mouth his Camerades were conscious to themselues of nouelty and innouation for in a point so notorious so scandalous of such consequence wee are not sent as accustomed to see any Fathers It is manifest saith Cessander a man professing himselfe a Romane Catholique though of wonderfull modesty moderation and learning that in administration of the sacred Sacrament of the Eucharist the Vniuersall Church of Christ vntill this day and the Westerne or Romane Church for more then 1000 yeeres after Christ especially in their solemne and ordinary dispensation of this Sacrament did exhibit and giue vnto all faithfull Christians not one only but both the kinds of Bread and Wine as is most cleere and euident out of innumerable testimonies of the old Writers both Greeke and Latine which I can make good and of some will giue a taste Ignatius in his Epistle to the Philadelphians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One Bread is broken vnto all and one Wine giuen to the whole multitude This man was Saint Iohn's Disciple Martialis as you say one of the 70 Disciples Epist 1. Sect. 3. Nunc autem multò magis sacerdotes Dei honoratis qui vitam vobis tribuunt in calice et viuo pane and he speaketh you see to the people Dionysius Areopag S. Paul's Disciple pag. 157. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. for hauing discouered the couered vndiuided bread and diuided it into many parts and distributed to all the Vnity of the Cup hee consummateth in those Symbols and signes the Vnity of the Church and so in many other places S. Clement Saint Peter's Disciple and Successor in his Masse hauing set downe the order and forme of consecration cometh to participation thus Let the Deacon giue the cup and when all haue receiued men and women let the Deacons carry the remainder into the Reuestry So Saint Mark in his Liturgie another Disciple of Saint Peter So Saint Peter himself in his Liturgie or Masse as you call it So the rest Iustin Martyr in the end of his Apologie describing the seruice of those antient Christians saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They whom we call Deacons giue to euery one present part of the consecrated Bread and Wine Irenaeus in lib. 4. cap. 33. prooueth the Resurrection because we participate of the body and bloud of Christ And lib. 5. cap. 11. speaking of a Christian man he saith that de calice qui sanguis eius est nutritur de pane qui est corpus eius augetur That railing Feuardentius in his Notes vpon Irenaeus was not able to produce one Testimony for half Communions though he vaunt it was a practice in the Apostles time Tertul. in de Resurrect speaking of all Christians in generall Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur vt anima saginetur And because these Patrons of a desperate cause contrary to all art and reason conclude negatiuely The cup was not communicated because the bread is alone sometime remembred we may inferre alike The bread was not giuen but the cup because Tertul. in depudicitia remembreth onely the cup thus Aqua aliis initians cui ille si fortè patrocinabitur pastor quem in calice depingis prostitutorem ipsum Christiani Sacramenti mento et ebrietatis idolū moechiae asylum post calicem subsecuturae de quo nihil libentius bibas quà m ouem poenitentiae secundae The man was then I yeeld a Montanist but that hinders not his credit from relation of truth and vniuersall practice on foot though he oppugn it Clemens Alexandrinus Stro. 1. p◠117. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For which cause some men when as they distribute the holy Eucharist as the custome is permit euery man of the common people to take a portion And what he meaneth by Eucharist himself explaineth 2. Paedag. 2. cap. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The mixture of both in one that is of Wine and the Word is that which wee call the Eucharist whereof the Faithfull when they participate are sanctified in soule and body both Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria in Euseb Hist lib. 7. cap. 8 writing vnto Xystus Bishop of Rome relateth of an antient Christian no Priest but a Lay-man that vpon occasion supposed he had not been well baptized Of him he writeth there that long before and often hee had been partaker of the body and bloud of Christ not of his body alone but of his bloud also in expresse words Saint Cyprian in moe places than one Epist 63. Tamen quoniam quidam vel ignoranter vel simpliciter in Calice Dominico sanctificando plebi ministrando non hoc
of the Sonne of man and drink his bloud you haue no life in you Lo without drinking no life euerlasting then poore deceiued Papists what will become of you you shall perish in your sinnes though your bloud shall bee required at the hands of your ignorant or rather deceitufll guides that thus mis-leade you from Christs Institution Luk. 24. 30 35. Christ at Emmaus communicated his disciples vnder one kinde Two things are insisted on out of these words as it appeareth by the laying downe First that this was actio sacra a Communion of the Body of our Sauiour then that it was done vnder one kinde this is taken as granted because there is no mention of drinking of Wine there is made mention of breaking the Bread Ignorants and wilfull take things amisse an ordinary Hebrew phrase it is in the Scriptures to eat bread to break bread for to eat and drink to take a refection or repast This man imagineth that all their meales were sicca conuiuia altogether without any liquor nor Wine nor Water vsed though in hot countries Such a foole would haue no other answer made vnto him but as Arisotle would haue made to him that should deny motion or that hee should neuer drink at his meales the best answer could possibly be made vnto him That it was actio sacra and not communis our Sauiour did celebrate the Communion of his Body and Bloud though I know it is controuerted for my part I will not contend at present I know it is held so by Augustine Theophylact and I adde too Beda and Hierome with others but take heede of the Precedent for if hee communicated onely Bread then I know not what vse of Wine at all there will bee in the blessed Sacrament For these were peraduenture of his Apostles but without all question of his Disciples and so had interest in the Cup if any had at all See more wee cannot Acts 2. 42. then we haue seene already mention made of breaking of Bread which is not exclusiue from drinking of Wine no more then 1. Cor. 11. 13. drinking doth exclude eating at all Poore shifts for Sacriledge and impiety of late made an Article of faith in the Church of Rome He that instituted the one ordained the other ioyntly both and at the same time with all circumstances alike if any aduantage is it is for Drink not for Eat For Drink you all of this saith the Author of the Sacrament hee saith not expresly Eat you all of this as foreseeing that impiety which in time humane presumption should bring-in vpon and against his owne institution fulfilled in the Church of Rome at this day XXXVII That Sacramental vnction is not to bee vsed to the sick VSe it if you will wee hinder you not nor much care or enquire what effects ensue vpon it but obtrude it not on vs or vnto the Church as in Censu of the Sacraments of the time of Grace as Baptisme is held and the Lords Supper Visible signes of inuisible Grace Powerfull instruments ordained by God to work in our Soules eternall Life by conueighing the meanes thereof vnto them Sacramental vnction call it if you please so farre as in the writings of the antient Fathers all Articles peculiar vnto our Christian faith and beliefe are sometime called Sacraments all duties of religious piety vnto God all diuine and Ecclesiasticall ceremonies are named Sacraments in which sense you might reckon not seuen but seuenscore if you were disposed to make a search for Sacraments In the Apostolicall and Primitiue Church it was a custome to anoint the sick with oyle to pray ouer them and so commit them vnto God This Saint Iames remembreth 5. 4. Is any sick among you Let him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray ouer him anointing him with oyle in the name of the Lord. The Apostle doth not call it a Sacrament Sacramentall vnction as the Thesis proposeth and which is that should bee expresly prooued Our Bibles say the sick were anointed but not our Bibles nor theirs doe say that this anointing was a Sacrament And Fathers wee are not sent to see that proue it so the place is not to purpose as it is proposed Mar. 6. 13. is a Text defacto They anointed with oyle many that were sick and healed them but de iure there is not a word in that Text whether yea or no this Anointing should bee a Sacrament The Master of controuersies confesseth himselfe that it is not accorded whether in this Text or not Sacramentall vnction was instituted and himselfe is of opinion that it is not grounding on the resolution of the Councell of Trent to which all Papists are tyed to subscribe and yeeld and how dare you bring this as a proofe Now say the truth Sir Goose and shame the diuell How plain are these Texts that set your great Directors together by the ears Where were your sick wits that did not aduise you Take heed of falling foule with the Councel of Trent the cynosura of your faith Sure they were made of the pappe of an apple so easily they squeeze themselues out to nothing your great Dictators haue found hitherto but one direct Text Iames 5. 4. can we think your sharp sight should spy out three more a Fox or a Fearne-bush somewhat or nothing for Mat. 16. 18. Acts 28. 8. nor oyle nor vnction is remembred bare imposition of hands vpon the sick and diseased so that wee stand in some possibility heerafter to haue added an eightth Sacrament to the former seauen XXXVIII That no interior grace is giuen by the imposition of hands in the Sacrament of holy orders THis indeed is contrary vnto the expresse words of our Bible and therefore directly contrary to our Opinion Doctrine and Practice Can this fellowe bee so ignorant as not to know or rather so impudent as to deny that in giuing of holy orders we vse those memorable formall words of our Sauiour Receiue the holy Ghost Was euer man made Minister in the Church of England but in that sort with that forme Can hee deny that wee not onely practise it but propugne it command it to bevsed enquire of and punish the neglect opposition and contempt thereof What shall wee say to such a base detracting Varlet as shameth not in view of heauen and earth to deny the Sun shineth at noone-day Romane Catholiques I admire your patience that suffer such Hog-rubbers to leade you by the nose and make you beleeue the snowe is black Poore deceiued Soules trust no such Merchants that would sell you to the diuell for a morsell of bread and make you stand out vpon tearms of Separation for their owne aduantages against the Church as Schismaticks in which you liue and haue beene baptized XXXIX That Priests and other religious Persons or any others who haue vowed their chastity vnto God may freely marry notwithstanding their vowes TOuching marriage of Ministers this is our Doctrine resolued