of S. Paul The chalice of benediction which wee do blesse is it not the communication of the bloud of Christ and the bread which wee breake is it not the participation of the body of our lord I answeare that our doctrine is not here denied but affirmed for the Apostle teacheth here importing withall by his manner of speach the doctrine to be so well and so commonly knowne that none can denie it he teacheth I say that the breade and the cuppe are the communication of the body and bloude of our lord The reason whereof is cleere because in those formes are exhibited reallie the body and the bloude of Christ Whereas in your sense there were no reall receauing giuing or participating of the body and bloud of Christ but of bakers breade and meere wine And therefore to the Apostle the Corinthians if they had bene of your Religion might haue answeared no it is not any communication participation or communion of bloude and flesh but of naturall meate and drinke If you stick at the word breade you are dull for the words annexed to it doe interprete fully what breade it is and before you haue the word applied and the sense of it inculcated in the Sixt of S. Iohn where our Sauiour saith the breade which I will giue is my flesh Io. 6. v. 51.32.58.48 my father giues you true bread from heauen I am the breade of life c. where I thinke you are not so seÌ„sles as to take the word breade for that which bakers make More ouer this flesh or body of Iesus Christ is in the forme of bread in the Church as it was allso in his owne haÌ„d wheÌ„ he gaue it uÌ„to his disciples aÌ„d therefore after the phrase of Scripture it is called breade Mar. 16. Act. 1. as Angells appearing in meÌ„s likenes are there called meÌ„ 30. Fourthlie whereas wee say that it is not necessary the publique seruice be said in the vulgar tongue You oppose those words of S. Paul If I pray in a tongue to wit 1. Cor. 14. v. 14. which I vnderstand not my Spirit prayeth but my minde is without fruite Answ The meaning is that I haue not in that case the benefit of profiting my soule or minde with contemplation of the thinge yet neuer the lesse my Spirit is eleuated and ascendeth vnto God which is the substance and essence of prayer and this is nothing against vs. You vrge againe if thou blesse in Spirit how shall he say amen which doth supplie the place of the vulgar v. 16. since he knoweth not what thou sayest Answ The meaning is if thou speake some praise of God the hearers not knowing whether it be good or bad he that supplies the place of the vulgar cannot say amen to it Neither is this against vs for our coÌ„mon prayers or liturgies are both knowne and approoued by the Church to whom this approbation doth belonge and this all do know and therefore the clarke or he that supplieth the place of vulgar may boudly sâ—â— Amen Moreouer the Apostle doth not censure as ill that blessing in Spirit which you do vrge but sayeth expresly that he doth giue thankes well which doth so v. 17. If you say the contrary theÌ„ you coÌ„tradict the scripture not wee De imputa iustitia nihil noruÌ„t VValdenses Luth. colâ—oq c. de Suermeris Coce l. 8. â— 4. 31. The fift place is to shewe by Scripture that iustifyiÌ„g faith is that speciall faith whereby you beleeue that your sinnes are all forgiuen and you iust by an extrinsecall imputation of the iustice inherent in Iesus Christ This which is the ground and soule of your Religion wee denie Your proofe is Abraham beleeued God and it was imputed vnto him to iustice Rom. 4.3 v. 16. And therefore of faith that according to grace the promise may be firme Answ This is nothing against vs nor for you for the question is of the Obiect of this faith whether it were the remission of sinnes to him that beleeued they were remitted as you interprete it From the 16. v. to the end or somthing els Reade further and you shall finde in the same Chapter that the Obiect or thing he beleeued was that God would make him the father of many Nations and that notwithstanding his owne age and the sterilitie of his wife God was able to performe this promise Of your Obiect there is not one word neither is it to be fouÌ„d any where in all the Bible The Obiect of Iustifying faith if you beleeue Scripture is the Incarnation the Passion Resurrection and other revealed Mysteries Who is he that ouercometh the world he that beleeueth that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God â— Io. 5. v. 5. Rom. 10.9 If thou confesse with thy mouth our lord Iesus and in thy hart beleeue that God hath raised him from the deade thou shalt be saued Without faith it is vnpossible to please God for Heb. 11.6 he that coÌ„meth to God must beleeue that he is and is a rewarder to them that seeke him This is the Obiect of iustifying faith and the second part you do not beleeue because it implieth a merite in the beleeuer 32. The sixt place is about communion of lay people in both kinds You would haue it a diuine precept for the lay people I admit a diuine precept for the Priests who do consecrate and denie that there is any such whereby the lay people are commanded to receaue the Sacrament in both kinds Your place is Drinke ye all of this Mat. 26.27 But this place doth not import a precept or commaund for the lay people to receaue the blood for the speach is not directed to the lay people but to the Apostles And the word all is referd to them and was verified by them This is manifest by the words of the Gospell He gaue to his Disciples and said take and eate ibid. v. 26.27.28 this is my body And taking the chalice he gaue thankes and gaue to them the same disciples saying drinke ye all of this for this is my bloode c. And S. Marke relating it saith and taking the chalice giuing thanks he gaue to them and they all dranke of it If all dranke of it theÌ„ by all the Apostles are meant onely for all men were not there neither haue all Christians drunke of it In this therefore you haue produced no diuine precept for all men in their owne persons to receaue the blood 33. The seaueÌ„th place is to prooue the Scripture to be iudge of CoÌ„trouersies aÌ„d sufficient of it selfe without helpe of TraditioÌ„ Wee hold the necessity of TraditioÌ„ too â— Tim. 3.16 The place is All scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach to argue to correct to instruct in iustice that the maÌ„ of God may be perfect instructed to euery good worke Answ This is not against vs wee graunt tath it is profitable Wee denie that it is
fellowes in words admit a reall Presence being forced there vnto by the arguments of our men yet they allso when they are lookt into are essentially Caluinists in this point beleeuing no more that Christ is in the signes or in the formes of breade and wine then a mans lands are in the Chest where his writings be or in his fathers will and testament whereby they were made his which is VVhites example VVee beleeue that in the Eucharist vnder the accidents of breade and wine there is the bodie and blood of Iesus Christ You say No. So Iohn Caluins schoole Our sauiour in the scripture This is my bodie Mat 26. v. 27.28 Reall Presence This is my bloode VVee beleeue that the breade which our Sauiour gaue was in substaÌ„ce flesh the verie same with that which was giuen on the crosse for the redemption of the world You say No it was not in substance flesh but plaine breade Calu. schoole Our Sauiour in the scripture Io. 6 51. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c Luk. 22.19 The breade which I will giue is my flesh which I will giue for the life of the world This is my bodie which is giuen for you VVe beleeue that the drinke in the Cuppe in forme of wine was shed for vs and therefore was in substance bloode and not wine You say No it was meere wine Calu. Schoole The Scriprure Luk. 22.20 Io. 6.55 This is the chalice the newe Testament in my bloode 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Chalice is shed for you My flesh is meate indeede and my blood is drinke indeede VVe beleeue that the Church is to eate the flesh of our Sauiour and to drinke his bloode You say No. Calu. schoole The Scripture Vnles you eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloode you shall not haue life in you Wee beleeue that the ChristiaÌ„ church doth Sacrifice and offer vnto God publiklie an Oblation euery where You say No There is is no Sacrificing or offering of any publike OblatioÌ„ since Christ offered himselfe at Hierusalem on the crosse Luth. de for Mis pro Eccl. wit Calu. 4. Inst c. 18. The Scripture From the rising of the Sonne euen to the going downe Mà lae 111 OblatioÌ„ great is my name among the Gentiles and in â—uery place there is sacrificing and there is offered to my name a Cleane Oblation because my name is greate amonge the Gentiles saith the lord of hosts Is is prettie to see how you offer to interprete this place of your works as if they were the cleane Oblation here spoken of and opposed to the publick visible Sacrifices of the Iewes when as notwithstanding you teach and maintaine that all your works are fowle and impure Luth. de boâ— oper fol. 581. Gal. l. 1 de lib. arb p. 141. All your iustice or righteousnes as the cloath of a meÌ„strued woman all your fairest and best actioÌ„s mortall sinnes These forsooth are that which God himselfe esteemes a cleane Oblation These are the rare Sacrifice which could not be found amonge the Iewes Further wee beleeue that our Sauiour being a Priest according to the Order of Melchisedech Psal 109.4 Heb. 5.6 did offer his bodie and bloode after an vnbloody manner before his passion for his Church and for the remission of Sinnes And that he did ordaine it should be continued and frequented in the Church which is to offer and institute a Propitiatorie Sacrifice You say No. Luth. de Capt. Bab. Cal. 4. Inst c. 18. 1. Cor. 9. The Scripture This is my bodie which is giuen for you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is broken for you Do This. Luk. 22.19 1. Cor. 11.24 Mat. 26.28 Luk. 22.20 Propitiatorie Sacrifice This is my bloode of the newe Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is shed for many vnto remission of Sinnes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which traÌ„slated word by word is This the chalice the newe Testament in my bloode which chalice is shed for you In which sentence the word signifying effusion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not accord with the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth blood but with the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 26.28 Mar. 14.24 Luk. 22 20. and of the Body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luk. 22.19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Cor. 11 24. which signifieth the Chalice as euery Syntaxian knowes whereby the sense is This the Chalice which chalice is shed for you And since you cannot exclude the tyme present because the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports it and all the Greeke texts of the Euangelists agree in it it is cleere that then before the passion at the last supper the chalice was shed for the Church and for remission of Sinnes by Iesus Christ a Priest according to the Order of Melchisedech And this wee call an vnblody and propitiatory Sacrifice Wee beleeue that vnder Iesus Christ our high Priest there are Priests in the newe Testament You say No. Luth. Abrog Mis pri Calu. 4. Inst c. 18. Isay 66. v. 19.20.21 Priests Episcopi Presbyteri propriè iam in Ecclesia vocantur Sacerdotes 8 Aug. li. 20 de Ciu. c. 10. The Scripture I will send of them that shall be saued to the Gentiles into the sea into Africke and Lydia into Italie and Greece to the Ilands far of c. And I will take of them to be Priests and Leuites saith our lord wee beleeue the Apostles and their successors were by Christs institution for a perpetuall memorie and representation of his death and passion to doe that which our Sauiour did at his last Supper that is as I haue declared by the Gospell to offer vnbloody Sacrifice You say No. Luth. Calu. cit The Scripture Luk. 22.19 Doe this for a commemoration of me wee beleeue that there is allso in the Christian Church an Alter these three things Sacrifice Priest and Alter hauing a reference of coexistence You say No. Luth. for Mis Eccl. Wit Calu. 4. inst cit 1. Cor. 9 The Scripture In that daye there shall be an Alter of our Lord in the middest of the land of Egypt Isay 19.19 Altars Heb. 13 10 And the Apostle VVee haue an Alter whereof they haue not power to eate who serue the tabernacle 54. Wee beleeue that Traditions are to be obserued whether receaued from the Apostles in writing or els by word of mouth You say No. Luth. Post in fest sancti Steph. Calu. 4. inst c. 8. Antid sess 4 Kemn ibid. The Scripture Hold the traditions which you haue learned 2. Thess 2.15 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Traditions whether it be by word or by our Epistle Wee beleeue that Gods word shall by diuine Assistance be continuallie deliuered by word of Mouth and openlie be still professed You acknowledge no infallible deliuerie of true doctrine by word of Mouth Luth. Calu. cit Beza not Eccl. whitt cont 2. q. 4. c. 3.
it filles no place He is the Creator and may doe as he list The Bodie of our Sauiour in the Sacrament hath not situall extension or Localitie it succeeds into the roome of breade Before breade was vnder those dimensioÌ„s which you see and the body succeeds to bread wherefore the body is now vnder the same It is true that the nature of a bodie requires extensioÌ„ but God is Author of nature and needs nor paie but when he please his DominioÌ„ is absolute Humane nature hath a proper subsistence due vnto it yet in Christ it hath none but diuine 39. To your question how this is donne I answere that other Infidels had the like difficultie in other matters as how he who filles heauen and earth should be in a Mothers armes a little child Almightie God Do you vnderstand how this doth come to passe how is the indiuisible Substance of God in each part of the world all S Chrys in Ep. ad Heb Hom. 2. S Cyrill Alexand. l. 4. in Ioan. c. 13. Reade here an â—xcellen discourse â—o this â—urpose I said God is euery where saith a learned Father but I doe not vnderstand it I say that he is without begining but doe not vnderstand it I say that he hath begott a Sonne c. You should attend to the counsell of S. Cyrill in such high things neuer to question how when God works leaue the way and the knowledge of his worke vnto himselfe As the heauens are exalted aboue the the earth so are my wayes exalted aboue your wayes Isa 55. and my cogitations aboue your cogitations saith allmightie God This how is the Iewes question in this matter as the Father before named doth wel obserue Our Sauiour had said that the bread which he would giue was his flesh 10. 6. aÌ„d that he who did eate it should liue for euer Wherevppon the Iewes moued this questioÌ„ how can this man giue vs his flesh to eate If they had beleeued he was God they might then haue knowne that he was able to turne breade into his flesh and so giue it in the forme of breade to be eaten but they did not beleeue him to be God aÌ„d therefore moued the question how Which question I leaue a while in your mouth and betake my selfe to the text where I finde that he gaue his bodie and blood to the disciples and thus I argue 39. If Iesus Christ true God and therefore allmightie did affirme in expresse termes that the Eucharist which he gaue his Disciples was his bodie and bloode wee are to beleeue it was so since God is Truth and Truth cannot lie but Iesus Christ whom you confesse and I haue declared to be true God l. 2. c. 4â— and allmightie did affirme in expresse termes that the Eucharist which he gaue his disciples was his bodie and blood therefore wee are to beleeue it The Proposition you will not question for you professe you are a Christian l. 2. and if you were none there is inough said in another place to make you graunt it The AssuÌ„ption is cleere in the Gospell THIS IS MIE BODIE Mat. 26. THIS IS MIE BLOOD And further yet that men should not mistake our Sauiours meaning he our Sauiour did adde such attributes to this Bodie and Blood as cannot agree to Breade and Wine Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11. or is deliuered This is my Bodie which is giuen for you this is my bodie which shall be deliuered for you Was breade giuen for vs were wee redeemed with breade was bread crucified for the redemption of the world Mat. 26. This is my blood of the new Testament which shall be shedde for manie vnto remission of sinnes Was wine the blood of the new Testament was wine shed for remission of Sinnes No it was the true blood of Iesus Christ Luc. 22. This is the Chalice the new Testament in my blood which Chalice shall be shed for you or is shed The Chalice that is the thing in the Chalice is shed for vs. Is this thing wine or blood If wine then you are redeemed with wine wine was in the side of Iesus Christ If the thing in the Chalice were blood then blood true blood the blood wherewith wee were redeemed was there in the Chalice 10. 6. and the Disciples dranke it In an other place he said allso the bread which I will giue is my flesh vnles you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood you shall not haue life in you my flesh is meate indeede and my blood is drinke indeede he that eateth my flesh aÌ„d drinketh my blood 1. Cor. 10. abideth in me and I in him And the Apostle The Chalice of benediction which wee do blesse is it not the communication of the blood of Christ and the bread wee * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe sacrifice vnbloodilie as in the next ch v. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And your Caluin doth acknowledge this sense frangi saith he vppon that place Interpreter immolari 1. Cor. 11. breake is it not the participation of the bodie of our Lord whosoeuer shall eate this bread or drinke the Chalice of our Lord vnworthilie he shall be guiltie of the bodie aÌ„d of the blood of our Lord. He that eateth and drinketh vnworthilie eateth and drinketh iudgment to himselfe not discerning the bodie of our Lord. And you too discerne it not you esteeme it bakers bread You doe not beleeue that it is the bodie of our Lord. You doe not beleeue that it is heauenlie breade That it is the flesh of Christ that the Chalice is the communication of blood that the blood of Christ is drinke and his bodie meate that Christ is is in him that hath eaten this breade This you beleeue not but are content with common bread and wine Common wine with you is the Testament of Iesus Christ it issued out of his side you were redeemed with it and bakers breade was crucified for your sinnes THE SEVENTH CHAPTER The Fathers vnderstood the Reall Presence as wee doe 40. FOr the Reall Presence out of Antiquitie are cited Iustinus the Martyr Ireneus TertulliaÌ„ Hilarius both the Cyrills Ambrose Epiphanius Hesichius Optatus Augustine Ierom Leo Gregorie and others by Zanchez Coccius Garetius and Gualterius Your answere is that all are to be vnderstode of a figuratiue and not a reall Presence You thinke the Bodie and Blood are in heaueÌ„ onelie and no neerer but wine and breade you say are equiuocallie called the blood and Bodie though they be indeede nothing els but signes This deuice doth not satisfie For the Fathers haue directlie expressed all the conditions of a reall Presence to the verie last and will not be contented with your figure This I delare 41. First because in conceauing the Institution of a signe there is no difficultie it was easie to say and for men to vnderstand that breade was a signe or figure of the bodie if
our Sauiour had meant onelie this but the Fathers apprehende in the Eucharist a great and incomprehensible Mysterie I will cite one or two least you denie it and will obserue the same manner of proceeding to the end of this Chapter S. Chrysostom speaketh thus Good Lord what a wonderfull miracle is this S. Chrys dâ— Sacerd. l 3. how great is Gods loue towards mankinde Behold he who sitteth aboue with his Father in one and the same moment of tyme is touched by the hands of vs all and he giueth himselfe to such as are desirous to receaue and embrace him IdeÌ„ Hom. 60. ad Pop. Antioch Thinke with thy selfe what honour is done vnto thee and what a table thou art made partaker of Wee are vnited vnto and are fed with that verie thing at which the Angells when they behold it do tremble neither dare they boldlie gaze vppon it by reason of the bright shining splendour which issueth from it IdeÌ„ hom 14. in pri Cor. Ibid. vocat caliâ— em benedictionis salicem formi dolosum horroris plenum S. Ephr. l. de nat Dominimè scrut c. 5. Ibidem In saying the Eucharist I open all the treasure of Gods blessing S. Ephrem Why dost thou search things that are vnsearchable If thou diue curiouslie into these matters thou shalt not be called faithfull but curious Be thou faithfull and innocent receaue the vnspotted bodie of this Lord with an entire faith being assured that thou eatest the lambe himselfe entire The Mysteries of Christ are immortall fire search them not rashlie least in their search thou be burned This truely which the onelie begotten sonne Christ our Sauiour hath donne for vs surpasseth all admiration all thought and all speach for he hath giuen vs fire and Spirit to be eaten and druÌ„ke that is his body and his Blood Hence I argue thus If the Fathers did apprehend in the Eucharist a greate and vnsearchable mysterie they apprehended more then breade and wine with a relation vnto the bodie and blood this being an easie thing and not incomprehensible but the Fathers did apprehend in the Eucharist a great and vnsearchable Mysterie as you haue heard therefore more then bread and wine with a relation to the bodie and blood of Christ 42. Secondlie The Fathers saie that bread and wine are changed into the bodie and blood of Christ You striue indeed to put theÌ„ of with an accidentall change in office and vse as a counter when it stands for a crowne hath a morall change by reason of this deputation though the substance be still the same it was so here you admitte a change in accidentall reference for of no signe it is made a signe it hath a newe reference yet the nature you say is the still the same to wit breade aÌ„d wine But this will not serue For the Fathers saie they are changed in nature and esteeme it a worke of Gods omnipotence comparing it allso with other physicall changes as of Moyses rodde into a Serpent â— Ambros de myst â— nit c. 9. water into wine c. How many examples do wee vse to prooue that the thing is a not that which nature made but that which the blessing hath consecrated and that the power of consecration is greater then the power of nature for by consecration the verie b nature it selfe is changed Thou hast learned therefore that of breade is c made the bodie of Christ Id. l. 4. de sacr c. 4. and that wine and water is putt into the chalice but by the consecration of the heauenly word it is made blood He our Sauiour changed once water into wine S. Cyrill Hier. Catech Myst 3. Id. Catech 1. and is he not worthie to be beleeued of vs that he hath d changed wine into blood The breade and wine of the Eucharist before the sacred inuocation of the adored Trinitie were simple bread and wine but the inuocatioÌ„ being once done the bread indeed is e made the flesh of Christ and the wine his blood The bread which our Lord gaue vnto his disciples Auth serm de coena ap Cypr. being changed not in shape but f nature by the omnipotence of the word is made flesh I doe righlie and with good reason beleeue that the bread being sanctified by Gods word S. Greg. NisseÌ„ orat Cathec c. 37. is g changed into the bodie of God the word Christ thorough the dispensation of his grace entereth by his flesh into all the faithfull and mingleth himselfe with their bodies which haue their substance from bread and wine to the end that man being vnited to that which is immortall may attaine to be made partaker of incorruption Ibib. and these things he bestoweth h transelementing by the vertue of his blessing the nature of the things that are seene into it God S. Cyril Alex Ep. ad Calos coÌ„descending to our infirmities doth flow into the things offered on the Altar the power of life conuerting them into the Veritie of his owne flesh that the bodie of life as it were a certaine quickning seede might be fouÌ„d in vs. â— Gaudent in Exod. tr â— The Lord aÌ„d Creator of Nature that of earth made breade againe because he can doe it and hath promised to doe it k makes of breade his owne bodie and he that of water made wine now of wine hath made his blood Now Sir CoÌ„uersion change of Nature it selfe transelementation of breade and wine into flesh and blood doe put flesh aÌ„d blood reallie and substantiallie in the remaining signes or exteriour formes of breade and wine 43. As that which wee beleeue in this matter may be and is explicated in seuerall propositions and by the Fathers too so your Opinion may be vnfolded into diuers propositions by way of explication I will brieflie put them downe and leaue your conscience to iudge both of my explication and of their accord with the Fathers to whom the letters shall direct you in order as I haue put them downe And first your opinion if it be stripped naked is that the Eucharist is nothing els reallie but plaine breade and wine For relations founded in exteriour deputation onelie are not reall and the substance of our Sauiours bodie you say is not at oÌ„ce in many places reallie This supposed your Opinion is that a the thing on the Altar is in Substance the same it was The Protestant Opinion of the Eucharist by theÌ„ hiddeÌ„ vnder figuratiue speaches there by to cozeÌ„ the vulgar Epist Cyrill ad Calos extat grâ—cè in Bibliotheca Imperat that it is b not reallie changed by consecration that the bodie of Christ is c not made of blead nor his blood of wine that wine it not d changed into blood that it is reallie e the same it was before Inuocation that it is not changed f in nature not changed g into the bodie that nothing is heere h transelemented into the bodie and blood of Christ
immolated there is no vnbloodie d Sacrifice which is the flesh of Christ the lambe of God is not on the e Altar he is not offered in sacrifice by the Priest the Sonne of God is not f againe sacrificed for vs the sacrifice is not g dispenced from the Alter Compare 52. Seauenthly the Fathers did beleeue that the bodie of our Sauiour was present to our bodies and mouthes when wee receaue the Eucharist which is another euident argument that they thought it substaÌ„tiallie present here on earth where our bodies are for a thing which is in heauen only cannot be so present Wee denie not that wee are Spirituallie ioyned vnto Christ by true faith and sincere Charitie S. Cyr. Alex l. 10. in Io. c. 13. but that wee haue 1 no coniunction with him at all according to the flesh that verilie wee denie and affirme it to be contrarie to the diuine Scriptures aÌ„d because you are readie to runne to the Incarnation it followes a little after Doth he Nestorius thinke perchance that wee knowe not the force of the mysticall benedictioÌ„ coÌ„secratioÌ„ which being done in vs doth it not make Iesus Christ to dwell in vs 2 corporallie also with the communication of the flesh of Christ which thing he doth prooue there by Scripture and after declare with an example S. Aug. l 2. cont Adu Leg. c. 9. Wee receaue with faithfull hart and 3 mouth the Mediatour of God and man man Christ Iesus giuing vs his bodie to be eaten and his blood to be drunke though it seeme more horrible to eate maÌ„s flesh then to kill and to drinke mans blood then to shed it S. Leo. serm 7. de Ieiun meÌ„s 7. You ought so to communicate of the holie table that you doubt nothing at all of the truth of the bodie and blood of Christ for that is receaued with 4 the mouth which by faith is beleeued S. Greg. Dial. l. 4. c. 58. S. Greg. Nyss orat Catec c 37. His blood is powered into the mouthes of the faithfull Our Sauiour by his flesh entereth into all the faithfull and mingleth himselfe with their 5 bodies to the end that man being vnited to that which is immortall may attaine to be made partaker of Incorruption Wee are made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hearers of Christ when wee haue receaued his bodie and blood into 6 our members S. Cyr. Hi. Catec 4. So the Fathers vnderstanding the bodie of Christ indeed to be in those dimensions and so to be in our bodie reallie when the Sacrament is in it and to be receaued with our mouthes Whereas you denying that he can be reallie here and in heauen too must gape as wide as heauen if you will receaue the signes and the bodie too with your mouth for the signes are here and the bodie and blood according to you are onelie there in that one place 53. The Protestant Opinion The flesh of Christ is 1 not neere vnto our flesh Christ is not 2 in vs corporallie Christ is not receaued with the 3 mouth that which is beleeued is neuer 4 in the mouth neuer neerer then heauen is to the earth the blood of Christ is no where but in heauen it is in no bodies mouth at any tyme. the flesh of Christ is not neere our 5 bodies it is as farre of as heauen is from earth the bodie of Christ is neuer 6 in vs. Compare 54. That which troubleth you did not moue the Fathers to discredit the word of God as you doe His omnipotencie was in the begining of their Creed as it is in ours Heare what they say of your doubtes The first S. Cyr. Hi. Catec 4 S. Chrys ho. â—3 Mat. Sense telles vs it is bread S. Cyrill though it seeme breade it is not bread S. Chrysost let our Sauiours words master our sense and reason His words cannot be vntrue our sense is many tymes deceaued The second It is not possible for one to haue his owne bodie in his owne haÌ„ds S. Augustine In what manner this may be vnderstood of Dauid or another pure man wee cannot finde S. Aug. in in Psal 33. conc 1. but wee finde it fulfilled in Christ for Christ was caried in his owne hands when commending his owne verie bodie he said this is my bodie for then he caried and held that bodie in his owne haÌ„ds If you did beleeue it were reallie in the Sacrament as the Fathers did you would neuer sticke at this nor at any other thing for all are grounded in the Sacramentall being The third Christ could not eate himselfe the Sacrament he might and did eate S. Ierom. He S. Hieron Ep. ad Hedib q. 2. Christ was the Banquetter and the Feast the eater and the thing eaten Wee drinke his bloode c. The fourth Christ is ascended S. Chrys hom 2. ad Pop. Ant. therefore his flesh is not here S. Chrysostom Christ both left vs his flesh and ascended hauing it The fift the bodie should by this time be all consumed for many thousands haue receaued it S. Grerie S. Greg. Nyss orat Cat. c. 37. Wee must enquire how it can possibile come to passe that the one onelye bodie of Christ which is allwaies thorough out the world imparted to so many thousands of the faithfull may be wholie in euerie one in particular and allso remaine whole and entire in it selfe His answere These things he Christ bestoweth by transelementing thorough the vertue of benedictioÌ„ the nature of those things which appeare of breade and wine into it his bodie The sixt A mans bodie cannot be in that forme S. Epiphanius When he Christ had giuen thankes he said this is my bodie and blood S Epiphaâ— in Ancora and yet wee see that it is not of equall bignes nor yet like for it hath no similitude with the image of that flesh which he tooke vpon him nor with the Diuinitie it selfe which cannot be seene nor with the lineaments and shape of members For this is of a round figure aÌ„d according to the power insensible yet he vouchsafed by his grace to say this is my bodie and blood neither may any man refuse to giue credit to his words The reall Presence a fundameÌ„tall point For he that beleeueth it not to be true falleth altogeather from grace and saluation 55. Being here come to the end of this Chapter I wish you now to consider how vnpossible a thing it is for you to make it euident that Antiquitie was with you against vs and to make such as haue witte and learning to beleeue it That which wee beleeue wee finde in the Fathers and the iudgment belonges not to you or me but to the Church which if the cause were obscure by the diuine Assistance promised and present to her could determine it but this cause is cleere the Fathers haue giuen as faire euidence as wee could wish Wee cannot yet expresse our meaning better then they haue
donne It is not common bread it is not breade it is not that which nature made The Fathers breade is made the bodie of Christ that in the Sacrament is flesh it is the flesh of Christ made of bread the nature is changed nature it selfe is changed it is changed by Gods omnipotencie it is transelemented The senses may be deceaued beleeue theÌ„ not beleeue the words of Christ It is not breade though the tast esteeme it so it is changed not in shape but in nature it is the flesh which suffered for vs that which did hange vppon the crosse the price of our redemption It is the Lord of Angells he is heere on earth and thou receauest him He is sacrificed on the Altar the Sonne of God is againe sacrificed for vs the LaÌ„be that taketh away the sinnes of the world is offered in sacrifice by Priests without slaughtering Wee offer an vnbloody sacrifice in the Church it is offered euery where it is the same which Christ offered The victime is dispenced from the Altar wee doe eate the lambe entire Christ he is the feast the Angells tremble when they behold that wherwith wee are fed Christ is worshipped on the Altar wee adore the flesh of Christ in the mysteries the mysticall signes are adored as beiÌ„g that they are beleeued to be That in the Chalice is not wine it is blood it is that which did issue out of the side of our Sauiour VVee drinke blood wee drinke blood with our mouthes it is powered into our mouthes that which faith beleeueth the same wee receaue with our mouth wee receaue the bodie and blood of Iesus Christ with our mouth into our bodies into our members So the Fathers Our B. Sauiour This is my body this is my blood I conclude with S. Hilarie S. Hilar. l. 2 de Trinit There is no place left of doubting of the truth of the flesh and blood for now both by our Sauiours profession and our beleefe it is trulie flesh and truelie blood And these being receaued and drunke do bringe to passe that wee be in Christ and CHRIST IN VS THE EIGTH CHAPTER Of Transubstantiation 56. IN the Councell of Trent is defined the conuersion of breade and wine into the bodie and blood of Christ which conuersion is there and in the Lateran Councell termed by a proper name transubstantiation To these Councells and to the AuncieÌ„t Fathers aboue cited you oppose a fewe obscure sentences One out of an Epistle of one Iohn of ConstaÌ„tinople falslie attributed to S. Chrysostome Another out of one Gelasius whom to make your argument seeme the stronger you stile Pope but falslie as Baronius and others haue demonstrated against your Caluin The third out of Theodoret a knowne Aduersarie of your cause Ep. ad Caes Mon. 57. The first Chrysostome saith the nature of the breade remaines Answere It is false sainct Chrysostome saith expreslie it is changed as you shall heare anon The Epistle which you cite is a refutation of Eutichianisme which beganne many yeares after S. Chrysostome was deade Chrysostomus videtur traÌ„substantiationoÌ„ confirmare nam ita scrible moÌ„ vidos paneÌ„ num vinuÌ„ num sicut reliqui tibi in secessum vadunt absit nec sic cogites nam sicut cera c. Magdeb cent 5. c. 4. col 517. the Author of it is also against you for he saith in the same place that there are not in the Sacrament of the Eucharist two bodies but one and that one the bodie of the soÌ„ne of God This man you see was not yours in this point his doctrine take it all is not curraÌ„t among you for if there be in the Eucharist onlie One bodie and this One the bodie of the sonne of God then breade in substance is not there because the bodie of Christ and naturall breade be not one and the same bodie by the nature he meaneth the proprietie or naturall qualitie of the breade which is allso called the nature and this doth remaine 58. The second Gelasius saith De Duab. naturis the substance or nature of breade doth not leaue to be Answere The meaning of this man is that it is not annihilated but the substance is turned into another thing and so as it remaines not in it selfe for it is turned but in the proprietie or proper accidents tast colour c. All this the same Author teacheth in the verie same place in these words they the substance of breade and wine do passe into a Diuine substance the holie Ghost effecting it yet remaining in the proprietie of their nature wherefore this maÌ„ whosoeuer he be is noe ProtestaÌ„t in this for he that holds the substance of breade and wine to be conuerted by the power of God into a Diuine substance the bodie and blood of Christ is no meere Figurist nor of your Schoole but this Author did old it as you finde in his owne words therefore he was not a Protestant as you are Theodor. Dial. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 manent enim in prioris substantiae figura forma or manent enim in riri esentia c. Idem Dial 2 Idem transsubstantiationem videtur â—apere quod Theodoretusscribit sicut ergo Symbola c post innocationem 59. The third Theodoret saith our Sauiour deliuering the SacrameÌ„t called his bodie breade aÌ„d that which is in the Cuppe he called his blood he chaÌ„ged the names aÌ„d gaue his bodie the name which belonged to the signe and to the signe the name which belonged to his bodie Answere Reade further and you meete the solution of your difficultie The reason of the change of names was because he would haue such as partake the diuine sacraments not to heede the nature of those things which are seene the signes but for the change of names to beleeue allso the change that is made hy grace You replie out of another place the mysticall signes after consecration depart not from their nature but abide still in their former substance and figure and forme and may be seene and touched as before Answere It is true that the signes are not changed for those are Accidents those remaine but the substance whithin the signes or Accidents is changed The things are chaÌ„ged by reason of that which is interiour and within they are not changed by reason of that which is exteriour and without exposed to the sense mutantur alia fiuÌ„ c. Magd. cent 5. co 517. Ibidem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Theodoret proceeding saith they are vnderstood to be that they are made that is the bodie and blood of Christ and are beleeued and adored as beiÌ„g the things they are beleeued to be No man beleeues that breade is flesh No man doth beleeue these propositions to be true breade is a maÌ„s bodie breade is flesh flesh is breade No maÌ„ adoreth breade Now the Mysteries Theodoret saith are adored as being indeed the things which they are beleeued to be
nimirum qui voto propositum illum caelestem panem edentes fide viua quae per dilectionem operatur fructum eius vtilitatem sentiunt tertios porrò SACRAMENTALITER simul SPIRITVALITER Conc. Trid. sess 13 cap. 8. If you vnderstand this as it is easie you will vnderstand many passages of the Fathers which doe concerne the communion Dupliciter caro Christi sanguis intelligitur vel SPIRITVALIS ILLA atque diuina de qua ipse dixi caro mea verè est cibus eadem substantia coÌ„parata ad diuersos modos existendi sanguis meus verè est potus Vel caro sanguis qua CRVCIFIXA est qai militis effusus est lancea Iuxta hanc diuisionem in Sanctis eius diuersitas sanguinis carnis accipitur vt ALIA sit caro quae visura est salutare Dei alia caro sanguis quae regnum Dei NON quâ—ant possidere S. Hieron Comment in cap. 1. ad Ephes Learne this all well and when you reade S. Augustine it will do you good Flesh and blood cannot possesse the kingdome of God 1. Cor. 15. v. 50. you would thinke this to be against the Article of the Resurrection reade the whole Chapter and marke the Apostles distinction of a bodie into a naturall body and a spirituall bodie and this spirituall bodie in substance is the same bodie which heere nature framed consisting of flesh and blood and this you beleeue the Resurrection See Card. Peron his Treatise of the Eucharist Paris 1622. comes to the communicants mouth Yea some tymes he is receaued vnworthilie as you may reade in S. Paul 1. Cor. 11. but those receauers haue not the spirituall effect and coniunction they receaue the bodie into their bodies they receaue not grace into their sowles from this bodie because they receaue it vnworthilie and not as the bodie of Christ a thing most holie by reason of the vnioÌ„ to the diuine person ought to be receaued 72. As for signes some doe signifie things present some things absent The Eucharist is a Sacrament and therefore a signe it is a signe of grace and a signe of the bodie of Christ present So the forme doth signifie This is my bodie and so the species vnder these words doe signifie to good Christians to all those that beleeue Iesus Christ S. Aug. enarrat ps 3. cont Adimant c. 12. This mysterie is allso a representation of the bloodie passion as I said before it is a figure of that sacrifice yet a Sacrifice too The word of God is the figure of the Fathers substance and yet he is a diuine person too The same thing may haue diuers attributes one not excluding another the Eucharist is a signe a representation an oblation a Sacrifice and in it are reallie the bodie and blood of Christ yea Christ himselfe is there All these doe consist one doth not exclude the other 73. Lastlie to conclude this matter I wish you to reflect that opposing the Masse as you doe you oppose all the Christian world that was before Luther This I will declare brieflie In Antioche AlexaÌ„dria Ierusalem Aethiopia Chaldaea East India First it is manifest that all knowne Christian Churches in the age before Luther did frequent the Masse In all Europe in all parts of Asia and Africke where anie Christians were The Christians in the partes latelie discouered all were found to frequent the Masse Allso the Nestorians and Eutichians in Aegypt the Russians Muscouites and Grecians all frequent the Masse Which is an euident argument they had it by tradition from the Apostles Both those who knewe nothing of the Bishop of Rome and those who knew him but obaied him not all agreed in the substaÌ„ce of the Masse or vnbloody Sacrifice who taught the world for such vniformitie and consent of so many Nations so dispersed and some to the rest wholie vnknowne in so darke a Mysterie as this is could not be from any naturall cause SecoÌ„dlie all these Churches that is all the knowne Churches in the world did beleeue they were thus to doe by the institution of Iesus Christ and the Tradition of the Apostles And among these the true Church was one because that is euer visible by her profession as I haue prooued Whence it followeth that the frequenting of Masse is approoued by the Spirit of the true Church S. Aug. l. 4. de bapt c. 6 and consequentlie it cannot be an ertour Thirdlie that custome which men euen then looking vpwards did not see instituted by those which were later then the Apostles is well beleeued to haue beene deliuered by the Apostles saith S. Augustine But all these Churches Infinite eies looking vpwards could not see the Institution of vnbloodie Sacrifice or Masse later then the Apostles which is manifest because they all receaued it as diuine and Apostolicall Therefore by S. Augustines rule it is well beleeued so to be 74. For the later ages you easilie admitte they weÌ„t to Masse and that they beleeued an Vnbloodie Sacrifice for the Primitiue Church you are yet some what doubtfull it seemes what to doe Missa abominatio in calice aureo propinâ—â—a omnes reges terra populos a suÌ„mo vsque ad nouissimum sic inebriauit vt proram puppim sua salutis in hac vna voragine statuerint Cal. 4. Inst c. 18. Let me helpe you forward to resolue vppon the truth That vnbloody Sacrifice in the formes of breade and wine which wee call the Masse was frequented by the Primitiue Church I prooue first by the consent of all Christian Churches euer since aÌ„d by their liturgies which as all these Churches doe testifie were deliuered them from the Church Primitiue Among these haue beene infinite wise men and greate Schollers as in another place I did argue They had better meanes to know the practise of the Primitiue Church then wee haue being neerer and some of them immediate The matter as frequentation of the Masse and their exteriour profession of their faith touching these things was subiect to the seÌ„se And amoÌ„g these was the catholique Church the spouse of Iesus Christ hauing the Assistance of the holie Ghost to discerne the true worshippe of allmightie God The testimonie of all these is sufficient to make vs beleeue that the Primitiue Church went to Masse or no testimonie of men is sufficient in any cause 75. I goe neerer In the begining of the seuenth age liued Isidorus S. Isid l. 1. Offic. c. 15. plura c. 18. Bisshoppe of Ciuil and a Sainct and he saith the order of Masse or prayers whereby SacrificeS offered vnto God are consecrated was first instituted by S. Peeter the celebration whereof saith he THE WHOLE VVORLD doth performe after one and the same manner All this world sure had meanes to knowe what their Fathers in the age before had donne better then wee they had their books they had conuersed with manie of theÌ„ let vs ascende In