call the Sacrament bread which yet condemneth all Lutherans and Zuin glâ—ans And she calleth the Sacrament bread bycause the Sacrament hath the forme of bread and bycause bread in the Scripture signifyeth any foode and bycause Christ his bodye ys in deede true bread and bread of life and heauenlie bread Therefore bycause it ys called bread vpon that onlye to conclud that it contynueth bakers bread it ys the argument of thinkers tailers and coblers and not of lerned scholars Then as concerning Gelasius which sayeth that the substance of bread or nature of wyne doe not cease to be in the Sacrament he expowndeth hym felfe by that which foloweth strayt after in thâ— same sentence adding these plaine wordes But they remaine in the proprieties of theyr nature Which proprieties are these folowing whitnes thicknes breadeth weight tast and power to norissh and feede the bodye with such like which he calleth the substance of bread and wyne and more playnelie the properties of their nature The lyke is to be answered vnto Theodoretus whiche sayeth that Christ honored the bread and wyne which we see with the names of his bodye aud bloud not chainging the nature of them that is to saye the naturall proprieties because in all poyntes it appeereth vnto owr eye to be euen as it was before consecration but ioyning grace vnto that nature Ouer and aboue all this a most true and readie answer ys that the faithfull doe consider allwayes not what one or two doe saye but what the whole cumpanye of lerned men or the greater part doe testifye Agayn before the church had expressed it and opened by her sentence the manner of Christ his being in the Sacrament it was no heresie if proude obstinacie dyd not make it to saye that bread remained or that it vanished in to nothing Bicause both opinions dyd hold with reall presence and the authors of them were contented to yeld vnto their betters iudgement And so if we should graunt vnto the heretâ—kes that which thei do require about Gelasius or Theodoretus they both defending the reall presence it ys no small matter against the heretykes other opinions and it ys nothing at all against the Catholykes But in these dares now when it hath been decreed according vnto scriptures and auncient fathers in a generall councell that the substance of bread is conuerted in to the bodie of Christ now to denie transsubstantiatioÌ„ and to reuyle the decree of the Catholike church this is greatlie against the faith and this is it which maketh heretikes S. Cyprian which defended the rebaptizing of them whom heretykes had baptized before was no heretyke in so doing bycause the question was not then determined by the church vnto whose iudgement he submitted his lerning and authoritie But now if it should come in to an idle head to bring that blessed martyrs reasons and to withstand the Catholike church he should do nothing els in wyse mens iudgementes but declare his owne vaine gloriouse folie And yet I do not ne will not vse this defence but plainelie answer that Gelasius and Theodoretus doe meane well and speak as papistes may doe that the substance or naturall propertie of bread remaineth that is to saie the same quantitie vertue and qualitie which it had before the coÌ„secration Wherefor to conclud the cleane contrarie vnto Master Iuells assertion I saie that neither the auncient doctors do affirme that the substance of bread remaineth vnderstanding by substance the essentiall and internall forme or nature of bread neither Duns and Durand doe saie that if bread remain there is daunger of Idolatrie Farther yet the scholemen say quod M. Iuell that yf a man happen to worship the accidentes of bread Idolatrie may be done to the sacrament No good Syr not to the sacrament but to the accidâ—ntes wherein if fault shold be committed it is not the fault of the institution of Christ but of the silence of priestes or simplicitie of the people Neither is adoration therefor to be forbydden but the manner of adoration is discretelie to be opened whiles owr Sauior him selfe walked visiblie vpon the earthe if one should haue worshipped his verie face or garment not able to distinct betweene the two natures of God and man neither in what diuersitie and degree the face and the garment appertein vnto one selfe same person whereas in truth it were idolatrie to worship that face with godlie honor in that respect and consideration as it is onlie an holie and graciouse visaige of a right excellent and perfect man bycause herein may be daunger should we not worship Ihesus Christ at all or not worshipp hym before we vnderstand the distinction betwene Latria and Dulia that is honor due and proper vnto God and honor which may be geauen vnto any holyâ— creature O miserable people sayeth master Iuell that thus are lead to worshipp they know not what For alas how manie of them vnderstand these distinctions or care for them How manie of them vnderstand after what sort accidentia be sine subiecto c. But o miserable world saye I allso then and alas alas that any wyse man should be so taken to thinke that what so euer ys concluded in scholes should be opened in the pulpites Alas alas the churche doth teache openlye that the Father ys vnbegotten the Soune onlye begotten the Holye ghost proceding and this who so euer doth not beleue shall not be saued O miseserable people that this are lead to beleue they know not what For what know they or what care haue they of proceding or begetting or how can they vnderstand those misteries of the schole men as for example Christ toke the nature of man he toke not the person of man as coÌ„cerning Christ his person God died for man as concerning the diuine nature God can not die and he which beleueth not those thinges shall neuer be saued O miserable people that this are lâ—â—d to beleue thei know not what for which of them vnderstandeth the distinction betwene substance and person But what shall we saie must the lerned men of the church O master Iuell beleue no more then the people are able to conceiue or bycause the people vnderstand not what is accideÌ„ce or what is substance or what is quantitie or qualitie relation or action is it therefor no matter whether it be fysh or flesh square or round white or black worldlie or euerlasting for the 〈◊〉 this is sufficient to beleue that Christ is in the sacrament vnder forme of bread and wyne the bread bâ—â—ng chainged by his almightines in to his boâ—â—e and the wyne in to his bloud or if some can not beare awaye all this let hym cleane to the Catholyke faith and hold vp his hands at sacring as others doe and beleue more excellent thinges to be present then hym selue can see or feele and be content to be reformed if perchaunse he should be in any error and God will 〈◊〉
to most shamefull death reignyng at the right hand of God his father and present among men vpon the altar Stick not therefor I say vnto the body lett not your thoughtes and desires rest in the flessh onlye but goe hyer by your faith and coÌ„sider that blessed sowle of his so chast patient wise charitable bright glorious and yet hyer and hyer in to the very heauens and aboue all heauens beholding and wondering how the maker of them all whom thowsand thowsandes and ten hundred thousand thousands do wayte vpon ys present here for vs to be receaued of vs and to incorporate vs in to hym selue This loâ— haue I spoken more largelie bicause M. Iuell hath no other way to answer S. Augustine but to declare as we denye it not vnto them but which thei haue lerned of vs that we must ascend with our hartes in to heauen and there honor Christ. Which being most true and grawnted vnto hym he doth vntruly and ignorantlye to say that Christ is not to be honored also in earth in the sacrament of his very bodye and bloud bycause he is to be honored in heauen For we doe not diuide Christ and make one Christ to be in heaueÌ„ an other to be on earth one bodye in heauen an other in earth but men worshipp hym in heauen one God and the Angells worshipp hym in the Sacrament here on earth as S. Chrisostome proueth And men worship hym as he lieth vpon the altar and Angells worship hym as he sitteth at the right hand of God his father And so both Angells and men doe worshipp Christ both in earth and in heauen and that not with two kindes of honors one for holy dayes an other for working but with one salfe same honor and worship The protestants wold be seen to say much when they appeale so often to heauen and receaue Christ sitting at the right hand of God as who shold saie the papistes myndes goe no hyer then the priestes handes when he sheweth the SacrameÌ„t vnto them And when they haue supposed that this is true then loe they triumph in recityng S. Chrisostome S. Augustyne S. Hierome and then are they sorye that old holie fathers be not regarded But the answer vnto them is readie that they haue saâ—ed therein very well but nothing to the purpose for Catholykes doe beleue that they must lift vp their hartes and seeke for Christ in heauen and worship hym at the right hand of his Fatherâ— but protestantes denye that Christ is reallie present in the Sacrament or that he is to be worshipped therein which I shal disproue a litle more S. Augustyne vpon the .21 Psalme The riche of the earth sayth he haue eaten also the bodye of their Lorde but they haue not been fulfylled as the poore men were in folowing of Christ but yet they dyd worship hym Now M. Iuell coÌ„fesseth that where we eate Christ there we worship Christ. ergo these riche men of whom the Prophet and S. Augustyne speak which did eate Christ on the earth did worshipp hym also on the earth for in heauen they did not eate hym bicause they folowed hym not as the poore did which worthelie did receaue hym Again how could the gentyles haue misreported the Christians in the primitiue church for honoring of Ceres and Bacchus the false goddes ouer bread and wyne except they had geuen some argument thereof in deed by reason of honoring Christ in the SacrameÌ„t For if an Ethnyk shold behold a Christian after grace sayd to eate his meate sauorlie and soberlye he could not think that he worshipped Ceres and Bacchus therein But when the panymes hard saye that the Christians dyd eate the flesh of theyr God and when they could see nothing but bread and wyne which were receaued with all reuerence and deuotion they might not saye that is was onlie bread bycause of the honor which at the presence thereof the Christians exhibited vnto it and they could not saye it was the bodye of Christ bycause that being yet infydells they were not instructed in owr misteries it remayned then to think and to report that vndoubtedlie Christians dyd worshipp Ceres and Bacchus Which proueth that the Sacrament was then adored and worshipped Besides this it ys gathered owt of the same blessed Doctor that we doe honor thinges inuisible I meane flessh and bloud vnder the forme of bread and wyne whiche we see And we doe not take these two kyndes after lyke sort as we dyd before the consecration whereas we confesse faythfullie that before the consecration it is bread and wyne which nature formed but after the consecration it ys the flessh and bloud of Christ which blessing hath halowed But yet for all those testimonye what sayeth M. Iuell It is a verie now deuyse quod he and which as it is well knoweÌ„ came but latelie in to the church about .iij. hundred yeares past Honoâ—us being Bishop of Rome and coÌ„maunding the SacrameÌ„t to be liâ—â—ed vp and the people reuerentlie to bowe downe to 〈◊〉 After hym Vrbanus the fowerth appointed 〈◊〉 holydaie of Corpus Christ c. Threâ— hundred yeares are 〈◊〉 but a very litle 〈◊〉 with â—ow when we â—alke of the adoration of the sacrament but if we come to the glorious setters furch of the new fownd Ghospell thirtie yeares lacking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 computationem Eccelesiâ— Anglicaâ—â— doe â—â—â—ke a greaâ—â— antiquitie And then 〈◊〉 or after hym Zuinglius must be named fathers and Apostells when very blessed Bisshoppes Honorius and Vrbanus whom all Christendome assented vnto are named contemptuouslie as who should say I knew them whem thei did stand withowt the church doores and could not read any letter in the bâ—ke But goe to when Honorius did commaund the adoration of the sacrament dyd any countrey of all Christendome or Cytie or godlye man speake agaynst it Or when S. Vrbane apoynted an holidaye for it is it writen or extant by any argument that it was refused in any place The popes I am sure were not withowt counsell the Vnyuersities were not withowt great scholars religious houses and orders were not theÌ„ destroyed the holy ghost in true Catholykes was inuincible the wicked spirite in heretykes would haue been venterous a good man with the daunger of his life would haue spoken the trueth an heretyke to wynne a fame would not haue passed vpon death the dyuel also being his comforter and in these so manye causes whi the trueth should not be suppressed is it possible that withowt open coÌ„tradiction a false honor of God should be receiued among Christians therough the whole world yf the adoration of the Sacrament were in deed blasphemous being so receaued as it was in all ChristeÌ„dome so many people runnyng headlong as you ween in to their damnatioÌ„ did the holy ghost stirr vp no one good man to call them back That holy ghost which was promysed before and is now performed vnto the church of Christ which
doe yow may be poysoned the host may chaunse not to be consecrated and then there is dawnger of idolatrie And so the people should be dimissed with scruple of conscience as M. Iuell vnderstandeth the scholemen which is nothing so â–ª for the conclusion of scholes and answer vnto that obiection which Master Iuell alleageth ys that the people are withowt all daunger in so much that the opinion of worshypping the Sacrament vnder a condition ys refused of the best lerned Now as concerning Duns and Durand Master Iuell reporteth of them by these wordes That they thowght it best to remoue away the bread and to bring in transubstantiation for it were remayned the substance of 〈…〉 and how 〈◊〉 vnto 〈◊〉 What is he which â—â—â—ring 〈◊〉 wordes and knowing neither the places where Dunâ— and Durand say 〈◊〉 or any good lernyng besides wolâ— not 〈…〉 Duns and Durand dyd so cast their heades to geather as thowgh they were able to bring thâ—â—â— opinions in to the articles of owr Crede and as thowgh transubstantiation were inuented and authorised by them and not rather coÌ„firmed by the whole church of Christ. It ys a shamefull kynd of lyeing when the true orderers of Christ his church shall be suppressed with silens and when the veâ—â—tyes of the Catholyke faith shall be attributed vnto the disputatioâ— of â—â—holemen Sainct Thomas indeed hath this argument that it ys agaynst the worshipping of the Sacrament if any creaâ—ed substance which may not be worshipped with godlie honor should be there ergo sayeth he no substance of bread remaineth Agaynst which reason of his Duns and Durand both doe argue verie busilie and they doe think that the substance of bread might be graunted to remain and yet the bodye of Christ might be worshipped in the Sacrament withowt all daunger of Idolatrie Therefor M. Iuell as cunnyng as he maketh hym selfe in Duns and DuraÌ„d doth so far and fowlâ—e goe â—â—de of theyr meanyng and opinion that they argued the plaine contrarie vnto that which he reporteth of them For whereas he interpreteth then sayinges after thiâ— manner that for auâ—yding of idolatrie in the Sacrament the substance of bread must be remoued they reason a playne contrarie way â–ª and argue their obedience vnto the church allwayes reserued that for all the remayning of â—read yet the bodie of Christ might be in the Sacrament and withowt daunger honored But they speak therein lyke scholemen and also lyke aduersaries of Sainct Thomas whose argumentes â–ª whiles they discussed to the vttermost â–ª they haue fallen some tymes in to the suspition either of enuie or curiositie And see agayne how litle it hangeth togeather that which M. Iuell would father vpon them Yf there be any substance of bread in the Sacrament sayeth master Iuell in his coÌ„mentarie vpon Duns and Durand there must be daunger of idolatrie ergo by transubstantiation lett vs take the substance of bread awaye and then will all thinges be safe and suâ—e and the people shall be cleane voyde of ieopardie But how can this sense and conclusion seeme agreable to a schole man For if as M. Iuell hath tolde vs owt of theire writinges there be daunger of Idolatrie when consecration ys omitted how much hath Duns holpen the people by bringing in of transubstantiation where as the substance of breade neuer so much taken away yet there may lacke consecration and that failing as master Iuell weeneth idolatrie may be committed and Duns and Durand should misse of their purpose for which they deuysed transsubstantiation Wherefore I wonder at the libertie which master Iuell taketh vpon hym in makyng as pleaseth hym free reportes vpon the lerned as thowgh they were easie to be vnderstanded or he had euer great mynd to read them or as thowgh his report were of such authoritie that as he sayeth so it must be in them Now as concerning Sainct Thomas which proueth that no bread doth remaine in the Sacrament bycause godlye honor ys geuen vnto it the authoritie and present practise of the church dyd moue hym thereunto As though he should saye on this wise The church doth geue godlie honor vnto that which ys vnder the formes of bread and wyne but no godlye honor ys due vnto anye pure creature ergo except the churche should committ Idolatrie which ys impossible no other substance besides the body of Christ can be conteined in the Sacrament In which his conclusion the honor which the church gaue to the Sacrament was sufficient vnto hym to inferr that no bread remayned and not his desire to haue the Sacrament worshipped was the motyue and occation to inuent that no bread remayned For to speake the trueth the scholemen as they were for the greater part men of excellent witt and holynes so thorowghe the ghift of vnderstanding and cumpassing weightie matters they went verie farr in serching owt the treasures of all diuinitie and yet thorowgh the grace of holynes which qualified their deepe inuentions they allwayes submitted their conclusions vnto the authoritie of the Catholyke church In so much that if a thowsand Dunces and Durandes shold so decide this question and matter as master Iuell reporteth of them yet needeth not the Catholyke for that cause to be trobled or the heretyke crake of anye victorie agaynst the practyse and faith of the churche But lett vs behold how master Iuell plaieth the schole man and vttereth such an insight in the Sacrament as the greatest doctors for subtilitye haue neuer marked throwgh their dulnes For vpon this which he supposeth Duns and Durand to saye the Sacrament ys to be worshipped ergo no bread must be remayning he inferreth a contrarie conclusion as that there ys bread remayning ergo it must not be worshipped Wherein both the argument concludeth not if he will folow Duns and Durand and the formar proposition ys hereticall if he would submitt his vnderstanding vnto the Catholyke church The argument I saye and the consequence ys nawght bycause for soth by his doctors Duns and Durand the schole men for all the substance of bread remainyng yet might the SacrameÌ„t be adored and worshipped But that is one doctors opinion Then also his antedent ys false because the church hath so receiued and tawght vs that the substance of bread ys clean conuerted And as concernyng master Iuell his profes of his antecedent where as he alleageth Sainct Augustyne in a sermon of his ad insantes saying that which you see vpon the table ys bread it doth conclud that the other thing which we beleue to be vnder those formes of bread is not Christ his naturall bodye And I trow Sainct Augustyne dyd not meane such bread to be there as childerne spread their butter vpon For it is wryten by the same blessed doctor VVe honor thinges which we see not that ys to saye flessh and bloud in the forme of bread and wyne which we see The church also herselfe feareth not to
still that in the sacrament is Christ his bodye and to make playne what body is meaned it foloweth which shalbe delyuered for yow Agayne it is a verâ—tie most certain that Christ hath not left his church without guides and gouernours in which be first Apostles then Propheâ—s then EuaÌ„gelistes after these Pastors and Doctors to the perfiting of her Which if yow graunt to what purpose is any talk or brable moued if more masses be sayd in one church at one tyme if laye men be restrained from commenting vpon the Scriptures or if the host be diuided in to three partes or if the laie man receiue in one kynd alone wher as all these thinges be such that being once appointed they must nedes be obserued And if they neuer had ben appointed the veritie of the SacrameÌ„t were nothing thereby diminished To what purpose then do I speak all this Truly to come at length to some end with out aduersaries and to geue waâ—â—ing vnto our frendes that in all thinges they require that which is materiall and necâ—ssary and lerne to distinct that from thinges indifferent in them selues â–ª also to appeale vnto the principall coÌ„clusion and not to meddle with lower matters before the principall be decided Can you proue saieth M. Iuell that it was lawfull by the old Doctours and Councels for the priest to pronounce the wordes of coÌ„secration closely What then Sir I can proue that there was and must be a principall head in the church by whom we must be ruled whether he appoint the wordes closely or openly to be pronounced how now then should any wise man and desirous of the truth haue talk with an heretike aboute the open and close speaking of the priest which dependeth of that other question whether the Bisshoppes and heades of the church may not rule the churche of Christ as they shall see expedient what a doe is made about the coÌ„munion vnder one kynde of prayers in the vulgar tong and of order in the seruice in which questions the heretike hath this aduantage that whiles these thinges are indifferent he maye bring for him selfe a probable argumeÌ„t and the Catholike whatso euer he shall bring except he goe to a higher questioÌ„ he shall speak but probablye and so the hearer of bothe partes can not dissalow greately any one But if we wold come to that which is the chefe in all such indiffereÌ„t matters and reason whether we shold not obey the lawfull Bishoppes and heads this question concluded would sone put to silence all heresy and settle well the consciences of true Catholikes I would faine be at an end and I can not For behold more then a dosen interrogations do folow which if I doe not answer I think that will be the best answer rather then to trouble both you and my self in opening all the matters which goe before and folow after vpon the foresaied interrogations But what nedeth that I go thorough all his interrogations and articles whereas if we be able to auouche against him any one of them all he is content to yeld and subscribe I will shew therefor which he demeth that the priest hath authoritie to offer vp Christ vnto his father Euery Bisshop saieth the blessed Apostle vnto the Hebrewes selected and chosen outâ— of men is appointed for men in those thinges which appertaine vnto God that he offer vp giftes and sacrifices for sinnes which being a generall proposition ergo either there be no priests and Bishopes in the new lawe or els they must haue a sacrifice which they may offer Which sacrifice must be of that valew that none may offer it but he which is called therevnto as Aaron was called â–ª and which sacrifice must be according to the order of Melchisedech as it is writen Thou arte a priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech Of which order Christ our Lorde was in his last supper as being the priest of the gentils and not annoynted with visible oyle as the olde Bishoppes of the lawe were and thirdly bycause he offred vp sacrifice there his owne body and bloud not in forme of bloud and flesh but in forme of bread and wine as Melchisedeth did before Of which order Christ is truly saied to be a priest for euer as Oecuâ—enius saieth in respect of the priests which be now a dayes by meanes of whom Christ doth offer and also is offred Therefore if allmighty God hath taken an oth and if it doth not repent him thereof that Christ is priest for euer according to the order of Melchiâ—edech and if these wordes for euer be verified in Christ thorough priestes which be now in the world and whereas Christ offred in his last supper his very body and bloud in formes of bread and wine as it dyd appertayne vnto the order of Melchisedech how can it be saied that the priests haue no authoritie to offer his bodye which except it were offred God should seme to repent him of his oth and to break it also And further except priestes made out of men should offer it no offering wold be at all our Sauiour now according to his visible forme being ascended in to heauen and there abiding vntill the last iudgement of the world And not onely by this argument it is proued that priestes may and should offer vp Christ but also by the very expresse commaundement of Christ in his last supper when he sayed Do this in remembrance of me which commaundement except it had ben geuen what man in all the world wold haue entreprised to haue coÌ„secrated the body of oure Lorde For as S. Denyâ— testifieth of the priests of his time They did excuse them selues reuerently and Bishoplike that they offred vp the â—olsome sacrifice which is farr aboue them trying first vnto God decently and saying Thou hast sayed Do this in my remembrance and then beseching him that they maye be made worthy of so great a ministery and seruice that they maye holylye consecrat the Sacrament By which wordes it appereth that the priestes of the primitiue church much abashed at the excellency of their function did yet take harâ—e of grace to consecrat the holsom sacrifice because they were commaunded so to do by God him selfe In which sense also Sainct Basil praieth in his lyturgye and masse Make me saieth he meete through the power of the holy Ghost that I being endued with the grace of priesthood maye stand at this holy table and maye consecrat thy holy and vndefiled body and precious bloud And like wise again For thy vnspeakable and exceding kindnes sake withoute all mutation and conuersion thou hast ben made man and hast ben named oure Bishop and hast deliuered vnto vs the consecratioÌ„ of this seruiceable and vnbloudy sacrifice And after this very sorte all blessed men haue euer done in the church of Christ not denying but that all priestes do in very dede coÌ„secrat and offer vp the body of Christ but leâ—t