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
dissension For truthe is allwaies vniforme and agreable with it selfe And as the philosopher saieth of vertu so in truthe there is but one waie to hitt the marke a man may shoote aside diuers waies Wherefote two contrary sayings maye bothe be false and vntrue but truthe can neuer stand with a contrary Who then teacheth contradiction as he must nedes teach some falshood so possibly he may teach al false and beside the marke euen as it happeneth with all heretikes that leaue the common highe waie of their forefathers and seke out by pathes of their owne inuentioÌ„s wherein the faster they runne the farder they straye and the harder they finde the right waie againe Secondarely as touching the repugnaunce that is in Caluins doctrine against the expresse worde off God I will also by two maner of waies declare First by a number of his propositions and assertions coÌ„trary to the expresse wordes of Christ and his Apostles next by the auouching of such doctrine as concurreth with olde heresies condemned aboue a thousand yeares past in that state and time off Christ his church as Caluin him selfe doth in sundry places especially vpon the prophets and in his epistle to Sadoletus allowe and reuerence We recited you before diuers olde carren heresies that Luther stirred vp but Caluin beside all those hath nouseled yet a litle farder and digged deper then Luther did For euen as a a bestly sowe coming in to a faire garden sett with diuers swete flowres and pleasaunt herbes if in some corner thereof she espie a donghell or heape of rotten wedes or other filthe cast aside will straite nousell there and tomble her selfe in the filth and carren thereof not medling with the swete floures or pleasaunt herbes so truly these bestly heretikes of our time especially Luther and Caluin liuing in the church of Christ compared in scripture to the garden of the bridegrom wherein are bothe swete herbes of heauenly doctrine and most delectable floures of vertuous liuing lacking not yet her spottes and wrincles of euil life wich she alloweth neuer but tolerateth of necessite and lamenteth hauing also not in her but by her and cast oute of her a nuÌ„ber of olde coÌ„demned heresies they like bestly swine nether embrace the vertuous liuing that she vseth but raiseth at the infirmities whiâ—h she is constrained to suffer nether folow the steps of her heauenly discipline and vpright belefe but getting them to the donghell nouâ—ell them selues in the olde condemned heresies and veÌ„t them abrode to the world But nowe to come to the matter it self let vs considre first the absurde doctrine that he leaueth vs in his writings I entend not to discourse vpon all the pointes of his hereticall doctrine but for a taste off the rest I will examin his assertions about the blessed SacrameÌ„t of the aultar bicause this article doth most nearest touche the glory and maiesty off oure Sauiour being the most precious iewell that he left vnto his church After also we wil note diuers heresies bothe olde and new in his doctrine vpon the sacrament of baptim Last of all a fewe notable contradictions aboute his doctrine of the fre will of man But now to the first point Caluin in his Institutions in his treatise of the Lordes Supper teaching howe by his imagination we receiue Christ in the Sacrament after long dalying as though he would graunte a reall receiuing off Christ his body at the length he concludeth in these wordes Corporis communionem Spiritus sui virtute Christus in nos diffundit that is Christ pooreth downe vpoÌ„ vs the communion of his body by the vertu of his Spirit Which is as much to saie Christ communicateth vnto vs his body by the vertu of his Spirit This is in fewe wordes the communion of Caluin and all the Sacramentarieâ—â— denieng that we eate in dede the body of Christ otherwise then by faith Nowe let vs see what absurdites folowe thereof First no scripture hath this doctrine And how absurde a thing it is to folowe any doctrine without Scripture Caluin him him selfe telleth vs. In his institutions thus he writeth I ought not to seme to any man coÌ„tentious that I staie so earnestly vpon this point that it is not lawfull for the Churche to make any new doctrine that is to teache or deliuer for truthe any more then the Lorde hath reueled by his worde For wise men do see howe great a danger that is if so much authorite were graunted to men They see what a windowe is opened to the mockes and scoffes of wicked men if we sayie that to be taken for truthe among Christians which men shall thinke good Let now then any scholer of Caluin showe in all Scripture where it is writen that Christ by the vertu of his spirit pooreth downe vppon vs the communion off his body For Caluin as he writeth in his Harmony vpon the ghospelles thinketh it an absurde thinge to saie that the flesh of Christ it selfe should be deriued vnto vs. But he sayeth the communion of Christ his flesh is deriued vnto vs which he interpreteth to be a quikening vertu out of Christ his flesh correcting Christe promising vs his very flesh Now as I saied of the deriuation of any such communion of Christes fleshe no Scripture mencioneth But it is a sophisticall suttelty of Caluins imagination not reueled in any place by Gods worde This is lo then one dangerous absurdite by the confession off Caluin him selfe onles perhaps he haue some priuiledge more then the whole Churche hathe For in the Churche he alloweth nothing beside the expresse worde off God Againe let vs consider what is the communion of Christ his body poored downe vpon vs. It is saieth Caluin vis quaedam viuifica ex Christi carne in nos diffusa that is a certain quickening power poored downe vpon vs out of the flesh of Christ. Christ saieth in S. Iohn that his flesh is meat in dede and biddeth vs eate his flesh and drinke his bloud and in the other thre Euangelistes he saieth Eate this is my body but Caluin saieth we eate the bread and haue a certain quickening power out of the fleshe not as in his Harmony he saieth the flesh it self and that we haue a communioÌ„ of his body poored downe vpon vs which is not to eate the body as Christ badde vs. This lo is not only beside scriture but expresly against holy Scripture Thirdly where Christ biddeth vs eate his fleshe saying he that eateth my fleshe abydeth in me he teacheth an action on oure part touching the receiuing of Christ But where Caluin telleth vs that a communioÌ„ of Christ his body is deriued vnto vs he putteth no action on oure part touching the receiuing off Christ but only touching the eating off the bread For we eate not the body of Christ by Caluins doctrine but a coÌ„munion of the same body is deriued vpon vs and poored downe
vpō vs we suffring such deriuation and infusion Therefore betwene the saying of our Sauiour and the doctrine of Caluin there is as much difference as betwene doing and suffring action and passion Fourthly what meaned Caluin to imagin this communion of Christ his body to be deriued vnto vs and not the body it selfe He might haue muche peuish meaning beside which perhaps they onely know that are admitted to the secrets of his misteries as the Electi of the Maniches were But this one thing I am sure he meaned that bicause communion importeth a number of communicants and one alone cā not communicat which is the cause why these sacramentaries require allwaies a number at their table therefore he would haue no receiuing of Christe without a communion nor any other receiuing of Christ then by hauing a communion of him deriued vnto vs. Let vs suppose then as it maie easely happen that amonge the numbre of all that communicat one onely be a true and vpright beleuer and all the rest euill and miscreants as among so diuers sectes of protestants none other are to be found but such as for feare or otherwise sitt downe amongest them being no protestants in dede though in this point no good catholikes neither But let vs suppose that at the table of the protestants one onely were faithfull and duly prepared thereunto It will folow that bicause according to the doctrine of Caluin the infidel and wicked receiueth only the signe and bare bread the faith full person remaining alone through the infidelite of other shall not receiue Christ neither For being alone he can haue no communion of Christ his fleshe deriued vnto him euery cōmunion importing a number as these men saie Now what an absurdite is this that the good man shall not receiue Christ in the Sacrament bicause euill men receiue with him or bicause he can haue no cōpany of good men Fiftely if the communion of Christ his flesh be deriued vnto vs by the Spirit of Christe then the Spirit of Christ serueth the fleshe as an instrument Which Caluin in his institutions expresly saieth calling the Spirit of Christ a cundyt pipe by the which the flesh of Christ is deriued vnto vs. Nowe beside that this is a horrible blasphemy to make the Spirit of Christe which is his godhead inferiour to the flesh of Christe as an instrumēt of the same it is also cōtrary to al reason and common course of nature For the fleshe serueth well in thinges created as an instrument whereby the Spirit showeth forth his operations as by our eies we see by oute handes we feele and so forth but the Spirit neuer serueth the fleshe nor neuer may be saied to be an instrument of the same Last of all if the due eating of Christ is to haue the communion of flesh deriued vnto vs by his Spirit whereby we receiue life then the vnworthy eating of Christ is the communion of dānation How shall that be deriued vnto vs by the Spirit off Christ to what cā be a more horrible blasphemy by some euill sprit that were the doctrine of the Maniches And yet if it be true that the due receiuing of Christ is no other thing but to haue a cōmunion of him deriued vnto vs thē truly the vnworthy receiuing of Christ must nedes be a communion of damnation deriued also vnto vs. Lo in what absurdites Caluin hath entangled him selfe by departing from the Catholike faith For keping the Catholike doctrine none off al these absurdites shal ensue Wherefore it semeth I maie well saie nowe to Caluin and all suche as folowe this his doctrine that which S. Augustin saied to the Arrians Ego secundum fidem Catholicam Video quomodo exeam de questione sine offensione sine scandalo tu autem circumclusus quaeris qua exeas that is I folowing the catholike faithe ▪ can easely finde a waie to ridde my selfe oute this of question without offence or inconueniēce But thou being al compassed in arte to seke whiche waie to gett oute And euen so fareth it with Caluin For leauing the sure knowen doctrine of the catholike Churche teaching vs according to the tenour of Christ his owne wordes that we eate his fleshe and drinke his bloud in the blessed Sacrament and imagining a communion of Christ his fleshe to be deriued vnto vs by the Spirit of Christ as by a coundit pipe you see what hainous blasphemies and brutish absurdites he is forced withal to cōfesse And this point by vs nowe examined is the chefest Kaye of all the Sacramentary doctrine which being proued nought and full of absurdites declareth that all the store within is of no better stuffe And that shall you anon see and sensibly feale if priuat preiudice haue not vtterly bereued you of common sence Caluin in his commentaries vpon the first to the Corinthians disputing howe we receaue Christ in the blessed Sacrament concludeth his whole disputation in these wordes I conclude saith he the body of Christe is geuen vs in the Supper really as they commonly speake that is truly to the entent it may be holesome foode for oure soules I speake after the common fashion but I meane that oure soules are fedde with the substaunce of Christ his body to the entent we may be made one with him or which is all one that a certain quickening vertu is poored vpon vs oute of the fleshe of Christ by his Spirit though it be farre distant from vs and be not mingled with vs. In these wordes Caluin vttereth two straūge doctrines First that our soules are fedde with the body of Christ secondarely that we receaue the body of Christ really and truly though he saie after that body to be farre distant from vs meaning that it remaineth only in heauen as in the very nexte wordes folowing he declareth As touching the first point if oure soules are fedd with the body of Christ by eating the sacrament we must lerne whether he meane the soule onely to be fedde and not the body or the body also to eate the fleshe of Christ as well as the soule Caluin meaneth the soule onely to eate the body of Christ. For in his cōmentaries vpon the sixte of Iohn he pronoūceth our eating of the sacrament to be the worke of our faith and saith farder in expresse wordes I confesse we eate not Christ any other wise then by beleuing which doctrine howe absurde it is we shall anon speake off Nowe let vs see what absurdites folowe graunting the eating of Christ his body onely to the soule First if the bread of life whiche Christ geueth in the Sacrament be eaten onely off the soule then Manna the figure of this sacrament was more auailable to the Iewes then this blessed foode is to vs Christians For that the Iewes did eate Manna bodely not onely by faith and that it was a corporal foode vnto them the scripture doth clerely testifie Againe that it
we are assured of suche thinges as seme not to be but are in dede But a thinge to be whiche is not oure faithe can not assure vs. So by faith we beleue the present being off Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament which appeareth not present vnto vs. Nowe then if Caluin shooteth much amisse to attribut his fonde imagination to the miraculous working off God howe muche were his scholers beside the marke that seing Gods power failed woulde flie to their faithe and attribute suche operation to it as God him selfe worketh not And this doctrine being so absurde Caluin hath inuented bycause he woulde destroye Transubstantiation That is to saye Rather then with the Catholike churche he will graunte that Christ maye be in many places at ones as in heauen and in the blessed Sacrament to whiche is no contradiction but a worke though aboue the commō course of nature yet wel agreable to the omnipotēcy of almighty God and vniformely of al holy fathers acknowledged he inuenteth an imagination of his owne making God the authour off contradiction saieng we eate Christ in the Sacrament aud yet being as farre distant from vs as heauen is from the earthe whiche bothe is a thing that God neuer worketh and such as neuer man before the dayes of Iohn Caluin taught in Christ his churche I haue ben good readers some what long in debating this one point bicause I wish euery mā to vnderstande me As for the deceaued scholers of Caluin in oure dere countre if they will not beleue the Catholike churche touching the omnipotency of Christe to be in diuers places at ones they are confuted by the greate worke of Brentius a Lutheran de vbiquitate sette forth this very yeare for the proufe of that onely pointe though it be otherwise hereticall Caluin in his commentaries vpon S. Iohn saith in expresse wordes I confesse we eate Christ by no other meanes then by beleuing And what beleuing he meaneth in his Catechisme he doth expresse In beleuing that Christe is dead for our redemptiō and hath risen for our iustificatiō our soule eateth the body of Christ spiritually Finally he meaneth no other eating of Christ in the sacramēt thē by faith For vpon the sixt of Ihon he affirmeth eating to be the worke of faith and in his Institutions he calleth it the effect of faithe And this againe is a greate stay of al the Sacramentary doctrine to make men wene that we ought to looke for no other eating of Christ his flesh and drinking his bloud in the blessed sacramēt then by faith For this their faith is so precious a thing in the eye of Caluin that he is not ashamed to write in his cōmētaries vpō S. Matthew these wordes If we could sufficiently be mindefull of the passiō of Christ it were but superfluous to haue the commō vse of Sacraments for they are remedies of oure infirmitie This doctrine bicause it is a most perilous and most blasphemous doctrine and yet as I vnderstande to my greate grief much rooted in the hartes of many of my dere deceaued countremen I wil labour with such reasons as I may to remoue it frō their hartes For truly this proude confidence of faith planted by Luther watered by Caluin and encreased by the pricking forthe of the deuill in his Ministres excludeth all meanes to call for grace all due preparation to the holy Sacraments all endeuour of vertuous liuing First if by beleuing in Christ we eate Christe and eate no otherwise then by faithe then is all excommunication vaine Bothe the Catholike church hathe allwaies practised and the protestants of our countre for the maintenaunce of their wicked doctrine do gredely practise that for certain hainous crimes men are kepte from the holy table as they calle it or embarred the receauing of the blessed Sacrament as the Catholike churche termeth it The doctrine off the Catholike church teaching vs as the wordes of our Sauiour expresly importe to eate not onely by faith but in dede the fleshe of our Sauiour in the blessed Sacrament worthely excludeth from that most holy mistery open penitents as the primitiue church speaketh that is suche as hauing committed notorious crimes either wickedly perseuere in the same or though repenting thereof haue not yet done due satisfactiō therefore But the doctrine of Caluin and al the Sacramentaries excluding the reall presence off our Sauiour and graūting this heauēly foode to faith only what auaileth it thē to excōmunicat or remoue frō their table any notorious offender keping yet not withstanding his faithe and beleuing allwaies in the passiō of our Sauiour and resurrectiō also if by faith onely he receaue Christ then may he eate as well at home in his house as if he were admitted in to the congregation For though he be excommunicat he loseth not yet his faithe vnlesse perhaps as they saie according to the doctrine of their graundfather Luther that who hath faith hath withall necessarely good workes whereupon they builde their perilous doctrine of only faith so contrary wise they will saie that a notorious offender a bearer of malice a disobedient person and so forthe leseth with al his faith by the lacke whereof he can not eate Christ vnlesse he be absolued if they saie this first I aske what if the person repent before the pretended bishop or Ordinary absolue him In this case other he beleueth and so eateth Christ though he stande yet excommunicat as being not absolued or he beleueth not and so his faith dependeth vpon the external absolution which were to superstitious a doctrine for the newe ghospell Againe though we graunted them this suttle shift and suffred them so to pluck their heades oute of the coler that their excommunication were good bicause their excommunicats haue loste their faith and are become infidels though truly their excōmunicatiō be nothing els but the diuels curse yet by this their doctrine they condemne the primitiue church embarring penitents such as lacked no faithe pardy onles a man maie bewaile his sinnes and haue no faithe some three some seuen some ten yeares some euen to the houre off their death from the receauing of the blessed Sacrament Nowe if they boldely condemne the primitiue church what maie they not be bolde to do yet they beare men in hande forsothe that they reduce all to the state off the primitiue church and will be tried by the first six hundred yeares after Christ. Well this only practise in the primitiue Church excluding penitents from the blessed Sacrament directly destroieth oure Sacramenaries doctrine teaching vs to eate Christ no other wise as Caluin saythe then by beleuing Againe the practise of the primitiue church was that the Cathechumeni that is such as were not yet baptised and beleued not withstanding bothe in the passion and in the resurrection of Christ should not only not be admitted to receaue the holy Sacramēt but were not suffred to tary in the church
as a Sacrament hauing efficacy thereunto but to be a signe of that entring to the entent that being first grafte in Christ or being borne of Christen parents by the vertu of Gods promise or being borne of infidels by faith and repentaunce as he teacheth manifestly in his institutions being as I saie thus grafte in Christ before then by baptim as by a sure token we maie be accompted for Christians not made such And this to be his very meaning I will by his owne wordes declare you oute of his Institutions In his chapter of baptim not farre from the beginning thus he writeth Baptim promiseth vs no other cleāsing then by the sprinckling of the bloud of Christe whiche is figured by the water who then will saie that we are cleansed with this water which dothe assuredly testifie that oure true and onely cleansing is the bloud of Christe Lo here he teacheth baptim to figure oure cleansing procured by the sheading of Christ his bloud whiche he calleth oure true and onely cleansing It is most true that by the precious deathe and passion of oure Sauiour we are purged from the sinne of our father Adam and all other actuall sinnes And yet it hath pleased God to vse meanes for the appliēg of this souuerain benefit vnto vs. Those are amonge other his holy sacraments And Caluin him selfe writing vpon S. Paule to the Corinthians saith plainely that by the blessed Sacrament of the aultar Sacrificij beneficium nobis applicatur The benefit of the sacrifice is applied vnto vs. And writing vppon the sixte of Ihon he blameth them which teache the fleshe of Christ to profit vs onely as it was crucified and saieth Quin potius comedere eam necesse est vt crucifixa profit that is Na rather we must of necessite eate it to the entent it maye profit vs which was crucified And againe in in the same place he saieth Nihil nobis prodesset victimā illam semel esse immolatā nisi nūc sacro epulo vesceremur that is It shoulde nothing auaile vs to haue that sacrifice ones offred onles we did nowe also eate of this holy bāquet Caluin him selfe therefore acknowledgeth that not only the passion of Christ suffiseth but that also this Sacrament of Christ his body and bloud must feede vs. The like truly we saie of baptim For as our Sauiour saied Onles you eate my fleshe and drinke my bloud you shall haue no life in you so he saide Onles a man be borne againe of water and of the holy ghoste he shall not enter in to the kingdome of heauen And though Caluin call here the bloud of Christe oure onely clensing yet S. Paule is not afeared to call baptim also Lauacrum regenerationis the cleansing of our new birthe saieng we were saued thereby Againe Caluin him self writing vppon S. Paule to the Romans teacheth no lesse For there he saith that by baptim we are graffed in to the body of Christe and liue by the substance thereof euen as the graffe by the stocke sauing that the graffe kepeth his naturall taste and sape but we kepe nothinge offour owne but chaunge vtterly our nature in to the nature of Christ. Howe then is baptim as he made it before a figure of our clensing and a testimony onely Yow see he cōdemneth him selfe And this I haue thought good presently to declare allbeit beside oure principall purpose leste that the other doctrine of Caluin being apparently plausible might corrupt the vnlerned and well meaning Reader But now to the matter againe In the same chapter of baptim Caluin mocketh at the whole Catholike churche as Pelagius the heretike did a thousand yeares paste teaching that originall sinne is taken awaye by baptim Brefely in the next chapter folowing of his Institutions at the ende thereof he maketh so light of baptim in the children of Christen parents that if contempt and negligence be not on our partes oure children saieth he without daunger may lacke baptim Thus lo you see howe Caluin maketh baptim but a figure and token or testimony of clensing and euen so much maketh he the blessed Sacrament off the aultar comparing it vnto baptim to witt a figure a signe a testimony which a man may as well lacke as haue and withoute the which a man maye as well receaue Christ as with it imagining that these two most waighty and holy Sacramēts for of al the rest he maketh no accompte at all are naught els but as certain markes and tokens whereby Christ may knowe his flocke lest perhaps in seking for them he should misse See to what point oure Christen religion is brought by these newe ghospellers of late yeares Forsothe to mere signes tokens and figures As though we were yet vnder the shadowes off Moyses lawe as though that which happened to thē in figures were not brought nowe to a sure verite as though the coming of Christ procured not better and more present remedies for mans saluation then such as were betokened in the tabernacle finally as though the church of Christ redemed with his most precious bloud were fedde with figures and traded ▪ with signes and tokens as the synagoges of the Iewes was Would Christ thinke we threaten vs damnation for lacke of signes as he dothe for wante off baptim saieng vnto Nicodemus Onles a man be borne again of water and the holy ghoste he shall not enter in to the kingdom of heauen Would he denie vs the life of resurrection for lacke of tokens as he doth for not receauing his precious body and bloud saieng vnto the Iewes Onles you eate my flesh and drinke my bloud you shal haue no life in you Would S. Paule pronounce dānation vpō vs for the vnworthy receauing of a piece of bread as he doth for the vnworthy receauing of Christ his body Was S. Peter deceaued when he wrote that by baptim we were saued as Noe was by water or S. Paul writing that Christ cleāsed his church with the washing of water in the word of life or the whole church in S. Augustins time condemning Pelagius for an heretike for that he denied as Caluin dothe nowe that by Baptim originall sinne was taken awaie We recited you before in this laste conclusion of Caluins whole doctrine touching this blessed Sacrament oute of his resolutions vpon the sacraments that we receiue Christ no lesse withoute the vse off the Cōmuniō thē in vsing it You haue heard there his reasons why Truly he vttereth this doctrine off his not in one or two but allmost in all places of his workes where he treateth of this matter In his cōmentaries vpon the sixte of Ihon where Christ promiseth life and resurrection to those whiche eate his fleshe and drinke his bloud Caluin saithe Nō de Coena habetur cōcio sed de perpetua communicatione quae extra Caenae vsum nobis constat that is Christ preacheth not of the Supper but of
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
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
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
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
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