suddaine all Christianity for so it was as all learned men know all Christianity I say both in the East and the West both amongst those who hold with the Roman Church and those who stood in defiance of it eyther amongst the Grecians Georgieans Abissins Aethiopians all I say again all of them who would be called Christians every where firmely believing every where professing and confessing the reall presence of Christ in the Sacramēt ād falling on theyr knees to adore him Is it possible that in a point so hard as this is so many so differing in customes Languages Manners Educations Interests Opinions and beliefes so distant from one another in place and affections in dictamens and practices should all be found at once and no body can tell at what time first to consent most vnanimously Could so great a thing as this be done upon the persuasion of one man and done so silently that no one single writer should be found to record who that omnipotent man was or by what meanes he could possibly effect a thing so incredible all Christianity over without finding any where amongst good or badd learned or unlearned any considerable opposition This seems to me a thing so incredible that all you can say against our faith in this point is nothing so hard to believe as this alone Wherefore if this can not be so as surely it can not you must all be forced to confesse that when the faith was first preached by the Apostles and theyr successours they did not teach your doctrine concerning this Sacrament but they taught and delivered our doctrine And then you will soone understand that all the difficulties here mentioned be easy to be answered For hence you will easily vnderstand how no other beginning thē that of our first Christēdome could be found of this doctrine because such a doctrine as this is found so universally spread over all Christendome and never recorded to have been accounted new or to have had any particular author or opposer could not possibly have had any other beginning or if it had had more notice would have be taken of it But coming in with first Christianity you can not wonder to see all Christianity found embracing it And though it be a doctrine containing so many difficulties yet beeing proposed as a part of that Christian doctrine with all those powerfull motives which first moved all Christians to be Christians you can not wonder to see those who received Christianity to receive allso this Christian belief Whereas if they all had at first received the contrary belief surely at the first proposing of this known novelty some body or other in some one place of Christianity or other would have opened his mouth and sayd Wee can not adore that for God which the whole torrent of Antiquity from Christ to vs hath taught to be bread as allso our senses tells us Had it been to be adored the Apostles and those who were taught by them would have taught us so or at lest some where some body or other would have heard some newes of this doctrine before now But that which You say is too new to be true it is too cōtrary to all peoples fayth to all practice to all reason and comon sense Can any man imagin that in all Christianity there was neither grace nor witt enough to say this And certinly at that time the very saying of this must needs have quite overthrowne that new Paradox or at lest have withdrawne thousands in all natiōs frō following of it with so great facility For against a novelty so notorius and so absurd so much would have been sayd so much would have beē writtē so much would have been acted in Councells either Generall or Nationall or Provinciall that some smale mention of all this would have come to notice of Posterity as we see things of a thousand times lesser concernment have done Even by your owne bakwardness to believe Transubstantiation and by your great wondering at us for believing it and by the many and great difficulties which you still object against us you may clearly see how evidently true all that is which I have here so fully sett downe because it imports so much 3. Lett us go on now when Iohn 6. Christ sayd I am the bread of lyfe v. 48. and v. 51. The bread which I will give you is my flesh for the life of the world The Iewes therefore strove amongst themselves saying as you Protestants say how can this man give us his flesh to eate Iesus therefore sayd unto them Amen amen I say to you unlesse you eate the flesh of the Sonne of Man and drinke his blood you shall not have life in you My flesh is meate indeed and my blood is drinke indeed These things he sayd teaching in the Synagogue And he was so farre from declaring himselfe to speake figuratively that by all he was conceived so manifestly to meane litterally that many of his disciples and not only ill affected persons hearing sayd This saying is hard and who can believe it And all this happned though even then he tould them that the words he spoake to them were spirit and life Because as I sayd these words ought to have raysed up theyr spirits to believe this flesh of his not to be meere mans flesh but to be joyned with the divinity which was able by vertue of its omnipotency to give them his flesh to eate like bread and his bloud to drinke like wyne yet there beeing not faith enough for this high point From that time many even of his disciples went backe and walked no more with him v. 67. That you may evidently see how hard this doctrine would have sounded at first broaching of it in the Church if Christ had not delivered it seeing that at that very time when it came first even from his mouth it found so smale acceptance even amongst many of his disciples Iesus therefore sayd to the twelve will you allso depart Peter answered wee believe and know thou art the son of God And so art able by that thy divinity to which thy flesh is joyned to give vs thy flesh to eate lyke bread Now to what end had eyther this been sayd or Christ the lover of soules permitted all those many disciples to go back to theyr ruine and now to walke no more with him to what end this if he might have saved them all by declaring in a word that he only intended to give a signe or figure of his body to eate This one word would have saved both thē and would allso have saved those millions and millions which afterwards believed these words to be litterally meant as I expounded them and S. Peter seems to have vnderstood them when to make them appeare credible he sayd we believe and know thou art the Sonne of God And consequently that thou canst make good thy word which had been a very easy matter if he only spoke of giving
living bread you have all him in it and so you are deprived of nothing He gave us his body not his Carcasse without blood In his body we have all both body and blood You take both from us we give both Agreable to this sayth S. Paul 1. Cor. 11.27 Therefore whosoever shall eate this bread or drink this Chalice of our Lord unworthyly he is guilty of the body and blood of our Lord which he could not be if he did not receive both body and blood so that by either eating or drinking both are received Againe Luke 24. v. 30. And it came to passe whyle he sat at table with them the two disciples in Emaus he tooke bread and blessed and brake and did reach to them Twice Christ with his owne hands gave the Communion First at the last supper under both kinds Secondly here at Emmaus under one kind only For many Holy Fathers without ever scrupulizing at the giving only one kind absolutely say Christ here gave thē the Communiō And the Text insinuates as much by the use of those Sacramentall words of taking blessing breaking reaching with the ensuing effect of opening theyr eyes to know him to be the same Christ who at his last supper had done the same action So that it is the more probable that he did administer Cōmuniō under one kind thē that he did not How thē dare you absolutely condemne this They object drinke ye all of this Matth. 26. But this command was only given to all then present and was fullfilled And they all dranke of it Mark 14.23 So when he commanded do this He did not commaund Lay men to do what he did Theyr other objections are excellently answered by the Scriptures alledged in the Councel of Trent Sess 21. c. 1. in these notable words he that sayd unlesse you eate the flesh of the Son of man and drinke his blood you shall not have life in you hath allso sayd If any one eat of this bread he shall life for ever And he that sayd He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath life everlasting hath allso sayd The bread which I will give you is my flesh for the life of the world he that sayd Who so eateth my flesb and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him hath likwise sayd He that eateth this bread shall live for ever What need wee more then to live for ever THE XIV POINT Of the Masse or of the Holy Eucharist as it is a Sacrifice 1. CHrist in his last supper sayd Luke 22.19 Do this in remembrance of me We must see then what Christ did that we may know what is commanded here to be done If he did offer his Body and Blood then in Sacrifice the Church allso is bound to have some Ministers doing that in remembrance of him We say then that Christ did then offer his body and blood in Sacrifice and we say that the doeing this is the very essence of our Masse I know as soone as Protestants heare the word Remembrance they will object that Christ can not be really offered there where the offering is done to his Remembrance I answere that S. Paul tells us what it is to do this in Remembrance of Christ 1. Cor. 11.24.26 This do ye in Remembrance of me for as often as you shall eat this bread and drink the Chalice you shall shew the death of our Lord untill he come Christ here is remembred by us to have dyed for us yet he doth not here really dye againe bloodily but this unbloudy Sacrifice is done in remembrance of his real bloudy death It is not only in Remembrance of him that we do this but we do this in Remembrance of him dying for us a bloody death upon the Crosse Now his beeing truly present maketh the Remembrance not lesse but more lively and perfect For if a Prince who had gained a great battel with much losse of his blood would have yearely some action or representation exhibited in remembrance of it would in person be present with his wounds acting his owne part the representation would not cease to be a Remembrance but it would rather be a far more lively Remembrance as often as the king should act his owne part And the yeare he should not do this the Remembrance would be lesse lively and lesse representative so c. How perfectly in this Sacrifice is Christs death represēted whilest by the force of these words This is my body only his body is put in shape of bread in one place wholy different from that other place in which by force of those words This is my blood his blood in a liquide shape of wine like blood lately shed is put in the Chalice a part from his body 2. Now I will shew that Christ did truly Sacrifice and offer up his body and blood under the formes of bread and wyne First out of the old Testament Psal 100. v. 5. it is sayd of Christ Our Lord swore and it shall not repent him thou art a Priest for ever of the order of Melchisedech which words S. Paul 5. Heb. 10. sayth to have bin spoake of Christ and of this is Priesthood We have great speach sayth he and inexplicable to utter because you are weake to heare You must looke therefore for a mystery not easily understood by new Christians The famous Priesthood in the old Law was settled in Aaron and his Sonns Levit. 8. they offered bloody Sacrifices and yet our Saviour is not sayd a Priest according to the order of Aaron but of Melchisedech who was not so much as a Iew. He whose descent is not counted from them took tythe of Abraham and blessed him that had the promisses Heb. 7.6 which sheweth he was a Priest of higher dignity then Abraham as S. Paul here proves Lett us see now all that the old Testament sayth of Melchisedech and his Priesthood and you shal find it to be only that which is written Genesis c. 14.18 But Melchisedech King of Salem bringeth forth bread and wyne And he was the Priest of the most high God And he blessed him Abrahā and he gave him tythes of all So unanimous is the consent of all the H. Fathers who did write either upon this text of Genesis or on that of S. Paul or that of the Psalme that the Priesthood of Melchisedech did consist in offering bread and wyne by way of Sacrifice to God and that Christs beeing a Priest according to his order did consist in his offering up and sacrificing his body and his blood for us under the formes of bread and wyne that to deny this is to crosse all antiquity see the Rhemists upon these two last Texts Now becaufe Christ to the end of the world offereth still this sacrifice by his Vicars or Ministers hands in the Sacrifice of the Masse He is sayd to be a Priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech For by force of these words This is my
not be partakers of the Table of our Lord and of the Table of the Divels The reason why we cite and expound this place so fully is because we desire exceedingly to have it noted how that here our Chalice our Bread our Table and Altar the participation of our Host and Oblation are point by point in all Conditions effects and proprieties compared to the Altar Hosts Sacrifices and Oblations of the Iewes and Gentills and as he calls theyr Chalice the Chalice of the Divels for no other reason but because it conteyns liquor Sacrificed to him so he must be sayd to call our Chalice the Chalice of our Lord because it conteyns the liquor of Christs blood sacrificed to our Lord. For by force of these words This is my blood his blood under a liquid species is put in the Chalice as it were a part from that body which before he had put under the shape of bread All which discourse had been very ineffectuall if this had not bin the proper sacrifice among the Christians as those others were the knowne Sacrifices of the Iewes and Gentills 8. Again the same S. Paul sayth Heb. 13. v. 10. We have an Altar of which they have no right to eat who serve the Tabernacle still pressing the Iewes that they can not partake of the Sacrifice of our Altar if they will still stick fast to theyr old Sacrifices And note that which he called before the Table of our Lord he now calleth an Altar truly and properly ordeyned for Sacrifice and so he tearmes it thysiastirion that is Sacrificatorium An Altar to Sacrifice upon And by that word allwaies the Altars of the Iewes ordeyned for Sacrifice are still out of the Hebrew interpreted in Greek Well thē we have an Altar built purposely to offer Sacrifice upon therefore we have a true Sacrifice not of bread and wyne for in no mans opinion we Sacrifice these but of the Body and Blood of our Saviour under the shape of bread and wyne And this was the reason why in the Primative Church the Heathens would some times say we worshipped Bacchus the God of wyne and Ceres the Goddesse of corne sometimes they traduced us as feeders on mans flesh for eating the flesh of our Saviour in this Sacrifice 9. I conclude that had not this manner of Sacrificing in the Masse been delivered us with our first faith from the Apostles it could never without notice beeing taken of the first authour and of the time c. have been universally receaved with out opposition of any or without beeing ever taxed by any one of Novelty yea and be received allso so universally that if before Luthers days you look into all Parishes of Christianity where Confessed Heretiks did not domineere you will in every Parish thereof find no other Common service used publikly in that Parish but the saying and celebrating Masse with offering that which they all adored for the true Body and Blood of Christ under the shape of bread and wyne A Proofe unanswerable See what we sayd before Point 12. n. 2. THE XV. POINT Of saying Masses and other publike prayers in the Latin tongue 1. INS Matth. Chap. 1. v. 17. All the generations from the Transmigration of Babylon unto Christ fourteen generations a very long time And yet all this time the Iewish Church the only true Church in the world had all her Scriptures and all her publike service and prayer which was all taken out of the Psalmes the Law and the Prophets in that very language in which they were written to witt in old Hebrew that is in a language wel known indeed to the common people of the Iewes before theyr Transmigration into Babylon but in theyr Captivity at Babylon they lost the knowledge of theyr old Hebrew language in which all theyr Scriptures were written and did not perfectly learne the Chaldean or Babylonian language whence they made a mixture of both those languages which was called the Syrike language The very letters and characters of this language differ as much as the Greek letters differs from the Latin So that those who can perfectly read the one can not so much as read the other Neither do they understand one another more then the Italians can understand Latin which was theyr ancient native tongue The Scriptures were not at this time but some good time after Christ translated in to Syrike as your great Doctours who now at Londow have sett forth your famous Bible of so many languages do professe in theyr Praeface to theyr Bible And by the way they allso in the same Praeface plainly and openly confesse that in no Parish in Christendom they could in any of those nations which they have caused to be searched for old copies find so much as one ancient service booke written in a language understood by the vulgar or common people of the place A testimony to theyr owne condemnation and confusion The knowledge then of the old Hebrew tongue in which all the Scriptures were written beeing so much lost in the Captivity of Babilon they had all theyr Scriptures and publike service which was taken out of the Law and the Prophets and Psalmes read in a language unknown to all the common people and this was done for fourteen generations 2. Hence presently after theyr Captivity when they first retourned into theyr country Esdra was forced by himself and others to make the Law be interpreted unto them Nehemiah c. 8. v. 8. v. 13. So when our Saviour upon the Crosse did in the old Hebrew words of the Psalme say as it was first written Eli Eli Lammasabachihani Mat. 27. v. 46. S. Matthew who did write his Ghospel in that new kind of Hebrew or Syrike which was vulgarly spoaken by the Iewes in Christs dayes is forced to interprete these words saying which is interpreted my God my God why hast thou forsaken me For this reason allso he interpreted severall other Hebrew words A manifest signe they could not be understood by the Iewes in whose language he did write without interpretation And as he who writes English should ridiculously interpret English so if those words of the Psalme had been written by David in the same language in which S. Matthew did write it had been ridiculous for him to adde theyr interpretation Iosephus the Iew tells you what a world of schooles there were in Ierusalem for Children to learne the Law and Prophets they beeing written in a language otherwise unknown Well then as those who have not been now at our Latin Schooles understand not our Latin Bible and service so then the vulgar sort understood not theyr Scriptures nor theyr common service taken out of them and read in theyr Synagogues before theyr Sermons and Exhortations which S. Paul calls The lesson of the Law and Prophets Act. 13.5 Neither after the Captivity did the vulgar understand the words of Moyses who of old times hath in every citty those who preach him in the Synagogue where he is
in another a greate way of And so to goe seeking from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the Apocalipse And this though the number of Pointes necessary to saluation be but smale as Protestants all agree I can not therefore thinke is was Gods intention te leave us to the Bible only as to the sole Rule of Faith THE SECOND POINT Tradition besides Scripture must direct us in many necessary Controversies 1. FIrst the word of God may be notified either by Tradition with out writing or by Scripture or writing It is undoubted that the word of God written or unwritten is the Rule of Faith wherefore seeing it hath been proved in the former Point that the writteÌ„ word of God is not our only Rule of Faith it evidently followeth that Gods unwritten word notified by Tradition must be taken as part of this Rule 2. Secondly Moyses was the first Scripture writer and he according to his own story did not write till the world had continued above two thousand and four hundred yeares so long then all the faithfull in the world were truly faithfull without any Scripture All this long time then the unwritten word of God that is Tradition was the only Rule of Faith For even then many had that faith which is defined by S. Paul 11. Hebr. 1. which I prove because in that very place he numbers Abel Enoch Noë Abraham and Sara all having the faith he there described and yet Sara cannot be shewed to have had her faith grounded on any other word of God but that which was delivered by the Tradition of the Church in her times And generally then the faith of all true beleivers was grounded upon Tradition only By this Tradition they knew that God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it Gen. 2.3 And so all held themselves obliged to keep the Saboth By this Tradition they knew the distinction of Beastes cleane and uncleane Gen. 7.2 By this Tradition they knew themselves obliged not to eate the flesh with the blood Gen. 9.4 so likewise that the Tithes were to be pâ—yd to the Priest Gen. 14.20 By only Tradition they knew the fall of Adam theyr future saluation by the Messias to come theyr remedy from sinne by Pennance and repentance theyr reward of Good punishment of evell Againe from Abraham untill the written law that is for some foure hundred yeares they knew by Tradition only that this is the Covenant which ye shall keep between me and you All man kind shall be circumcised an infant of eight dayes Gen. 17.10 Now give me one Text if you can which bide us not to take Tradition for a Rule of Faith after the writing of Scripture 3. Thirdly even after the writing of Scripture the Gentils had not the Scripture yet by Tradition only many of them as apeares by the booke of Iob retained true faith And even among the Iews after they had the Scripture several necessary Pointes where left to be knowne by Tradition only as the remedy for Original sinne before the eight day and for woemen children both before and after As also by only Tradition they knew that all the vertue there sacrifices had to take away sinne was from the blood of theyr Redeemer to come The observing of al these traditions was not any unlawfull Addition to the written word of God whence you may understand the clere meaning of those words so often objected against us Deut. 4.2 You shall not adde to the word I command you neither shall you diminish ought from it For here is only forbidden to add contrary to the law So that other place Ch 12.32 Whatsoever I command you observe thou shall not adde thereunto nor diminish from it For this place is meant only of offerings not any other sacrifices besides those which were in the law prescribed But it was ever lawfull for lawfull Superiors to add more preceps agreable to the law So 2. Ch. 30.21 after the Children of Israël according to the law had kept the solemnity of Azymes seven dayes v. 23. The whole assembly took good counsel to keep other seven dayes And v. 27. Theyr prayer came to the Holy habitation of heaven This addition then did not displease God Again Esther 9.27 The Iews ordained and tooke upon them and theyr seede and upon all that would be ioyned with them so as it should not faile that they keep these two dayes and that these dayes should be kept through out every Generation every family Behold here an other addition and behold also an other again of the Dedication of the Altar made for eight dayes from yeare to yeare 1. Mach. 4.56.59 And that you may know that this booke is Scripture or at least that a feast is to be kept not appointed in Scripture our Saviour himselfe did keep this Feast Iohn 10.22 as I shall shew Point 38. Again the change of the Sabboth into the Sunday is only clearly known by Tradition Yea the manner of keeping it is contrary to all Scripture we have for Scripture sayth Levit. 23.32 From Even unto Even shall ye celebrate Your Sabboth Yet we do not begin the Sunday the even before neither dare wee worke after the even upon Sunday Who taught us this Tradition only 4. Fourthly Tradition is and therfore is truly to be held the word of God making us fully assured of what is not written For example for some yeares after the Death of our Saviour his glorification after death was not written so as to expresse that Iesus was that Christ whom God had glotified and yet before this was written S. Peter sayd truly Acts 2.36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly marke the word assuredly that God hath made the same Iesus whome you have crucified both Lord and Christ We may then have an infallible faith of what is not written yea we are forbidden to believe otherwise then was delivered by Tradition 2. Thess 2.14 Therefore Bretheren stand and hold the Traditions you have bin taught whether by word or by our Epistle For what he taught by his tongue only was as truly the word of God as what he did also write with his penne Yea this which I call Tradition is the Epistle of Christ 2. Cor. 33. you are the Epistle of Christ not written with inke but with the spiritt of the living God This Epistle written with the spiritt of the living God is no lesse true nor of lesse credit then what is writteÌ„ with inke in papers Whereforemost of the Apostles did give their Convertites no other forme of beliefe but what by their preaching they had written in theyr heartes not with inke but with the spiritt of the living God For the proper subject to receive and râ—â—ayne the word of God is not paper but the heartes of the faythfull Whence S. Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 4. What if the Apostles had also left no Scripture Ought not we to follow the order of Tradition which they delivered to them to
his flesh to be eaten in a meere signe or figure of it had S. Peter thought this I dare say he would have pulled the other disciples backsaying our master only speaks of giving a signe of his body Had this been so then allso vndoubtedly the other Evangelists when they had come to write of this mystery which had scandalized so many before theyr writing would not have encreased the scandal by writing so vnanimously of this Sacrament in words sounding so loud a litterall sense as these do This is my body this is my blood But they would rather have lessned the difficulty by declaring it only to be a figure which they might have done in a word S. Paul was so farre from declaring it to be so that 1. Cor. 11. v. 27. he flatly saith Therefore whosoever shall eate this bread and drink the Chalice of our Lord unworthily he shall be guilty of the Body and Blood of our Lord. Which could not be vnlesse he received the Body and Blood truly and not in a figure only To eate a Paper picture of Christ makes no such heinous guilt though it be done by a sinner and it be allso a figure of his body 4. S. Luke allso had been particularly to blame in encreasing the scandal by expressing so clearly a litterall sense Chap. 22. v. 19. This is my body which is givē for you This cup is the new Testamēt in my Blood which Chalice shall be shedd for you I say which Chalice that is that which is cōteyned in the Chalice shall be shed for you Now wine was not shed for vs but his true blood His true blood therefore was the thing cōteined in the Chalice For though by the Latine or English words we can not tell whether Christ sayd his blood should be shed for thē or the Chalice or Cup yet S. Luke writing in Greek makes it evidēt to all who know that language that he sayd the Chalice should be shed for us for he speakes in the nominative case by a word which can not agree with the blood which in Greek is the dative Now thus having proved that Christ literally sayd This is my body I have proved allso that this is not bread For it is his body which is as good a consequence as this this is a stone therefore it is not bread Or this is not bread for it is a stoone 5. Coming now out of Scripture to answer the chiefe okjections I begin with one which doth afford me a new strong argument They object then Idolatry to vs for adoring that which is bread I answer that according to Scripture Idolatrie can not be found in the only visible Church of Christ for Scripture sayth clearly of this Church Ifa 2.18 And Idolls shall be utterly abolisht Again Ezech. 36.25 And I will power upon you cleane water c and from all your Idols will I cleanse you And in the next Chapter v. 23. Neither shall they defile themselves any more in theyr Idols Again Micheas Chap. 5.12 Thou shalt no more adore the works of thy hands Again Zachar. 13. v. 1. In that day shall be a fountaine lying open to the house of David And it shall be in that day sayth the Lord of Hosts I will cast of the names of Idols out of the Land and they shall be remembred no more Hence I argue thus In the whole visible Church there continued and doth still continue adoration of the Sacrament but Idolatry did not continue in the whole Church visible therefore adoratiō of the H. Sacramēt is not Idolatry Moreover if worshipping this H. Sacrament were Idolatry all Christianity for many ages practizing this adoration had committed Idolatry and Christs Church for so many ages had quite failed as is cleare out of the third and fourth point For Christ had no other Church for many ages but that which every where practized this Idolatry as you miscall it Or tel mee if you can what other visible Church Christ had vpon earth different from the Roman in faith and worshipe for the thousand yeares before Luther If this be the only visible Church Christ had vpon earth then I have proved it could not be guilty of Idolatry 6. Against such a torrent of Scripture as we have for vs you ground yourselues not in Scripture but in Philosophy which tried by Scripture will be found to faile you in all your objections First then you object that an accident can not be without a substance Wee answere out of Gen. 1.3 God sayd be light made and light was made Light is a quality or accident Yet hence S. Basil S. Greg. Naz. and Theodoret are of opinion that light was without any subject at all for the Scripture specifyes no subject in which it was put Whence followes that at lest they must needs think it possible that light should be without a subject Secondly you object that the same body of Christ can not be multiplied so often over We answere again out of Gen 2.21 Our Lord God cast a dead sleepe upon Adam and whē he was fast a sleepe he tooke one of his ribbs and filled up flesh for it And our Lord God built the ribbe which he tooke of Adam into a woeman I aske how many times over must this one ribbe be multiplyed before a whole woeman of a comely proper stature could be made up of it After the same manner God can of one ordinary brick make a pillar of many foote high by multiplying that one brick In the like manner our Saviour multiplyed those five Barley loaves with which he fed above five thousand men Io. 6. For if he made new loaves he did not feede them with those five but with those many hundred new loaves which he made and yet the Scripture sayth v. 12.13 After they were filled they gathered the remnants and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves and not of any new loaves created by Christ so that the bread which was eaten remained still to be eaten And it is worth our noting that our Saviour did this miracle immediatly before he did first declare this strange doctrine of giving his flesh to be eaten like bread by every one that so when he should presently declare this strange doctrine they should have no reason to disbelieve the possibility thereof For his disciples seeing that he had done that most prodigious miracle so very lately ought not presently to have sayd This is hard and who can heare it Neither ought they so soone to have walked a part from him as there S. Iohn sayth they did but rather they ought to have sayd with S. Peter We believe and know thou art the Sonne of God able to make they words good as thou wart able so to multiply so few loaves 7. Hence appeares a solution of that which allso they still object one body can not be in two places at once For if whole Eve were made of one ribbe of Adam as the
Scripture testifieth surely the whole substance of that one ribbe must have been in many places or else Eve would have been a very litle woeman or Adam must have had very great ribbs Again our Protestants commonly read thus Act. 3.21 Whom the heavens truly must conteyne we read Receive untill the time of Restitution of all things HeÌ„ce they inferr that after Christs Ascension the heavens at all times must conteyne his body Therefore say they after his Ascension his body can not be on earth This theyr owne Text shall refute them thus The heavens must at all times after his Ascension conteyne his body But after his Ascension the earth allso did conteyne his body Therefore his body can be conteyned in two distant places And if in two why not in three and more Make the Scripture judge of this point and it will clearly cast you for did not Christ after his Ascension appear in his true body to S. Paul Act. 9. Who sayd who art thou Lord and he I am Iesus v. 5. And v. 17. Ananias sayth to him The Lord even Iesus that appeared unto thee in the way that thou camst That he appeared in his owne true body I prove by evident Scripture For by reason of this his apparition S. Paul numbers himself amongst those who with theyr owne eyes had seen Christ risen again in his true body For labouring to prove Christs Resurrection in a true and not in a phantasticall body as some Heretiks will have it he proves it by eye witnesses who all must have seen Christ now risen in his true body or else theyr testimony is vainly brought to prove a true Resurrection of the flesh he then bringing eye wittnesses who had seen Christ now risen in his true body makes himself as true an eye wittnesse of this as any other For thus he speakes 1. Cor. 15. v. 4 c. He rose again and was seen of Cephas after that of the eleven Then he was seen of more then five hundred Bretheren together moreover he was seen of Iames then of all the Apostles And lastly of all he was seen allso of me To witt in his true body or else all others may be sayd to have seen him in a phantasticall body and allso because any other manner of seeing him had been to no purpose to prove the true Resurrection of dead bodyes which is here his drift Where supposing himself by these eye wittnesses to have proved this he presently sayth v. 12. How do certaine amongst you say that there is no resurrection of the dead Yet againe Act. 22. v. 14. But he Ananias sayd to S. Paul the God of our fathers had preordeyned thee that thou shouldest know his will and see that Iust one and heare the voyce of his mouth Therefore he appeared in a true body which had a voyce and a mouth of flesh Buth as Christ sayth Luke 24.39 A spirit hath no flesh and bones as you see me have Yet again Act. 23. v. 10. S. Paul seeth Christ on earth for when there was made a great dissention the Tribune fearing lest Paul should be torne in peeces by them commanded the souldiers to go downe and take him out of the middest of them and to bring him into the Castle And the night following the Lord stood by him and sayd Be constant for as thou hast testifyed of me in Ierusalem so must thou testifie of me at Rome allso Here we have that very Lord of whom S. Paul did testify standing by him in the Castle farr distant from heaven by which is evident in how distant places Christs body may be To disprove so many cleare Texts give me but on if you can that S. Paul did not see Christ after his Ascension in his true body vpon our earth if you can not do this you are cast by Scripture in this point which proveth that one body can be at the same time in two distant places 8. Lastly they object that so great a body as Christs Body is can not be in so smale a compasse as a litle bitt of bread We still answere out of Scripture First Matthew 19 v. 26. where speach is of making the great body of a Camel passe through a needles eye Christ sayth with men this is impossible Where note that Christ here according to three Evangelistes speaks of such a passage through a needles eye as is in possible with men so that though with men there is no such thing possible as penetration of severall parts of the same great Camels body brought into so smale a compasse as is a needles eye yet not so with God With God all things are possible Secondly God can put two different bodyes so as to take vp only the place of one body therefore he can put al the parts of one body so as to take up only the rome of the lest part with which he can penetrate al the rest Thus Iohn 20. v. 19. When the doores were shutt where the disciples were gathâ—red together for feare of the Iewes Iesus came and stood in the midle So that as at his birth his body penetrated through his Mothers wombe at his Resurrection through the great stone of his monument and as at his Ascension he did not make a hole through the body of the heavens but his body was penetrated with those heavenly bodyes so here it penetrated through the shutt doore or wall and so two bodyes were in one place at once by which allso we prove that one body may as easily by his power be in two places at once Wherefore it is to you who against Scripture thus stand still alleadging Philosophy that we must say with S. Paul Col. 2.8 Beware least any man deceive you by Philosophy and vaine fallacie according to the Tradition of men and the elements of the world and not according to Christ against whom you cite Aristotle THE XIII POINT Of Communion under one kind PRotestants complaine we take half of the Sacrament from them We complaine they have taken five Sacraments from us and grace from all seven And as for this Sacrament they have taken both the body and blood of our Saviour from it and left only bread and wyne If we had taken wyne away no great hurt wyne beeing nothing but wyne To the purpose we have a full compleate and perfect Sacrament when we have such an outward signe as signifyeth and conteyneth invisible grace The consecrated bread alone doth this in this therefore we have a full compleate and perfect Sacrament Christ speaks this clearely Io. 6. v. 48. I am the bread of lyfe your fathers did eate manna in the desert and they dyed This is the bread that descendeth from heaven that if any man eate of it he dye not I am the lyving bread that came downe from heaven If any man eate of this bread he shall live for ever Behold as full an effect of the Sacrament as is any where promised to both kinds And he beeing
which we call austerity of life such as that of Iudith was both great and voluntary as allso that of Rechabites or Sonns of Ionadab how great and voluntary was the austerity of Holy David though a King His knees were weake through fasting Psal 109.24 I am weary with my groaning All the night make I my bed to swimme I water my couch with my teares Psal 6. v. 6. By reason of the voice of my groaning my boanes have cleaved to my skin Ps 102. v. 5. I have eaten ashes like bread and mingled my drinke with weeping v. 9. His prayers allso farre exceeded any commaund given him Psal 119. 148. Mine eyes have prevented the nights watches that I might meditate thy word I prevented the dawning of the morning and cried And v. 62. At midnight I will rise to give thanks to thee And v. 97. Thy Law is my Meditation all day And 164. Seven times a day I do prayse the. Daniel c. 9.3 of himselfe sayth I did put my face to my Lord God to beseech and pray him in fastings sackcloath and ashes And Nehemiah 9. v. 1. The Children of Israël came together in fasting and sackclaths and earth upon them What the Ninivites did is wel knowne Of Iacob as wealthy as he was the Scripture tells us how sleeping on the ground he used a stone for his pillow and so was favored with that heavenly vision Gen. 28.11 so all Israël is sayd Ioël 2.12 Turne ye to me with all your heart with fasting with weeping and with mourning 5. Now in the new Testament Christs doctrine would have made the great sinners of Tyre and Sidon do pennance in sackloath and ashes Matth. 11. v. 21. He sayth to all He that will come after me lett him take up his crosse Great and voluntary was the austerity of S. Iohn Baptist He shall be great before our Lord. Wine and sicer or strong drink he shall not drinke Luc. 1.15 The Child grew and waxed in spirit and was in the desert untill the day of of his Manifestation or shewing in Israël v. 80. That is from his childhoode untill he was above 30. yeares old He was cloathed with Camels haire and a girdle of skinne about his Ioynes and he did eate locusts and wilde honie Mark 1. v. 6. And he did eate so sparingly that of him Christ sayth Iohn came neither eating nor drinking Matth. 11.18 Of his Disciples often fasting we reade Matth. 9. v. 14. And they were instructed by him of whome Christ sayd amongst the Children of woemen there hath not risen a greater then Iohn Baptist Christ allso promised there that his Disciples should do as Iohns did that is fast often when the Bridgrome should be taken from them 6. They did but what S. Paul taught 2. Cor. 6. v. 4. In all things approving our selves as the Ministers of God in much patience in tribulations in necessityes in distresses in strypes in prisons in seditions To these which all perhaps were not voluptary he exhorts us voluntarily to adde In labours in watchings in fasting in purenesse or Chastity For as we shall be partakers of his sufferings so shall we be of his consolation 2. Cor. 1.7 Mortify your members which be upon earth Col. 3.5 But before I passe hence I must observe what is sayd of Holy Anne Luk. 2. v. 37. Shee was a widdow untill eighty and fowre yeares living even untill that age shee departed not from the Temple by fasting and prayers serving God night and day Behold by what exercises God is served Who commaunded her this The desyre of serving God more perfectly 7. Heare S. Paul of himselfe 1. Cor. 9.27 I keep under my body and bring it into subjection least perhaps whilst I preach to others my selfe may become a cast away or reprobate Who commaunded him Desire of securing his saluation Again Col. 1.24 I Paul who now rejoyce in suffering for you and do accomplish or fill up that which is behind or those things which want of the affliction of Christ in my flesh for his body which is the Church Behold an other reason which was to suffer thereby to satisfy for the sinns of others of which text more when we shall speake of satisfactory good works in the next point n. 6. 8. S. Timothey Disciple to S. Paul having great weaknes of stomack and frequent infirmities in the midst of so great labours did notwithstandin so continually drinke water at all his meales that S. Paul thought it necessary to write to him thus 1. Tim. 5.23 Drinke not yet water but use a litle wine for thy stomack ād thy oftē infirmityes So that you see that before he did not so much as drinke a litle wine though it were the common drinke of that countrey and though he were so weakned by sicknesse and labour Thus voluntarily absteyning from wine so good a creature of God Who commaunded him this abstinence Love of Perfection THE XXIV POINT Of satisfactory good workes 1. THese voluntary austerities of which we spoake in the former point and all such painfull and laborious good workes when they are performed in state of grace are held by vs Catholicks to have a great satisfactory vertue by which the paine due to our sin is forgiven and is more or lesse cancelled as the works are more or lesse perfect For wee teach that after the sin it selfe is forgiven by our true repentance and humble Confession there yet remaines the guilt of temporall paine to which that sin makes us still lyable as I shall prove in the next point which if you please you may reade before this Protestants thinke they much magnify the Passion of our Saviour by saying that by vertue of that alone all sinns and all paine due to all sinns are quite forgiven But first I aske them if nothing else be required on our parts They are forced to confesse something else required for they are constrained to acknowledge First that we must be baptized Secondly that we must lay hould of the Passion of Christ by the hand of Faith Thirdly that besids this faith wee must have true repentance Fourthly they must needs say that allso you must have a will to receave the Body and Blood of Christ Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood you shall not have life in you Io. 6.53 Fiftly they must needs allso say that either the observation of the commaundements is necessary as we shall shew point 36 or at least a good will and serious endeavour to keepe them He was made to all that obey him the cause of eternall saluation Hebr. 5.9 So that obeying him is required on our parts to have him be effectually to us the cause of eternall salvation 2. By this discourse it is evident that though the Passion of Christ in it selfe be of a sufficient worth and value to satisfy for all the sinns of the world yea of a million of worlds and allso for all the paine that
death belonged not to us 5. Wee fast the Eves of severall great feasts so to be the better disposed to prayer the next day By fasting allso we imitate and excite those Saints to help us whose feast wee solemnize thus more honoring them and more powerfully imploring theyr intercession by fasting ioyned with our prayers Wee fast for 40. dayes in Lent for even the most ancient Fathers called this fast an Apostolicall Tradition And surely if the Apostles had not together with the other practises of our Religion delivered allso this practise of fasting for 40. dayes the like may be sayd of fasting weekely no man afterward could have had sufficient authority and this through the whole multitude of Christians to make them all believe themselves to be obliged to fast so often Men love theyr belley to well to be brought so easily to such an insufferable burthen as this seems to many Nothing but a strict command of an undoubted authority could have made all Christianity accept of this great fast with that rigour which Luther found in the whole Church at his time Some Protestants venture to say that Pope Telesphorus who lived Anno Domini 141. was the first that commāded this fast They should have sayed he was the first that by written Law commanded the more exact observance of this Apostolicall Tradition which by some mens neglect was grown to be lesse observed if they make him the first Introducer of Lent then they must be enforced to confesse that in that primitive age the Popes authority was known for undoubted and reverently obeyed even over all Christendome at that time and this in a matter which pincheth many so hardly that we see here in England neither the known Laws of the land made by those of theyr own Religion nor the Kings Proclamations pressing those Lawes nor the Penalties enjoyned by them can prevail half so much in this one nation as the Authority commanding Lent did in those pure and primitive ages prevail through all Christian nations I must not end this point without observing that the whole Church may stand obliged to observe such and such fasts notifyed to her without any Scripture by the sole attestation of Church Tradition delivering this obligation as imposed first by the Apostles or such like lawfull authority For from the dayes of Noë untill Moyses that is above a thousand yeares all were obliged thus not to eat the flesh with the bloud Gen. 9.4 see Point 2. n. 2. A Command made known to them only by Tradition THE XLV AND LAST POINT That wee laudably in our fasts abstayne from certaine meates 1. OVr adversaries finding fasting so often and so highly commended in Scripture and not knowing well how to find fault with it they turne to pick a quarell against our manner of fasting For upon fasting dayes wee abstaine from flesh and in Lent from eggs yea from whitemeates also in some places for wee hold that the more afflictive or laborious the fast is so that it be discreet the more perfect it is of its own nature as beeing more satisfactory for our sins past and by more taming of our flesh more preventive of new sins and conteyning a greater exercise of vertue to the greater encrease of merit Not that God delights in our sufferings as they are afflictive of us but because he highly delights in them as they are so many wayes beneficiall unto us hence Ioel 2.12 Turne ye unto me with all your heart and with fasting Now to fast all day with out eating any thing is a thing over hard to be prescribed by preccpt to such a vast eommunity as the Church is The Church therefore according to her prudent Charity hath thus moderated the Matter First that we should fast till noon or there about with out eating any thing that may break out fast Secondly that the meat wee then eat be not of flesh which beeing more nourishing doth allso nourish temptations Thirdly that at night wee eat no supper but a slight collation is permitted for fear our nights rest should otherwise be lost with prejudice of health Other fasts be lesse strict and be rather to be called dayes of abstinence as Saturdayes are on which we only abstaine from flesh But other fasts we have yet more rigorous as from egges and all that is made of egges from whitemeat which no one who hath the sense of feeling can deny to be a very considerable addition to the austerity of fasting 2. This abstaining from certaine nourishing and delightfull meates is peculiarly recommended by Scripture as especially pleasing to God First the Nazarites Num. 6. were obliged to abstaine from wine though wine were the usuall drink of theyr Country there beeing no beer Secondly Ieremy 35. The Rechabites in like manner abstaining upon command from wine are highly commended by God and rewarded for it v. 18. Thirdly S. Luke c. 1.15 He shall be great before our Lord wine and strong drink he shall not drink Fourthly the same great Iohn Baptists ordinary food was Locusts and wild hony Matth. 3.4 And even of this course food he did feed so sparingly that Christ himself sayd he came neither eating nor drinking Matth. 11.18 Fiftly S. Timothey could not be induced to drink a litle wine in the weaknes of his stomake and his often infirmities untill S. Paul for this reason advised him not still to drink water 1. Tim. 5.22 Sixtly I might adde that this kind of fast is the most effectuall to keep under our bodyes and bring them into subjection least we become reprobate as S. Paul sayd of himself 1. Cor. 9.27 Daniel sayth allso of himself Flesh and wine entred not into my mouth for three weekes Dan. 10.3 3. Hence we may easily answer our Adversaries objections First then they object Mark 7.15 Nothing that is with out a man entring into a man can defile him For the sense is this no meat of its own nature is polluting or defiling though to eat meats that are forbidden doth pollute and defile the soul as the Apple defiled Adams soul as allso the taking of drink in excesse pollutes the Drunkard And even after our Saviour spoak these words eating of Hoggs flesh would have defiled the soules of the Apostles Yea and the first primitive Christians should have been defiled by eating bloud or meates strangled Not because those meates were still uncleane but because the Church thought fitt yea and necessary to forbidd at that time the eating of those meates Acts 15.28 It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us to lay no further burden upon you then these necessary things that you abstain from meat offered to Idols and bloud and that which is strangled So Gen. 9.4 For above a thousand years before Scripture all were obliged not to eath the flesh with the bloud And this no Scripture then either commanded or testifyed yet even then not the meat but the breach of the Churches commandment would have defiled them and
body his body is put under the species of bread and then in a place a part from that body of his he by force of these words This is my blood doth put his blood in the Chalice under the shape of wyne like blood poured forth and separed from the body 3. Again Ieremy 33. v. 18. There shall not faile of David a man to fitt upon the throne of the house of Israël And of the Priests and Levits there shall not faile from before my face a man to offer offerings and to kindle meat offerings and to do sacrifice continually By such sacrifices as then were known God expressed the continuance of true sacrifice in his Church there must not then fayle now Priests and Levits offering a true sacrifice 4. Now God speaks thus expresly to the Priests of the old Law I have no will in you sayth the Lord of Hostes and an offering I will not receive of your hands Malachy 1. v. 10. So that the former Text must needs be understood of Priests offering continually Sacrifices in the new Testament But now a cleane Sacrifice not a bloody one therefore here in the next verse it followeth for from the rising of the Sunne even to the going down great is my name among the Gentles And in every place incense shall be offered to my name and a pure offering to wit the pure offering and cleane Oblation of Christs body under the sweet and lovely shape of bread and wyne into which all those Holocausts burnt-offerings and killing of Victimes were turned though Ieremy used these termes because they as then knew no other sacrifices as they knew no other Priests and Levits but such as were killers of Victimes in a bloody manner But it is very observable that the same Prophet Malachy speaking in the third chapter of the coming of the Messias and the Lord whom ye seek v. 1. doth allso tell us clearly this then shall the offerings of Iuda and Ierusalem be pleasant unto the Lord v. 4. although before he had so flatly sayd to the Priests of Iuda and Ierusalem I have no will in you and offerings I will not receive at your hands Whence it is evident that by the pleasing Sacrifice of Iuda and Ierusalem he meaneth not the carnall but the spirituall Iuda and Ierusalem that is Christs Church where sacrifice is to be done continually as we did now say out of Ieremy 5. In the very last yeares of the world Antichrist knowing the chiefe worship of God to consist in this Sacrifice shall so mightily labour to abolish it that he shall seem for a very short time to have prevailed Daniel 9.27 And in the half of the weeke shall the Host and the Sacrifice faile and there shall be in the Temple abomination of desolation which last words our Saviour himself expoundeth to be understood of the end of the world Matth. 24. What signe of thy coming and of the Consummation of the world Sayd the Apostles to him v. 3. Our Lord telling many other signes at last sayth v. 14. This Ghospel shall be preached in the whole world and then shall come the Consummation thereof therefore when you shall shee the abomination of desolation which is spoken of by Daniel the Prophet c. This then shall not happeÌ„ untill the world is eveÌ„ come to the end and the Ghospel shall have been preached every where 6. According therefore to the practice of the Law of nature in time of Melchisedech and according to the practice and manifest prophecies in the written law exteriour Sacrifice which from the beginning of the world was ever held the chief and peculiar worship due to God is allso to be found in the Church of Christ from the rising of the Sunne to the going down even till the worlds end when Anti-christ for a short time shall in great part abolish it Lett us then see the Sacrifice that Christ a Priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech did institute in his Church Luke 22. v. 19. This is my body which is given for you Now given in this very present time and now by me offered in an vnbloody manner he sayth not to you but for you that is for your sins which body presently after I wil offer in a bloody Sacrifice upon the Crosse Behold here a Sacrifice and a propitiatory Sacrifice For what is offered for us and offered for remission of sins is a propitiatory offering applying plentifully the satisfaction of Christs Passion to us not derogating from that Sacrifice but deriving the fruits thereof to us Thus his body is properly sayd given for us But when it is given in the Sacrament it is sayd given to us not for us This Sacrifice the Apostles were offering to our Lord Act. 13.2 when they are sayd to have been ministring to our Lord. Had they been ministring the word of God or ministring the Sacrament they had ministred to the people But they had not been ministring to our Lord that is offering some thing to him In the Greeke text it is they beeing offering Sacrifice to our Lord. And so Erasmus translats it 7. This Sacrifice is plainly insinuated in S. Paul 1 Cor. 10. if his discourse be well noted He there discoursing of the Iewish and Heathnish Sacrifice doth conclude that all such persons as will be partakers of these Sacrifices can not be made partakers of the Christian Sacrifice of the Body and Blood of our Saviour First then v. 14. he bids them fly from serving Idols by eyther Sacrificing to them or eating of that which hath been Sacrificed to them If they will doe this he tells them of a farr better Sacrifice of which they may be made partakers at our Altars For sayth he v. 16. The Chalice of benediction which we do bless is it not the Communication of the Blood of Christ And the bread which we break is it not the partieipation of the Body of our Lord And having thus taught them that by vertue of the Priests Benediction or Consecration the true Body and Blood of Christ are made communicable upon our Altars under the shapes of bread and wyne he goeth on to tell them they can not be partakers of this Sacrifice if they will continue still to partake of eyther Iewish or Heathnish Sacrifices of which they truly make themselves partakers if they will still eat of that which is sacrificed by them For behould Israël sayth he v. 18 they that eat of the sacrificed Hosts are they not partakers of the Altar For by thus doeing they communicate with those that Sacrifice And having thus spoakeÌ„ of the Iewish Sacrifices he speaks to them of the Gentills Sacrifices But the things which Heathens do Sacrifice to Divels they Sacrifice and not to God And I will not have you have fellowâ—hip with the Divels as you will if you eat or partake of what is imolated to theÌ„ and will drink the Libaments offered out of theyr cup. For sayth he you can
receiving of it because that worship is done to the person signifyed by this signe But that which presseth you farr more is that S. Paul sayth He that eateth and drinketh unworthyly is guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ 1. Cor. 11.27 Now of this beeing guilty of Christs Body and blood it is impossible for you to give any other reason but that the abusing of the signe or figure of Christs body is a high abuse done to the body it self The same is proved out of Samuel 2. c. 6.16 where of Davids dauncing before the Arke it is sayd Michol saw David dauncing before our Lord. You see the honour thus done as much to the Ark as our bowing or kneeling or prostrating is done to the Images is referred not to the Ark but to our Lord and is layd to be done before him 2. First then I say wee neither are nor can be accounted guilty of Idolatry upon this account No understāding mā can deny but this hath been the practice of the only true visible Church for a thousand yeares at lest therefore no Idolatry can be in this practice For Idolatry destroyeth the very essence of a true Church Moreover the Scripture manifestly tells us that all Idols after the coming of our Saviour shall be quyte abolished in his known and visible Church For how can otherwise be understood that Isa 2.18 Idols shall he utterly abolish That of Ezech. 36.25 I will power upon you cleane water And from all your Idols I will cleanse you And Chap. 37. v. 23. Neither shall they defile themselves any more in theyr Idols And therefore Micheas Ch. 5. v. 13. Thy graven images allso I will cut of and thy standing Images out of the midst of thee Therefore in Christs Church there can not be found the use of such Images as were unlawfull that is of such as should be made to be adored as Gods whence the next words are And thou shalt no more worship the work of thine hands Now all those words are evidently spoken of what should happen after the coming of the Messias for in the beginning of this chapter is the famous Text prophesying that Christ should be borne in Bethlem And then he prophesyeth the ensuing benefits of his birth Zacharias allso speaking c. 13. v. 1. of this time sayth In that day shall be a fountaine lying open to the house of David and it shall be in that day sayth the Lord of Hostes I will cutt out the names of Idols out of earth and they shall bee remēbred no more And yet what a remēbrance of Idols would it be to see all Churches in the whole visible Church filled full of statues Images and pictures exposed to all to be worshiped if the worship used in these Churches be Idolatrous A most urging Argument and cleer demonstration Yea among the Iewes as prone as they were to Idolatry there was by Gods appointment a Religious use of Images 3. Thus God to Moyses Thou shalt make a mercy seat of pure gold Two Cherubins also thou shalt make of beaten gold on the two ends of the mercyseat Let one Cherub be on the one end and the other on the other end And the Cherubins shall stretch forth theyr wings on high covering the mercyseat with theyr wings Exod. 25. v. 17. And thus Moyses by the command of God made the Propitiatory that is the Oracle or mercyseat of the purest gold Two Cherubins allso of beaten gold on either side of the Propitiatoryes even to the mercyseat ward were the faces of the Cherubins Exod. 37.9 It is no smale signe of honour that these Cherubins pictures were made of gold as allso that they were placed before the Oracle it self The Holy of Holies Hence S. Paul sayth Hebr. 9.5 Over it were the Cherubins of glorie shadowing the mercyseat When this Tabernacle came to be placed in Gods Temple The Temple it self had graven Cherubs in the walles 2. Chron. 3.7 And v. 10. And in the most Holy house he made two Cherubins of image worke and theyr faces were towards the house v. 13. So that the people adored towards them v. 14. He made the vaile of bleue and purple-crimson and wrought Cherubins thereon Note here how all the people kneeled immediatly before these pictures when they prayed yea graven Cherubins were in the walles as I sayd placed before them which way soever they turned 4. There is allso a memorable passage of Osee the Prophet Chap. 34. where lamenting the great desolation of the Temple he particularly allso laments the want of that Religious use of Images in Gods Temple Because sayth he many dayes shall abide many dayes sit without King without Prince without Sacrifice and without an Image or statue and without Theraphim that is without Images which word of Images some of your Bibles have some put the word Theraphim which properly siggnifies a Statue Image or Similitude either of Indifferent use as the statue which Michol put in Davids bedde Sam. 19.16 is called Teraphim or of an Idolatrous use as Gen. 31. v. 19. Rachel stole the Teraphim Idols of her Father or of Religious use as in this place of Osee where the want of Teraphim is bewailed with the want of Sacrifice and Altar And hence the Ancient Rabbies proved that Images of Angels are not contrary to the Decalogue The same we may say of the Images of Saints not then used because as then the Saints were not in heaven But theyr Images now may so much the more be allowed because they can be pictured in theyr own true likenes and shape which Cherubins and Angels could not no more then God Where for simple people you may note that it litle imports whether the Picture be just like the person pictured It is sufficient it serves perfectly to represent him as these Cherubins and Angels were represented perfectly enough to our Imaginations by theyr Images or statues which were nothing like them 5. A further proof for Images is out of S. Paul Phil. 2.10 He hath given him a name above all names that at the name of Iesus every knee should bowe We have from hence that because this name is above all names therefore every knee is to bowe at it Why so because it is a name representing Christ by our eares as his Image represents him to our eyes Only the Image beeing a more lively representation especially to those who know not the person is the farre more noble Remembrance of the two And as to bowe at the name of Iesus was and is commanded the English reformed Church by theyr Canons so to bowe at the more perfecter Representation of Iesus can not be but as lawfull an act of Reverence to his person The Iewes out of Reverence to God dared not to pronounce his most sacred name of Iehova for so you are pleased to read this name now as the honour done to the name of any person so the honour done the Image of such a person redownes