accedat Caluin acknovvlegeth the Sacrifice vvas in the ancieÌ„t Churche M. Ievvel denieth nec Domini institutioni consentaneum sit minimè probo That the olde Fathers called the Supper a Sacrifice it is knowenâ— neither can I excuse the custome of the auncient Churche for that with gesture and outward rite they did set forth a certaine fourme of a Sacrifice with the same Ceremonies in a manner Caluin alloweth not the olde Churche yet must vve needes allovv Caluin that were in vse in the olde Testament saue that they vsed the hoste of Bread in place of a beast Whiche thing sith it commeth to nigh to Iewishnes neither is agreable vnto the Institution of the Lorde I doo not allow Thus M. Iewel should haue tolde his tale if he had folowed the chiefe Inuentour and founder of his Geneuian Gospel for so besides heresie he had offended but in pride But now he hath so proclaimed his Chalenge that besides heresie and pride he hath also proued him selfe ignorant rash and impudent And thus is he confuted by his owne chiefe Doctor who being conuicte with euident truth with some modestie confesseth that he could not denie though with intolerable pride he disallowed that whiche he was not hable to disproue So Lucifer knew that his Creator was aboue him yet not lyking wel of it Esai 14. he said I wil be like vnto the highest As concerning the Institution of Christe that by a cleare declaration of it The institution of Christe declared it may appeare by the acte of Christe that at his Supper he offered vp to his Father his body and bloude it is to be considered what he did Doo ye this said he in my remembrance What this This very thing that I now haue done He tooke bread into his handes and lifting vp his eyes vnto heauen as by assured tradition the Churche hath receiued Ambrosius De sacrament li. 4. cap. 5. and S. Ambrose reporteth it as a thing vndoubted and shewing it vnto the Father as we read in S. Iames Masse he gaue thankes vnto him as being the author almighty of al thinges Iacobus in Liturgia from whom al that good is procedeth and as it was accustomed to be done in Sacrifices with a certaine rite of Religion he consecrated the bread blessing it he brake it and gaue it vnto his Disciples to eate saying This is my Body that is geuen for you To whom is it geuen To my Father almighty to whom as being Lorde of al I haue geuen thankes It is geuen I say to my Father presently without bloudshed and in a Mysterie but anonne for his willes sake to be rent and torne and to be put to death Euen so a litle after he said lifting vp his eyes also into Heauen as it is in S. Iohn Iohan. 17. Pro illis ego sanctisico meipsum I sanctifie my selfe for them fulfilling that olde Lawe in deede it selfe Exod. 13. whiche required Num. 8. that euery first begoten should be sanctified vnto our Lorde Luc. 2. that is to say be offered and appointed vnto Gods holy seruice Likewise he tooke the Cuppe after that he had supped saying Mat. 26. This is my bloude of the new Testament that for you and for many is shed Luc. 22. in remission of sinnes This is the visible worke whiche we doo according to the instruction of Christe with which by publique auctoritie bicause Christe so ordeined and commaunded we professe God to be not onely the beginning and end of al thinges the founteine of al felicitie and ende of our desires but also through the Death of his owne Sonne the redemer of al men and the repairer of al thinges which through sinne we had lost That this commemoration ought to be celebrated externally with outward worke S. Paule plainely signifieth saying to the Corinthians So ofte as ye eate this bread 1. Cor. 1â— and drinke of this Cuppe ye doo shew forth the Death of our Lorde vntil he come For that shewing forth can not be made with the internal commemoration of the minde Whiche sense is also signified by the verbe of the present tense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ye doo shew forth our Lordes death for so in the Greke S. Paule speaketh Touching testimonies that may be alleged for further proufe of this Sacrifice bicause it is declared and set forth at large bothe in my Answer to M. Iewels 17. Article and in this Reiondre and for so much as the coÌ„uenient breuitie of a Preface wel beareth not so large a treatie as the dew opening of this point requireth and furthermore least by treating of it here I should withdraw thy desire Reader from perusing that wherewith I haue fortified and made good my Answere for these considerations I referre thee vnto my Reioindre it selfe Now let vs see how the foure thinges whiche after the doctrine of S. Augustine be required in euery Sacrifice August de Trinit lib 4. c. 14. be found in the most blessed Sacrifice of the Aulter 1 To whom oblatioÌ„ is made 2 by whom it is made 3 what is that whiche is offered 4 and for whom it is offered To vvhoÌ„ is OblatioÌ„ made in the Sacrifice of the Churche Concerning the first This doctrine of the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe whiche now we are driuen to defende against the Professours of this newe deuised Gospel was so certainely knowen and generally holden of al men in the first times of the Church that the very Arians who were Heretiques and enemies of Christe thought they had founde an inuincible Argument against the Equalitie of the Sonne of God with the Father bicause in this Sacrifice the Sonne is offered vp vnto the Father For it is certaine said they that he which is offered is lesse then he to whom he is offered To whiche Argument that which Fulgentius an auncient Father writeth may serue for answer who sheweth learnedly writing to Monimus that this Sacrifice is not offered to the Father onely but to the whole Trinitie If â—here be any Catholique beleuers saith he that seemed hitherto to be ignorant of this Sacrifice Fulgenâ—tius lib. 2. ad Moninum from hence forth they ought to knowe that al seruice of euery wourship and healthful Sacrifice OblatioÌ„ is made to the most blessed Trinitie is of the Catholique Churche exhibited both to the Father and to the Sonne and to the Holy Ghoste that is to say to the Holy Trinitie in whose onely name it is manifest that the Holy Baptisme also is celebrated Neither is preiudice goten vnto the Sonne or vnto the Holy Ghoste whiles prayer by him that offereth is directed vnto the person of the Father the ending of which prayer whereas it hath in it the name of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghoste sheweth that no * discrimeÌ„ oddes is in the Trinitie bicause whiles the wordes of honour be directed vnto the person
diuers degrees that with how muche the more grateful and deuoute memorie they did it so muche the more by this Sacrifice they should obteine and againe how muche the nearer any man came vnto that dooing and action of offering the more benefite thereof he should receiue For though al they that be iuste may be said to offer this Sacrifice by a certaine generalitie August Epist. 23. which S. Augustin semeth to meane for so muche as it pleaseth them al that it be offered yet they come nearer vnto this action who doo it them selues who heare Masse deuoutely who serue and attend vpon the Priest to doo that actioÌ„ who susteine him for his ministerie who with godly desire require Masse of him Wherefore as a prayer profiteth them that pray them selues more then an other for whom it is made so this Sacrifice profiteth more them that offer it them selues then it doth them for whom only it is offered And as a Prayer profiteth more that is specially made for one then that whiche is made onely in general for al euen so it is in the Sacrifice But these thinges shal appeare more clearely by the effectes whiche we looke for to enioye by the Sacrifice of the Masse through the vertue of Christes passion if we reherse them particularly The first effecte by consent of al men is the remission of Venial sinnes The effectes that we obteine by the Sacrifice of the Masse which the very iuste doo daily commit and also of temporal paines vnto whiche they remaine thral and bounde though damnation euerlasting be forgeuen An other effecte is the increase of righteousnes and the continuance in good life These are expressely declared in the Institution of this Sacrifice by the Institutor him selfe who first offered it This is my bloude saith he of the new Testament a Luc. 22. whiche for you and b Mat. 26. for many is shed in remission of sinnes That the Apostles vnderstood the very same also in the Consecration of the Body the Masse of S. Iames doth shewe Where after the pronouncing of those wordes Liturgia Iacobi this is my body which for you is geuen and broken the Deacon forthwith addeth in remissionem peccatorum in remission of sinnes By whiche wordes for so muche as with them Christ to this effecte offered him selfe albe it peraduenture they might be more generally vnderstanded that at least may be gathered which now we haue said of the remission of Venial sinnes and temporal paines vnto whiche the Apostles them selues were thral Touching the other there is a manifest place in S. Iohn Christe speaking of the Apostles and of them that should through their preaching beleue in him Iohan. 17. saith For them I sanctifie my selfe that they also may be sanctified in truth Whiche saying is truly vnderstanded of the encrease of holynesse and of continuance in asmuche as the Apostles were now cleansed and sanctified And vnto these effectes the Sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable for al the faithful that pertaine to the body of Christe that is to say for the iuste not only by the deuotion and merite of men that offer it but by the vertue of the Sacrifice it selfe neither onely by meane of a certaine common Prayer whiche standeth vpon liberalitie but of suche prayer as satisfieth the requestes of Gods iustice with presenting vnto him the price paid for sinnes and with a gifte geuen worthy to obteine that is asked whiche is the proper nature of a Sacrifice which is to be satisfactorie and to be offered by way of satisfaction And therefore S. Paule specially considering the worthines of this true Sacrifice said in general that euery Bishop or Priest is ordeined to offer giftes and Sacrifices for sinnes Of this it is learnedly by the Diuines gathered that for so muche as Infidels and suche wicked persons as be not yet reconciled vnto the Churche or vnto God nor so disposed that for them satisfaction may effectually be made Sacrifice for them is not properly offered For whether they them selues or others for them doo offer God doth not accepte giftes for the wicked to this ende for whiche properly they be offered as it appeared in Cain Gen. 4. This is witnessed in the Scriptures and in sundry other places Prouer. 15 Eccles. 34 Therefore S. Augustine saith writing to Renatus Quis offerat Corpus Christi August de origine animae lib. 1. c. 9. nisi pro eis qui membra sunt Christi Who may offer the body of Christe but for them whiche are the members of Christe The late holy general Councel of Trent approuing this sentence of S. Augustine Masses common not priuate and wherfore Concil Trident. Sess. 22. cap. 6. and declaring that the Masses whereat no man communicateth besides the Priest be not priuate but common saith that they ought to be iudged common partely for that the people in them doth communicate spiritually partly for that they be celebrated by the publique Minister of the Churche not for him selfe onely but for al the Faithful that pertaine to the Body of Christe When therefore Petrus à Soto that learned man was demaunded in that Councel whether Chaunteries might be erected and Masses appointed to be said for Infidels he answered that it was vnlawful bicause to ordeine Masse for any is to ordeine that Sacrifice for them be offered and that to them thereby satisfaction be applied whiche ought not to be done bicause satisfaction requireth before a remission of the deadly faulte Yet wel may it be said he that Prayer in the Masse for their Conuersion be made Our Sauiour him selfe semeth to haue insinuated this propertie of the Oblation when offering vp his body and bloude at the Supper after the fourme and rite of Melchisedek not without cause he said of the one Lucae 22. whiche for you is geuen of the other whiche for you Math. 26 and for many is shed that is to say is presently offered vp and shed in Mysterie anonne with outward violence to be shed in remission of sinnes For as touching the valour of the price it was offered vpon the Crosse not for many but for al. And so the Sacrifice of Melchisedek obteined the benediction for iuste Abraham who is the example and paterne of al that folow him This iudge I to be the chiefe cauâ—e why in the Primitiue Churche as we finde in S. Dionysius the Areopagite when true discipline was exactly kepte Ecclesiast Hierarch c. 3 part 5. the learners of the faith before they receiued Baptisme then called Catechumeni they that were possessed of vncleane sprites called Energumeni Publique Sinners and they that did publique penaunce were commaunded by the Deacon to departe out of the Churche before the Oblation that they should not be present at it Yet as it is here before said and as it is cleare by S. Paul 1. Tim. 2. in a certaine general and coÌ„mon respecte we offer for
any other learned Fathers is a very false parte and such as must nedes much discredit you when it is detected against you And yet by such false dealing you and your felowes haue begyled many vnlearned and vnstable soules How be it if it were S. Augustines or any other auncient Doctours saying it forced nothing For true it is the signes or sacramentes of the newe Testament be diuerse from the sacramentes of the olde Testament the faith notwithstandinge is not changed bicause Christ signified by the signes or sacramentes of both being that which faith reacheth vnto remaineth one and the same Let vs see whether your other stuffe be any better Iewel But here hath M. Hardinge donne greatte and open vvronge vnto S. Augustine vvilfully suppressing and drovvning his vvoordes and vncourteousely commaunding him to silence in the middest of his tale VVherein also appeareth some suspicion of no simple dealing S. Augustines vvoordes touchinge this vvhole mater Aug. De Fide ad Petrum Diacon cap. 19. are these In illis carnalibus Victimis Figuratio fuit Carnis Christi quam pro nobis fuerat oblaturus Sanguinis quem erat effusurus in Remissionem peccatorum In isto autem Sacrificio Gratiarum actio est Commemoratio Carnis Christi quam pro nobis obtulit Sanguinis quem pro nobis idem Deus effudit In illis Sacrificijs quid nobis esset donandum Figurate significabatur In hoc autem Sacrificio quid nobis iam donatum sit euidenter oftenditur In illis Sacrificijs praenunciabatur Filius Dei pro impijs occidendus in hoc autem pro impijs annuntiatur occisus In those Fleashly Sacrifices of the Ievves there was a Figure of the Fleashe of Christ whiche he woulde afterwarde offer for vs and of the Bloude whiche he would afterwarde shead for the Remission of Sinne But in this Sacrifice of the nevve Testament there is a Thankesgeuinge and a Remembrance of the Fleashe which he hath already offered for vs and of the Bloud which he being God hath already shead for vs. In those Sacrifices it was represented vnto vs vnder a Figure what thing should be geuen vnto vs But in this Sacâ—ifice it is plainely set foorth what thing is already geuen vs. In those Sacrifices it was declared that the Sonne of God should be slaine for the wicked But in this Sacrifice it is plainely preached vnto vs that the same Sonne of God hath already benne slaine for the wicked Likevvise againe be saith Huius Sacrificij Caro Sanguis ante Aduentum Christi per Victimas Similitudinum promittebatur Aug. Contrae Faustum lib. 20. ca. 21. in Passione per ipsam Veritatem reddebatur Post Ascensum verò Christi per Sacramentum Memoriae celebratur The fleashe and Bloude of this Sacrifice before the comming of Christ was promised by Sacrifices of Resemblance The same in his Passion vpon the Crosse was geuen in Truth and in deede But after his Ascension it is solemnized by a Sacramente of Remembrance This is the Difference that S. Augustine noteth bitvvene the SacrameÌ„tes of the Olde Lavve and the Sacramentes of the Nevve Therefore the vvoordes that M. Harding hath herevnto added Christe is offered vp vnto his Father and that vnder the Formes of Bread and VVine yea and that truely and in deede are his ovvne onely vvoordes confidently and boldely presumed of him selfe neuer vsed neither by S. Augustine nor by any other Ancient godly Father Harding Ful euil doth it become you to charge me with wrong done vnto S. Augustine wheras in the very next sentence before your self did him so much wrong as to father a saying vpon him in that place where he hath none such at al. If he be to be burthened with doing wrong vnto the Doctours that in alleging their sayinges doth not with al circumstances of the place that serueth to the present purpose set them forth then is there no man so much to be reproued as your selfe M. Iewel For of al that euer wrote we finde none that so much and with like falshode and to so euil meaning cutteth pareth and nippeth their sentences as you commonly doo Truly in laying this to my charge you haue not so clearly proued me to haue donne wrong vnto S. Augustine as you haue with the scornful vtterance of your wordes declared your owne spite Concerning the thing it selfe I haue donne S. Augustine no wrong at al. For what needed me to reherse his whole processe to the ende of the Chapter M. Iewels charge discharged I recited faithfully so muche as apperteined to the proufe of the mater for which I alleged his authoritie The sentence that foloweth belongeth to an other mater whereby is declared which no catholike man euer denied that the Sacrifice of the newe Testament is a thankes geuing and a commemoration of Christes flesh and bloude which he hath offered for vs. But that member of the diuision which I went about to establish by S. Augustines authoritie speaketh onely of the Sacrifices of the olde Lawe that they prefigured the flesh of Christ which he would afterward offer and the bloude that he would shed for remission of sinnes If I had rehersed al that you blame me for leauing it out I had but made the booke bigger and wearied the reader with a long superfluous saying superfluous I say bicause the same was in effect vttered in the next sentence before taken out also of the same S. Augustine For al that you force out of the longe processe there folowing is only the coÌ„memoration of Christes flesh and bloud offred and shed which though in fewer wordes was expressed in the former sentence out of the bookes against Faustus the Manichey as the reader by conference may sone perceiue The place of S. Augustine for leauing out whereof you so much reproue me and wherein you repose the coÌ„fidence of your doctrin helpeth you nothing at al. For there he saith not what is the substance of our Sacrifice wherein lyeth the questioÌ„ but what thing is done in our Sacrifice to wit geuing of thankes and the coÌ„memoratioÌ„ of our Lordes flesh and bloude which he offred and shed for vs and likewise what thing is shewed and declared in the same that is to say his death and passion Al which we denye not But that S. Augustine ascribing vnto the Sacrifice of the Church thankes geuing and commemoration of the flesh and bloude of Christ doth exclude the real Sacrifice of his fleshe and bloude by vertue of his woorde through the holy Ghost made substantially present that we denie vtterly And that was your parte to proue els you proue nothing againste the auncient doctrine of the Church M. Ievvel citeth one truth against an other truth But seing your selfe not hable to performe so muche you thought it an easier mater after your common woonte to set one truth against an other truth to wit the commemoration or memorie of the bloudy Sacrifice of the
and putteth away al mystes and clowdes of any obiection to the contrary For hauing alleged the prophecie of Malachie to proue the New state of the new Testamēt in which prophecie God saith that in euery place Incense shal be offred vp vnto his name and Pure Sacrifice to declare what he vnderstādeth by either of them first he sheweth what is the Pure Sacrifice that we offer next what Incense we burne and what perfume we make Concerning Incense VVhat Eusebius vnderstādeth by Incense in Malachie he maketh it to be Prayer and not only Praier but also other spiritual Sacrifices namely the sweete fruit of our right opinion touching God the sacrificing of our selues vnto God the puritie of our bodies and mindes the worshipping of God with syncere affection Ad finem lib. 1. De Demonst. and with doctrines of truth For these saith he do please him more then the multitude of sacrifices made with bloud smoke and vnsweete sauours Touching the Pure Sacrifice Pure Sacrifice he saith that we sacrifice vnto God the sacrifice of praise And least he shuld seme to meane none other but the mere spiritual sacrifice that is declared by wordes he declareth with very expresse and apt termes what Sacrifice specially he meant saying Lib. 1. De Demonst. in fine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Sacrificamus Diuinum venerandum sacrosanctum Sacrificium Sacrificamus nouè secundùm Nouum Testamentum Sacrificium purum We sacrifice the Diuine and the reuerend and most holy Sacrifice We sacrifice after a new manner according to the new Testament the Pure Sacrifice In these wordes Eusebius doth as it were with pointing of his finger direct vs vnto the most blessed Sacrifice of the Aulter and withal toucheth the manner how it is offred For what other sacrifice is there in the Church which is set forth with so special and so high titles of honour but the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ For this aboue al other is Diuine as that wherein Christ God and man but as man vnto God is offred This chiefly is reuerend and honorable and most worthily to be accompted holy wherein is conteined Sanctum sanctorum the holiest of al holy As for the manner of sacrificing what is that we offer vp now in the Church of God after a new manner and according vnto the new Testament but the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ which Priestes vnder Christ after the order of Melchisedech offer vp vnto God vnder the formes of Bread and Wine This new manner of offering Christ taught his Apostles the Apostles deliuered it vnto the Church to whom after that he had taken bread into his handes geuen thankes broken and blessed saying Luke 22. this is my body and likewise the cuppe saying also this is my bloude he gaue that he professed to be his body and bloude and commaunding them and in them their successours to doo the same in remembrance of him he taught as S. Irenaeas saith the new Oblation of the new Testament Irenaeus lib. 4. capite 32. Let it be remembred now and considered how many properties are attributed vnto this Sacrifice that Malachie speaketh of partely by the other olde learned Fathers but specially by S. Hierome and Eusebius whom M. Iewel hath brought for him First that it succede al the sacrifices of the olde Lawe Hieron in Malachi Cap. 1. Secondly that it be offered in euery place Thirdly that it be pure and cleane Fourthly that it be done in the Ceremonies of the Christians Fifthly to come to Eusebius that it be Diuine Euseb. de Demonst. lib. 1. reuerend and most Holy Sixthly that it be offered after a new manner Seuenthly that it be offered according vnto the Mysteries of the new Testament Eightly that I may adde certaine properties out of Eusebius fifth booke De Demonstratione that it be done according vnto the rules rites and ordinances of the Churche Nienthly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Christe doth performe it after the forme and maner of Melchisedech yet to this day amon gest men by his ministers Tenthly that it be such as was first done by our Lord and Sauiour him selfe and afterward by Priestes that * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 procede from out of him Eleuenthly that the thinges which be offered conteined vnder the formes of bread and wine vsed in this Sacrifice Lib. 1 De Demonst. bee as Eusebius saieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say the very and true thinges and the principal paternes of the Images by which worde he meaneth the Sacrifices of Moses Law which were Images in respect of this truth Twelfthly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they be the thinges whereof being then to come Melchisech long before vsed the Images as Eusebius speaketh which Images were Breade and Wine wherewith as he saith he blessed Abraham S. Cyprian calleth this Gen. 14. Cyprian lib. 2. epistol 3. veritatem praefiguratae Imaginis the truth of the Image that went before in figure Now let M. Iewel name if he can what sacrifice is that which we offer vp after a newe manner according vnto the newe Testament and hath al these conditions and properties And if he haue none to name besides the blessed Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe whereof we speake as we are assured he hath none then I wish his conscience would ouercome shame lead him to recant and consider of the false doctrine whereby he enuegleth the people of God making them to beleue that this Sacrifice is to be vnderstanded only of Prayer as he him selfe taketh Prayer and that there is no such external Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe at al. This much I thinke to be yenough for answer vnto his .3 Diuision The .4 Diuision The Ansvvere FOr whereas the holy Euangelistes reporte that Christe at his last Supper tooke Breade gaue thankes VVordes of Oblatiō without Termes of Oblatiō brake it and said This is my body which is geuen for you Againe this is my Bloude which is sheadde for you in remission of sinnes By these wordes being wordes of Sacrificing and offering they shewe and set forth an Oblatiō in Acte and deede though the terme it selfe of Oblation or Sacrifice be not expressed Albeit to some of excellent knowledge Datur here soundeth no lesse then offertur or immolatur that is to say is offered or Sacrificed specially the addition pro vobis withal considered For if Christe said truely as he is trueth it selfe 1. Pet. 2. and guile was neuer founde in his mouthe then was his body presently geuen and for vs geuen at the tyme he spake the woordes that is at his Supper For he saide datur is geuen not dabitur shal be geuen And likewise was his Bloud sheadde in remission of sinnes at the tyme of that Supper for the text hath funditur is sheadde But the geuing of his Body for vs and the
if it offer ought at al and feedeth the people with figures in steede of the truth Nay this Communion is not by many partes so good as Melchisedeks oblation and blessing of Abraham was For he offered in a figure and blessed according to his Priesthod being in time of figures before the truth was come into the worlde But our prety Cōmunion of England bringeth forth bare shewes of bread and wine now in the time of grace the truth being come and accepted Iewel And least any maen happen of simplicitie to be deceiued thinkinge that S. Hierome hereby meante M. Hardinges Real Presence for that he saith Melchisedek dedicated the Christian Mysterie in the Bodie and Bloude of Christe It may please him to consider that bothe S. Hierome and also other ancient Fathers haue often vsed the same manner of speache in other cases vvherein M. Harding can haue no manner suspicion of Real Presence Hieron aduers Iouin lib. 1. S. Hierome saithe Euangelium Passione Sanguine Domini Dedicatur The Gospel is Dedicated in the Passion and Bloude of Christe S. Augustine saithe Quid est mare Rubrum August in Psal. 80. Sanguine Domini Consecratum VVhat is the Redde sea He ansvveareth Consecrate in the Bloude of Christe Againe he saithe August in Ioan. tractat 11. Vnde rubet Baptismus Christi nisi Christi Sanguine Consecratus VVhereof is Christes Baptisme redde but that it is Dedicate in the Bloude of Christe Thus Melchisedek Dedicated the Christian Mysterie in the Bloude of Christe Harding Al that here foloweth to the ende of the Replie to this Diuision toucheth not at al any thing by me written or faid But it is inferred by M. Iewel vpon occasion of a testimonie of S. Hierom which he him selfe alleged fearing in the conceit of his owne imagination that S. Hierome wil be found against him in the very place where he craued helpe of him as he is directly against him in deede M. Iuels feare least the Eucharist be accompted a better thing thē bread and vvine And here is a great feare conceiued least forsooth the reader should be deceiued and thinke that S. Hierome in this place meant the real Presence Then tel vs good Sir onlesse the body and bloude of Christe be really present in the Mysterie of the Christians how is not the Figure of Melchisedech who dedicated the same as good and as worthy as is the Mysterie it selfe of the Christians which was dedicated But say you where so euer any thing is said to be dedicated in the body and bloude of Christe there his body and bloude are not consequently present as it may appeare by the example aboue alleged and by many other the like I graunt this muche what then Wil it thereof folow by necessary cousequent that in the Mysterie of the Christians whereof Melchisedeks Oblation was a figure and which was by him dedicated in a figure Matt. 26. the body and bloude of Christe is not really present Luc. 22. specially whereas Christe him selfe doth in termes pronounce Marc. 14. This is my body 1. Cor. 11. this is my bloude What neede you here to talke so much of the real presence You know pardy I stay not vpon this saying of S. Hierome for proufe of the real presence as though we had not many other and manifester proufes for it I confesse if Christe had neuer spoken those wordes and had neuer made promise that he would geue vs in our Mysterie the selfe same flesh Ioan. 6. that he would geue for the life of the worlde S. Hieromes testimonie of it selfe were not a sufficient proufe like as neither his saying that the Ghospel is dedicated by the Passion and bloude of Christe doth force vs to graunt that the Ghospel is the real bloude of Christe for lacke of Christes owne worde pronouncing that the Ghospel is his bloude And likewise for lacke of the worde of Christe saying that Baptisme is his very bloude which is shed for remission of sinne although it be said by S. Augustine not onely of Baptisme it selfe but also of the Read Sea which was a figure of it that they were redde as being consecrate in the bloude of Christe yet neither of them is in deede Christes bloude Concerning your phrase of dedicating VVhat S. Hierom vnderstode by the terme of dedication alleged out of S. Hierome I see not to what purpose it serueth you but to dazel the eyes of the vnlearned The circumstance of the place doth easily shewe what he meant by saying The Gospel is dedicated by the Passion and bloude of Christe for so it is to be turned Bicause Iouinian the heretique against whom he wrote making mariage equal with virginitie Hieron lib. 1. aduersus Iouinianū after that he had in his booke alleged examples of the olde testament folowing his order pretented to come to the Gospel and then in commendation of Mariage brought forth Zacharie Elizabeth and Peter with his wiues mother as perteining to the time of the new Testament and to the Gospel S. Hierome taketh him vp roundly and twiteth him of ignorance saying Consueta Vecordia non intelligit istos quoque inter eos qui legi seruierint debuisse numerari Neque enim Euangelium ante Crucem Christi est quod Passione sanguine ipsius dedicatur Thorough his accustomed doltishnes he vnderstandeth not that they also ought to haue ben numbred among them that were vnder the lawe For the Gospel is not before the Crosse of Christe that is to say before Christe was crucified whiche is dedicated by his Passion and bloude S. Hierome meaneth by these last wordes that the time of the Gospel beganne when Christe had suffered his Passion and shed his bloude and not before And here this worde◠Gospel Gospel signifieth not the booke written by the Euangelistes but the state and 〈◊〉 of the newe Testament Whiche tooke force and was dedicated that is to say was consecrated and made holy to the seruice and honour of God by the Passion and bloude of Christe Therefore he noteth Iouinian to be but a dolte in that he did attribute the Mariages of Zacharie and Elizabeth and Peter to the Gospel whiche in deed belonged vnto the lawe of the olde Testament bicause the lawe continewed til Christe had suffered his Passion Iohan. 19. as he said him selfe Consummatum est it is ended In like sense S. Hierome vseth the worde of Dedicating in the same booke a litle before saying Virginitatem à Saluatore virgine dedicari that virginitie is dedicated by our Sauiour being a virgin for that now it is otherwise with vs then it was with them of the olde lawe and with those to whom it was said Gen. 1. Grow ye and be ye multiplied and that virginitie is now sithens our Sauiour came in fleshe more generally commended then it was before among them who as there S. Hierome saith haue geuen vs types and figures
Sacrifices they thought them selues to be destitute of the benefites of the Lawe and remedies for sinne Herevnto the Apostle maketh answere and in effect teacheth That of such Sacrifices as the Lawe ordeined now we haue no neede for so much as the Priesthood of Christ who hath once offred him selfe with sheadding of his bloude vpon the Aulter of the Crosse hauing thereby fulfilled them remaineth and continueth stil with vs whiche is sufficient We haue saith he to them an Aulter whereof it is not lawful for them to eate whiche doo serue the Tabernacle Heb. 13. And that ye see not hostes to bâ— killed and the bloude of Calues to be shed of vs the cause is for that the onely blouddy hoste of Christe hath sufficed that now we haue neede of no other but of that That hoste is the founteine and endlesse treasure whiche conteineth the sufficient price of our Redemption onely it is neede that wee be made partakers of it Neither were those Sacrifices of Moyses lawe suche that by vertue and power of them being but signes and figures of Christ Heb. 9. synnes were remitted in conscience but by them synnes were brought to remembrance and signification was geuen out that there was neede of an other blouddy Sacrifice by whose vertue men in conscience should be made perfite And so the Apostle treateth of the thing it selfe that was shadowed in al the Sacrifices of the Law and is so acceptable vnto the Father that by his owne propre vertue and merite it sanctifieth men and remitteth sinnes whereunto by the ordinance of Gods iustice the Bloude of the Sonne of God was Requisite Suche is the Hoste or Sacrifice of the Crosse onely by whose vertue and merite they be sanctified whosoeuer from the beginning either by the Sacrifices of the former times or by the daily Sacrifice of the Churche are sanctified By whiche onely for this cause al be said to be sanctified bicause who so euer be sanctified be by that and by the vertue of that made cleane In case the olde Sacrifices or the Sacrifice of the Masse also were suche sufficient prices of our redeÌ„ption without doubte bothe those and this had long sithens ceassed to be offered For suche a Sacrifice whiche by his owne proper merite geteth sufficient price for sinnes ought to be great in deede soothly by the Death of the Sonne of God but one onely sufficeth Heb. 10. Wherefore of a blouddy Sacrifice there is no more neede but of suche a one as by which we may be made partakers of that great and most worthy Sacrifice Of whiche sorte the Sacrifice of the Masse is where in the person of Christe that Death is presented for vs vnto the Father And what Hoste or thing mystically offered could either better set Christes Death before his Fathers sight or more effectually deriue the merites of his Death vnto vs then that very body wherein he suffered For which cause when he deliuered the Sacrament of his Possion vnto vs Lucae 22. he said Doo ye this in remembrance of me So that this Sacrifice of the Masse although it be in his kinde a true Sacrifice as it shal be proued here after in this Reioindre yet it taketh his whole vertue and power of the Sacrifice of the Crosse which is of it selfe the whole price of our Redemption Now S. Paul disputeth with the Hebrewes of that whiche with bloudshed redemed vs and not of that whiche without bloudshed applieh the Redemption vnto vs. That was but once offered this is and must be ofte repeated Faultes escaped in printing Faâ—lte leafe line Correction Accidententes 31. b. 24. Accidentes Sigular 47. a 11. Singular â—nd 56. b. 20. and in here 79. a. 4. is here the termeth 94. a. 21. be termeth end 108. b. 5. and sacrified 111. a. 3. sacrificed iam num 117. b. 25. iam nunc the vnbloudy 119. b. 33. the bloudy taught them the nevv test 131. b. 26. taught them the nevve Oblation of the nevv Testament argume 136. b. 30. argument neither he they 140. b. 13. neither be they and circumstance 149. b. 23. any circumstance is the Masse in one 195. b. 10. in the Masse is one and maketh haste 208 a. 10. and make hast he briefly examined 215. b. 15. be briefly examined In the Epistle to M. Iew. Page 1. In the margent read Math. 5. Item there pag. 11. Lin. 2. for novv broched read nevv broched Item there pag. 13. Lin. 11. for hen read ben Item there Pag. 15. Lin. 14. for him reade him A REIOINDRE TO M. IEWELS REPLIE AGAINST THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASSE The wordes of M. Iewels Chalenge IF any learned man of our Aduersaries or if al the learned men that be alyue be hable to bring any one sufficient sentence out of any olde Catholike Doctour or Father or out of any olde general CouÌ„cel or out of the holy Scriptures of God or any one example of the Primitiue Churche wherby it may clearely and plainly be proued that for the space of sixe hundred yeres after Christe the Priest had authoritie to offer vp Christe vnto his Father I am content to yeelde and to subscribe The wordes of the Answer first made to this Chalenge Of the Priestes auctoritie to offer vp Christe to his Father CHrist is offered vp to his Father after three manners Figuratiuely Truely with Bloudshedding and Sacramentally or Mystically In Figure or Signification he was offered in the Sacrifice made to GOD bothe in the time of the Lawe of Nature and also in the time of the lawe written And therefore S. Iohn calleth Christe the Lambe Agnus occisus est ab origine mundi Apoc. 13. Heb. 10. Lib. 6. c. 5. which was killed from the beginning of the world meaning in figure The Sacrifices of Abel Noe and Abraham and al those of the people of Israel commaunded by the Lawe of Moses figured and signified Christe For whiche respecte chiefly the lawe is reported of S. Paule to haue the shadowe of the good thinges to come S. Augustine writing against Faustus the Heretike saieth Testamenti Veteris Sacrificia omnia multis varijs modis vnum Sacrificium cuius nunc memoriaÌ„ celebramus significauerunt All the Sacrifices of the olde Testament signified by manie and sundrie waies this one Sacrifice whose memorie we doo nowe celebrate And in an other place he saieth Dâ— fide ad PetruÌ„ Dia câ—nuÌ„ c. 19. That in those Fleashly Sacrifices there was a SignificatioÌ„ of Christes Fleash which he shoulde offer for sinnes and of his Bloud which he should sheadde for the remission of our sinnes Truely and with Bloudsheadding Christ is offered on the Crosse in his owne person wherof S. Paule saith Tit. 2. Christ gaue hiÌ„ self for vs Ephes. 5. that he might redeme vs froÌ„ al iniquitie And againe Christ hath loued vs and hath deliuered him selfe for vs an Oblation and Sacrifice to God into a svvete sauour Sacramentally or in Mysterie
suche manner order sense and meaning as the new state and condition of the Church succeding the Iewish Synagoge requireth that is not according to the figure shadow letter or signification but according to the truth the body the spirite and the very thinges Iesus vetus testamentum consummabat Ser. 7. de pass Domini nouum Pascha condebat saieth the auncient and learned Father S. Leo. Iesus made an ende of the olde Testament and did set vp the newe Easter or Passeouer And this new Easter doe we kepe and celebrate The same Father saith also Vt vmbrae cedereÌ„t corpori et cessareÌ„t imagines sub praesentia veritatis antiqua obseruantia nouo tollitur Sacramento hostia in hostiam transit sanguinem sanguis excludit legalis festiuitas dum mutatur impletur That the shadowes should geue place to the Body and the Images ceasse in presence of the Truth the Olde Obseruance is taken away by the newe sacrament hoste passeth ouer into hoste bloude putteth out bloude and the holy solemnitie of the Lawe whiles it is chaunged is fulfilled Againe more plainely to this purpose in an other place Leo. Ser. 13 de Pass Domini Nihil legalium instructionum nihil propheticarum recedit figurarum quod non tatum in Christi sacramenta transierit Nobiscum est Signaculum Circumcisionis sanctificatio Chrismatum consecratio Sacerdotum Nobiscum puritas Sacrificij Baptismi veritas honor Templi vt meritò cessarint nuncij postquam nunciata venerunt What so euer instructions be in the Lawe what figures so euer be in the Prophetes no iote of it departeth quite away but is gone ouer altogether into the Sacramentes of Christe With vs is the signet of Circumcision the hallowing of the holy Ointements Priestes the Consecration of Priestes With vs is the purenesse of Sacrifice Sacrifice the truth of Baptisme Baptisme the honour of the Temple Temple that for good cause the Messangers that is to saie the olde lawe ceassed after that their tidinges came Were it not tedious easily might a hundred such places be alleged out of the Fathers by testimonie of which the obseruation and vse of these thinges of the olde Testament Pascha Easter Pentecoste Priest or Sacrificer Hoste Aulter and Sacrifice is acknowleged as of thinges translated established and hauing place in the newe Testament The olde Obseruation is taken away by the newe Obseruation For the olde Aulter that was in Salomons Temple at Ierusalem we haue newe Aulters in the Churches of Christians thoroughe out the whole worlde Optatus lib. 6. on which the members of Christ be susteined and in which the body and bloude of Christe * Per certâ— momeÌ„ta at certaine times do dwel as the auncient Father Optatus writeth Newe Aulters I say bicause they serue to a new purpose and to a newe kind of Sacrifice in respect of the olde Sacrifices Concerning the hoste for Oxen sheepe goates and dooues we haue the body and bloude of Christ. For the figuratiue Lambe we haue the true Lambe of God that taketh away the synnes of the worlde Ioan. 1. For the feast of the Olde Passeouer Exod. 12. wherein the Iewes solemnized the memorie of the Striking Angels passing ouer them or beside them when he destroyed al the first begoten of the Egyptians and of their owne safe passing ouer the redde Sea out of Egypte 1. Cor. 5. we haue our Passeouer or Easter wherein we kepe a holy and soleÌ„ne feast in remeÌ„brance that by the merite of Christes bloude who is the true Lambe the plague of euerlasting death is past ouer and quite beside vs 1. Pet. 3. that for our sake he hath conquered al power that was against vs I. Ioan. 3. that he is passed ouer froÌ„ death to life and hath traÌ„slated aÌ„d redemed vs froÌ„ death and hel to be partakers of life aÌ„d glorie euerlasting in his kingdoÌ„ As the Iewes had their PeÌ„tecost so we haue ours For as when they were deliuered out of Egypte the Lawe was geueÌ„ them in the Mount Sina vpon the Pentecoste Exod. 20. that is to say the fiftith day after that the Lambe had beÌ„ sacrificed 1. Cor. 5. So vpon the fiftith day after our Passeouer in which the true LaÌ„be of God was slaine the holy Ghost came down vpoÌ„ the Apostles Act. 2. and the coÌ„panie of theÌ„ that beleued which holy Ghost froÌ„ that day to the end of the world coÌ„tinueth with the Church aÌ„d worketh in the sonnes of God the performaÌ„ce of Gods holy wil by loue aÌ„d Matt. 28. charitie as the Lawe wrought it or rather moued men to it by threates and terrour Leo Ser. 1. de Pentecoste Sâ— Leo speaking of this Feast saith Hodiernam solennitatem in praeciâ—â—â—â— festis esse â—â—â—â—â—â—ndâ—m omnium Catholicorum corda cognoscunt The hartes of al Catholike men knowe that the solemnitie of this day of Pentecoste ought to be had in honour among the chiefe feastes Remember M. Iewel if your hart geue you that there is no such feast of Pentecost to be obserued in Christes Churche because the vse of it is expired VVhat ansvver you M. Ievvel as you say by whose verdite you are excluded out of the nuÌ„ber of Catholike men and so pronounced gilty To whether parte wil you answer Doth your harte know it or know it not If your harte know it not then you are not Catholike and therfore you ought not to be admitted to teach Gods people If your harte knowe it and yet ceasse not to teache the coÌ„trarie then are you a daÌ„nable dissembler and a false deceiuer So touching this point euery way your doctrin is to be shunned Thus then it is made cleare the olde learned Fathers folowed not their pleasure or vaine delite when they spake of SabbatuÌ„ Parasceue Pascha Pentecoste Priest Aulter Sacrifice But vttered the truth seriously as men ready to geue accompte of their doctrine before God and man and as speaking of things that haue vse and place in Christes Churche though the Iewish obseruation and Ceremonie of them be abolished M. Iewels reason reproued The reason why the Fathers vsed these termes is as M. Iewel saith onely for that the eares of the people as well of the Iewes as of the Gentiles had ben long acquainted with the same This reason is altogether without fauour For if al manner vse and obseruatioÌ„ of the thinges by these termes signified were quite abolished whereas wordes and termes serue to th ende the hearers and readers by them be taught and the Fathers in al their writings intended to teache Christe and his Lawe what could the Iewes or Gentils learne touching the faith of Christe hearing and reading these termes not signifying to them the thinges which they did before their conuersion The more acquainted their eares wer with them before the more by hearing the same nowe were they put in minde of that they once signified
of these Sacrifices and both may wel stand together Rom. 15. Origen in Epist. ad Ro. lib. 10. Where he saith S. Paule speaketh of him self in this sense saying Sacrifico Euangelium Dei I sacrifice the Ghospel of God and Origen Sacrificale opus est annunciare Euangelium It is a worke of Sacrifice to preach the Gospel What sense meaneth he or what sense would he his Reader to conceiue sith that he spake no worde of any sense before He spake onely of a certaine delite that the olde learned Fathers had in vsing wordes which after the promulgation of the Gospel signified nothing extant nor practised I trow therefore he meant that S. Paule had also that delite which he pretendeth Now true it is that S. Paule hath nowhere these very wordes Sacrifico Euangelium Dei I sacrifice the Gospel of God Neither be the woordes Origens that he ascribeth to Origen but S. Hieromes who added vnto and tooke from Origens fifteen vnperfite bookes vpon the Epistle to the Romains and disposed that whole worke as he thought best as it appeareth by his Epistle to Heraclius The place which he meaneth Rom. 15. is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for which the common Latine bookes haue sanctificans Euangelium Dei Erasmus administrans S. Augustine consecrans which worde liketh Caluine and the same he pteferreth before Erasmus worde whiche notwithstanding the translatours of the Englishe newe Testament folowed Al which interpretations be too obscure Beza in Annot. in no. test as Beza iudgeth and therefore he liketh his owne best Operans Euangelio Dei as his Maister Caluine liked his owne better then that of Erasmus S. Hierome confesseth it to be more highly and with a more magnificēce spoken in Greke then he was hable fully to expresse in Latine Yet as being destitute of a fuller and perfiter worde he turneth the Greke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into sacrificans and saith that to preach the Gospel is a sacrificing worke and there plainely declareth how Now though it be graunted that both S. Paule alluded to the manner and condition of the Sacrifices of Moyses lawe and S. Hierome consydered the same in his exposition of that place yet thereof it wil not folowe that when so euer the olde Learned Fathers speake of the external visible and singular Sacrifice of the Churche they meane that there is no real Sacrifice in deede but onely in a figuratiue speache M Ievvel for the most part so argueth that he impugneth one truth by an other truth This Argument is naught pardy as M. Iewel knoweth him selfe S. Paule saith he consecrated the Gospel as it were a Sacrifice throughe preaching of the same offering vp the beleeuers as Hostes vnto God Item Saint Hierome for that respecte calleth preaching of the Ghospel a sacrificing worke Ergo the Fathers woordes spoken of the daily Sacrifice of the Churche are to be taken metaphorically onely and not properly Bothe manners of sayinges be true in their right sense the one in figuratiue the other in proper sense Who so euer aunswereth M. Iewel he must alwaies sing one song vnto him that his continual shift is to impugne one truth by an other truth The same answer serueth to the places by him alleged out of S. Gregorie Nazianzen and S. Chrysostome if S. Nazianzen haue any such wordes at al. For amongst al his Orations that be extant none beareth the title that is here noted in the margent Yet I acknowledge them to be such as he might wel haue spoken them by a metaphore M. Ievvel falsifieth S. Chrysostome The Testimonie of S. Chrysostome he hath fouly falsified with vntrue translation For whereas he found these wordes in S. Chrysostome Ipsum mihi Sacerdotium est praedicare Euagnelizare he hath thus translated it into English My whole priesthoode is to teach and to preach the Ghospel As though ipsum in Latine signified whole in English and as though it were true that S. Paules Priesthode consisted wholy and altogether in preaching the Ghospel whereas he confesseth him selfe to haue baptized Crispus 1. Cor. 1. and Caius and the householde of Stephana and it is not to be doubted but he consecrated and ministred also the blessed Sacrament of Christes body and bloude and where occasion so required loosed and retained synnes Which three functions be diuerse from the preaching of the Ghospel Whereby it is cleare that S. Paules whole Priesthode consisted not in preaching But these men would faine inclose al Priestly office within the limittes of preaching For so should our whole Religion consiste in prating so few Sacramentes would serue so the continual Sacrifice should ceasse so should Hostlers and Tapsters occupie the Pulpittes and what other so euer lewd Iackes could chatte and chapter their matters they should be admitted to the gouernement of soules And thus thinke they Papistrie should quit be throwen doune and their glorious Ghospel be set vp But S. Chrysostomes meaning was vpon occasion of S. Paules worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 15. whereby he signified the excellencie of his Office deducing his talke from the inferiour and common terme Latria that apperteineth to al whereof he spake in the beginning to termes of an higher and more speciall dignitie to wit Liturgia and Hierurgia which import Priestly Office his meaning I say was partely to declare that S. Paules preaching was a certaine Priesthode forasmuche as by the same he offered vp those that beleued as a sacrifice vnto God their outwarde man killed and carnal affections quite mortified for which cause he calleth the Gospel his sworde Machaera mea Euangelium est the Gospel which is the worde of preaching Chrysosto in epist. ad Romanos homil 29. is my sworde partely also to signifie that of al other offices and dueties the chiefe function of S. Paules Priesthode was to preach the Gospel according to that him selfe witnesseth Non misit me Christus baptizare sed euangelizare Christe sent me not to baptize 1. Cor. 1. but to preache Which wordes Thephylacte expounding wherein he foloweth the vaine of S. Chrysostome saith expressely that although the Apostle were not sent specially to baptize yet he was not forebidden to take that office vpon him M. Iewel not being ignorant of al this I see not what he can pretend for any colorable excuse of his false translation specially directed to so wicked an ende as of him it is which is either quit to abolish the external and true Priesthode of the newe Testament or to abridge it onely to a bare preaching of Gods wordes al other functions therevnto belonging as to baptize to loose and binde synnes to consecrate and offer vp to God the body and bloude of Christe to minister the other Sacramentes and the like clearely excluded Thus I hope thou perceiuest Reader what miserable and shameful an entrie M. Iewel hath ben driuē to make to come to his purpose whiche was to impugne the most worthy and
Cyprians doctrine they may offer the Sacrifice as the Vicars of Christ. What thinke we then May any Christian man sauing his profession imagine yea beleue and openly by preaching and writing publish vnto the worlde that the Apostles successours and Christes substitutes want auctoritie and commission to doo that vnto thoffice whereof they succede and be substitutes Now let these circumstances be gathered and set together in fewer wordes so shal the necessary sequele the better be perceiued Melchisedech was a priest and figure of Christ by offering bread and wine Christ fulfilled this figure at his Maundie by consecrating and offering his bodie and bloude vnder the formes of Breade and Wine vnto his Father him selfe being the true bread of life that came downe from heauen and gaue commaundement and auctoritie to his Apostles and to their successours to do the same in remeÌ„brance of him The successours of the Apostles in this behalfe be the Priestes of the newe Testament Ergo the Priestes haue a commaundement and thereby sufficient auctority to doo that Christe did at his Maundie that is to coÌ„secrate and offer the body and bloud of Christ vnto his Father And so to conclude these circumstances thus considered doo clearely prooue to the detection of M. Iewels either blinde ignorance or cankred malice against the Churche this to be a good and true consequent which he proponed as absurde and ridiculous God the Father saith vnto Christe Thou arte a priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech Ergo the Priest hath auctoritie and power to offer vp Christ vnto his Father That the Prophecie of Malachie foresignifieth the Sacrifice of the Masse Touching the prophecie of Malachie it doth in conclusion importe as much as the figure of Melchisedech if the circumstances be wel weighed and coÌ„sidered This Prophet enspired with the holy Ghoste forsaw that the sacrifices of the Iewes which were grosse and in sundry respectes vncleane yet for a time allowable should ceasse and haue an ende Malach. 1. And that in stede of them God would be honoured with a pure and cleane Sacrifice which should be offred vnto his name not only in Iewrie but also among the Gentiles froÌ„ the rising to the going downe of the sunne This is the effecte of that Prophecie Now if we serch neuer so exactly and seeke for that Sacrifice which was not vsed in the olde Lawe but succeded in the roome of al them of the olde Law and hath ben frequented thorough out al nations what other can we finde but the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe In this Sacrifice we perceiue most clearely al the conditions of that Prophecie fulfilled Al the conditioÌ„s of Malachies prophecie founde in the Sacrifice of the Aulter First it is in stede of many Next it is offered vnto Gods most holy name Thirdly it is celebrated and solemnized among the Gentiles and thereby Gods name is magnified Fourthly it is a most pure and syncere Sacrifice bicause the thing that is offered is the immaculate Lambe of God the body and bloud of him 1. Pet. 2. that was conceiued of the holy Ghost borne of the pure virgin who neuer committed synne nor was any guyle founde in his mouth Fiftly it is offered through out al the worlde from East to West Sixthly it had beginning in the newe Testament and was not vsed in the olde Testament but only by figures foresignified Sure it is that none can be named beside this in which al these conditions by the Prophete specified be accomplished As for the Sacrifice of Christes body vpoÌ„ the Crosse it was offered in one special place Sacrifices common to bâ—â—h â—estaments in Golgoltha without the gates of Ierusalem The sacrifices of thankes geuing of praise of almose dedes of mercie of a contrite harte of preaching Gods wordes these and such like succeded not in the roome of al the olde sacrifices nor beganne they in the newe Testament but were vsed in the tyme of the Law as wel as they be now in these daies as they which be common to bothe Testamentes That this Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe That this Sacrifice succeded al the Sacrifices of the olde Lavve succeded al the Sacrifices of the olde Law which of the Fathers in their learned treatises haue not reported It is needelesse to reherse many testimonies The witnesse of S. Augustine alone for the plainenesse and auctoritie of it might suffice He writeth thus Vbi ait Ecclesiastes non est bonum homini August de ciuita lib. 17. ca. 20. nisi quod manducabit bibet quid credibilius dicere intelligitur quà m quod ad participationem mensae huius pertinet quam sacerdos ipse mediator Testamenti noui exhibet secundùm ordineÌ„ Melchisedech de corpore sanguine suo Id enim Sacrificium successit omnibus illis Sacrificijs veteris Testamenti quae immolabantur in vmbra futuri Propter quod etiaÌ„ voceÌ„ illam in Psalmo tricesimo nono eiusdem mediatoris per Prophetiam loquentis agnoscimus Sacrificium oblationem noluisti corpus autem perfecisti mihi quia pro illis omnibus sacrificijs oblationibus corpus eius offertur participantibus ministratur Whereas Salomon saith Eccles. 3. a man hath no good thing but that he shal eate and drinke what thing is more credible that he vnderstandeth in so saying then that appertaineth vnto the partaking of this table which the Priest him selfe the mediatour of the newe Testament doth exhibit according to the order of Melchisedech of his owne body and bloude For that Sacrifice hath succeded al those sacrifices of the olde Testament which were sacrificed in shadow of that which was to come For whiche cause we doo acknowledge that same voice of the selfe same Mediatour speaking by prophecie in the nyne and thirteth Psalme Sacrifice and Oblation thou refusedst but a body thou madest perfite for me bicause for al those sacrifices and oblations his body is offered and ministred vnto the partakers The last cause of this testimonie declareth plainely that S. Augustine meant not the bloudy Sacrifice made vpon the Crosse but the vnbloudy Sacrifice offered by the Priestes in remembraunce of the same as the which is not only offered vp but also ministred vnto the partakers If this notwithstanding any yet remaine in doubte whether the Prophecie of Malachie be to be vnderstanded of this vnbloudy Sacrifice it may please him to heare other olde learned Fathers teaching the same doctrine S. Chrysostome writing vpon the .95 Psalme alleging this very Prophecie Chrysost. in Psalm 95. In omni loco Sacrificium offeretur nomini meo Sacrificium purum In euery place a Sacrifice shal be offered vnto my name and that a pure Sacrifice saith forthwith Malac. 1. Vide quà m luculenter quámque dilucidè mysticam interpretatus est mensam quae est incruenta hostia See how plainely and how clearely he hath declared the mystical Table
sheadding of his Bloude in remission of sinnes is an Oblation of the same Ergo Christe offered his body and bloud at the Supper And thus datur signifieth here as much as offertur Now this beinge true that our Lorde offered him selfe vnto his Father at his last Supper hauing geuen coÌ„mandement to his Apostles to do the same that he there did whom then he ordeined Priestes of the newe Testament saying Doo this in my remeÌ„brance as ClemeÌ„t doth plainly shew Lib. 8. Apostol CoÌ„stitut cap. vltimo the same charge perteining no lesse to the Priestes that be now the successours of the Apostles in this behalfe then to the Apostles them selues it doth right wel appear howe so euer M. Iuel assureth him selfe of the contrary and what so euer the Diuel hath wrought and by his Ministers taught against the Sacrifice of the Masse that Priestes haue auctoritie to offer vp Christe vnto his Father Iewel Here M. Harding beginneth to scanne his Tenses to rip vp Syllables and to hunte for Letters And in the ende buildeth vp the highest Castle of his Religion vpon a gheasse I maruel that so learned a man vvoulde either vse so vnlearned argumentes or hauing such stoare of Authorities as he pretendeth vvould euer make so simple choise He saith These wordes Is Geuen Is Shead be wordes of Sacrificing though the Terme it self of Oblation and Sacrifice be not expressed Here M. Harding bâ—sides that he hath imagined a straÌ„ge Construction of his ovvne that neuer any learned man knevve before and so straggleth alone and svvarueth from al the Olde Fathers includeth also a repugnance and Contradiction against him selfe For vvhereas vvoordes and termes sound both one thing the one being mere Englishe the other borovved of the Latine M. Harding saith Christe in the Institution of his Supper vsed the VVordes of Sacrificing and yet expressed not the Termes of Sacrificinge Suche Priuilege these menne haue vvith shifte of termes to beguile the vvorlde For if Christe vsed the vvordes of Sacrificing hovv can M. Harding say He vsed not the Termes of Sacrificing and yf he vsed not the Termes vvordes and Termes being one thing hovv can he say He vsed the vvordes Harding Litle regarding what M. Iewel saith in the lying and scoffing entrie that he maketh vnto his Replie in this Diuision The chief pointes of M. Iewels Replie in the 4. Diuision I wil first briefly note vnto thee good Reader the pointes wherein the weight of his whole tale standeth That done I wil answer to them in such order as they shal be proponed First he would prooue that my wordes include a repugnance and contradiction against my selfe Secondly he chargeth me with controlling the Olde common Translation of the Newe Testament Thirdly he would a contradiction to seme to be implyed in my doctrine Fourthly he burtheneth me with the corruption and falsifying of S. Clement Fifthly and lastly he auoucheth that Christe by these woordes Luc. 22. Doo ye this in my remembrance made not the Apostles Priestes nor gaue them nor their Successours auctoritie therby to consecrate and offer vp in Sacrifice his Body and Bloude but that what so euer was by these wordes commaunded to be done it perteined vnto the whole people as wel as vnto the Apostles So he denieth vtterly the singular and external Sacrifice of the Churche confoundeth the order of the Mysteries and referreth al to eating of bread and drinking of wine in remembrance of Christe These be the pointes he treateh of in this Diuision whereby his intent and endeuour is to reproue my Answer vnto his Chalenge But with how substantial and piththy reasons or authorities he performeth it when they shal be examined and disclosed it wil appeare Touching the first the mater is sone answered Lyes make no proufe This is your common grace M. Iewel M. Iewels custome for your aduantage in one place to make me say lesse then I doo in an other place more then I doo in euery place other â—yse then I doo Why do you here by false abbridging of my wordes attribute that vnto two verbes Is geuen and Is shed which I ascribe vnto the whole sentence In my Ansvvere fol. 165. b Lothe I am to fyl vp the paper with repeating that I said before but your impudencie driueth me vnto it Read the place againe There as you knowe I say thus Luc. 22. Whereas the holy Euangelistes reporte that Christe at his last supper tooke Bread gaue thankes brake it and said This is my body wich is geuen for you Againe this is my bloude which is shed for you in remission of synnesâ— By these woordes being woordes of sacrificing and offering they shewe and set forth an Oblation in acte and deede though the terme it selfe of Oblation or Sacrifice be not expressed Vse as much pryieng as you can in these woordes where finde you the Contradiction M. Ievvel â—aineth a lye vpon his aduersary and therevpoÌ„ descaÌ„â—eth I graunt you that woordes and termes sounde both one thing But where said I that Christe in the Institution of his supper vsed the woordes of sacrificing and yet expressed not the termes of sacrificing For thus you make me to speake and therevpon you dally at your pleasure and grounding your selfe vpon a lye you seme to conclude absurditie against me as though I had said that Christe vsed the wordes of sacrificing and yet had denied that he vsed the termes of sacrificing Which had ben very vaine and fonde wordes and termes being one thing Now the truth is I said not the one ne denied not the other Here one of vs both must needes be found a lyer If it be not you tel al the worlde for clearing of your selfe and for sauing your Ministerships honestie where I say that Christ vsed not the termes of sacrificing The woordes by which the Euangelistes do describe what Christe did at his last supper doo importe and implie the signification of sacrificing and offering Christe say they toke bread into his handes gaue thankes brake it and said This is my body whiche is geuen for you Againe This is my bloud which is shed for you in remission of synnes Bicause these wordes do report and set forth an oblation in acte and deede therfore I said and might wel so say they were wordes of sacrificing and offering Yet in al this description there is not founde this expresse terme Sacrifice or Oblation I referred me to the EuaÌ„gelistes description and you referre al to the wordes of Christe If you marke my wordes wel you shal finde therein reported not only woordes but also an acte of Christe and by the Euangelistes who declare the whole an oblation shewed and set forth in acte and deede this very terme it selfe of OblatioÌ„ or Sacrifice not expressed and this to be shewed and set forth whereby I meane the Gospel written not by Christe but by the EuaÌ„gelistes Againe whereas I said of the woordes of the Gospel that they were wordes
the Iewes meaning that he did vnto him selfe that at the Supper which was done on the morow with the violence of them that crucified him Wherby neuerthelesse he vnderstandeth the mystical Oblation of him selfe not the manner of his blouddy Oblation For he confesseth it to be secret inuisible and vnspeakeable And that no man should doubte of this Sacrifice he ascribeth vnto him both the office of a Priest and also of the Lambe As a Priest he sacrificed as the Lambe he was sacrificed For the better vnderstanding of this point the Sacrifice at the Supper and that on the morow vppon the Crosse The sacrifice of the supper and the sacrifice of the Crosse one and diuers in diuers respectes may truly be accompted and named one Sacrifice and also diuers Sacrifices Neither is this Sophistrie good Reader as these newe Gospellers wil beare thee in hande by this true distinction sophistical obiections and wranglings of the Gospellers may reasonably be answered How then is it one how be they diuers Learne it once and be no more contentious as they be who hauing heard it so oftentimes by the Catholikes tolde them wil yet seme not to vnderstand it Before I answer to this question Sacrifice taken tvvo vvaies this much is necessarily to be declared that the name of Sacrifice is wont to be taken sometime for the thing that is offred vnto God sometime for the action it selfe of sacrificing Now then it is one Sacrifice in respect of the thing offred and sacrificed which is the body and bloude of Christ. For that is one and the selfe same in both in the Supper and vpon the Crosse. The Action is of two manners bloudy and vnbloudy These Sacrifices be diuers in respect of the manner of the Action and of the offering For in the Supper it was vnbloudy and vpon the Crosse it was bloudy Concerning the former Sacrifice in deede al dependeth of the real presence that is to say vppon the credite of Christes worde whereby his body and bloude is both professed to be present and is made really present Which if it were truly beleued al contention about the Sacrifice were sone ended And yet hath that point of late bene learnedly and substantially entreated by D. Heskins and by D. Saunder who hath clearely answered and refuted the obiections what so euer Maister Iewel in his Replie was hable to bring to the contrary Tertull. In praescript But what shal we say These mennes reasons may sone be answered their pertinacie can neuer be answered Of suche Tertullian saith ouercome they may be persuaded they can not be Theophylact in Matt. capit◠28. Now to come vnto Theophylacte His wordes be these according to the Greke Quinta feria fecit Dominus coenam Discipulis dixit Accipite comedite Corpus meum Itaque quia potestatem ex se habebat ponendi animā suam manifestum est quòd ex eo tempore immolauerit seipsum quando tradidit discipulissuis corpus suum Nemo enim comedit aliquid nisi prius fuerit immolatum Vpon the fifth day our Lorde made his Supper and said vnto his Disciples take ye and eate my body So that bicause he had power of him selfe to put of his soule it is manifest that from that time he sacrificed him selfe when he delyuered his body vnto his Disciples For no man doth eate any thing at the solēnitie of a sacrifice so he meaneth which is not sacrificed before What can be vttered in plainer termes then that we find in these two Fathers The one saith that Christ offered him selfe when he gaue his body and bloude vnto his Disciples The other that he preuented the violence that was done vnto him on the morow and offered vp him selfe an Oblation and Sacrifice performing the parte bothe of a Prieste and of the Lambe And least any man should myssetake them vnderstanding it to haue ben done vpon the Crosse onely with most expresse wordes they referre it vnto the Supper And so by their doctrine be the verbes Datur frāgitur effunditur is geuen is brokē is shed verefied in the present Tense and not only in the future Tense In these testimonies the cause that both Nyssen and Theophylacte geueth why Christe offered his body which he deliuered vnto his Disciples is specially to be noted which is bicause in the solemnitie of Sacrifices no mā eateth that which is not before sacrificed Wherein they allude vnto the olde manner of Sacrifices which alwaies were offered vp before they were eaten And so the body and bloude of our Sauiour Christe our true Paschal Lambe was at his Maundie and now ought to be offered vp before it was then or now is to be eaten and dronke in the blessed Sacrament Hesychius lib. 1. in Leuit. cap. 46. Hesychius vttereth the like doctrine writing vpon the booke of Leuiticus Iewel To be shorte if it be true that Christe shead his bloud at his Last Supper and that Verily Really and in deede as M. Hardinge alone strangely auoucheth and no man els I trovve beside him then can he no more say The same was an vnbloudy Sacrifice And so must he yelde vp the strongest Tovver of al his Holde For yf the Sacrifice that Christe made at his Supper vvere vnbloudy hovv did Christ there shead his bloud Yf Christ as M. Harding saith did there Shead his Bloude hovv can that Sacrifice be called Vnbloudy But to leaue these fantasies and vaine shiftes Christe gaue his Bodie to be broken and his Bloude to be shead not at his Last Supper but only vpō his Crosse and no vvere els There he bare our iniquities there was he rent for our Sinnes Psal. 53. And in that only respect vve receiue his body and embrace it and haue fruit of it In this respect S. Paule saith God forbid Galat. 6. I should reioice in any thing sauing onely in the Crosse of our Lorde Iesus Christe Therefore this nevv Article of the faith of the real sacrificing and Sheadding of Christes bloud at the table neither being true in it self nor hitherto by M. Harding any vvay proued notvvithstāding the great Stoare and choise of his Authorities for asmuch as Christ neuer gaue neither his Apostles nor any their successours Commission to do more in that behalfe then he him selfe had done To say that any mortal man hath povver and authoritie really and in dede to Sacrifice the sonne of God it is a manifest and vvicked blasphemie the great and grosse errours vvherevvith the Diuel and his Disciples in the time of his kingdome of darkenesse haue deceiued the vvorlde notvvithstanding Harding But here M. Iewel replieth and would faine prooue a contradiction to be implyed in this doctrine I omit his falsifying of my Answer affirming me to say that Christe did shed his bloud at his last Supper verily really and in dede which I said not though it may be so said in a right sense and much lesse meant I as thereby
thinges and intreate them to absteine from others But louers shewe this their desire in money in garmentes in possessions in his owne bloude no man euer shewed it Figure only excluded To proue that Christe loueth vs more then euer any man loued an other he saith that he geueth vs his owne bloude Which in this place of S. Chrysostome can in no wise be expounded of the Figure and token of his bloude For worldly louers geue vnto their beloued as much and as good a thing as that namely money garmentes their possessions As for a token or signe of their bloude or of their persons it were easy for them to geue But Christ saith he sheweth his loue toward vs by that whereby no man euer shewed his loue to an other If the onely token of bloude might at any time haue declared so certaine and assured loue louers would oftentimes haue spared their money their garmentes and their possessions and would haue geuen vnto their dere beloued the figure of their bloude or of their whole persons Thus is the true and real presence of Christes bloud and consequently of his flesh prooued by witnesse of S. Chysostome And by the same is that prooued which we cal the real Sacrifice of the Church For by that we say Christe to be really offered vp vnto his Father we meane none other thing but that the substance which we offer and sacrifice is the real body and bloude of Christe This much therefore may stande for answer to M. Iewels Reply in this place Christe in the Sacrifices of the olde Lawe was so offred in a Figure as he was not the substance of them In the Supper he was and in the Masse he is so offered as he is the substance present And bicause this real Sacrifice of Christe being the Sacrifice of the New Testament and the worthinesse of it is much impugned by the enemies of the Churche in our time yea villanously mocked skoffed and railed at by Antichristes wicked broode Reasons vvhereby the Catholikes may be armed agaiÌ„st the SacrameÌ„taries for defense of this Sacrifice the godly Catholiques may by these reasons be sufficiently armed against them If it were necessary for the people of the olde Lawe to haue real sacrifices to protest and to mainteine their beleefe in Christes Death to come why is it not as necessary that the faithful people of the Newe Lawe haue also a real Sacrifice to protest and keepe in memorie their beleefe in Christes Death already past Againe as the newe Lawe is better and excellenter then the olde so is it necessary it haue a better and excellenter Sacrifice But if we take away the Sacrifice of the Reall flesh and bloude of Christe and leaue onely bread end wine to be offred vp in a figure or mysterie then haue we not a Sacrifice proper vnto the new Law that in worthinesse passeth and excelleth the Sacrifices of the olde Lawe as the which consisted of as good a substance as the other and signified as good a thing as the other and expressed it by slaughter and shedding of pure and innocent beastes bloude more liuely then the other Contrarywise let the real body and bloude of Christe be the substanee of the Sacrifice of the new Law as the truth teacheth saying Lucae 22. this is my body which is geueÌ„ for you this is my bloud which is shed for you Math 26 c. and the Church beleueth then doth it infinitely excel al the Sacrifices offered in the Lawe of Nature or in the Lawe written And then shal the New Lawe as in greatenesse of graces and promises and plainenesse of Scripture so surmount and passe also the olde Lawe in Maiestie of the Sacrifice and of Priesthode which haue euer in al Lawes ben accompted the two principal pointes of the same To be shorte how can it be conceiued that our Sacrifice should be but a figure a signe or a mysterie onely and no true and real Sacrifice better then the olde sacrifices sith that by the teaching of al the auncient learned Fathers it is the truth and perfourmance of al the olde sacrifices Hauing said this much for the real offering of Christe let vs now examine M. Iewels argument Examination of M. Iuels Argument As Christe was slaine at the Table saith he so was he sacrificed at the Table But he was not slaine at the Table verely and in dede but onely in a Mysterie Therefore he was not sacrificed at the Table really and in deede but onely in a Mysterie Christe was then and is now also at the holy Table both really sacrificed in respect of his real and true body and bloude by vertue of the Worde made present and also in a Mysterie in respect of the outward formes of bread and wine vnder which they are present and of the mystical manner of sacrificing This being true as before we haue declared and therefore the Conclusion being false let vs see which of the Premisses of M. Iewels Argument is false It is the Maior or first Proposition If the same be resolued into the partes whereof it consisteth the vntruth wil soone appeare The first parte is this Christe was slaine at the Table That is false The second is this Christe was sacrificed at the Table That is true So that one parte is false and the other true And so by this trial which is the surest way to trie such kinde of Propositions the whole Proposition in it selfe is found false and therefore the Conclusion foloweth not For the better euidence of the thing it selfe we most gladly acknowledge and protest to the worlde that Christe was really and in deede slaine and put to death once for euer and neuer shal againe suffer the paines of Death Yet neuerthelesse he is and shal to the worldes ende continue the real and true Sacrifice of the newe Testament according to his owne merciful Institution at his last Supper As for the lacke of any slaying and shedding of bloude it is no cause at al why it was not at the Supper is not now or may not be a true and real Sacrifice For it is sufficient that is was once offered vp with slaying and bloudeshedding to pay the raunsom of our synnes He did then and we de now offer the same body and bloude in consideration and remembrance of that slaying and shedding He offered at the Supper his body and bloud that on the morow was to be slaine and shed we at the Aulter do stil offer that body and bloude that was slaine and shed euen the same selfe body and bloude in number For as Theophylacte folowing S. Chrysostome saith Theophylact in â—0 c. ad Heb. Eundem semper offerimus Imò potius memoriam illius oblationis qua seipâ— sum obtulit facimus ceu nunc iam facta sit we offer vp alwaies the selfe same Christe or rather we kepe the memorie of that oblation whereby he offered him selfe as though it were
euen right now donne In this point therefore this Sacrifice is clearely vnlike the sacrifices of the olde lawe wherein although beastes of one kinde were offered daily as for example this day a lambe and to morow likewise a lambe yet it was not one lambe but diuers lambes And therfore a new killing and shedding of bloude was daily required But we doo not offer this day one lambe to morow an other but alwaies the selfe same as S. Chrysostome saith Chrysost. in epist. ad Heb. Hom. 17. Ibidem Againe this Hoste is suche as can not be consumed though they be neuer so many that be made partakers of it as he also saith Ipsam offerimus nunc quae tunc oblata quidem consumi noÌ„ potest We doo offer vp now also the same hoste which being offered then he meaneth vpon the Crosse can not be consumed Wherfore sith it is continually the selfe same hoste in number with that which was slaine vpon the Crosse albeit it be really againe sacrificed to continue the memorie of the real death of the same and to be the real Sacrifice of the newe Testament M. Iewel going about to abolish the truth of our Sacrifice for that it is not truly againe slaine bewrayeth his owne penurie of better and sounder reasons and semeth to reproue al the olde learned Fathers for calling it the vnbloudy Sacrifice Iewel Notvvitstandinge Hesychius expoundinge the Booke of Leuiticus to the intente he may force the vvhole Storie of the Life and Deathe of Christe to ansvveare euery particulare Ceremonie of the Lavve is sometimes driuen Hesych in Leuit. li. 1 cap. 4. to streatche and straine the Scriptures to his pnrpose So he saithe Christe is the Aultare And Christe Incarnate in the Virgins VVombe is the Sodden Sacrifice Novv as Christe vvas the Aultare Li. 1. ca. 2. SacrificiuÌ„ Coctum and as he vvas Sacrificed in his Mothers VVombe euen so he Sacrificed him selfe at his Supper not in proper or vsual manner of speache but onely in a Mysterie Signifieinge Othervvise S. Cyprian plainely openeth the vvhole difference of these tvvo Sacrifices in this sorte Cyprianus de Vnctione Chrismatis Dedit Dominus noster in mensa in qua Vltimum cum Apostolis participauit Conuiuium proprijs manibus Panem vinum In Cruce verò manibus militum Corpus tradidit vulnerandum Our Lorde at the Table whereat he receiued his laste Supper with his Disciples with his owne handes gaue not his very Bodie and very Bloude Really and in deede but Breade and VVine But vpon the Crosse he gaue his owne Bodie with the Souldiers handes to be VVounded This saithe Sainte Cyprian is the difference bitvvene the Sacrifice of the Table and the Sacrifice of the Crosse At the one Christe gaue Breade and VVine Vpon the other he gaue his Bodie Therefore vvhereaâ— M. Harding saith onely vpon his ovvne vvarrante That Christe Really Sacrificed him selfe at two sundrie times and that he twise Really Shead his Bloude Firste at the Table and Afterwarde vpon the Crosse The vntrueth and folie hereof is easily reproued by these plaine vvordes of S. Paule Hebrae 9. Semel Oblatus est ad multorum exhaurienda peccata He was once offered to take away the sinnes of many Hebrae 10. And againe VVith one Sacrifice he hath made perfite them for euer that be Sanctified These places are cleare and vvithout question onlesse M. Harding vvil say that One and Tvvo and Once and Tvvise be bothe one thing Harding Concerning the wordes of Hesychius they be plaine for the real sacrifice of Christe at the Supper For if he had there offered vp him selfe in a figure or Mysterie only as M. Iewel meaneth by his only mystery he would neuer haue called it a preuention of the bloudy Sacrifice Hesychius In Leuit. li. 1. cap. 4. neither would he haue vsed the terme praeueniens preuenting For Christe to offer vp him selfe at the supper in a figure onely in such sorte as he was offered in the sacrifices of the olde lawe had not ben a preuention of his bloudy Sacrifice vpon the Crosse. Verely if M. Iewels vnderstanding were streatched and strained vnto the obedience of faith he would not say so sawcily of that auncient and learned Father that he is driuen to stretche and straine the Scriptures to his purpose And what if it were graunted that so he did sometimes for more this Replyer saith not him selfe wil it thereof folow that he hath so done in this place As for the streatching and straining of the Scriptures which he layeth to Hesychius charge it is a very simple answer to the authoritie out of him alleged That he calleth Christe the Aulter it is not strange for so S. Paule calleth him as there he allegeth Neither was Christe by his reporte sacrified in his Mothers wombe he was incarnate in the virginis wombe and the same Christes incarnation he calleth the baked Sacrifice for thereof he speaketh and not of a sodden sacrifice as the place is euident The Oouen wherein it was baked was the Virgins wombe Hesychius in Leuit. li. 1. cap. 2. Lucae 1. bicause as he saith shee receiued from aboue the bread of life to wit the worde of God in her wombe and the fire of the presence of the holy Ghoste For the holy Ghoste saith the Angel shal come ouer into thee and thee power of the highest shal ouershadow thee And the same Christe that was incarnate in the Virgins wombe sacrificed him selfe at his Supper although not in such manner as the liue hostes in the olde Testament were sacrificed that is to say with bloudshed and slaughter yet in a mysterie but truly and really and after that manner of speache which is proper and vsual to the Catholique Church speaking of this singular Sacrifice not onely in a mysterie signifying that is to say in a figure or signification onely as M. Iewel meaneth the substance of Christes body and bloud excluded but so in a mystery as that most diuine substance be beleued to be verely present and by vs in remembrance of his death presented to God Touching the place of S. Cyprian S. CypriaÌ„ falsified by M. Ievvels maÌ„gling and hevving de vnctione Chrismatis he is like to haue smal aduantage and lesse honesty by alleging it when it is knowen how falsly he hath done in taking the begynning of the sentence which being set a parte from the rest semeth to geue a sownde of his doâ—ctrine and cutting away the ende that declareth the Doctours meaning and quit ouerthroweth the SacrameÌ„tary heresie For immediatly after the wordes that M. Iewel taketh for his purpose wherby is signified that our Lorde at his last Supper gaue vnto his Apostles bread and wine with his owne handes and vpon the Crosse deliuered his body to be wounded with the handes of the Souldiers this much foloweth in the same senteÌ„ce Vt in Apostolis secretius impressa syncera veritas
mynde Cyprianus ibidem and enkindle the affection of deuotion in vs If I had such a motion when I wrote those woordes M. Iewel ought not to scorne and skoffe at it An other learned Father touching the appearing of Christe in heauen before his Father with such a body writeth thus Theophylacte I meane who though he be not one of the most auncieÌ„t yet reporteh that which he learned of the olde learned Fathers of the Greke Churche and so reporteth it as he may seme to expounde what S. Cyprian meant by claiming the paiment or reward of Mans saluation These be his woordes Etiam num vnà cum corpore quod pro nobis immolauit Theophyl in epistol ad Hebr. cap. 5. apud Deum patrem intercedit hoc est quas pro nobis pertulit afflictiones vt multùm commoueat proponit etiam sine voce reipsa nimirum patriloquens Pro humana natura filius tuus ego sustinui haec miserere igitur horum pro quibus ego pati mori sustinui Christe euen now by his body which he sacrificed for vs with God and his Father maketh intercession that is to say he setteth forth to the intent he may much moue him the afflictions which he suffered for vs without voice euen by deede it selfe speaking vnto the Father in this wise I which am thy Sonne haue suffered these thinges for mankinde haue mercie therefore of them for whom I haue susteined to suffer and dye What other thing in effect doo my wordes importe which M. Iewel so much ieasteth at and saith I speake them vpon myne owne credit onely without witnesse of any Auncient writer then that was spoken so long sithens by Hesychius S. Cyprian and Theophylacte For as concerning S. Chrysostome who saith no lesse Chrysosto in caput 9 ad Hebrae Homi. 17. though in fewer wordes Cum Sacrificio ascendit quod potuit propitiare Patrem Christ ascended into heauen with the Sacrifice that was hable to pacifie the Father and other auncient Fathers by which they meane the body that suffred vpon the Crosse bicause they speake it more darkely here I omit to recite them If then M. Iewels humour be suche as he must needes please him selfe in mocking and skoffing let him consider how it becommeth him to skoffe at Hesychius S. Cyprian Theophylacte S. Chrysostome and other holy and learned Fathers That Christe was thus inuisibly sacrificed in heauen M. Ievvel falsly reporteth the Ansvver I say not it is your false reporte M. Iewel let my booke be trial This is your common woonte with shifting of your wordes in my wordes place to frame an absurde saying and thereat to exercise the talent of your skoffing Wherein you fight but with your owne shadow you touche not my person Onely I said that Christe offered him selfe in heauen when he was crucified on earth reade my wordes who liste And that I said is true And it is none other thing then was said by Hesychius aboue a thousand yeres paste Hesych in Leuit. lib. 1. cap. 4. Whose wordes these be Quo tempore vitulus immolabatur in inferioribus eo tempore vt Pontisex ipse sibi Sacrificium offerebat in coelo At what time the Calfe that is to say Christe was sacrificed beneathe in the earth at the same time Christe as the high Bishop him selfe offered vp Sacrifice to him selfe in heauen As for your mery obiection of Pilate Annas Caiphas the Souldiours aud Tourmentours of whom you maruel I said not that they were likewise in heauen to make this Sacrifice you might haue semed to haue some reason if I had said or meant that this Sacrifice was made in heauen as you by falsifiyng my Answer beare the vnware Reader in hande I said This Sacrifice I say by which you meane the visible paineful and bloudy Sacrifice that was made vpon the Crosse and not in heauen This Sacrifice wherein Christes Bloude was shed without which companie say you it was not shed And yet where it was shed I trow you can not proue that Pilate Annas and Caiphas were in the companie of the Souldiours that shed it Therefore where you say thus That Christe was thus Thorneprickte Naileboarde Spearepearsed and Crucified in Heauen I thinke noman euer saw or said but M. Harding I answer that M. Harding neuer said it as he referreth al to his booke for trial and I thinke noman is so impudent as in so plaine a matter so to belye him but M. Iewel With what eyes did you reade my booke in this very place Or thinke you other men haue not eyes to see these expresse wordes there put in by a pareÌ„thesis to take away this very fonde cauil that you make whereby we vnderstand the vertue of his oblation on the Crosse euer enduring not the oblation it selfe with renuing of paine and sufferance continued This once espied by the Reader how doth not al your skoffiing lose his grace and set forth your impudencie of lying And therefore you spende labour in vaine to proue that is not denied Hebre. 7. that Christe once offered vp him selfe and once entred into the holy place Which is true once through shedding of his bloude Yet that Oblation neuerthelesse endureth for euer and he with that very broken and torne body stil appeareth to the countenance of God in Heauen making intercession for vs. And there when we haue synned if we repent and cal vpon him he is a Propitiation for our sinnes as S. Iohn saith 1. Ioan. 2. not by a newe shedding of bloude but by vertue of his bloude once shed vpon the Crosse and of his Passion Vnto whiche manner of Oblation and appearing before the face of the Father whiche hath continued from the houre of his Passion to this time and shal continue to the last day the companie of Pilate Annas Caiphas the Souldiours and Tormentous as you skoffe is not necessary They are appointed an other place where is weeping and gnasshing of teeth Luc. 13. where you are sure to haue your parte with them onlesse you repent and returne vnto the Catholique Churche Iewel Hovv be it like as the Praiers that Christe once made and the Doctrine that he once taught remaine stil ful and effectual as at the first euen so the Sacrifice that Christ once made vpon the Crosse remaineth stil in ful force effectâ—al and perfite and endureth for euer Therefore S. Paule saithe Hebre. 7. Christe hath an euerlastinge Priesthode and liueth stil that he may stil pray for vs. And therefore God the Father saithe vnto him and to none other either man or Angel or Archangel ChrysostoÌ„ in epist. ad Hebrae Hom. 17. Cyprian De Baptis Christi Tu es Sacerdos in aeternuÌ„ Thou art a Priest for euer And therefore S. Chrysostome compareth this Sacrifice to a most soueraine salue that beinge once laide to the vvounde healeth it cleane and needeth no more laiâ—inge on Likevvise S. Cyprian saithe â—
Nec Sacerdotij eius paenituit Deum quoniam Sacrificium quod in Cruce obtulit sic in beneplacito Dei constat acceptabile perpetua virtute consistit vt non minus hodiè in conspectu Patris Oblatio illa sit efficax quà m ea die qua de saucio latere Sanguis Aqua exiuit semper reseruatae in Corpore plagae salutis Humanae exigant pretium It neuer repented God of Christes Priesthoode For the Sacrifice that he offered vpon the Crosse is so acceptable in the good wil of God and so standeth in continual strength and Vertue that the same Oblation is no lesse acceptable this daie in the sight of God the Father then it was that day when Bloud and VVater ranne out of his VVounded side The Skarres reserued stil in his Bodie doo weighe the price of the Saluation of man Harding Now commeth M. Iewel to proue that no man denied That the Sacrifice of Christe vpon he Crosse continueth stil in force and effectual as the Prayers that he once made and the doctrine that he once taught remaine effectual as at the first Al this is true M. Iewel but how pertaineth it to your purpose Wil you thereof conclude against vs and thus reason against the vnbloudy Sacrifice The vnbloudy Sacrifice continueth alwaies in force Ergo the vnbloudy Sacrifice is superfluous That is acceptable in the sight of God Ergo this is vnacceptable and displeasant If this be not your Argument why said you so much for that which euery faithful man confesseth If this be your Argument we require you to learne your Logique better before you teache vs newe Diuinitie For whereas there be two thinges true it is a fonde kinde of reasoning to conclude the denial of the one by the affirmation of the other as I must tel you oftentimes This much we confesse also that onlesse the Sacrifice whereof we speake were one and the same in substance of the thing offered with the Sacrifice made vpon the Crosse though the manner of offering be diuers it were superfluous and to God displeasant For the newe Testament acknowledgeth nor accepteth none other real and external Sacrifice but the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe which hath succeded as S. Augustine August de ciuitate Dei li. 17. cap. 20. and al the learned Fathers with one consent do confesse in place of al the olde Sacrifices Yet you wil replie and say If that Sacrifice vpon the Crosse be styl effectual and continue in force for euer what neede is there of this Sacrifice daily made vpon the Aulter Concerning this Replie euery man shal easily satisfie him selfe if he wil consider it in a like case Christe once prayed and that prayer is effectual to this day and shal be to the worldes ende Neuerthelesse we must pray also if we wil be partakers of his prayer Christe wasshed away the sinnes of the worlde with the bloude that was shed out of his body at his Passion Notwitstanding we must if we wil be saued be baptised that we be made cleane from Original sinne and from Actual too if we haue committed any before our Baptisme Hebr. 10. Christe hath for euer perfited them that be sanctified with one oblation 2. Cor. 7. Yet S. Paules counsel is vt emundemus nos ab omni inquinamento carnis spiritus perficientes sanctificationem in timore Dei That we cleanse our selues from al filth of flesh and spirite perfiting our sanctification in the feare of God Here is special mention made of two perfitinges of our sanctification the one belonging to Christe the other to our selues If Christe doo perfite what neede we to perfite For the better assoiling of this doubte let vs cal to mynde what S. Paule writeth in his Epistle to the Corinthians saying 1. Cor. 3. Dei sumus adiutores We are the helpers of God What wil some say hath God neede of helpers Yea truly His goodnes is suche that he vouchesaueth to take vs to be his helpers not for any defecte or vnhablenesse that is in him but bicause he would haue vs to be occupied in his seruice and not to be idel And therfore he hath appointed certaine meanes and instrumentes to practise vs withal as Faith Baptisme Penance Fasting Prayer Almose and specially a Sacrifice wherein we may concurre with him not in the chiefe first and general cause which alone hath wrought and daily worketh but as liuely instrumentes to deriue vnto our selues the effecte of that chiefe first and general cause that as he generally hath deserued and purchased a most ful and perfite saluation for al the worlde which in it selfe can not be increased bicause it is perfite ne can not be diminished bicause it is infinite so we ech of vs by his grace vsing and putting in practise the meanes that he hath appointed may be made comparteners of the same saluation which otherwise can not be auaileable vnto vs. It should be ouer longe and beside my purpose to stande about the prouing that Baptisme Penaunce Prayer Fasting Almose ioyned with Faith that worketh through Charitie That thiâ— Sacrifice is a meane to deriue thâ— effecte of Christes death vnto vs. be meanes to deriue vnto vs the effect of Christes death It shal suffise to prooue the Sacrifice of Christes body and bloud vpon the Aulter to be one of those meanes This truth is prooued not onely by that which I haue before alleged out of S. Gregorie who saith that as ofte as we offer vp vnto him the hoste of his Passion so ofte we renew vnto our selues his Passion for our absolution Gregor Hom. 37. but also by that which S. Augustine writeth in a Prayer which is to be founde in a treatise of deuoute Prayers intituled Manuale August in Manuali cap. â—1 Where asking of God a contrite harte and a fountaine of teares specially at the time when he prayeth he saith thus Dum sacris Altaribus licet indignus assisto cupiens tibi offerre illud mirabile coeleste Sacrificium omni reuerentia deuotione dignum quod tu Domine Deus meus sacerdos immaculate instituisti offerre praecepisti in commemorationem tuae charitatis mortis scilicet Passionis pro salute nostra pro quotidiana nostrae fragilitatis reparatione Geue me I besech thee ô Christe Iesu contrition of harte c. Whiles I although vnworthy doo stande at the holy Aulters desirous to offer vp vnto thee that maruelous and heauenly Sacrifice worthy of al reuerence and deuotion which thou Lorde my God vnspotted Priest didst institute Luc. 22. and commaundedst to offer vp for a remembrance of thy charitie that is to say of thy death and passion for our saluation and for the daily repairing of our frailtie Nowe whereas this Sacrifice offered vp for the remembraunce of Christes death is here said to be profitable to saue vs and to repaire our daily ruines happening vnto vs through our frailtie
shal be taken for good then haue the Arians ouercomme For if the Churche shal be driuen to shewe letters syllables and termes neither can we finde the CoÌ„substantialitie of the Sonne of God with the Father nor the Procession of the holy Ghoste from the Father and the Sonne nor certaine other great pointes of our Faith which notwithstanding being reueled to the Churche by the holy Ghoste the spirite of truth and declared by the expositions of the holy Fathers we are bounde to beleue vnder paine of eternal damnation Knowing your selfe ouerborne with the force of this plaine testimonie of S. Irenaeus craftily you dissemble it and keepe your selfe a loofe of from rehersing the wordes pretending thereby that he neuer said so as I haue reported him But let the booke be vewed and it shal be founde wil you nil you that I haue truly alleged him M. Ievvel forgeth sayinges of his ovvne head and reporteth them for the sayinâ—ges of S. Ireneus You on the other side to conueigh the whole point to Malachie the Prophete where you thought rather to haue some colour of aduantage come in with a forged saying of your owne and setting it forth in the lettre that you caused the Doctours sayinges to be printed in you ascribe it vnto S. Irenaeus whereas the sentence which here you haue inserted pretending for credit your solemne warrant with these woordes Thus onely he saith is not in S. Irenaeus You should haue tolde vs M. Ievvel diuerteth from the testimonie wher vvith he is vrged and entreth into an other mater and with good authoritie haue prooued it what other thing can be vnderstanded by the newe Oblation of the newe Testament whereof S. Irenaeus speaketh but the Oblation of that which Christ said to be his body and confessed to be his bloude To this you make no directe Answer but slily carye away the reader vnto the saying of Malachie whereof I haue treated before I vrge you with S. Irenaeus and you shooting wide of the marke make answer to the place of Malachie whose saying is not in this place principally obiected but brought in by the way as it were by Saint Irenaeus interpretinge the pure Sacrifice by him mentioned of the Newe Oblation of the Newe Testament The olde learned Fathers you say neuer vnderstoode so much So much What so muche meane you That the Oblation of Christes body and Bloud is the new Oblation of the New Testament Irenaeus li. 4. cap. 23. which Christ taught his Disciples which the Church receiued of the Apostles and now offereth vp vnto God through the whole wrrlde as S. Irenaeus saith Did the Fathers neuer vnderstand this much What say you then to S. Irenaeus who vnderstoode so much as by his wordes it is cleare What is this but to set the holy Fathers at variance with S. Irenaeus Yet you wil needes seme to vnderstande the Sacrifice that Malachie spake of of Preaching of a Contrite hart of Prayer of Praise and thankesgeuing For credite hereof you allege TertulliaÌ„ S. Hierom and S. Augustin Wel what if it be so What answer is that to S. Irenaeus As for the place of Malachie as I said before it is past and answered Certainly it can not be vnderstanded of the purenes of mans hart for of lacke therof he complaineth not but of polluted sacrifices Againe the purenes of mans harte commonly is not so great as therfore the name of God should so much be magnified And the same was in many Iewes then no lesse then it is in the ChristiaÌ„s now To that you bringe out of Tertullian and S. Hierome concerning what is meante by the Pure Sacrifice in Malachie you haue myne answer before in the thirde Diuision In the .3 Diuision fol. â—0 b. deinceps What you bringe here you brought the same before Sparing my labour inke and paper I remitte the Reader vnto that place where he shal finde you to haue but a weake aide of Tertullian and shamefully to haue falsified S. Hierome as becommeth such false shifters to doo To prooue that Malachie by the pure Sacrifice meant not the Sacrifice of the Aulter you bringe in S. Martialis ad Burdegalenses whom you cal one of myne owne newe founde Doctours If you contemne him why doo you allege him Wil you shunne his auctoritie and yet craue helpe of him If I would vse your owne Rhetorique here might I say what toole is so bad that Maister Iewel wil not occupie M. Ievvel falsifieth Martialis rather then seeme to be without al weapon Of what authoritie so euer he be once this is true in your translation you haue fowly falsified him by putting in woordes of your owne forgerie For he speaketh nothing at al of Malachie nor in that place once nameth him Whose name you added of your owne vnto the sentence out of him alleged to vnderproppe your weake and ruinous building with al. In that Epistle ad Burdegalenses S. Martialis vnderstandeth by Ara Sanctificata one Special Aulter that in the Citie of Burdeaulx was consecrated in the name of GOD and S. Steuen Which Aulter being in olde time dedicated to an vnknowen God he at the ouerthrowe of Idols Aulters there caused to be reserued whole and him selfe halowed it This much is declared in the Epistle it selfe And as you haue falsified your Doctor with putting in stuffe of your owne to the beginning of the sentence so haue you corrupted him much worse with cutting away from the middest the hinder parte Martialis Epistol ad Burdegal For these be his wordes Nec solùm in ara sanctificata sed vbique offertur Deo oblatio munda sicut testatus est cuius corpus sanguinem in vitam aeternam offerimus Neither onely vpon the halowed Aulter but euery where is the cleane oblation offered vp vnto God as he hath witnessed whose body and bloude we offer vp to life euerlasting And what is that Christ hath witnessed for of him he speaketh That Priestes should offer vp his body and bloude in euery countrie Luc. 22. saying Do this in my Remembrance This serued not your purpose and therefore you hewed it away Double oblation one in spirite only the other in the Sacrament If this answer do not satisfie you may it please you to take this other S. Martialis speaketh of two kindes of Oblations The one is offered vp in spirite only the other in mysterie and in the Sacrament The spiritual oblation is offered vp not only vpon a sanctified Aulter but also euerywhere But the mystical and Sacramental oblation which is of the body and bloud of Christe is offered vp only vpon a consecrated Aulter bicause thereon is the real presence of the same And of that kinde of oblation in that very place which you haue so fowly corrupted he saith thus Christ hauing a body both vnspotted and without synne bicause he was conceiued of the Holy Ghoste and borne of the virgin Marie permitted it to be
Rocke was not Christe in deede Ergo Neither Christe is the Sacrifice If he make this Argument I denie his Maior or first Proposition For the Rocke was Christe in signe onely but Christes body and bloud Really made present by the almighty power of the Worde is in deede the substance of the commemoratiue Sacrifice Wherefore no likenesse touching the Phrase being betwen these two Propositions the Rocke was Christe and Christe is the Sacrifice the one can not rightly be applyed to ouerthrowe the other And whereas M. Iewel maketh his colourable aduantage by making Sacrifice the nominatiue case to the verbe in this saing of S. Cyprian In Sacrificio quod Christus est he is to be tolde that he misconstrueth it and that false coÌ„structioÌ„ maketh no proufe For S. Cyprian saith not the Sacrifice is Christ which also is true and that taketh M. Iewel for his purpose but Christe is the Sacrifice In coÌ„sideratioÌ„ wherof the figuratiue saying and the Phrase of the Rock and the great number of his other phrases serueth not his turne That the Sacrifice after the order of Melchisedech was not onely vpon the Crosse but also at the Supper Vpon this false constructioÌ„ of S. Cyprians saying how so euer he procedeth speaking coÌ„fusely of the sacrifice which is after the order of Melchisedek and of the propitiation for the synnes of the worlde this I acknowledge that onely Iesus Christe the Sonne of God is the propitiatorie Sacrifice for the synnes of the worlde and that such a Sacrifice in most perfit wise he was vpoÌ„ the Crosse yea also after th' order of Melchisedek wher as Melchisedek offred bread and wine so he offered vp his body and bloud Hieronym in Psalm 109. the true bread and the true wine as s. Ierom saith For al though he expressed the shadowes of al Aarons sacrifices vpon the Crosse yet ther he was a Priest after the order of Melchisedek For so S. Paule in th'Epistle to the Hebrues sheweth by the dissimilitude of both Priesthods But that he was a sacrifice after th' order of Melchisedek only when he hoong vpoÌ„ the Crosse that I denie For he was a Priest and also a sacrifice after th' order of Melchisedek at his last supper at what time offring vp his body and bloud vnder the formes of bread and wine he began to execute th' office of the Priesthod after th' order of Melchisedek and taught his Disciples the way Theophyl in Matth. cap. 28. how after his death to make the same oblatioÌ„ Vpon which coÌ„sideratioÌ„ Theophylact as it is before rehersed saith Tunc iÌ„molauit seipsuÌ„ ex quo tradidiâ— Discipulis corpus suuÌ„ he sacrificed him selfe at the time he deliuered his body to his Disciples And S. Austine more plainly August de ciuit Dei lib. 17. capit 20. expounding this place of Ecclesiastes Non est bonuÌ„ homini nisi quod maÌ„ducabit et bibet wher he saith thus Quid credibilius etc. What is more credible we should thinke SalomoÌ„ meant by those wordes then that perteineth to the participatioÌ„ of this table which Christ him selfe a Priest and mediator of the new TestameÌ„t doth exhibit after the order of Melchisedek of his body and bloud For that sacrifice did succede al other sacrifices of the olde Testament which were offred in the shadow of this to come A litle before in the same chapter speaking of the Table which Christe prepared with bread and wine he geueth an euideÌ„t testimonie for the Sacrifice and Priesthod after th' order of Melchisedek where he saith thus Vbi apparet etiaÌ„ fâ—cerdotiuÌ„ secunduÌ„ ordineÌ„ Melchisedech that is to say where also appeareth the priesthod after the order of Melchisedek By this authoritie it is cleare that Christ at the table wher the blessed SacrameÌ„t was first instituted and is now daily celebrated in memorie of his Passion doth exhibite that which is a sacrifice after the order of Melchisedech which can be nothing els but the Sacrifice of his body and bloude vnder the formes of bread and wine That Christ merited the forgeuenes and propitiatioÌ„ of the sinnes of the world vpoÌ„ the Crosse only that I gladly graunt As for the Sacrifice and Priesthode after the order of Melchisedech S. Augustine in an other place saith August in Psalm 33. concion 2. that Christe at his Supper instituted a Sacrifice of his body and bloude according to the order of Melchisedech De corpore et saÌ„guine suo of his body and bloud saith he signifying his body and bloud to be the mater of the Sacrifice Lo here againe it is plainely auouched that Christe instituted a Sacrifice after the order of Melchisedech before he was nayled vpon the Crosse yea the Sacrifice of his body and bloude For to the time of the Supper this is to be referred when both he taught them how and commaunded them to sacrifice Of this Sacrifice S. Augustine in the sermon there nexte before geueth vs a manifest testimonie where he saith Nondum erat Sacrificium corporis sanguinis Domini quod fideles norunt Ibidem in Psal. 33. CoÌ„cion 1. qui Euangelium legerunt quod sacrificium nunc diffusum est toto orbe terrarum The Sacrifice of the body and bloude of our Lorde was not yet in place he speaketh of the time when beastes were sacrificed which the faithful do knowe and they that haue reade the Gospel Which Sacrifice is now spreade abroade in al the worlde Let M. Iewel tel vs what iâ— this Sacrifice of the body and bloude of our Lorde that is diffused and spread ouer al the worlde besides that is celebrated in the Masse and then we wil say he saith somewhat to his purpose NOw M. Iewel departeth from our special point which is as it is auouched by S. Ireneus S. Cyprian and others that Christe offered his body and bloude vnto God at his Supper and commaunded the same sacrifice to be offered by Priestes of the newe Testament in remembrance of his death and commeth to proue that whereof no question was moued That the Ministration of the holy Mysteries in a phrase and manner of speach is the same Sacrifice How be it what he meaneth by his ministerlike termes wel I wote not He sheweth him selfe inconstant in the vse of them In this one Diuision he calleth it first The ministration of the holy Mysteries Nexte the Ministration of the holy Communion Thirdly the Sacrifice of the holy Communion For the same he allegeth a certaine saying as he telleth vs out of S. Augustine vpon the .20 Psalme where he hath no such saying at al. The place he meaneth is in Gratian. Where it speaketh not of M. Iewels Ministration of the holy Mysteries which I trow in his meaning is the Ministration of bread and wine at the Geuenian Communion for what other holy Mysteries they haue I knowe not nor of the Sacrifice that is daily celebrated in the Churche but of the solemnitie which once in
shadow of thinges and to the newe Testament Imaginem rerum an Image of thinges If of the affirmation of the Image you wil inferre as your manner is the negation of the thing it selfe shal you not so prepare a way for the heinous heresie of the Arians who denyed the Sonne of God to be of one substance with God the Father For though it be most true that he is so yet doth not the Scripture cal him the Image of the inuisible God Coloss. â— Doth not S. Ambrose speaking of the bloudy oblation of Christe vpon the Crosse cal it an Image in comparison of the true and euerlasting Oblation that is in heauen Ambros. of ficiorum libr 1. c. 48. Hîc vmbra hîc Imago illic veritas caet Here saith he that is to say in this worlde there is a shadow here there is an Image there in heauen is the truth The shadow in the Lawe the image in the Gospel the truth in heauen Before a lambe was offered and a Calfe now Christe is offered But he is offred as man as receiuing Passion and he offereth him selfe as being a Priest to remit our synnes here in Image there in truth where with the Father as an Aduocate he maketh intercession for vs. How say you Sir if a man would folow the veine of your Logique whereby you conclude the denial of a real and true Sacrifice in the Masse bicause you can bring certaine peeces of Doctours sayinges reporting a representation commemoration and image of it might he not of this place of S. Ambrose denie that Christe was euer offered vp and sacrificed vpon the Crosse truly and in deede bicause he saith he was offered here in Image And so should not the Deuil haue a prety deuise to shake the foundation of our faith and put the simple in doubte whether the worke of our Redemption be yet truly performed or no That S. Cyprian saith the Sacrifice which we offer is the Passion of our Lorde August libro senâ—ent Prosperi S. Augustine declareth how such sayinges are to be vnderstanded Vocatur ipsa immolatio carnis quae sacerdotis manibus fit Christi passio mors Crucifixio non rei veritate sed significante Mysterio The oblation saith he of Christes flesh which is made in the handes of a Priest is called the Passion Death and crucifying of Christe not in truth of the thing but in a Mysterie signifying Which is as muche as if he should say it is not called passion death and crucifying for that Christ dieth or suffereth againe but for that in mysterie it renueth representeth signifieth and putteth vs in mynde againe of his Death and Passion Hovv Christe dieth againe in this Mysterie Where S. Gregorie saith after that he hath taken away al occasion of grosse imaginations that Christe who dyeth no more but lyueth immortally in him selfe dyeth againe in this Mysterie and that his flesh suffereth againe for the peoples health De Consecrat Distin. 2. Quid sit August Epist. 23. ad Bonifacium it is the sooner vnderstanded what he meaneth if his Antithesis be considered which consisteth in these wordes in seipso in hoc Mysterio in him selfe and in this Mysterie The like whereof we finde in S. Augustine before alleged Christe was once sacrificed in seipso in him selfe and yet he is daily sacrificed in sacramento in a Sacrament In him selfe that is to say in his visible person and in the forme of man he dyeth no more yet in this Mysterie he dieth againe that is to say his death is so for our behoofe by vs to the Father represented and to vs renued and the vertue and effect of it is so applied and transferred vnto vs as if he were now presently hanging vpon the Crosse. De Consecrat Dist. 2. Quid sit Haec salutaris victima illam nobis mortem vnigeniti per Mysterium reparat This healthful sacrifice doth renue vnto vs the Death of the only begoteÌ„ by this Mysterie saith S. Gregorie in the same place doth any man aske wherewithal and whereby this is done Verely as it is said before touching the memorie out of S. Augustine by the Oblation and participation of the same body that suffered and died vpoÌ„ the Crosse. For though the paines and violeÌ„ce of Death be not here presently suffered yet the body that once suffered Ibidem is present and the bloude that was shed on the handes of infidels is now shed into the mouthes of the faithful as S. Gregorie him selfe here saith And to the working of such a death of Christe againe and of his Passion to our saluatioÌ„ in this Mysterie that is to say to the repairing and renuing and applying of the effecte of his death vnto vs that which is done in this Mysterie without violent shedding of bloude is sufficient This doctrine S. Gregorie teacheth in other places wherby he both declareth the vertue of the Mystical Sacrifice and also expoundeth him selfe how that strange Phrase may be vnderstanded which M. Iewel bringeth against the Real and true Sacrifice Gregor lib. 4. Dialog cap. 58. Thus he saith in one place Haec victima singulariter ab aeterno interitu animam sâ—lâ—at quae illaÌ„ nobis morteÌ„ vnigeniti per Mysterium reparat This Sacrifice doth singularly saue the soule froÌ„ euerlasting destructioÌ„ which by Mysterie renueth vnto vs the. Death of Gods onely begoten Sonne Againe in an other place Idem homil 37. Quoties ei hostiam suae Passionis offerimus toties nobis ad absolutionem nostram passionem illius reparamus As often as we offer vp vnto him the hoste or sacrifice of his Passion so often we renue and repaire his Passion vnto vs for our absolution Now then bicause by this Sacrifice the Death of Christe is renued and applied vnto vs for our absolution and remission of synne which is the effecte of his Death as if we had ben present at the Crosse when he was crucified therefore S. Gregorie was so bolde as to say that Christe lyuing immortally in him selfe in this Mysterie dyeth againe Such Sacrifice such Death If the Sacrifice be bloudy then the Death must be bloudy or with shedding of bloude If the Sacrifice be vnbloudy Vnbloudy Death then is the Death also vnbloudy and mystical that is to say the effecte of his death as if it were now present And that there be truly and in proper speach a Sacrifice it is ynough that the body and bloude of Christe being made present by vertue of his worde his Death be so applied vnto vs to remission of synne as if he were now a dying And this muche may serue for Answer to the heape of your mangled and maimed allegations that here you haue laid so thicke together Whereof not one proueth your purpose which is that in S. Cyprians iudgement Christe in the celebration of the Supper is not a Sacrifice in true and proper speache and in deede but
of his owne body Which can not be otherwise vnderstanded then of the Oblation made at the Supper as onely being vnbloudy for the Oblation made vpon the Crosse was bloudy as you konwe Againe he saith that Christes Priesthod after the order of Melchisedek endureth for euer for that euen to this day he sacrificeth and is sacrificed by the meane of Priestes now being Furthermore that Christe in his last Supper deliuered to them the manner of such a Sacrifice These be pointes conteined in this testimonie of Oecumenius besides those which you haue noted and be such as you and your felowes can not wel brooke and therfore your policie was to dissemble them To the whole place you answer by comparing it as your manner is to doo vnto certaine phrases M. Iew. roÌ„neth to his phrases and figuratiue speaches for aÌ„swer to that vvhich is spoken in ê“per speache and literally and figuratiue speaches of the Fathers in which they say one thing in sounde of worde and meane an other or at least in which their meaning is to be vnderstanded Mystically and not exactly to be construed after the rigour of the precise termes Six sentences or rather peeces of sentences you pretend to allege which you wil nedes haue to be like vnto this testimonie of Oecumenius Of which six the first is your owne and not S. Hieromes at al Shiftes not to be borne vvith in a preacher as you vtter it As for the second there is no such thing in his Commentaries vpon the Psalme 97. as your cotation directeth the fourth is not to be founde in the .38 Sermon of S. Augustine De verbis Domini secuÌ„dum LucaÌ„ as you note bicause he neuer made of that mater but .37 Sermons The fifth is falsified S. Chrysostom vttereth it otherwise The third and the sixth if you had alleged them whole Ansvver to the first autoritie alleged out of S. Hierom. as they lye in the authours would seme to make nothing for you as here it shal be declared If humanitie required me not to deale rigorously with you but gentilly to beare with you not to reuele your false sleightes to your discredite but for your honesties sake to winke at them then thus should you be answered 1. Where S. Hierome saith Si volumus quotidie nascitur Christus Hieron in Psal. 86. If we wil Christ is borne euery day the worde Christe is not taken in proper signification for the second person but for any vertue that man may worke 1. Cor. 1. bicause it is said of him that he is the vertue and wisedom of his Father as I haue before declared Now where Oecumenius saith Christe hath offered an vnbloudy Sacrifice for he hath offered his owne body Christe hath vouchesaued to be our Bishop Christe sacrificeth and is sacrificed by meanes of the Priestes that now be Christe deliuered vnto them the way and manner of such Sacrifice in his mystical Supper in al these speaches Christ is the name not of vertue and power indefinitely but of the only begoten Sonne of God the second Person in Trinitie that was conceiued by the holy Ghoste and borne of the virgin Marie Therfore there is no similitude or likenesse betwen the Phrase of S. Hierome which in truth is as here I allege and not as you forge it and this saying of Oecumenius Whereas then your Argument is this As Christ is borne euery day so is he offered by Priestes euery day But he is not really and in deede borne euery day Ergo neither is he offered by Priestes euery day If this be your Argument your Maior or first proposition is false bicause as I haue shewed the similitude holdeth not and the case is not like And so S. Hierome doth nothing helpe your cause Crucifying of Christe considered tvvo vvaies Touching your other places one Answer in manner may serue for them al. 2. Christe vnto vs is daily crucified saith S. Hierome perhaps some where or some other Father for your cotation is false This much is to be considered The crucifying of Christe is of two sortes The one external and bloudy The other mystical and vnbloudy In that Christes bloude was shed to be the general redemption In this the bloude of Christe already shed is applyed vnto vs that is to say the effecte of his bloude to particuler remission of synnes and paines dew to sinnes as if he were now hanging vpon the Crosse. This application of Christes death vnto vs is sometimes of the Fathers called his Crucifying sacrificing Death and killing After the first way he was neuer crucified but once After the second way he is crucified daily and so often as the Death of him that was crucified is the sacrament of Reconciliation presupposed applied vnto vs to effecte Neither is the doctrine of Application of Christes Death strange Application The substance of it hath ben taught in diuers respectes by the learned Fathers of the Churche bothe olde and newe Albeit the terme of Application be more common in the Scholastical Doctours Tertul. lib. 1. aduersus Marcion Hierony in Matth. cap. 26. who haue treated most exactly of these pointes then in the most Auncient writers Tertullian writing against Marcion and S. Hierom vpon S. Mathew to signifie the real presence vse the terme of Representation whereby is signified in Latin the exhibiting of a thing present Representation S. Gregorie expresseth the same meaning that Application conteneth Gregorius Homi. 37. by the terme of Repairing or renuing So often as we offer vp vnto him saith he the hoste of his Passion Reparation or repairing so often we renue and repaire his Passion vnto vs for absolution Dialog 4. cap. 58. Againe in an other place This hoste or Sacrifice saith he doth singularly saue the soule from damnation which by Mysterie renueth vnto vs the Death of the only begoten Sonne of God S. Augustine signifieth this muche by the worde of Insinuation Insinuation Now who so euer doth insinuate a thing to an other that is to say putteth it in his bosome for so muche the worde signifieth the same doth also applie it vnto him For declaration hereof S. Augustines testimonie by your selfe here alleged serueth very aptly Which if you had with more sinceritie and truth alleged you had dealt more like a true man but then had you hindered your euil cause His wordes be these where he expoundeth the Parable of the Riotous Sonne written by S. Luke Lucae 15. August Quaestion Euangel lib. 2.33 making Vitulum saginatum the fatted calfe to be Christe Our Lorde saith he was this fatted Calfe who according to flesh was filled with reproches Quòd autem imperat vt adducant eum quid aliud est nisi vt praedicent eum annunciando venire faciant in exhausta fame viscera filij esurientis S. Augustine vnderstandeth by the killing of Christe novv the insinuatioÌ„ of his death Nam etiam vt occidant
Priestes but also the faithful Christian people doo offer vp this Sacrifice whiche here M. Iewel calleth the vnbloudy and Daily Sacrifice of the newe Testament meaning notwithstanding thereby not the body and bloude of Christe but a mere spiritual Sacrifice of Praise thinking by the name of the Sacrifice of Praise to exclude the Real Sacrifice of Christes body and bloude whereas none other is so muche a Sacrifice of praise and thankes as this Sacrifice is Touching the Priestes and the peoples parte in this behalfe looke what the people doth in good affection and vowe the same doo the Priestes in Ministerie saith the learned Pope Innocentius Tertius Innocentius 3. De officio Missae li. â— cap. 20. As for the Argument which M. Iewel saith I conclude out of S. Augustines wordes he may scoffe at it as he liste being the inuention of his owne meery head by me not so muche as once dreamed of It is not so harde to tel how the Antecedent and Consequent of it came together as it is for him to shewe how I haue so concluded out of S. Augustines wordes For in this place as S. Augustine alludeth to the Prophecie of Malachie so of Melchisedek he speaketh not so muche as one worde No man hath a grace to fight with his owne shadow in stede of his aduersarie but M. Iewel What he meaneth by mincing of my Logique I wote not But verely by this and a thousand mo places it is now wel knowen what a number of lyes and corruptions he hath minced and shrid together to fil vp the Hotchepotte of his Replie Iewel Christe onely is that Priest for euer accordinge to the order of Melchisedek He hath made an endles Sacrifice He him selfe hath offered vp him selfe vnto God his Father vpon the Crosse. Therefore God the Father saithe vnto him Thou art that Priest foreuer not any mortal Creature Hebrae 7. 9. or vvorldly vvight but thou onely beinge bothe God and man Psal. 110. art that Priest for euer S. Paule saithe VVee ar made perfite and Sanctified by that one Sacrifice once made vpon the Crosse. Hebrae 9. 1. Ioan. 2. S. Ihon the Euangelist saithe He is the propitiaton and Sacrifice for our sinnes 1. Pet. 2. S. Peter saithe He carried our sinnes in his Bodie vpon the Tree 2. Cor. 5. S. Paul saithe God was in Christ reconcilinge the worlde vnto him selfe Therefore S. Iohn the Baptiste saithe Iohan. 1. Beholdâ— that Lambe of God that taketh awaie the sinnes of the worlde Yf M. Hardinge and his felovves doubte hereof as they seeme to doo let Ceriste him selfe beare vvitnesse to the price of his ovvne Bloude Hanging vpon the Crosse and yeldinge vp the Sprite he sealed vp al vvith these vvordes Consummatum est That is to say This is the Sacrifice for sinne Hereby my Fathers wrathe is paciâ—ied hereby al thinges are made perfite Thus Sacrifice is but one wee maie looke for none other It is ful and perfite wee maie looke for no better Harding What neede so many wordes in a mater confessed Who denieth but Christe is a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedek Yea he is not That Priest so onely vpon which worde you harpe much but that men may be Priestes vnder him and Ministers of the same Priesthode as before I haue proued by witnesse of Eusebius and of Oecumenius And S. Augustine also saith August de Ciuit. Dei lib. 17. cap. 17. Iam vbique offertur sub Sacerdote Christo quod protulit Melchisedech quando benedixit Abraham Now is that offered vp euery where vnder the Priest Christ which Melchisedek brought forth when he blessed AbrahaÌ„ whereby he vnderstandeth not only the bare figure bread and wine but more specially the body and bloude of Christe now really conteined vnder the formes of bread and wine after consecration and then signified and forefigured by bread and wine True it is no mortal Creature or worldly wight as you speake is that Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedek To what ende bring you this in Christe also is the Lambe of God Ioan. 1. that taketh away the sinnes of the worlde He is the propiciation and Sacrifice for our sinnes What conclude you of al your needeles number of allegations Whereas you say that I and my felowes seme to doubte hereof you say like your selfe The wordes of Dronckerdes of Skoldes and of Common Lyers must not alwaies be taken for a sclaunder This Sacrifice is but one say you we may looke for none other it is ful and perfite we may looke for no better Is this the mater for which you haue spent so many wordes and textes Why sir I pray you is there any man so farre an ennemie to Christe and to his Death that now telleth you of mo redemptions then one of an other Redeming Sacrifice besides that of the Crosse of any perfiter and better then that If there be any suche let him be punished in Gods name to the example of al blasphemers yea if ye wil let him be handled as il as ye would longer this haue handled Bishop Boner that constant Confessour of God if ye could haue had so much lawe thereto as ye had malice Or as ye would haue handled me when M. Grindal procured some of the Quenes Garde with his owne men to be sent out by nyght in al haste vnto a place in Essex I knowe not where to take me and bring me prisoner to London being at good reste in my bed at Louaine Touching this point we tel you and this is not the first time we haue tolde it you There is but one Sacrifice of it selfe sufficient for the Redemption of Mankind There is but one Lambe that taketh away the synnes of the worlde Ioan. 1. and that one Lambe was neuer but once killed for taking away synnes The Sacrifice that now is daily offered in the Churche is done in remembrance of that was once done for our Redemption vpon the Crosse. We pretende not to make a newe worke of Redemption as though that whiche Christe wrought vpon the Crosse were insufficieÌ„t and vnperfite For better declaration of that whiche we doo Chrysost. in Epist. ad Hebr. Homil. 17 S. Chrysostome demaundeth Do we not offer euery day Yeas saith he we do offer but we doo it for remembrance of his death And this Sacrifice is one not many How one and not many In asmuche as it was once offered it was offered vp into the most holy of al holy But this Sacrifice is a sampler of that we offer vp alwaies the selfe same thing August coÌ„tra Faust. lib. 6. c. 5. Ibid. lib. 20. ca. 21. August li. De fide ad Petrum cap. 19. Al the Iewes sacrifices by many and diuers wayes signified the one Sacrifice the memorie of which now we celebrate saith S. Augustine After Christes Ascension it is celebrated by the Sacrament of memorie saith he in
was incarnate which is against our Faith Now if Christe touching his Godhead coulde do that which the Father and the Holy Ghoste should not do the Godhead were diuided and peaces or partes were made thereof it being immutable indiuisible one and most excellently perfect so that touching that parte of the Godhead whiche were in Christe Sacrifice might be made but touching that which were in the Father and the Holy Ghoste sacrifice might not be made Here we shal trie how this nowe broched Arian wil purge him selfe Here shal we see whether this Heresie shal also be soothed bolstered and shouldered vp as your other Heresies are or no. Last of al here shal we see whether you wil recant and retract this abominable Heresie as in your Sermon of the .15 of Iune last at Paules Crosse you promised and protested to doo if you could be conuinced of any Of this I say no more But if this blasphemie may be mainteined in this newe English Churche vndoubtedly this English Churche ô pitiful case wil proue a professour of Arianisme yea I feare at length of worse if worse may be Certainely our Christe neuer taught this doctrine neither was euer any such thing attributed vnto Christe by Gods worde nor by the Catholike Churche wherefore you seme not to beleeue in our Christe Christ said of the Spiritual Rewlers Luc. 10. he that heareth you heareth me he that despiseth you despiseth me and so taught obedience vnto his Church and also vnto that chiefe Gouernour whom he instituted Head of the same and appointed to be his Vicare For wheras he said Ioan. 21. feede my shepe he meant that the sheepe should obey him whom he ordeined their feeder or Pastor Whereof it foloweth that who so euer refuseth to be fed that is to say to be gouerned and taught by that general Shepeherd he forsaketh the state and order of a sheepe Math. 25. and becōmeth a Goat and therefore to be placed at the lefte side when the great Shepeherd of al Shepeherdes shal come to sorte his flockes Christ commendeth vnto vs the Sacrament of Penaunce in which if we sinne after Baptisme we are reconciled to God by a Priest whereunto Confession of sinnes belongeth Christ also requireth perfourmance of Vowes This doctrine you receiue not you teache it not You beleeue not our Christe Christ saith S. Irenaeus at his last supper tooke into his handes the creature of bread blessed and gaue thankes Iren. li. 4. cap. 32. saying This is my body and taking the Cuppe likewise he confessed it to be his bloude and taught the nevve Oblation of the nevve Testament vvhich the Churche receiuing it of the Apostles offereth vp to God in the vvhole vvorlde Christian people hath euer bene taught from the Apostles time to this day that to be his true Body and his true Bloude whiche are offered an vppon credit of Christes saying doo adoure and worship the same You teache not this doctrine You beleeue not that Christes wordes do implye this much you teache the contrary Thus you beleeue not in our Christe That Christe sitting at the right hande of his Father in heauen is at the same time in the handes of them who receiue the Sacrament of the Aulter bothe Sacrifice and Sacrificer as S. Chrysostome teacheth and the Church beleeueth you teache not you receiue not you beleeue not Whereas Christ consecrateth the hoste by the ministerie of the Priest saying this is my body this is my bloude his saying being true and you not beleeuing how beleeue you in Christe Christ said Math. 5. A Citie built vpon a hil can not be hidde meaning it of his Church built vpon him selfe You teach that the true Church of Christ hath hen hidde these almost a thousand yeres and so hidde that before Luthers time al Christians were in palpable darknes How then beleue you in Christ Christ said to his Disciples bearing the person of al the Church Math. 28. Behold I am vvith you al daies vntil the end of the vvorld And againe Ioan. 14. I vvil pray my Father and he vvil geue you an other cōforter to remaine vvith you for euer the Spirite of Truth Marke wel good Reader Al daies For euer and The Spirit of Truth But you M. Iewel and your good felowes do teache plainely that the whole Churche of Christ was guided in Truthe by the Holy Ghost only for the space of .600 yeres and therefore you limit and prescribe the trial of Controuersies to that age onely As for these later so many hundred yeres you say the Pope hath blinded the whole worlde You beleue then in a Christe of .600 yeres only not in our Christe and Sauiour which promised to remaine with his Churche Al dayes no daye or yere intermitted euen to the vvorldes ende August in epist. Iohan tractat 6. Nay beleeue you in Christ at al S. Augustine teacheth that Heretikes beleeue not that Christ came in flesh Charitie saith he brought him vnto flesh VVho so euer therefore thus he concludeth hath not Charitie he denieth that Christ came in fleshe And to proue that an Heretike hath not Charitie thus he reasoneth Tu non habes Charitatem quia pro honore tuo diuidis vnitatem Thou hast not Charitie bicause for thine owne honours sake thou diuidest vnitie There for sure trial of Preachers whether they haue the spirite of God or no comparing them as S. Paule doth to earthen pitchers he biddeth men to prooue them by the sounde Pulsate tangite vasa fictilia ne fortè crepuerint male resonent Knocke the earthen pitchers saith he tinke them with your fingers least perhaps they be crackte and geue a broken sounde You are crackte you are crakte M. Iewel We haue knockte you and we finde that your sound is not whole How so Bicause you haue not the Charitie and loue of vnitie You say I knowe wel that you haue Charitie and that ye diuide not the Vnitie but that we the Papistes for so ye cal the Catholiques be they by whom the Vnitie is diuided No no M. Iewel It wil not serue you so to say For when men were once One and in one Auncient felowship or Communion as ye and we were in One Auncient Church before Luther brake the knot he diuideth Vnitie which departeth from his felowes and former godly companie to ioyne him selfe with a newe companie not he who abydeth stil in the former Auncient companie Say therefore what ye wil S. Augustine plainely prooueth that ye are they which haue broken the Vnitie For this can not be denied which by him is spoken as it were to your person Tollis te ab vnitate Orbis terrarum c. Tract 6. in epist. Iohan. You vvithdravv your selfe from the vnitie of the vvhole vvorlde You diuide the Church by Schismes you rent the bodie of Christ. He came to gather together you crie out to the ende to set a sundre It is you M. Iewel
doo shewe Gen. 4. For what cause hath God engraffed in Man the rite of sacrificing As touching the cause why it hath pleased God to engraffe in the mindes of men the rite of sacrificing what other can we rendre but his great loue towardes Mankinde In declaration whereof this muche is to be considered Whereas our first parent Adam seduced by the enuy and crafte of the Deuil Gen. 3. brake Gods commaundement and through his sinne brought sinne into this world Rom. 5. yea suche and so great Sinne that al proceding from him according to the flesh became by nature the Children of wrath and therefore remained thral to Gods anger and iust damnation Ephes. 1. God of his owne goodnes not willing they should perish whom he had created determined with him selfe Gen. 3.12 22.26.28 and promised to Adam at the beginning and afterward to Abraham Isaac Iacob Moyses Dauid and the other Fathers to send that blessed seede Iesus Christe his Sonne Deut. 18. to reconcile vs vnto him selfe to pacifie his iuste wrath to wash vs cleane from our sinnes and to redeeme vs from damnation by Oblation of a singular Sacrifice Galat. 4. When the fulnes of time was come and the daies fully expired that God had appointed the Sonne of God our Sauiour came tooke our sinnes vpon him The true and chief Sacrifice Christes Death offered him selfe vp a Sacrifice for vs vpon the Crosse appeased the wrath of his Father and entring once by his bloude into the holy place as S. Paule saith founde for vs an euerlasting Redemption Heb. 9. This Sacrifice of Christe vpon the Crosse is the onely Sacrifice whereby we are redemed and without this is there no saluation Heb. 10. With one offering saith S. Paule he hath made perfite for euer them that be sanctified And in Esaie it is said of Christe Esai 63. Torcular calcaui solus The presse haue I trodden alone And as without and besides this Sacrifice nothing can saue vs so this is a sufficient price to satisfie God for the Dettes and sinnes of the whole worlde 1. Ioan. 2 He is the propiciation saith S. Iohn for our sinnes neither for our sinnes onely but for the sinnes of al the worlde This is the lambe that taketh away the sinnes of the worlde Iohan. 1. And God was reconciling the worlde in Christe vnto him selfe 2. Cor. 5. saith S. Paule The vertue of this Sacrifice reacheth from the beginning of the world to the ende from the first man to the laste bothe Testamentes taking their effecte of it and therefore S. Iohn calling Christe the Lambe saith he was killed from the beginning of the worlde Apocal. 13. verely bicause his bloude hath cleansed the sinnes of men of al ages But albeit this be the Lambe that taketh away the sinnes of the worlde Iohan. 1. and though it be the Sacrifice propiciatorie for the sinner of the whole world as S. Iohn saith yet is not the whole world thereby saued For sure we are the faithlesse Gentiles Turkes Moores Saracenes vnbeleuing Iewes and seined Christians be not saued What then shal we saye This Sacrifice is sufficient to saue al men but it is not effectual to the saluation of al men The vertue of it is suche as is hable to saue al yet be not al saued Wherof commeth this The defecte is not in God it is in man Now behold the goodnes of God That this Sacrifice of his Sonne as it is sufficient for al so it may be also effectual for al God hath ordeined certaine meanes whereby men may be made hable to receiue the merite of it and wherby the vertue of it is transferred and applied vnto them These meanes be Sacramentes and Sacrifices As for Faith Faith hope and Charitie first and chiefly required Heb. 11. â— Iohan. 3 Sacramentes Sacrifices double Invvard Sacrifices Heb. vlt. Hope and Charitie of necessitie they are presupposed without whiche neither Sacramentes nor Sacrifices doo ought auaile For without faith it is impossible to please God and who so euer loueth not he remaineth in death Likewise where is no hope there Christes mercie to saluation taketh no place Of Sacramentes some be propre to the olde Testament some to the newe Of Sacrifices some be inward some be outward The inward be knowen as the sacrifice of a contrite Harte an humbled spirite the sacrifice of prayer praise and thankesgeuing of mercie and beneuolence and other the like These be common to bothe Testamentes Outvvard Sacrifices But as concerning outward Sacrifices that men might be made partakers of the Oblation of Christe whiche hath most sufficiently merited the saluation of al men and that they might transferre the fruite of it vnto themselues God hath euen from the beginning of the worlde bothe vnder the Lawe of Nature by Diuine inspiration stirred vp the mindes of men vnto the rite of sacrificing for witnes whereof we haue the example of Abel Gen. 4.8 Noe and Melchisedek Abraham Isaac Iacob Iob besides others Iob. 1. and eftsones at what time he gaue the Law by Moyses he commaunded sacrifices to be made and shewed the diuers kindes of Sacrifices Exod. 12. as the Paschal Lambe Num. 28. the continual sacrifice the sacrifice for the sinnes of the Priest In Leuitico ca. 4. of the Prince of the people for ignorance forgeuing thankes for peace for chastitie c. The vse of al whiche outward Sacrifices was not that they should reconcile men to God The vse of the olde Sacrifices and merite saluation by strength of their owne nature but that by them the mindes of men might be moued and admonished to remember the great Sacrifice that was to come whereby God promised to redeme al men that so their faith might be confirmed and the fruite of it be applied vnto them hauing faith and truste in the Sacrifice to come What strength they had in their degree against sinne they had it not by their owne nature but by vertue of Christes Sacrifice vpon the â—rosse whereof they were figures and significations Of these outward Sacrifices so great an accompte is made in the Scriptures as necessary for the behoofe of Gods people lyuing vnder the Lawe that the lacke of them is reputed in sundrie places for an horrible plague God threatening the people of Israel saith by his Prophete Osee Osee. 3. that they should sit to many daies sine sacrificio sine Altari without sacrifice and without an Aulter In an other place he threatened king Asa and his people by the mowth of Azarias the sonne of Obed that for a longe time they should be without a Priest 2. Paralip 15. Azarias in Daniel lâ—mentably bewaileth the state of the Iewes as being greuously plagued for that they had neither burnt offering Danil 3. nor oblation nor incense nor place where to offer Wherefore if Christe would his Churche in the time
had suffered at their handes caused this much to be said vnto him Gen. vltimo Thy Father gaue vs in commaundement before he died that we should say these vnto thee with his wordes I beseche thee to forgete the wicked deede of thy brothers the sinne and malice whiche they wrought against thee And we also on our owne behalfe pray thee to forgeue the seruauntes of thy Father this iniquitie Euen so the Church first with the wordes of Christ recording his commaundement offereth vp vnto the Father his body and bloud After that the Priestes in the person of the Church whose publique ministers they are in this behalfe adde further their owne duetie of offering with their owne wordes These thinges being considered In vvhat parte of the Masse is the holy OblatioÌ„ made Vide Tho 3 part q. 82 art 4. ad primum Homil dâ— proditione Iudâ— that question is soone answered that of some is demaunded where and in what parte of the Masse is this most holy Oblation made For although from the lesser Canon vnto the Communion it be with wordes and intention presented vnto the Father yet forasmuch as the wordes of Christe as S. Chrysostome speaketh geue strength vnto the Sacrifice and they are no where els pronouÌ„ced properly and in deede then it is made when the Priest speaking in the person of Christe saith this is my body to wit whiche for you is geuen and broken which is added in the Canon of S. Iames and in S. Ambroses Masse and This is my bloude which is shed for you For then doo we that which our Lorde commaunded to be done in remembrance of him saying Doo ye this in remembrance of me As for the thinges that be spoken before and after they are to be referred vnto that time For albeit al manner Consecration coÌ„sidered by it selfe includeth not Oblation yet considered as it procedeth of the Priestes Intention to offer vnto God by Consecration it selfe the thing consecrated bicause vnto God and vnto the honour of him he consecrateth it hath the true nature of Oblation and Sacrifice Remembrance distinct from Sacrifice Although therefore our Lorde commaunded vs to doo this in remembrance of him yet is this Sacrifice a farre other thing then the remembraunce it selfe or the praise of God or thankes geuing sith that the thing it selfe whiche is commaunded to be made is in the very woordes of Christe distincted from the remembrance For he said not remember ye this but Doâ— ye this or make this in remembrance of me The Sacrifice and the Oblation ought to be made in the remembrance of Christe so that the remembrance it selfe is not the Sacrifice but the vse and ende of the Sacrifice for whiche it ought to be offered for by this vnbloudy Sacrifice a commemoration of the Blouddy Sacrifice that was offered vpon the Crosse is made vnto the Father And so saith S. Augustine Augu. lib. 20. contra Faustum cap. 18. Christiani per acti Sacrificij memoriam celebrant sacrosancta Oblatione participatione corporis sanguinis Christi The Christians doo celebrate the memorie of the Sacrifice already done vpon the Crosse by the holy Oblation and participation of the body and bloude of Christe Whereof it is euidently gathered also that Oblation is distincted from Participation although Participation perteine to the perfection and ful complement of the Sacrifice So here thou hast Reader that whiche was required in the second place By whom this holy Sacrifice is offered to wit In this sacrifice the Churche offereth and is offered by Christ through the Ministerie of the Priest and by the Priest in the person of Christ. Where also we ought to ioine the Church withal bicause of the vnitie of Christ and the Church and so we vnderstand the Churche also to offer August de Ciuit. Dei li. 10. cap. 6. by the ministerie of the Prieste For so S. Augustine teacheth vs with plaine wordes In that Sacrament saith he it is shewed vnto the Churche that in that Oblation which it offereth it selfe is offered Concerning the third point required by S. Augustine which was promised to be declared VVhat is the thing that is offeredâ— that is to say what is the thing that is offered if we wil admit the godly exposition of the Church the Prophet teacheth vs what it is Psal. 115. where he saith what shal I geue againe vnto our Lorde for al that he hath geueÌ„ vnto me I wil take the Cuppe of our Sauiour and cal vpon the name of our Lorde meaning by the Cuppe his precious bloud that vpon the Crosse was shed for vs and is the price of our Redemption Which bloud together with the body by vertue of Christes worde in the Euchariste is made present Who refuseth this exposition of the Prophete if he wil beleeue Christe him selfe Luc. 22. who said This is my body which is geuen for you Math. 26. This is my bloude which is shed for you he can not be ignorant what it is that is offered in this Sacrifice Whereas then God hath so loued the worlde Iohan. 3. that he hath geuen his onely begoten Sonne Rom. 8. and hath geuen vnto vs with him al thinges for a Babe is borne to vs Esai 9. a Sonne is geuen to vs saith Esaie the whole merite of Christe and the price of the Redemption which he gote vpon the Crosse is ours And therefore in this Oblation the thing offered being the body and bloude of Christe which as a most sufficient price he gaue vppon the Crosse for Redemption of mankinde and which of gifte we haue receiued of God we present and geue vnto God in the person of Christe that same true body and bloud that is to say Christe him selfe together with that great price and merite not to purchace a new Redemption but in commemoration of his death wherby the redemption is already purchaced in rendring of thankes for his benefites in a certaine satisfaction for our sinnes and defectes and for the temporal paines that be due vnto our sinnes mortal sinnes and paines euerlasting being forgeuen either in Baptisme Cyprian ad CeciliuÌ„ epist. 3. lib. 2. or through the Sacrament of Penaunce humbly beseching and as king in the person of Christe that so it be accepted In consideration wherof S. Cyprian calleth it the Passion of our Lorde that we offer And S. Augustine calleth it Aug. Confess lib. 9. cap. 12. Sacrificium prâ—tij nostri the Sacrifice of our Price wherewith our Raunsom is paid And hereof Reader thou maist conceiue what answere is to be made vnto them that moue this question which to some though without iust cause semeth to be of great difficultie whether the Sacrifices of the olde Testament the Sacrifice that our Lorde offered at his Supper the Sacrifice of the Crosse and that Sacrifice which is daily made in the Churche whether al these haue a like and the selfe same
be made no where but in the Temple In deede prayer was euermore added vnto the Sacrifices wherwith they asked that of God for which they offered Yet say we not that sacrifice is prayer as the name of prayer is taken properly but that oftentimes it is vnderstanded by the name of prayer bicause in this it is like vnto it for that it offereth a gifte vnto God to thintent to receiue some thing of him wherein it appeareth to be a prayer not in worde but in deede And bicause it geueth to receiue it hath also the nature of a certaine satisfaction as that which geueth one thing for an other The Sacrifice then of the Masse The Sacrifice auailable ex opere operato in vvhat respecte is auailâ—able ex opere operato that is to say in respecte of the vertue and strength of the thing it selfe that is offred of the thing it selfe I meane without consideration had of the priest whether he be good or euil bicause in the person of Christe and by his commission the body and bloude of Christe are offered vp vnto God Whiche oblation it selfe for the worthines and reuerence of Christe as a Prayer of greatest efficacie and moste worthy to be heard the Father beholdeth and in regard of it performeth that for whiche the body and bloude of his Sonne are so offred according to the order of his Diuine disposition and as it shal seme conuenient to him selfe forasmuche as al iudgement is geuen vnto him Iohan. 5. By the same consideration it hath very great force and strength to satisfie for temporal paines that be due vnto sinnes The Sacrifice satisfieth for paines whiche paines oftetimes in Scripture be called by the name of sinnes For if according vnto the counsel of Daniel Daniel 4. sinnes that is to say paines due to sinnes are redemed with almose how muche more with the body and bloude of the Sonne of God offered at the Aulter If paines were loosed by the sacrifices of the olde Lawe shal they not muche more be loosed by the Sacrifice of the newe Lawe For els what shal we say that the bloude of Christe is of lesse price in the sight of God then the bloude of a calfe Although Sacrifices haue their valour by way of Prayer yet when they bring a present that is worthy of Gods fauour to remission of paines and of his giftes they leane to a certaine right and equitie as the Price being exhibited and so they be satisfactorie S. Augustine speaking of this way of working by the name of Christe August coÌ„tra literas Petiliani lib. 2 cap. 54. in Sacrifices and otherwise saith to Petilian the Donatist Gratias Deo quia tandeÌ„ confessus es valere inuocatuÌ„ nomen Christi ad aliorum saluteÌ„ etiaÌ„ si à peccatoribus inuocetur God be thanked for that thou hast at length confessed that the name of Christe called vpon is auaileable vnto the health of others although it be called vpon of sinners If the name of Christe onely called vpon be auaileable vnto health shal not the bloud of Christ be auaileable to procurement of health specially if the person for whom it is offered be through his owne good disposition meete to receiue suche benefite Neither is this Sacrifice auaileable onely ex opere operato of it selfe The Saâ—crifice Auaileable 〈◊〉 opere operantis and of the worke done but also in some degree ex opere operantis for and through the merite of the offerer For in asmuch as the Priest doth offer this holy Sacrifice not as a priuate man and in his owne priuate name but as the publike Minister of the Church and in the name of the Churche assumpted thervnto by publike auctoritie whereas there neuer want great merites in the Churche the merite of the offerer is neuer separated from the vertue of the worke that is wrought that is to say from the body and bloude of Christe so that although the Priest that offereth and they that be present be wicked yet the Sacrifice of the Masse is not void and frustrat but much auaileable to the working of some good effect according to the disposition of Gods merciful prouidence â—ugust câ—â— epist. Parmen lib. 2. And therefore no maruel is it after the teaching of S. Augustin that good wordes which be said in the publike Praiers for the people though they be said of euil Bishops neuerthelesse be heard not according to the peruersitie of the Gouernours but according to the deuotion of the people And yet it skilleth muche what the Gouernours be seing that their godlines through the Sacrifice much helpeth the infirmitie of the people For which coÌ„sideration as S. Cyprian saith Cyprian lib. 1. epist. 4. we ought not to electe any other to be Bishops but suche as be vnspotted and whole who offering vp Sacrifices vnto God worthily and holily may be heard in their Prayers which they make for the safetie of our Lordes people Gregor in Pastorali part 1. ca. 2. For els when he that is sent to make intercession displeaseth the mind of the displeased is more greeuously prouoked saith S. Gregorie speaking of vnworthy Priestes But yet the Priestes impietie can not let but that the Sacrifice The impietie of the Priest is no hinderance to others touching the benefite of thâ— Sacrifice whiche of it selfe and being offred in the name of the Churche is so good and acceptable a thing vnto God shal profite them whiche besides the Priestes with godlines doo offer it according to the deuotion bothe of them that with the Priestes doo offer and of them for whom it is offred For true it is that S. Augustin saith to Petilianus the Donatiste Nos dicimus tale cuique SacrificiuÌ„ fieri qualis accedit vt offerat We say that the Sacrifice to eche man is made suche August contrà lit Petil. lib. 2. c. 52 1. q. 1. cap. Dominus as he is that commeth to offer Whereas then the wel disposed people doth offer vp that same very Sacrifice by deuoute affection whiche the Priest offereth by outward Ministerie the wickednes of the Minister bereueth not any deuoute person of the benefite of the Sacrifice Neither is this so to be taken as though in this case nothing were to be looked for aboue the merite of our deuotion for then to what purpose were the Sacrifice But what so euer benefite redoundeth of the vertue of the Sacrifice ouer and aboue the merite of deuotion the same is so muche the more abundantly of euery one enioyed with how muche more deuotion towardes Christe and his Death he offereth This deuoute disposition of the offerers our Lorde prescribed when consecrating and making his Apostles Priestes Luc. 22. he said Doo ye this in remembrance of me In whiche commaundement 1. Cor. 11. whereas there be two thinges conteined dooing and remembring or commemoration this muche our Lorde therein signified The Sacrifice profiteth in
al forasmuche as we present the body and bloude of Christe vnto the Father in his person and by his commission and beseche his goodnes that in regarde of his body and bloude he wil haue mercie vppon them But we doo not presente these giftes for al as a Price that is exhibited for them whiche thing the propre nature of this oblation comprehendeth in respecte of release of the paines bicause al be not capable that is to say not apte vessels to receiue suche benefite As touching other thinges whiche profitably be asked in the Masse Benifites redounding to vs by the Masse as victorie peace health ceasonable wether and such other the like wherewith mannes miserie is releeued and holpen the Sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable for them according to the order of Gods eternal disposition not onely by reason of the merite of the Priest and of the Churche that offereth but also and that more amply by reason of the qualitie and vertue of the Sacrifice whiche is consecrated in the person of Christe and by his commission But this is by way of Prayer whiche Prayer bicause it is not sitting the wordes of Christe to be frustrate by whiche he committed this Sacrifice vnto vs the Father very oftentimes heareth And whereas he heareth it not the iudgementes of God be secrete For great is the vertue of the signes and Sacramentes of the name of Iesus Christe vnto whose honour the very powers of the Aier are commaunded to yelde and geue place though it be called vppon by euil and for euil persons as S. Augustine very learnedly teacheth in his booke of .83 questions Augu. lib. 83. quaest quaest 79. or who els so euer is author of that booke For in no wise dare any sprites saith he to contemne these signes For they tremble at these where so euer they beholde them but men being vnwitting of it by God an other thing sometime is commaunded For whereas they geue not place vnto these-Signes God him selfe forbiddeth when he iudgeth it iuste and profitable Thus S. Augustine To this very aptly serueth that he writeth in his .22 booke De Ciuitate Dei Where he telleth of a house deliuered from euil Sprites by the Prayers and Sacrifice of the Masse August de Ciuit. Dei lib. 22. c. 8. Hesperius a noble maÌ„ saith he who dwelleth in our countrie hath in the Lordship of Fussala a Ferme called Cubedi Where when he vnderstoode that his house which he hath there susteined great hurte by euil Sprites and that his catail and his Seruauntes were much troubled he besought our Priestes in my absence that one would go thither that by his Prayers they might be driuen away One went and offered vp there the Sacrifice of the body of Christe praying as muche as he was haâ—le that the vexation might ceasse Forthwith by the mercie of God is ceassed S. Gregorie sheweth by many examples that through the Sacrifice of the Masse diuers receiued temporal benefites Grego in Dialogis who neither were present when Masse was said for them nor thought at al of it Also certaine special helpes by this Sacrifice be obteined which of the Diuines are called prima gratia for with these God doth oftentimes helpe them for whom the Sacrifice is offered that the motion of faith and deuotion and desire of the medicine of the Sacramentes be stirred vp in them Thus thou seest Reader what power the Sacrifice of the Masse hath And as this Sacrifice hath vertue to remoue al manner euils from vs so it hath vertue to get and procure al good thinges vnto vs according to the disposition of Gods Prouidence VVhat force the Sacrifice of the Masse hath â—ouching the remissioÌ„ of mortal sinnes Wherefore that also may easily be conceiued which of many men is called in question touching the remission of mortal sinnes Verely the blessed Martyr S. Alexander fifth in the Regester of the Popes saith in his firste epistle that Crimes and sinnes be put out by these Sacrifices offered vp vnto our Lorde And againe that our Lorde is delited and appeased with such Sacrifices and that through them he forgeueth great sinnes Alexander epist. ad oâ—Ì„s orthodoxos For nothing saith he can be greater in Sacrifices then the body and bloud of our Lorde Iulius speaking likewise of the Sacrifices saith that by them offred to God al crime and sinne is quite put out S. Gregorie also saith Iulius De Cons. Distinct. 2. CuÌ„ omne Gregor Dialog 4. Cap. 58. that this Sacrifice singularly saueth the soule from euerlasting destruction Al whiche and sundry other the like sayinges of certaine Fathers are so to be vnderstanded not as though we might obteine remission of such sinnes after Baptisme committed without Absolution of the Priest who is the Ministre of the Sacrament of Penaunce but that this blessed Sacrifice doth geue such grace and worketh so together with the infirmitie of the Penitentes that they may by the Priests be reconciled vnto God And it is so acceptable in the sight of God Sess. 22. Cap. 2. that as the CouÌ„cel of Trent teacheth being appeased by the Oblation of it graunting grace and the gifte of Penaunce he forgeueth Crimes and sinnes yea that be right great As concerning them The Sacrifice of the Masse profitable for the dead 2. Mac. 12 Ioan. 11. August in Enchirid. cap. 110. that with godlinesse are departed this life and haue taken their slepe as the Scripture speaketh and haue not as it behooued them made ful satisfaction whom we beleeue to remaine in Purgatorie although now they be not in state to merite any thing by any operatioÌ„ of their owne wil or to do holesom Penaunce for their sinnes yet bicause they be the members of Christ and felow citizens withal the Saintes felowes and brothers with them the Sacrifice of the Masse profiteth them as it doth the other iuste persons here but that their owne propre deuotioÌ„ caÌ„ helpe them nothing â—s now depending wholly of Christ and of the Church For although God in the day of our departure hence as it is said of the wise man do rendre to euery man according to his waies Eccle. 11. yet after the doctrine of S. Augustin this much by their good workes they haue deserued at Gods hand whiles they lyued here August in Enchirid. ad LaureÌ„ti cap. 11â— that these common dueties of Christian felowship might profit them also after their departure hence For els it should seme very vniuste and iniurious vnto the body of Christe if there were any members of it to which being in distresse it could not procure succour The motion of contrition and charitie with whiche they departed hence for els they remaine not in Purgatorie is a disposition Athanas. in quaest ad AntiochuÌ„ q. 34. Chrysost. ad pop Antioch Homil. 69 Sermo 3. in epist. ad Philip. Damas. in Oratione de ijs qui hinc in fide migraâ—â—nâ— whiche
stretching of his Armes abroade the Crosse by his making of many signes of the Crosse euery good effecte to procede of the merite of the Crosse is signified The like may be conceiued of such others moe For certainly as wordes be signes of thinges so be these Rites in the blessed Masse signes of great Mysteries To be shorte bicause through the infirmitie of our condition humaine affection for the most parte litle estemeth common thinges and such as be not distincte from other thinges by some token of a more excellencie yea rather dispiseth them as Malachie the Prophet complained of the vncleane Malac. 1. contemptible and vile Oblations of his time and woundereth and reuerenceth those thinges that by some shewe of excellencie seme to surmount others it was necessarie for the reuerence of so holy an Oblation and of the woâ—rship of so great a Maiestie that peculiar places as Churches Tabernacles Aulters also consecrated Ecclesias Hierarch cap. 5. p. 1 as we finde in S. Dionysius special and not common Vessels and peculiar Ministers were appointed for the same whereby the colde myndes of men might be brought to thinke more reuerently thereof As touching the practise of the Churche that is to say of the holy and learned Priestes and of al the people of God from the Apostles timâ— to these daâ—es what the Auncient Fathers haue wrâ—â—â—en in proâ—fe and confirmation of the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christ which hereto might be added for al this I reâ—erâ—e the Reader vnto my Reioindre Now then to coÌ„clude Sith that it is our duety to geue and offer vnto God some gifte and Sacrifice whereby to rendre vnto him due thankes for his benefites and to recognise him for our Creator and Redemer and nothing we haue to geue either in it selfe better or to him more acceptable then the body and bloude of his Sonne Iesus Christe and whereas we haue commaundement to offer the same and so great profite commeth to men thereof and whereas in the Masse in whiche this Sacrifice is offered by Christe and the Churche godly prayers be made for Kinges for them that be in auctoritie and for al men thankes be geuen certaine outward signes are shewed whereby the memorie of Christes Passion is stirred vp and to vs renewed and reuerence to Godward is enkindled what forbiddeth why on the behalfe of the most blessed Masse and of them who susteine persecution for this Sacrifice I may not here vtter the woordes of the Holy Patriarke Iacob by way of expostulation with our Aduersaries Quam ob culpam nostram Gen. 31. ob quod peccatum quod in Missa committimus Expostulation vvith the persecutions of the Masse sic exarsistis post nos scrutaeti estis omnem suppellectilem nostram What is our trespace and what is the sinne that we haue committed in saying and hearing the Masse that ye are so wroth and fume so much against vs Ye haue searched al stuffe as Iacob said to Laban ye haue examined our doctrine and what haue ye founde Ye haue examined vs ye haue depriued vs ye haue condemned vs some to prisons some to certaine places ye haue debarred vs of libertie to see our deare frendes to enioye our swete Countrie ye haue taken from vs great summes of money ye haue thirsted our bloude ye haue oftetimes called for the Princes sword to be drawen against vs ye haue geuen the cause of the losse of many of our liues This and much more haue ye done touching our parte But as touching Gods parte what iniurie what dishonour what pillages what robberies what Sacrileges what spoiles what prophane and Turkish saggages of Churches what contempte what despite what villanies ye and your brethren haue done in sundry places of Christendome what needeth it any man to speake the secretes of hartes do speake the sighing of Gods people speaketh the Earth the Heauen God him selfe by his brute and dumme Creatures speaketh But what auaileth it to make complaint vnto them that be not onely farre from al griefe of their euil doing and from remorse of conscience but also reioyse and glorie in malice NOw therfore to returne to thee good Reader that thou maist the better vnderstand our procedings when at the first I tooke in hand to answer M. Iewels ChaleÌ„ge and to iustifie the Articles that rashly and wickedly he had denied amnog other things I brought some of that I haue here said and what elles then to me semed good for proufe of the Sacrifice of the Masse which in his .17 Article he denieth Therto as to the rest of my Answere he hath made his Replie In which Replie he hath said what he was hable to say in disprouse of that singular Sacrifice But how insufficient his disprouse iâ— and of how litle substance al is that he hath brought how litle he amendeth his common woont of falsifying his testimonies what other false partes he playeth and what grosse errours he is fallen into thou shalt perceiue if thou vouchesafe to read this Reioindre Whereas against this Sacrifice by many men many wordes haue ben said many villanies haue ben wrought many blasphemous bookes haue ben written as is before meÌ„cioned according to the sprite that Satan the enemie of the Sacrifice hath enspired into their wretched breastes Out of al M. Iewel like a Spyder hath suckte the most venemous iouice and in his Replie hath vttered it as it were spitting forth his poison Which Replie as perhaps it poisoneth the lighter sorte who haue delite to feede thereon so to the wise and those that be stedfast in the Catholique Faith al the stuffe of his great booke appeareth as it were but Cobwebbes For in dede as with Cobwebbes nothing is holden but light moâ—es and weake flees euen so of a light witte and feeble Faith he sheweth him selfe to be whom that Replie catcheth and holdeth He hath not one Auncient Doctour for him not one Councel General or Prouincial olde or newe not one Example of the Primitiue Churche not one sentence of the holy Scriptures Not one I say for him that is to wit whereof any cleare conclusion may be gathered against the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe These doo I the rather make accompte of bicause by his owne appointement they be good waies and meanes whereby to trie pointes of Faith in Controuersie Now if M. Iewel haue nothing out of al these for a cleare disproufe of this Sacrifice after he hath vewed al the bookes that by these newe Maisters haue bene written in defence of his side after that he hath furnished him selfe with al that euer Luther Bucer Zuinglius Oecolampadius Caluine Beza and the vpholders of their sectes could deuise against it after that he hath coÌ„ferred with his felow Ministers and SuperinteÌ„dentes who most readily ioine their forces together against the Sacrifice yea after that he hath learned the Argumentes of Satan him selfe the first Founder of this new
to knocke him againe with the weapons that I was accustomed vnto lyuing in Papistrie and I laid for me the Intention and 16 faith of the Churche to wit that I had celebrated priuat Masses in the faith and intention of the Churche Albeit ê™ I 17 that I haue not beleeued or thought rightly yet in this point the Churche beleueth and thinketh rightly But then Satan laying at me more mightily and more vehemently Go too ê™ he bring me forth 18 where it is written that a man which is wicked and vnbeleeuing may stande at the Aulter of Christe and consecrate in the faith of the Churche Where hath God bid or commaunded this thing How wilt thou prooue that the Churche doth imparte vnto thee Intention to this thy priuate Masse 19 If now thou haue not the worde of God for thee but if men haue taught thee this thinge without the worde then all this Doctrine is a lye Beholde your boldnes c. 15 VVhy didst thou not blesse thee and arme thy selfe vvith the signe of the Crosse VVhy didst thou not cal vpon the name of Iesus Thoughtest thou thy selfe hable to matche the Deuil vvith vvordes 16 If thou hadst the Faith of the Church vvhy vventst thou from it And if thou hadst this Faith then hovv beleuest thou not Christe saying Doo this in my remembrance 17 By this thou impliest that the rest of the Churche before thou brochedst thy fifth Gospel beleued not Rightly wherin thou folowest Satan and beliest thy selfe and the Churche For the common profession of the Faith was â—hen right and sounde 18 To confounde this Frier the Deuil ioyneth a vvicked man and an vnbeleeuer together in the case of ConsecratioÌ„ and requireth Scripture of him for that which neither was ne neuer shal be done An euil Priest notwithstaÌ„ding his wickednes of life may consecrate though to his damnation as he may baptise and absolue but an vnbeleuing man that is to say an Infidel can not consecrate And what absurditie is it to say an vnbeleeuing maÌ„ to consecrate in the Faith of the Churche If in the Faith of the Churche how is he vnbeleeuing If vnbeleeuing how in the Faith of the Churche 19 For this Oblation and Sacrifice we haue the worde of Christe Do ye this in my remembrance And after this in the ende of the Disputation for it were to long to recite al thus it foloweth Fol. 230. Confessus quideÌ„ sum lege Dei coÌ„uictus coram Diabolo me peccasse me damnatum esse vt Iudam sed verto me ad Christum cum Petro c. 20 Being caste by the law of God I was faine to confesse before the Deuil that I had sinned and that I was damned like Iudas 21 But I turne my self vnto Christe with Peter c. 20 Say not foolish Fryer thou were caste by the lavv of God but by the Deuil for desert of thine ovvne iniquitie Thou makest Satan thy Ghostly Father vvho aftervvard taughtst that confession ought not to be made to a Priest for benefite of absolution 21 No no thou turnedst thy self from Christ vnto the Deuil vvith Iudas vvith SimoÌ„ Magê° and vvith other Heretiques And so do al that folovv thee and thy doctrine This is the Summe of the conference and disputation that Satan had with Frier Luther against the Sacrifice of the Masse by which Luther was persuaded not only to say Masse no more but also to write preach and worke against it in suche wise as became Satans scholer And thus thou seest Reader that this is not a tale maliciously and sclaunderously blased abroade by Pighius Hosius and Staphylus as M. Iewel saith but that it is in great sooth reported and in printed bookes published to the worlde by Luther him selfe Though M. Iewel be ashamed to heare of it yet he alloweth Satans Conclusion against the Masse The person of such a Schoolemaster he commendeth not but the Scholer he praiseth calling him In M. Ievvels Replie pag. 2. that godly man Doctor Luther and the doctrine he imbraceth By this we may conceiue what resistence the professours of this new Gospel wil make against Antichrist when he shal come among whoÌ„ the doctrine of the Deuil him selfe is so soone receiued so wel liked so boldly defended But ô foolish Frier whose vnstedfast harte was so soone ouerthrowen by Satans wicked suggestions false lyes and vaine reasons And ô light and miserable soules that sithens with the winde of that lewd Friers doctrine haue ben carried away For what is there in al Satans tale in Luthers bookes in the treatises of al his Scholers of Germanie of Cranmare Peter Martyr Zuinglius Oecolampadius Caluine Beza of al the other Sacramentaries briefly in the whole Replie of M. Iewel whose Puddel is filled with their Sinckes that ought to withdraw any learned wise or godly man from that beleefe touching the Sacrifice of the body and Bloude of Christe whiche the Catholique Churche hath alwayes taught from the beginning What so euer they haue said and what so euer they can say against this blessed Sacrifice assure thy selfe Christian Reader the effecte of al here shalt thou finde laid together in M. Iewels Replie Al whiche of how litle force it is consideratly perusing and weghing this Reioindre thou shalt perceiue Although the authoritie of the Churche be ynough to stay thee yet if thou desire to see the Aduersarie encountred and his Obiections answered reade what I haue here written and iudge not forgeting to cal to God for the assistence of his holy Spirite to illuminate thy vnderstanding and to purge thy affection that thou maist see what is true obserue the same and haue a ful wil to perfourme what is good and acceptable before God The chiefe and most common Argument that the Protestantes make against the Sacrifice of the Masse S. Paule declareth in the Epistle to the Hebrewes Heb. 9. that Christ was but once onely offered and that he offereth not him selfe oftentimes Cap. 9. By his ovvne bloude saith the Apostle he entred in once into the holy place and founde eternal redemption Againe He vvas but once offred to take avvay the sinnes of many And in an other place VVith one oblation he hath made perfite them that are sanctified for euer Heb. 10. Ergo to what purpose is it that Christe is thus daily offred vp vnto God in the Masse Solution This Argument is soone solued if a man consider the scope marke and purpose wherevnto S. Paule directeth him selfe in that Epistle This muche therefore is to be weighed There were many of the Hebrewes that although through the preaching and miracles of the Apostles were persuaded to beleue in Christe yet remained in great estimation and zeale of the Law stickte vnto their olde customes and ordinances of Moyses and specially vnto their Sacrifices whiche they were desirous to retaine for their sinnes And therefore they founde them selues agreeued with the Apostle for that whereas he tooke away their olde
filios Dei fieri He hath geuen them power to be made the sonnes of God Vnto which dignitie S. Paul addeth a farther degree saying Si autem filij Rom. 8. haeredes haeredes quidem Dei cohaeredes autem Christi If we be the sonnes of God then we be also the heires the heires of God and felow heires with Christe That high degree of honour which S. Peter speaketh of surmounteth al other neither can any other vnto it be cōparable Which is that God through Christe hath bestowed vpon vs so great giftes 2. Pet. 1. vt efficiamur Diuinae consortes naturae that we be made partakers of the Diuine nature Verily of the high dignitie that it hath pleased God to admitte man vnto in these and other the like cases that may wel be said against M. Iewel Esther 6. and all other the enemies of this Sacrifice which King Assuerus commaunded openly to be proclaimed of good Mardochaeus against wicked Aman Hoc honore dignus est quemcunque rex voluerit honorare Of this honour is he worthy whō so euer the King of al Kings wil haue honoured And this is a sufficient answere to M. Iewels secrete obiection against the Sacrifice taken of the basenesse and miserie of humanie condition He wil saye perhaps M. Ievvel denieth the Sacrifice of the Aulter stoutely these examples and Scriptures prooue in dede that God hath aduaūced man vnto high honour but not that he may offer vp Christ vnto his Father For saieth he for ought that may appeare by any clause or sentence of the newe Testament or of the olde God neuer appointed any such Sacrifice to be made Such stoute asseuerations make but weake proufes Here might be alleged for the Sacrifice first out of the olde Lawe the Figures foresignifying and the Prophecies foretelling that suche Sacrifice was to be instituted Secondly out of the newe Testament Christes owne facte offering this Sacrifice and his plaine precepte commaunding his Apostles and their successours in the office of Priesthood to continue the same vntil his comming Thirdly the interpretation of the Fathers expounding in that sense both those figures and Prophecies of the olde Testament and likewise Christes facte and precepte in the newe Testament Last of al the continual practise of the vniuersal Church both Greke and Latine wherein the Priestes in al ages since Christes death haue made to God a Sacrifice of our Lordes body and bloude But because this is done already in the discourse of my Answer to this 17. Article of M. Iewels Chalenge leauing to repeate the same here againe when orderly proceding I shal come vnto the places by M. Iewels Replie impugned there I truste I shal by disclosing the Repliers false sleightes and by bewraying the weakenesse of his Replie to the indifferent and vnaffectionate Reader euidently shewe how strong and sound the Catholike doctrine of the Church is in this behalfe and how inuincibly the testimonies of the Scriptures and Fathers which in my Answer I alleged proue and establish the same VVhat may folovv if al be takē avvay that hath not proufe of Scripture Anabaptistes But touching such kinde of assertions as this is of M. Iewels if they may take place and if it shal be ynough to say for ought that may appeare shal it not seme lauful to the Anabaptistes to say away with the baptizing of infantes For for ought that may appeare the Scriptures geue vs no warrāt so to do Wil not the blasphemous Ariās say away with Cōsubstātialitie and equalitie of Christ with his Father For Arians for ought that may appeare it can not be auouched by any Clause or sentēce either of the new Testamēt or of the olde Wil not the folowers of Iouinian and Heluidius say Iouinianistes away with the perpetual Virginitie of our blessed Lady Christes Mother Heluidiās For for ought that may appeare the Scriptures be plaine against it rather then with it The Sabbataries Sabbataries wil not they cry out agaīst keping holy and solēne the Sōday For for ought that may appeare say they the cōmaundemēt to hallow the Saturday stādeth stil in force neither is there any clause or sentēce in the olde or new Testament bidding vs to chaunge it into the Sonday To be short what Heretike euer was there in olde time or is at this day whose turne this kind of assertion for ought that may appeare may not serue wherewith to mainteine his Heresie As touching the saying of Theophylact M. Ievvel to proue his Negatiue at the first findeth no aunciēter Doctour thē Theophylacte a late vvriter wherwith this Replier would fortifie his Negatiue it geueth euidence how weake his side is that could not be mainteined by any sentēce of greater force thē this is nor by any writer of more antiquitie thē Theophylact is with him Who requireth his cause to be tried by those Fathers only that liued within the first six hūdred yeres If he were hable to make any mā beleue that the Priests of the Church haue at any time sacrificed beastes vnto God or that Theophylact in that saying meant that now there were neede of nothīg but of prayer only as prayer is takē in the cōmon significatiō and that al other meanes to serue God were needelesse thē might the sentēce be alleged and seeme to serue his turne so farr forth as in cōsideratiō of his request the author were to be estemed But now sith Priestes of the new Testamēt neuer honoured God with bloudy sacrifices ād slaughter of beastes that were foresignified to ceasse by our Lords driuing of the Oxē ād dooues out of the Tēple ād Theophylact here vseth no exclusiue wherby prayer alone as it cōmōly signifieth should be appointed a meane wherewith to serue God the saying was euil chosen ād with smal iudgmēt put into the Replie as that which nothing at al maketh agaīst the singuler external ād publike Sacrifice of the Church in myne Answer defended If M. Iewel would gather arguments out of this place thus he ought to dispose them Theophyl in Matth. cap. 21. In that Christ draue the oxē and dooues out of the Tēple he foresignified that there should be no more nede of sacrifices of beastes or of slaughters but of prayer Vvhat argument may be cōclnded out of Theophylact here alleged So be the very wordes of Theophylacte in Greke somewhat otherwise then this Replier hath translated them Thereof it is concluded Ergo nowe in the newe Testament there is neede of prayer Then further In the newe Testament there is neede of prayer But the Masse whereat the priest offereth vp Christ vnto his Father is no prayer Ergo in the new Testament the Masse is needlesse This is the best Argument he can make out of Theophylactes wordes In which how so euer it be allowed for good or otherwise the minor or second propositiō is euidētly false and so he is stopped frō his cōclusion
Wherfore Theophylact helpeth not the mater at al. Theophylacte maketh for the Sacrifice Yea rather by the manner of his speach he auoucheth the Sacrifice of the Church vnderstanding it by the name of prayer For whereas by his reporte which is expressed also in the Gospel Christ dryuing out the oxeÌ„ aÌ„d dooues foresignified the ceassing of the bloudy and vncleane sacrifices of the olde Lawe Matt. 21. certainely he shewed thereby that a newe Sacrifice vnbloudy and pure should succede in place of the olde because euery lawe hath a priesthod and a sacrifice peculier vnto it Which in the newe lawe is none other Prayer then the Sacrifice of his body and bloude consecrated with prayer and offered vp to God with prayer by them who vnder Christ be priestes after Melchisedeks order And this chiefly is that which Theophylacte calleth prayer For in asmuch as this Sacrifice due mater presupposed is coÌ„secrated by the Priest with the wordes of our Lorde Matt. 26. this is my body this is the Cuppe of my bloud Luke 22. c whiche wordes the Fathers oftentimes name the mystical prayer 1. Cor. 11. he had regarde to the fourme of the CoÌ„secration and would speake as the chiefe of the auncient Fathers haue spoken And so the saying of Theophylacte maketh for the Sacrifice it maketh not against the Sacrifice as to that purpose of M. Iewel it is alleged Furthermore Prayer in this place may be takeÌ„ not only for that which commonly we vnderstaÌ„d by the name of praier that is to say for petitioÌ„ made to God with words but for euery such meane Vvhat is signified by the name of Prayer as God is serued withal in his Church according as it is taken in Esay the prophete alleged by Christ in the Gospel Domus mea domus orationis vocabitur Matt. 21. vos autem fecistis eam speluncam latronum My howse shall be called the howse of prayer but ye haue made it a denne of theeues So that Prayer here being set contrary to the bloudy and vncleane sacrifices of the old Lawe signifieth al manner of seruice of God that is pure and cleane without bloudshedding Ye haue made it a denne of theeues In dennes of theeues slaughters and bloudsheddinges are made saith Theophylacte Nicolaus de Lyra writing vpoÌ„ this place Lyra in CommeÌ„t in 21. cap. Matt. saith Non curabaÌ„t de cultu Dei sed magis de excoriatione populi per astutias suas exquisitas They tooke no care for Gods seruice but rather how by their fyne crafty sleightes they might pille the people Praier taken generally for the seruice of God Here what the prophete calleth orationeÌ„ prayer the interpreter nameth it cultum Dei the seruice or worship of God And to this agreeth the general definition of Prayer oratio est mentis eleuatio ad Deum Prayer is the lifting vp of the mynde vnto God And because amoÌ„g al kindes of prayer that wherin and wherby Christ is offered vp vnto his Father is the chiefe therefore may Theophylact reasonably be thought in this place to haue meant that prayer which the Church calleth the Masse So then by Christes driuiÌ„g of the OxeÌ„ aÌ„d dooues out of the TeÌ„ple aÌ„d by coÌ„meÌ„diÌ„g vnto his Church the vse of praier this Sacrifice caÌ„ not in any wise seeme to be excluded but rather to be brought in as that which beiÌ„g vnbloudy aÌ„d pure ought to succede the bloudy aÌ„d impure sacrifices of the Iewes About the administratioÌ„ of which Sacrifice that Theophylact may also the rather seeme to haue vnderstaÌ„ded it by the name of praier after the mind of S. Augustin August ad PaulinuÌ„ epist. 59. the request of S. Paule touching sundry kindes of praier is accoÌ„plished Obsecro igitur primuÌ„ fieri obsecrationes orationes 1. Tim. 2. postulationes gratiaruÌ„ actiones ê“ oiÌ„bê° hominibê° pro regibus oiÌ„bus qui in sublimitate constituti sunt I beseche you therfore that aboue al thiÌ„gs supplicatioÌ„s praiers intercessioÌ„s and geuing of thaÌ„kes be made for al men for Kings and for al that be placed in high authoritie To coÌ„clude al redoundeth to this end that forasmuch as the special Sacrifice of the Churche is made and celebrated with praier so as it selfe be included within the general name of Praier M. Iewel findeth no helpe in this saying of Theophylact towards the maintenaÌ„ce of his Negatiue whereby he would vtterly deface and take the Sacrifice away Which thinge when he sawe him selfe euidently ynough he deuised other shiftes and saith Iewel Hovv be it the old learned Fathers as they oftentimes delited theÌ„selues vvith these vvoordes SabbatuÌ„ Parasceue Pascha Pentecoste and such other like termes of the old Lavv notvvithstaÌ„ding the ObseruatioÌ„ and Ceremony therof vvere theÌ„ abolished aÌ„d out of vse EueÌ„ so likevvise thei delited theÌ„selues oftetimes vvith these vvordes Sacerdos Altare SacrificiuÌ„ the Sacrificer Pachymeres pa 401 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 15. Origen in Epist. ad Rom. li. 10. Nazian in Oratio ad PlebeÌ„ Chryso in Epist. ad Rom. Homil 29. the Aultar the Sacrifice notvvithstaÌ„diÌ„g the vse therof vvere theÌ„ clearly expired only for that the eares of the people as vvel of the Ievves as of the GeÌ„tils had ben long acquainted vvith the same Therfore Pachymeres the Paraphraste vvriting vpoÌ„ Dionysius saith thus PresbyteruÌ„ appellat SacerdoteÌ„ vt etiaÌ„ in Coelesti Hierarchia idque vsus iaÌ„ obtinuit Him that is the Priest or elder he calleth the Sacrificer as he doth also in his Coelestial Hierarchie And the same word Sacrificer is now obteined by Custome In this sense S. Paul saith of him self Sacrifico EuangeliuÌ„ Dei I sacrifice the Gospel of God And OrigeÌ„ saith Sacrificale opus est anuÌ„nciare EuaÌ„geliuÌ„ It is a work of Sacrifice to Preach the Gospel So the learned Bisshop NaziaÌ„zenus saith vnto his people Hostiam vos ipsos obtuli I haue offred vp you for a Sacrifice So saith S. Chrysostom Ipsum mihi Sacerdotium est Praedicare EuaÌ„gelizare HaÌ„c offero oblationeÌ„ My whole priesthod is to teache and to preache the Gospel This is my OblatioÌ„ This is my Sacrifice Thus the holy Fathers alluding to the orders and Ceremonies of Moyses Lavvâ— called the preachiÌ„g of the Gospel a Sacrifice notvvithstanding in dede it vvere no Sacrifice Harding The effect of that hath ben said by the Replier hitherto is this The Sacrifice wherin Christ is offered vp vnto his Father is not appointed by God to be made by maÌ„ for ought that may appere by any Clause or SeÌ„teÌ„ce of the Scripture but yet it is reported aÌ„d ofteÌ„tymes spokeÌ„ of by the Olde learned Fathers What meaneth M. Iewel thus to teach would he haue meÌ„ beleue that the Holy Ghost the spirite of truth who vsed the Prophetes Apostles and Euangelistes for his Secretaries to endite the Scriptures agreeth not with the Holy Ghoste that sithens their tyme hath spoken by the mouthes of the
Sacrifices of both testamentes is diuers Secondly touching the substance it is diuers in the Sacrifices of both Testamentes For the substance of the olde Sacrifices was a brute beaste meale cakes oile wine and such the like But the substance of our Sacrifice nowe frequented in the newe Testament is the Body and Bloud of Christ. Luc. 22. So both the Scripture teacheth shewing how Christe hauing at his supper consecrated his body and bloude commaunded his disciples to doe the same that he had done in his remembrance and S. Augustine declareth in these woordes August in lib. senten Prosperi Hoc est quod dicimus quod modis omnibus approbare contendimus Sacrificium Ecclesiae duobus confici duobus constare visibili elemētorum specie inuisibili Domini nostri Iesu Christi corpore sanguine sacramento re Sacramenti This is that we say that by al meanes we ernestly endeuour to approue that the Sacrifice of the Churche is made of two thinges and doth consiste of two thinges of the visible forme of the Elementes and of the inuisible body and bloude of our Lorde Iesus Christ of the Sacrament and of the thing of the Sacrament that is to wit of the body of Christe S. Ireneus agreably to this doctrine Irene lib. 4. ca. 34. saith the Euchariste to consiste of two thinges the one earthly whereby he meaneth the forme of the elementes the other heauenly that is to say the body and bloud of Christe Learne Reader by this doctrine of S. Augustine The substance of bread and vvine hath no place in our Sacrifice that the substance of bread and wine which be called here the Elements hath no place in our Sacrifice which doth consist of two partes the one visible the other inuisible The formes of the Elementes be the visible parte As for the substance of bread and wine it is vtterly inuisible But the inuisible parte of the Sacrifice is the body and Bloud of Christ. And therfore onlesse we appoint two inuisible partes of this Sacrifice that is to say the substance of bread and wine and also the body and bloud of Christe which were absurde to thinke it must nedes be confessed that no place is here lefte for the substāce of bread and wine but that the inuisible thing or substance of the Sacrament and likewise of the Sacrifice is the body and bloud of Christe And thus it is euidēt that the substance of the Sacrifices of the olde Law and of the Sacrifices of the new Law is sundry and diuerse Wherof it is concluded that it is either ignorātly and grossely or heretically said if it be stubbornly mainteined that our Sacrifice is one in substance with the Iewish Sacrifices The effectes of the Sacrifices of both Lawes be differēt and diuers Now thirdly to speake of the effect of the Sacrifices of the olde Lawe and of the Sacrifice of the Churche wherein Christ is offered vp vnto his Father in a Sacrament and mystically to wit vnder the forme of bread and wine certaine it is the effectes be diuers To declare fully the manyfolde and heauenly effectes of our Sacrifice farre surmounting any effecte that euer was ascribed to the Sacrifices of the olde Lawe it would require a long treatise The difference of both may sufficiently appeare by comparing two or three of their effectes together The bloude of the Sacrifices of the olde Lawe confirmed the same Lawe The bloude of our Sacrifice confirmeth the newe Testamente Math. 26. Hic est Sanguis meus noui Testamenti this is my bloude of the newe Testamente saieth our Lorde in the Gospel Howe much diuersitie then is betwene the newe Testament and the olde which is incomparably great the new Law passing in excellencie the olde so much differeth and so far surmounteth the effect of the Sacrifice of Christes Church the effecte of the Sacrifices of the Iewish Synagogue Againe August de fide ad Petrum cap. 19. to vse your owne witnesse against your selfe by reporte of Saint Augustine the olde Sacrifices signified in Figures Christes death to come and to be suffered But the Sacrifice of the Churche representeth with the real presence of that body which hath dyed the death already past and perfited And who knoweth not what difference there is betwene a promise and the performance of the promise Performance I say for although in our Sacrifice the death of Christe be not performed a new and againe suffred yet in the same is the truth of that very body inuisibly present which by suffering death hath payd the price of our Redemption In consideration whereof S. Augustine speaking of this Sacrifice offred vnto God for that blessed woman S. Monica his mother at her burial Augustin Confes. lib. 9. cap. 12. whereby he meaneth the Masse calleth it Sacrificium pretij nostri the Sacrifice of our Price that is to say wherewith our Raunsome was payd S. Ignatius ascribeth to our Sacrifice of a faithful person worthily receiued Ignatius in epist. ad Ephesios a maruelous effecte calling it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a medicine of immortalitie and a preseruatiue whereby we may be kepte from dying Which maruelous benefite who euer attributed to the Sacrifices of the olde Lawe Other the like effectes which the olde learned Fathers haue ascribed vnto the blessed Sacrifice be many in number and great in excellencie of which the olde Sacrifices were neuer hable to worke any Wherefore you ought to recant this your false doctrine M. Iewel that the Sacrifices of both Lawes be of one effecte or which is the same one in effecte No lesse false is that you affirme that as we haue Mysteries so had they Mysteries specially yf your worde of comparison imply a likenes and equalitie of Mysteries as the purport of your other doctrine leadeth vs to iudge of you For although it be true that they had Mysteries and we also haue Mysteries yet had not they the like Mysteries nor equal in dignitie truth and plainesse to our Mysteries and Sacramentes Howe much ours are preferred before theirs in the iudgemente of S. Augustine August in Psal. 73. it is euident by that he saith speaking of bothe Mutata sunt Sacramenta facta sunt faciliora pauciora salubriora feliciora The Sacramentes saith he be chaunged they be made easier fewer healthfuller happier And in the same place Sacramenta noui Testamenti dant Salutem sacramenta veteris Testamenti promiserunt Saluatorem The Sacramentes of the newe Testamente geue saluation the Sacramentes of the olde Testamente promised the Sauiour Wherefore M. Iewel either make vs beleue that you are to be heard before S. Augustine and that better is worse and worse better or reuoke your woordes by which you teache likenes and equalitie betwene the Mysteries and Sacramentes of both Testamentes M. Ievvel vtterly taketh avvay the real Sacrifice of the nevv Testamēt Where you say further that as we Sacrifice Christe so did
they Sacrifice Christe you vtterly take away the Real Sacrifice of the newe Testamente Wherein being a very weighty pointe you dissent from the Catholike Churche for which you and your felowes be condēned of the Churche and holden for Heretiks This haue I auouched and sufficiently proued in myne Aunswere to this 17. Article of your Chalenge What you reply against the same here in the processe of this Reioindre by Gods grace I shal confute To make your vntrue and heretical saying appeare the more tollerable to the vnlearned you ioine vnto it a saying that in a righte construction may be admitted As the Lambe of God is slaine vnto vs say you so was the same Lambe of God slaine vnto them In deede if you meane a newe actual sleying of Christ who is the true Lambe of God he is not now in the daily Sacrifice of the Church slaine no more then he was slaine in the daily sacrifices or in the yerely Passeouer of the Iewes But for asmuch as in our daily Sacrifice we haue the true Body and Bloude of the Lambe of God Ioan. 1. that taketh away the sinnes of the worlde laid vpon the holy table which is the Aulter sacrificed of Priestes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Nicen Councel saith that is to say without killinge and bloudshed In consideration hereof you should not haue saied as we sacrifice Christ so did they sacrifice Christ. For though in our Sacrifice we sley not Christ the true Lambe of God as they slewe the Lambes which prefigured Christ yet so farre as that is true which the Fathers of the Nicen Councel reporte and as by vertue of Christes almighty wordes according to his commaundement and Institution his Body and Bloud are consecrate and really present we offer vp Christe in deede vnto God in the Sacrifice of the Church For proufe of the real presence I referre the Reader who vnderstandeth not the Latine tongue to sundry learned workes written in the Englishe tongue in our time therof In which he shal finde the mater so largely so clearely and so substantially proued that he shal confesse he seeth the same onlesse he wil as some doo wilfully blindefolde him self and say in midday it is darke night Forasmuch then as we sacrifice Christ truely bicause we haue and offer vp in our sacrifice the truth of the body and Bloude of Christ in deede present by th' almighty power of his owne worde after which sorte the Iewes had not Christ present therefore it is not true that you say that as we sacrifice Christe so did they sacrifice Christe Diuersite in the Sacramentes of both Lavves Touching the comparison you make betwen the Sacramentes of both Lawes for now soudeinly you chop from the Sacrifices into the Sacramentes in expressing Christes death then to come and nowe paste whereby you go about to proue the equal valewe of both Sacramentes notwithstanding that both do expresse or signifie though in diuers degree the death of Christ yet doth our Sacrament of the Aulter farre surmount theirs bicause in ours is conteyned the very body and bloude of Christ in theirs was nothing but a figure in theirs the shadow in ours the body The place you allege out of the booke de vtilitate Poenitentiae that you attribute to S. Augustine contrary to the censure of Erasmus serueth you to no purpose We agree vnto it no lesse then your selfe In that place the authour speaketh of the spiritual meate which the Iewes did eate the same as we do And that meate he wil both to be Christ teaching how they did eate Christe Aug. de Vtilitate Poenitentiae whom we do eate The whole processe there is to be vnderstanded of the spiritual eatinge for so he saieth Quicunque in Manna Christum intellexerunt eundem quem nos cibum spiritalem manducauerunt Quicunque autem de Manna solam saturitatem quaesierunt patres infidelium manducauerunt mortui sunt Sic etiam eundem potum Petra enim Christus Eundem ergo potum sed spiritalem id est qui fide capiebatur non qui corpore hauriebatur Who so euer in the Manna vnderstoode Christe they did eate the same spiritual meate that we eate But who so euer sought onely to fil their bellies by eating Manna being the Fathers of the vnfaithful they did eate and dyed So likewise they dranke the same drinke For the Rocke was Christe And therefore the same drinke which we drinke they dranke but spiritual that is to say whiche was receiued by faith not that whiche was taken in by the body Now what though Christe whome both the Iewes and we do eate spiritually be one spiritual meate one Christe and likewise one spiritual drinke as he is eaten and dronken with spiritual eating and drinking Shal that therefore whiche we receiue in our Sacrament by sacramental eating and drinking vnder the formes of bread and wine be no better then that which they did eate and drinke in the ceremonie of their Sacramentes Christe that was to come and Christ that now is come is one Christe thereof who doubteth And though the wordes shal come and is come be sundry yet Christe is one Christe is not sundred with diuision of times And this is al that the auctour meant wherein lyeth no controuersie betwixte vs. But that you woulde proue and can not proue and we vtterly denye is this that the thing and substance of the Sacramentes of both Lawes be not sundry but one and the same and of equal worthines We receiue Christ both sacramentally to wit his true and real body and bloude in the Sacrament of the Aulter vnder the formes of bread and wine and also spiritually that is to say by faith They receiued him only spiritually bicause in Manna they vnderstode Christ. The like is to be sayd of the water that flowed out of the Rocke which they dranke in comparison of the very bloude of Christe which we drinke not onely spiritually but also sacramentally and in deede vnder the forme of wine mingled with water which bloude is the true water of life the same that issued out of our Lordes body the true Rocke after it was striken with the Rodde Exod. 15. Aug. Tractatu de vtilitate Poenitentiae that is to say after that the Crosse came vnto it For in figure thereof the olde Rocke was striken with woodde and not with Iron quia Crux ad Christum accessit vt nobis gratiam propinaret bicause the Crosse came vnto Christ that it might * Propinaret brince his grace vnto vs as saith S. Augustine or who so euer was the author of that booke The other place that you pretende to allege out of S. Augustine M. Ievv forgeth sayinges of his ovvn fathering them vpon the Doctours In Iohannem Tractat. 26. is soone answered where so euer it be it is not there Thus to forge sayinges of your owne and to beare your Reader in hande it is S. Augustines or
the general teaching of al the Fathers Christe did institute it not onely to be receiued as a necessary foode but also to be offered as an healthful Sacrifice Cyprian de Caen. Dom. medicamentum holocaustum existens ad sanandas infirmitates purgandas iniquitates ◠being a medicine and sacrifice to heale infirmities and to purge iniquities as S. Cyprian saith Lib. 4.32 He taught the new oblation of the new Testament saith S. Irenaeus That I haue sufficiently proued the Real presence of Christes body and bloude in the Sacrament the Answer I made to the fifth Article of your Chalenge doth witnes to as many as be not lead with lewde and blind affection to your syde As for the shiftes of your Replie thereunto they are so detected and fully confuted and the Real presence otherwise so substantially proued by M. D. Saunder and M. D. Heskins that euery meane witte may easely see the weaknes of your cause The 2. Diuision The Ansvver THe two first manners of the offeringe of Christe our aduersaries acknowledge and confesse The thirde they denie vtterly And so they robbe the Churche of the greatest treasure it hath or may haue the Bodie and Bloud of our Sauiour Christe once offered vpon the Crosse with paineful suffering for our redemption and now daiely offered in the blessed Sacramente in remembrance For which we haue so many proufes as for no one pointe of our Christian religion moe And herein I am more encombred with store then straighted with lacke and doubte more what I may leaue then what I may take Wherefore thinking it shal appeare to the wise more skille to shewe discretion in the choise of places rather then learning in recital of number though we are ouer peartely thereto prouoked by M. Iuelles vauntinge and insolent chalenge I intende herein to be short verily shorter then so large a mater requireth and to bring for proufe a fewe suche auctorities I meane a fewe in respecte of the multitude that might be brought as ought in euery mannes iudgement to be of great weight and estimation Iewel Touching the Oblation of Christes Bodie vvee beleue and Confesse as much as the holy Ghost hath opened in the Scriptures VVhere as M. Harding saith Christes Bodie is offred vp by the Priest vnto God the Father in remembrance of that Bodie that Christe him selfe offered vpon the Crosse He seemeth not to consider the inconstancie and folie of his ovvne tale For it is vvel knovven to al Creatures not onely Christians but also Ievves Turckes and Saracenes that Christ vvas Crucified vpon the Crosse But that Christe should be sacrificed by a Mortal man Inuisibly and as they say vnder the Formes of Bread and vvine and that Really and in deede it is a thinge so far passinge the common sense of Christian knovvledge that the best learned and vvisest of the Ancient learned Christian Fathers coulde neuer knovv it Therefore this is not onely the proouing of a thinge knovven by a thinge vnknovven and of a thinge moste certaine by a thinge vncertaine but also the Confirmation of a manifest Trueth by an open Errour Neither do vvee robbe the Churche of God of that most Heauenly and moste comfortable Sacrifice of Christes Bodie But rather vvee open and disclose the errours vvherevvith certaine of late yeeres haue vvilfully deceiued the Churche of God Esay 53. VVee knovv That Christes Bodie was rente for our Sinnes and that by his VVounds wee are made whole 1. Pet. 2. That Christe in his Bodie caried our Sinnes vpon the Tree Heb. 9. And by the Oblation thereof once made vpon the Crosse Actor 4. bath sanctified vs for euer aud hath purchased for vs euerlastinge Redēption And That there is none other Name or Sacrifice vnder Heauen whereby wee can be saued but onely the name and Sacrifice of Iesus Christe I recken◠vvho so teacheth this Doctrine leaueth not the Churche of God vvithout a Sacrifice Touchinge the multitude of Authorities vverevvith M. Harding findeth him selfe so muche encombred the greater his stoare is the more vvil vvise men require his discretion and skil in the choise His choise vvil seeme vnskilful if he allege his Authorities biside his purpose His purpose and promise is to prooue that the Priest hath good vvarrant to offer vp Christe the Sonne of God vnto his Father VVhiche purpose if he neuer vouchesaue once to touche but range abroade as his manner is and roaue idlely at maters impertinent then muste vvee needes say He bevvraieth his vvante and bringeth his greate Stoare out of credit So shal the offer that is gently made him seeme to stande vpon good and conuenient termes of Trueth and Modestie So shal his stoareful Vaunte of al thinges perfourming nothing vnto the vvise to vse his ovvne vvordes seeme pearte and insolent Harding In your 2. Diuision though you be shorte yet you spende many moe wordes then either were nedeful or imported any direct answer M. Ievvel faineth me to say that I say not◠and therto directeth his Replie reason or learning You pretend that to be said by me which I say not and then as your manner is fighting with my shadow which you set before you by your owne fained imagination you come not to answer the point directly but speake altother inconsideratly Had that bene my tale whiche you tel for me wherein shewe you inconstancie and folie to be in it whereof you note the fame For say you not onely Christians but also Iewes Turkes Saracens you might haue added also the Deuil whose knowledge is great know that Christe was crucified vpon the Crosse. This much I graunt what conclude you But say you againe that he is sacrificed by a mortal man inuisibly vnder the formes of bread and wine the auncient Fathers could neuer know it Here I stoppe you and this I denie And what cause I haue to denie it I haue in the Diuision before shewed After this you come vnto your Conclusion wherein appeareth in deede both the inconstancie and folie of your tale Therefore say you of me in effecte I prooue a thing knowen by a thing vnknowen and a thing certaine by a thing vncertaine and confirme manifest truth by open errour Here if I would folow you and set forth the peeuishnes of your Argument by telling you how the Maior or first Prorosition is impertinent the Minor false being the Negatiue of our Question which being denied of me was very absurdly brought by you in the Premisses nor Moode nor Figure nor iust disposition of the termes duely obserued the Conclusion not folowing of the Premisses in right order of a Syllogismus I should bestowe many woordes to prooue that a foolish Argument whiche thereof without any curiouse shewing of Logique of it selfe geueth witnesse What leadeth you to thinke that by the vnbloudy Sacrifice of the Churche which you cal a thing vncertaine I go about to prooue the Sacrifice of the Crosse whiche I graunt to be certaine
which is the vnbloudy Sacrifice S. Irenaeus likewise writing against Valentinus the Heretike Irene lib. 4. ca. 32. Aug. cōtra◠Aduersar leg et prophet lib. 1. cap. 20. Iustmusin Dialog ad Tryphonē S. Augustine also and S. Iustinus the martyr do expounde the prophecie for the same Sacrifice Whose sayinges here to reherse to the proufe of so certaine a doctrine it were more tedious then needeful Wherefore this being so sufficiently witnessed by the Auncient Doctours of the Churche against whose auctoritie no noueltie is to be heard as a most vndoubted truth that the sacrifice which Christe made of his body and bloude at his last supper is that pure and Vnbloudy Sacrifice whiche Malachie prophecied should be offered vp vnto God from the Easte to the west this also being no lesse true that Christe appointed and auctorized some to offer the same otherwise to what purpose was it instituted and sith that we reade of none other appointed and auctorized thereto but the Apostles and their successours Priestes of the newe Testament nor haue we heard of any that lawfully euer tooke vpon them to offer the same that were not Priestes with what impudencie is it denyed that the Apostles had and Priestes now haue auctoritie to offer vp this pure Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe vnto his Father Thus thou maist perceiue good reader the argument which M. Iewel here ascribeth vnto me and would to seeme ridiculous to conclude rightly for the truth if the due consideration of the circumstances be not omitted Withal thou vnderstandest that who so euer allegeth the figure of Melchisedech and the Prophecie of Malachie to prooue that the Priestes of the new Testament haue auctoritie and power to offer vp Christe vnto his Father he maketh no euil choise of the stoare of authorities by witnesse of which that point is prooued and confirmed As for the mater of greeuance M. Iewel where of you complaine so greeuously which is that I charge them of your syde with wresting by ouerthwart and false interpretation the wordes of the Institution of this Sacrifice the figure of Melchisedech and the Prophecie of Malachie I vttered it vpon very iust occasion as the learned do knowe The same ought to be greuous in dede vnto you not bicause ye are tolde of it by me but bicause it is true Neither thought I it good to exemplifie the mater staying the course of my briefe Answer to your Chalenge by descending vnto the particulars for that my scope and chiefe intent was not to confute the contrary Doctrine but to prooue and establish the truth of this Article by you most wickedly denied If it be pleasure vnto you to beholde paricular places and pointes of your false Legierdemaine disclosed by reading ouer my Confutatiō of your lying Apologie my Reioindre to your Replie that also which M. D. Sander D. Heskins M. Rastel M. Dorman and M. Stapleton haue written against you your luste may happely be satisfied Take your fyl of that vntil more come Iewel Perhappes he vvil say Yee expounde the Prophecie of Malachie sometimes of Praier and sometimes of the Preachinge of the Gospel This vvas neuer the Prophetes meaninge This is an horrible vvreasting of the Scriptures Thus no doubte M. Harding vvil say for othervvise he can say nothinge And yet he knovveth and beinge learned can not choose but knovv that this is the Olde learned Catholique Fathers Exposition touchinge these vvoordes of the Prophete Malachie and not ours He knovveth that the Ancient Father Tertullian saith thus Tertull. contrae Iudaeos Tertull. contra Marcion lib. 4. Hieron in 1. Caput Malach. The pure Sacrifice that Malachias speaketh of that should be offered vp in euery place Est Praedicatio Euangelij vsque ad finem Mundi Is the Preachinge of the Gospel vntil the ende of the worlde And in an other place Simplex Oratio de Conscientia pura The Sacrifice that Malachie meante is a deuoute Praier proceedinge from a pure Conscience He knovveth that S. Hierome expoundeth the same vvoordes in this vvise Dicit Orationes Sanctorum Domino offerendas esse non in vna Orbis Prouincia Iudaea sed in omni loco The Prophete Malachie meaneth hereby That the Praiers of Holy people shoulde be offered vnto God not onely in Iewrie that was one prouince of the worlde but also in al places He knovveth that Eusebius calleth the same Sacrifice of Malachie Euseb. De Demonst. li. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Sacrifice and the Incense of Praier Thus the Holie Catholique Fathers expounded these vvoordes of the Prophete Malachie and yet vvere they not therefore iuaged either ouerthvvarte vvreasters of the Scriptures or horrible deceiuers of the people Novv of the other side if it may please M. Harding to shevvfoorth but one Anciēt Doctour or Father that either by the Exāple of Melchisedech or by force of these vvordes of Malachie vvil conclude that the Priest hath Authoritie and Povver to offer vp Verelie and in dede the Sonne of God vnto his Father he may happily vvinne some credit Harding In defence of your felowes and of your selfe you say that wheras ye expound the prophecie of Malachie somtimes of Praier and sometimes of the preaching of the Ghospel therin ye vse no wreasting of the Scripture nor falshod bicause the old lerned Catholike Fathers haue so expounded the place And here you name Tertullian S. Hierome and Eusebius That the Preaching of the Gospel may be and is called a Sacrifice I denie not Mary that by th'auctoritie which here you pretend to allege out of Tertulliā it is proued and that by the same the meaning of Malachies prophecie is to be drawen quit frō the Sacrifice of th'Aulter this I deny vtterly And how farre your dealīg in these weighty maters cōcerning the faith of a Christē man is to be trusted by this to al it may appere M. Ievvel forgeth a saiyng of his ovvne ād putteth it vpon Tertullian First wheras you beare al men in hand that I know that the Ancient Father Tertullian saith as here you reporte it is very false for how can I know the thing that is not at al Tertullian saith not so These wordes The pure Sacrifice that Malachias speaketh of that should be offered vp in euery place est Praedicatio Euangelij vsque ad finē mundi be not to be found in al Tertullians booke Cōtra Iudaeos Yet you haue put them in a distinct letter in which the sayinges of the Doctors be printed that your Reader should beleue they were the wordes of Tertulliā This is a forgerie wrought in your owne shoppe fathered vpon Tertullian Phy M. Iewel can neither shame nor the feare of God withdraw you from vsing such forged sayinges of your owne with which being by you fathered vpon som Ancient Doctor of the Church your common manner is to face out an vntrue mater as crafty players at Cardes doo as they say with a Carde of ten Nexte
you swarue very much from the meaning and purpose of Tertullian For he saith not that the Preaching of the Ghospel is that cleane Sacrifice which Malachie prophecied of but farre otherwise Tertullian hauing spoken of the two kindes of Sacrifices of the two peoples the Iewes and the Gentiles foreshewed at the beginning in th' oblations of Cain Genes 4. and Abel demaundeth whereas Gods law geuen by Moyses required the carnal sacrifices to be made by the people of Israel in the land of promise and nowher els why the holy Ghost afterward notwithstanding by Malachie Psal. 95. and also by Dauid fortelleth that the Iewes earthly and fleshly sacrifices should ceasse and that spiritual Sacrifices should be offered vp to God ouer the whole world Vnto this question he answereth him selfe Tertulliae contra Iudaeos and saith Indubitatè quòd in omni terra exire habebat praedicatio ApostoloruÌ„ that is to say Vndoubtedly bicause the preaching of th'Apostles was to come forth ouer al the world This assuredly is the true abbrigement and meaning of Tertullians woordes there TertuliaÌ„s place truly declared And cleare it is he saith not that the Preaching of the Ghospell is the pure Sacrifice that Malachie speaketh of as you vntruly reporte of him but onely that the holy Ghoste foresignified by Malachie and by Dauid that the Iewes sacrifices being abolished pure sacrifices should be offered among al Nations of the earth bicause it should come to passe that the Apostles should preach ouer the whole worlde So that by Tertullians verdite the preaching of the Gospel was not that pure Sacrifice it selfe spoken of by Malachie but the Apostles preaching that then was to come was the cause why Malachie and Dauid enspired of the holy Ghoste fortolde the ceassing of the Iewes carnal sacrifices and the setting vp or vse of the Gentiles spiritual Sacrifices More then this which is nothing at al TertulliaÌ„ in that place maketh not for you Leaue leaue M. Iewel for your credites sake if nothing els can moue you to deceiue vnlearned soules whom Christe hath so derely bought with sayinges of your owne forging fathering them vpon the auncient Doctours It is a manifest token what litle good stuffe ye haue to defend your new ghospel withal whereas ye set forth your owne pelfe vnder the name of the auncient writer Tertullian Wherein ye folow false Lapidanies and Goldsmithes who sel Cristal and glasse for true pretious stoanes and gilted copper for pure golde Your other three places which you pretend to allege out of Tertullian S. Hierome and Eusebius be not with such forme of wordes by those Fathers set forth as you here reporte them The sleight of falsifiyng that you so coÌ„monly vse in this place for your purpose maketh but only a colourable shew to the ignoraÌ„t who beleue what so euer you say to the learned who by diligent examition wil serch what you say a substantial proufe in dede it maketh not Thymiama oblatio munda Al be it I graunt wheras the Prophecie of Malachie speaketh of two thinges thymiama incense and Oblatio munda the cleane Oblation or Sacriâ—ice that the best learned Fathers haue expounded the Incense of Prayer and the cleane Oblation of the Sacrifice of the Aulter that is now offered in the Churche through the whole worlde Where Tertullian disputing with Marcion the heretike expoundeth it of Prayer Contra MarcioneÌ„ lib. 4. either it is his priuate sense which bringeth no preiudice vnto the doctrine of the Catholike Churche VVhat Tertullian meant by pure praier or he meaneth it as the other Fathers doo of the Sacrifice of the Aulter which is coÌ„secrate with prayer For so the olde learned Fathers cal the wordes of Consecration Els if it should be expounded of al manner of prayer or of prayer in general as it is made of ech priuate man it can not alwaies seme to be the cleane Sacrifice prophecied of by Malachie bicause the same is made by those that be not altogether pure Prouerbior 20. and without spot of sinne For so the Scripture witnesseth who can say my hart is cleane I am cleane froÌ„ sinne But the Prayer wherewith the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe is consecrate 1. Pet. 2. being the wordes of our Lorde Esai 53. who neuer did synne nor was guile found in his mouth is both in that respect pure and cleane and also for that it is pronounced by the Priest as the publike minister of the Churche whose priuate vncleannes what so euer it be in that behalfe impaireth not the worthinesse of the sacrifice nor of the prayer wherewith it is conâ—ecrate Who also at what time he offered that Sacrifice ought specially to be of a pure coÌ„science And therefore Tertullian hauing rehersed the woordes of Malachie though some what otherwise then either the seuenty Interpretours or the Hebrue bookes haue and otherwise then he him selfe rehersed them writing against the Iewes in euery place shal be offered vp in my name sacrifice Tertullia aduersus Marcion lib. 4. and the cleane Sacrifice might wel adde further by way of exposition scilicet simplex oratio de conscientia pura to wit simple or pure prayer from a cleane conscience In which prophecie the prophete fortelleth that God hath disposed a better Sacrifice to be offered vp vnto his name then the sacrifices were which the Iewes offered Simple Prayer By simple prayer he meaneth such as is not tempered and mingled with any sinneful infection of humane affections of which sorte is the prayer of coÌ„secration of this Sacrifice as that which is the worde of our Lorde and not the worde of man Whose prayer as al other his actions proceding out of his corrupte harte is steined with some spotte of synne wereunto oure nature corrupted in Adam is thral and subiecte The wordes of Consecration of the Sacrament called by the name of prayer If to any it seme strange the wordes wherewith the body and bloude of Christe are consecrate to be called a prayer by reading the olde learned Fathers he shal finde it so termed in sundry places Instinus martyr in 2. Apolog. S. Iustine the Martyr speaking of the blessed Sacrament nameth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the foode which is made the Eucharist through the prayer of the worde that we haue of him he meaneth Christe Loe he calleth the consecration the Prayer of the woorde that Christ deliuered vnto his Apostles and consequently to their successours Priestes of the new Testament S. Augustine writing vnto Paulinus saith Precationes accipimus dictas Augustin ad Paulinum Epistol 59. quas facimus in celebratione SacramentoruÌ„ antequam illud quod est in Domini mensa incipiat benedici Orationes cuÌ„ benedicitur sanctificatur ad distribuenduÌ„ coÌ„minuitur We take PrecatioÌ„es to be called those praiers which we make in the celebratioÌ„ of the sacramentes before that which is on our Lordes table beginne to
the wordes of the Psalme Psal. 140. Dirigatur Oratio mea sicut Incensum in conspectu tuo Domine Let my Prayer ô Lorde like a perfume be brought vp into thy â—ight Touching the Pure Sacrifice which is offred vp vnto God by pure and godly actions that thereby he vnderstandeth most specially the External Sacrifice of the Church which is offred vpon an Aulter the wordes folowing do manifestly declare For immediatly to shew what he vnderstode by the Pure Sacrifice he bringeth forth a prophecie of Esay foreshewing the same There shal be an Aulter saith the Prophet Esay as Eusebius reciteth to our Lorde in the countrie of Egypte Esai 19. and our Lord shal be knowen vnto the EgyptiaÌ„s and God shal send them a man who shal saue them and the Egyptians shal know our Lorde in that day and they shal offer vp sacrifices and make vowes vnto our Lord and shal performe the same and they shal be conuerted vnto our Lorde and he shal heare them and heale them For the better vnderstanding of this place by the Egyptians Esay meaneth as Eusebius there afterward expouÌ„deth al kind of meÌ„ that before the coÌ„ming of Christ were Idolatours as the Egyptians were Now if Eusebius had vnderstaÌ„ded the Pure Sacrifice meÌ„tioned by Malachie of prayer or only of mere spiritual and internal sacrifices he wold not haue alleged for further prouf and declaratioÌ„ of it that place of Esay wher he maketh expres mentioÌ„ of an Aulter to be set vp among the EgyptiaÌ„s that is amoÌ„g al the Gentiles who were before geuen to Idolatrie The external Aulter argueth and presupposeth an external sacrifice For els if the Sacrifice be inward onely and spiritual to the doing of it the building of an Aulter is void and to no purpose If M. Iewel to auoide the force of this place alleged by Eusebius wil bring phrases as his manner is whereby to declare that Aulters oftentimes be vnderstanded to be spiritual which I acknowledge and confesse that the Aulters of our hartes be of the Fathers not seldom spoken of and therfore wil say that Eusebius vnderstode this prophecie of Esay of such a spiritual Aulter to this I answer Eusebius vnderstandeth Esay to meane such an Aulter as Moses lawe forbad any where els to be set vp then in Iewrie and that only in one citie of Iewrie But it was neuer forbidden by Moses Lawe but that the spiritual Aulters of meÌ„nes hartes might be prepared in moe places then in one onely Citie of Iewrie for Ieremie Ezechiel Daniel Ezdras Tobias and many other holy Iewes and Israelites had such spiritual Aulters and theron offered acceptable spiritual sacrifices vnto God in other Countries besides Iewrie and in Cities farre distaÌ„t from Ierusalem wherefore he meant of such Aulters as Christians haue euer had in their Churches which be made after the manner of the Aulter appointed by Moses though the Sacrifice be of a farre diners manner Visible and external Aulter Eusebius wordes be these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. Moses ordeined Aulter and sacrifices to be made in no Land elswhere but in Iewrie only and that in one only Citie therof But this prophecie of Esay saith that an Aulter shal be set vp vnto our Lorde in the Land of Egypte and that the Egyptians them selues shal offer vp the Sacrifices vnto the Lorde of the Prophetes and no lenger vnto their Countrie Goddes After that he hath spoken what he thought good of this new manner of Aulter and Sacrifice of the translation of the Aulter and priesthod appointed by Moses and therefore consequently of the translatioÌ„ of the Law it selfe in conclusion thus he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As much to say Now then is the time come that there is neede of a new lawe to be made that the foresaid thinges may take place But as for the spiritual Aulter of mennes hartes and the mere spiritual and inward sacrifices as the sacrifices of prayer of laude and praise of thankes geuing and such other who vnderstandeth not that they might wel take place and be frequented without necessitie of any newe Lawe to be made and that other wheres then onely in one Citie of Iewrie Verely the vse of such Aulters requireth not a change of Moses lawe and priesthode For such Aulters and such sacrifices were in Egypte and Chaldaea among many thousandes of Iewes who lyued in those Landes long before Moses law was dissolued The Aulter therfor and Sacrifice that Eusebius meaneth in that place for declaratioÌ„ of Malachies Prophecie is the Aulter and Sacrifice wherevpon and which the faithful people by ministerie of Priestes of the new TestameÌ„t doth continually offer vnto God to wit the body and bloude of Christ in remembrance of his death after the new Decrees and ordinances of the new Testament as he saith in * Lib. 1. De Demonstrat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one place after the Decrees and ordinances of the Church as he saith in an * Lib. 5. De Demonstrat other place That no man should doubte of what Aulter he meant thus there he speaketh of it Lib. 1. De Demonst. To our one onely Lorde an Aulter of vnbloudy and reasonable hostes after the new mysteries of the new Testament throughout the whole worlde hath ben erected both in Egypt it selfe and in the other nations being of like conditions vnto the Egyptians as touching wicked errour Verely these wordes can not with any reason seme to be meant of the spiritual Aulter of our hartes For though on the same we offer vp vnbloudy and reasonable hostes yet that is not done after the new Mysteries of the new Testament For in the olde Testament also no lesse then in the new such mere spiritual and internal sacrifices were offered vp vpon the spiritual Aulters of good mennes hartes Luc. 22. And what other be these new Mysteries of the new Testament whereof this doctor speaketh 1. Cor. 11. but those that Christ taught the Apostles and deliuered vnto them at his last Supper where he conuerted bread and wine into his body and bloud whom as S. Irenaeus saith Iren. lib. 4. cap. 32. he taught the new Oblation of the new Testament which the Church receiuing of the Apostles offereth vp vnto God throughout the whole worlde Whereas then Eusebius expounding the prophecie of Malachie speaking of Incense and pure Sacrifice vnderstandeth it to speake of two distinct sortes of Oblations therein appeareth either the ignorance or the wilful malice of M. Iewel who referreth al to one that is to say to Prayer to thintent the Mystical Oblation and Sacrifice of the body aud bloude of Christ be quite excluded But as the weighing of that which is already alleged out of the myddest of Eusebius first booke De Demonstratione Euangelica detecteth M. Iewels falshod not obscurely so the due coÌ„sideration of that he writeth vpon the same place of Malachie in the ende of that booke doth the same most clearely
of sacrificing and offring M. Iewel falsifieth the vvordes of the Ansvver and that the terme it selfe Oblation or Sacrifice was not expressed to make my saying seme more absurde you falsifie my saying reporting me to haue spoken of the termes of sacrificing as though I had acknowledged the wordes of sacrificing and denied the termes of sacrificing But sir what meane you Hath the long studie of Rhetorique driuen out of your head the remembrance of Logique Haue you quite forgoten the olde Distinction of implicitè and explicitè so much tossed in our Sophismes when we were yong Sophisters at Oxforde Thinges implied though not vttered red in expresse termes Remember you not that a thing may be implyed in wordes albeit the very termes signifying that thing be not expressed As for example where it is written in the Psalme Dixit Dominus Domino meo sede à dextris meis Our Lorde the Father said to my Lorde the Sonne sit at my right hand Psal. 109. is not the Omnipotencie of God the Sonne and his Equalitie with the Father in these woordes signified though the terme it selfe of imnipotencie or equalitie be not expressed It is written of kinge Saules wicked and miserable ende â— Reg. 31. Arripuit Saul galdium suum irruit super eum Saul caught his owne sworde and ranne vpon it doth not the Scripture by those woordes shewe and set forth his murthering and kylling of him selfe though the terme it selfe of murdering or killing be not expressely vttered Likewise the Scripture signifieth with very plaine woordes the Aduoutrie that Dauid committed with Bethsabee 2. Reg. 11. and his murdering of Vrias her husband and yet in what place these actes be described there is not at al expressed the terme of Aduoutrie nor of Murder In the whole storie of Christes passion written by the Euangelistes it is not with any expresse terme of killing said that the Iewes or Souldiers killed him Yet I trowe ye wil not denie but that in woordes it is implied Actor 2. If you denie it S. Peter shal control you who said to the Iewes Hunc interemistis this man ye haue killed Actor 7. S. Steuen also who said vnto them cuius vos nunc proditores homicidae fuistis ye haue now ben the traitours and murderers of Iesus But what neede we to vse so many examples in a mater that may be declared by infinite examples Right so to be shorre the wordes which the Euangelistes No coÌ„tâ—adictioÌ„â—roued by M. Ievvel to be in the Ansvver and S. Paule vse in the Description of the Institution of the blessed Sacrament at Christes last supper be wordes implying and importing a Sacrifice al be it this terme it selfe of Oblation or Sacrifice be not expressed And who so euer affirmeth him that so saith to include a Contradiction is either a wrangler hunting for termes not regarding the thing implyed or very ignorant not knowing the nature of a Contradiction But besides al this The reproche of straggling alone anâ—vvered as M. Iewel hath founde in my wordes a Contradiction where none is so doth he also with like truth and like proufe charge me with as it pleaseth him to terme it straggling alone and swaruing from al the olde Fathers by a strange construction of myne owne for that I haue so construed the wordes vsed in the Scripture to declare the Institution of the Eucharist as to include and implie a Sacrifice For verely I haue learned this construction of the olde learned Fathers and haue not bene so presumptuous as in so weighty a mater to trust the deuise of myne owne head Which Fathers doo not onely in equiualent but in expresse termes declare that Christe offered a Sacrifice at his last supper Hesychius an olde Father maketh mention of three sundry Sacrifices Three sacrifices offered by Christeâ— Hesychius in Leuit. lib. 2. cap. 8 that Christe offered two at his Maundie and the thirde vpon the Crosse. His wordes be plaine Prius figur atam Ouem coenans cum Apostolis postea suum obtulit Sacrificium deinde sicut ouem seipsum occidit That Christe sacrificed hiÌ„ selfe at his last supper Christe supping with his Apostles first offered the figuratiue Lambe afterward he offered his owne Sacrifice and then after that he killed him selfe that is to say deliuered vp him selfe to be killed like a Lambe S. Cyprian one of the most auncient Fathers of the Churche speaking of the Figure of Melchisedech geueth most iust occasion of this construction Cyprian lib. 2. epist. 3. where he saith Quam rem perficiens adimplens Dominus panem calicem mixtum vino obtulit qui est plenitudo Veritatem praefiguratae Imaginis adimpleuit Which thing our Lorde perfourming and fulfylling he meaneth the perfourmance of that which Melchisedeks Sacrifice did foresignifie offered bread and the cuppe mingled with wine and he who is the fulnesse did fulfil the Truth of the forefigured Image Theophylacte although not so olde as the others yet a schoolemaister olde yenough to teach a Christian man this construction expounding the later wordes of the Institution of the Sacrament and speaking of the Sacrifice saith Theophylactus in Matt. 26. Sicut Vetus Testamentum immolationem habebat sanguinem ita Nouum Testamentum sanguinem habet ac immolationeÌ„ Like as the Olde Testament had sacrifice and bloude euen so the Newe Testament hath bloude and Sacrifice Here is to be considered that if the wine by th' almighty power of the Worde be not coÌ„uerted into the bloud of Christe but remaine stil wine as before consecration which doctrine our Caluinistes teach and the Lutherans impugne then wil not this comparison of Theophylacte holde neither is it true at al that now the Newe Testament hath bloude Euthymius also a Father of the Greke Churche Euthym. in Matt. construed the same wordes of Christe in like sense saying Sicut Vetus Testamentum hostias sanguinem habebat ita sanè Nouum Corpus videlicet sanguineÌ„ Domini Non dixit autem haec sunt signa corporis mei sanguinis mei sed haec sunt corpus meum sanguis meus As the Olde Testament had sacrifices and bloude euen so truly hath the New Testament also to wit the Body and Bloud of our Lorde He said not these be the signes of my body and of my bloud but these be my Body and my Bloude These Fathers and sundry others whose â—ayinges here to reherse I omit that I be not tedious auouching so plainely that a Sacrifice was offered by Christe at his Maundie I maruel at the impudencie of M. Iewel It is M. Ievv that in deede straggleth alone who solacing him selfe with the terme of straggling alone reporteth me in this point to swarue from al the olde Fathers as though I had deuised a newe construction that any learned man neuer knewe before Verely in deniyng this Sacrifice he sheweth him selfe to be departed
we vary froÌ„ the SacrameÌ„taries is touching the substance of the SacrameÌ„t or which is al one though in diuers respectes the Sacrifice We say that onlesse the flesh and bloude of Christe be the substance of this sampler or signe it can not be a Sacrament meete for the dignitie of the new Testament bicause it must be the truth of al the figuratiue Sacrifices of the olde Lawe according to that S. Augustine teacheth speaking of the Tableâ— Augu. De ciuita Dei lib. 17. ca. 20. which Christe being a Priest aftâ—r the order of Melchisedech doth exhibite and geue Id enim Sacrificium successit omnibus illis Sacrificijs veteris Testamenti quae immolabantur in vmbra futuri For that Sacrifice saith he hath succeded al those Sacrifices of the old Testament which were offered in the shadow of that to come Wherefore this Sacrifice being the body of those shadowes must excel in substance the Sacrifices that were the shadowes But how can that be if the substance of bread be the substance of our Sacrifice for asmuch as the substance of bread is no better if it be so good being an artificial and dead thing then is the substance of a lambe an Oxe or a goat which are natural and lyuing creatures whose substances were substances of the olde Sacrifices that were shadowes S. Alexander therefore the fourth Bisshop of Rome after S. Peter considering the excellency of our Sacrifice aboue the olde Sacrifices Alexand. epist. 1. De CoÌ„sec dist 2. cap. Nihil in saith Nihil in Sacrificiis maius esse potest quà m corpus sanguis Christi nec vlla oblatio hac potior est sed omnes haec praecellit c. Nothing can be greater in Sacrifices then the body and bloude Christe neither is there any oblation better then this but this doth farre excel al others the which ought to be offered vp vnto God with a cleane conscience and to be receiued with a pure mynde and of men to be wourshipped Thus our Sacrifice conteyning really the pretious body and bloude of Christe is a Sacrifice worthy of the newe Testamente most meete and hable to represent vnto vs and preserue in perpetual remembraunce the same body and bloude rent and shed vppon the Crosse and most effectual to deriue and apply vnto vs the merites and fruites of that bloudy Sacrifice And yet neuer the lesse being ministred vnder the outward formes not of the body and bloude it selfe but of bread and wine for our infirmities sake and for the better practise of our faith it is rightly called the sampler of the roial body of Christe so termed by a fitte worde in the greke tongue antitypon which being taken in the best signification Augu. lib. 2. quaest Euangel cap. 3. VVhat properly is signified by antitypoÌ„ as it is reason it should so be taken sith it signifieth a Sacrifice most diuine and as S. Augustine termeth it Sacrificium Sanctum Sanctorum the Sacrifice that is of al holy things the most holy doth import a true and like sampler or counterpane equal in truth and worthinesse with that which is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the principal copie For so much doth the greke preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie in composition as for example Homere oftentimes calleth that man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 asmuch to say equal to God who for some excellent qualitie semed to be nothing inferiour at least in that point to them whom he feined to be Gods And in consideration hereof learned men haue translated the Greke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by this Periprasis or circumlocution examplar similis formae a sampler of like forme Now what thing is there any where that is worthy to be or may be a true patern or sampler of like forme to the body and bloud of Christe crucified and shed and now remaining visibly in heauen but the body and bloud of Christe him selfe which by vertue of his almighty woorde he of his singular mercie so maketh and tempereth for vs in the most holy mysteries geuing them vs vnder the formes of our common foode breade and wine that neither the Maiestie of them should deterre and fray vs from offering them nor any lothsomnes or sight of fleshe and bloude shoulde cause vs to abhorre to eate and drinke them And thus the body of Christ in the Eucharist is antitypon that is to say a signe a sacrament a patern a sampler of his body that hoong vpon the Crosse and of his body that is now in Maiestie at the right hande of God the Father Neither is this a new doctrine of our deuise it was taught in Christes Churche aboue eleuen hundred yeres past Let these woordes of S. Augustine serue to witnesse the same Augu. lib. Sentent Prosperi de Consec Dist. 2. Hoc est Caro eius est quam forma panis opertam in Sacramento accipimus sanguis eius quem sub vini specie sapore potamus Caro videlicet carnis sanguis est Sacramentum Sanguinis vtroque inuisibili Spirituali intelligibili signatur visibile Domini nostri Iesu Christi corpus palpabile plenum gratia omnium virtutum diuina Maiestate The flesh of Christe it is that being couered with the forme of bread we receiue in the Sacrament and his bloud it is which vnder the shape and sauour of wine we drinke soothly flesh is a sacrament of flesh and bloude a sacrament of bloude by both being inuisible spiritual and intelligible the body of Iesus Christe our Lord that is visible and palpable ful of the grace of al vertues and diuine Maiesty is betokened Consider this doctrine wel Christian Reader First that whiche we receiue in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine S. Augustine telleth thee is the flesh and bloude of Christe Next he saith not that the outward formes of bread and wine but that the very flesh and bloude be sacramentes of flesh and bloude Lastly to put al doubte away and to make the mater cleare he sheweth how this is trueâ— and saith that by both flesh and bloude inuisible and intelligible the visible and palpable body of Christe is pointed to notified and signified Which is as much to say briefly as that the body of Christe in the Sacrament inuisible is a signe or sampler of Christes body visible Al this yf thou consider diligently and aduisedly thou maist easily vnderstande what both S. Clement in the place by M. Iewel alleged and other learned Fathers meane by this worde antitypon in the mater of the blessed Sacrament soothly not to exclude the real presence of Christes body but to signifie the secret meane of the presence We graunt therefore the Sacrament of the Aulter to be a signe as S. Clement calleth it antitypoÌ„ But when by any Sacramentarie the denial of the thing it self is inferred of the affirmation of the signe The kindes of Signes significatiue only and exhibitiue we
deny the Argument For there be two kindes of signes One is significatiue onely the other exhibitiue which doth not only betoken or signifie but also exhibiteth and geueth the thing signified In the olde Lawe the vnleuened bread signified onely that the feast of Easter was to be celebrated with sinceritie of harte and life The corporal purgations signified only the cleansing of myndes But Baptisme in the newe Lawe doth not only signifie but also exhibiteth and worketh the Wasshing of synnes and is the ablution it selfe or wasshing away of sinnes Likewise the holy Euchariste doth not onely betoken or signifie the body and bloud of Christe but contineth and exhibiteth it present Signū signatum exhibitiuū and is the very body and bloude of Christ it is signū signatū exhibitiuū Thus it appeareth how the Sacramentaries Argument is naught The Sacrament is a signe ergo it is not the body For it is both a signe and the body it sefe For if any wil say it is a signe significatiue only it is to be denied as false and contrary to the manifest wordes of Scripture and the expositions of al the Fathers Now I reporte me to the iudgement of the discrete Reader what aduauntage M. Iewel hath gotten by the terme antitypon alleged out of S. Clement against the blessed Sacrifice of the Churche S. Clemēt corrupted by M. Ievvel On the other side what aduauntage may iustly be taken against him for that most falsly he hath corrupted his author For looke Reader vpon the shorte testimonie which he allegeth out of S. Clement and thou shal finde that M. Iewel hath cut of out of the middest two wordes of greatest force for the vnderstanding of that goeth there immediatly before that by falshod he might geue at least some colour vnto his Reply where in truth he had none at al. The wordes falsly cut away be these Clemen Constitut. lib. 6. cap. 30. acceptabilemque Eucharistiam So that the whole sentence is this in S. Clement Antitypum regalis corporis Christi acceptabilēque Eucharistiam offerte in Ecclesiis coemeteriis vestris Offer ye vp the sampler of the roial body of Christ and the acceptable Euchariste in your Churches and burying places These two wordes with the sleight of falsifying nipte away by M. Iewel be so requisite to the vnderstanding of the authours meaning that without them mater of cauil by reason of the terme antitypon may be ministred vnto such as be more ready to impugne then to defend the doctrine of the vniuersal Churche touching the substance of the Sacrament and Sacrifice of the Aulter Contrarywise being leaft in the sentence considered and rightly vnderstanded they exclude al occasion of doubte or cauil that might rise through the other terme of more obscuritie For the Euchariste without doubt in that age being taken for the body of Christ how can it be conceiued that the other terme antitypon in the same place ioyned by a copulatiue together with it should importe the contrary That S. Clement meant by the Eucharist the true and real body of Christe it is euident by that we finde in the learned Fathers of that age namely S. Ignatius and S. Ireneus who lyued in or sone after S. Clementes tyme. S. Irenaeus saith Irenaeus lib. 4. ca. 34. that the breade hauing receiued the calling vpon of the name of God whereby he meaneth the Consecration is no more common bread but Eucharistia ex duabus rebus constans terrena coelesti the Euchariste consisting of two thinges the one earthly whereby he vnderstandeth the forme of bread the other heauenly which is the body of our Sauiour The Euchariste maketh our bodies to be immortal And that it appeare certainely that he thought the Euchariste to be the body and bloude of Christe he proueth that our bodies shal not remaine in corruption but haue the resurrection that is hoped for bicause they receiue the Euchariste and be fed with the flesh and bloude of our Lorde Ignat. ad Smyrnen apud theo dorit li. 3. Dialog S. Ignatius likewise in an Epistle ad Smyrnenses as Theodoritus allegeth him in the third booke of his Dialogues writing against certaine Heretikes that would haue neither Euchariste nor Sacrifice auoucheth the Eucharist to be the flesh of Christe The Eutheriste is the flesh of Christ that suffered for vs. These be his wordes Eucharistias oblationes non admittunt eò quòd non confiteantur Eucharistiā esse carnēseruatoris nostri Iesu Christi quae pro peccatis nostris passa est quam Pater sua benignitate suscitauit Eucharistes and oblations they wil not admit bicause they wil not confesse the Euchariste to be the flesh of our Sauiour Iesus Christe which flesh suffered for our sinnes and which the Father of his goodnes raised vp from death Marke Reader this auncient Father and blessed Martyr saith not the Euchariste signifieth Christes flesh but is Christes flesh yea that flesh which was crucified buried and rose againe And although Theodoritus alleged this authoritie to proue that it was the humaine flesh and not the Godhed of Christe that suffered death and rose againe which he proueth by the later parte of the same yet it principally proueth our purpose that the Euchariste is the true flesh of Christe Againe onlesse the selfe same flesh of Christe be in the Euchariste which died vpon the Crosse and rose againe this authoritie auailed Theodoritus nothing to proue that Christes flesh was crucified and raised vp againe Wherefore for so much as it is cleare by the testimonies of S. Ignatius and S. Irenaeus who liued not long after S. Clements time that the beleefe of their age was the Euchariste to be the flesh and bloude of Christe how can M. Iewel kepe his credite with any man that loueth truth and not seme to haue intended crafte and deceite in that of purpose least the truth should appeare manifest he falsified his auctor by clipping away those two wordes from the middest of the sentence that make directly against him and put away al doubte of contrary sense Thus to mainteine the false doctrine of his arrogant Chalenge he feareth not to violate the Fathers to corrupte their writings to deceiue the worlde to purchase him selfe the most reprocheful name of a falsifier By such champions such quarrels are mainteined Constitut. lib. 8. As for the other place of S. Clement where he saith offerimus hunc panem hoc poculum we offer this breade and this cuppe who nowe a daies knoweth not that the Sacrament sometimes is called by the name of breade and wine not bicause the substance of breade and wine remaineth but bicause the outwarde formes taft and other qualities of breade and wine be sene felt and perceiued bicause before consecration it was breade and wine and bicause it is the true breade and wine that came downe from heauen Neither doth S. Clement which is to be noted
the Caluinistes The ministratiō of the nevv holy Cōmunion made a nevv Sacrifice by M. Ievv which they haue set vp like an Idol in their defourmed churches in place of the blessed Masse after a diuers manner in diuers Cities and Countries according to the diuers fantasies of new Ministers who daily please them selues with changing what so euer liketh others in which sorte of Communion there is no substance of any better thing then of bread and wine no due consecration made no oblation no real Sacrifice no participation of the true body and bloude of Christe If this be his meaning as doubtelesse it is most certaine it is those auncient learned Fathers neuer spake of it neuer knewe it much lesse did they any where call the ministration of it a Sacrifice S. Augustine saith not Augustin ad Petrū Diaconū cap. 19. the ministration of the Communion is a Sacrifice which M. Iewel by his wordes taketh vpon him to proue but In this Sacrifice saith he there is a thankesgeuing and a cōmemoration of the flesh of Christe which he offered for vs and of the bloude which the same God did shed for vs. In this Sacrifice saith he he saith not in the ministration of the Cōmunion What he meant by this Sacrifice there he sheweth clearely For hauing said in the beginning of the chapter that beastes were sacrificed vnto Christe with the Father and the holy Ghost by the Patriarkes Prophetes and Priestes of the olde Law forthwith he addeth these wordes Cui nunc id est tempore Noui Testamēti cū Patre Spiritu sancto cū quibus est illi vna Diuinitas sacrificiū Panis vini in fide charitate sancta Ecclesia Catholica per vniuersum orbē terrae offerre nō cessat Vnto whom now that is to say in the time of the Newe Testament with the Father and the Holy Ghoste with whom he hath one Godhed the holy Catholike Church doth not ceasse to offer vp through the whole worlde the Sacrifice of bread and wine in faith and charitie M. Iewel thought to take aduantage of this place The Sacrifice of bread and vvine bicause this Sacrifice is here called the sacrifice of bread and wine and would nedes this to be taken for the ministation of his new Communion as though bicause bread and wine is named which is the substāce of their cōmunion the body and bloud of Christe were excluded But this reason is very weake besides that neither M. Iewel nor any of the Caluinistes doo vse to cal this sacrifice the Sacrifice of bread and wine Neither do they bring their bread and wine to church to make a sacrifice of it to God but to distribute it vnto their Congregations The sacrifice they pretende to make is of thankes and praises any outward thing they sacrifice not at al. True it is this Sacrifice is sometimes called the Sacrifice of bread and wine as in this place De Fide ad Petrum Diaconum either bicause it representeth in outwarde formes bread and wine or bicause bread and wine are the thinges whereof of the change it selfe which perteineth to the nature of a Sacrifice for so much as it requireth that the thing that is offered be sanctified by some change taketh beginning And as in the olde sacrifices of the Iewes the Calfe both being yet aliue was called a Sacrifice bicause it was that thing whiche by killing was to be sanctified and also being killed bicause it was the Hoste now sanctified by sacrificing whiche hoste so many as did eate of were made partakers of the aulter Euen so in the Sacrament of the Euchariste the bread and wine may be called a Sacrifice as being the thinges that by change made of them with consecration are to be sanctified Therefore in the beginning of the Canon of the Masse it is said of them Supplices rogamus ac petimus c. We humbly pray and beseche thee that thou accepte and blesse these giftes these presentes these holy Sacrifices The body it selfe also and bloud of Christe conteined vnder the fourme of bread and wine are called the Sacrifice as being the thinges into which the holy change by vertue of the wordes of Consecration is made of which it is said in the end of the Canon We offer vp vnto thy most honorable Maiestie of thy giftes and benefites a pure Hoste a holy Hoste an vnspotted hoste Thus we say and so the Fathers speake both waies of this Sacrifice that it is the Sacrifice of breade and wine that is to say made of bread and wine bicause that which was breade and wine is now turned and changed into the body and bloude of Christe and the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of our Lorde that is to say the very true hoste it selfe with a certaine diuine change consecrated and made In other places most commonly it is named of the Fathers the Oblation or Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe in consideration of the inward substance of the Sacrifice vnder the formes of bread and wine conteined As S. Augustine writing against Faustus the Heretique Aug. cont Faust. lib. 20◠ca. 18. hauing spoken of the manifold Sacrifices of the olde law and of the Sacrifice of the Crosse consequently saith whereby he signifieth what he vnderstandeth by this sacrifice of bread and wine I am Christiani peracti eiusdem Sacrificij memoriam celebrant sacrosancta oblatione participatione corporis sanguinis Christi The Christians do nowe celebrate the memorie of the Sacrifice of the Crosse past and done by the holy oblation and participation of the body and bloude of Christe So in diuers considerations both these savinges be true The holy catholike Churche euery where offereth vp to God the sacrifice of bread and wine and it offereth the Sacrifice of the flesh and bloud of Christe And whereas our daily Sacrifice which the Christians doo now euery where offer is the celebration of the memorie of that which was done vpon the Crosse and therefore oftentimes of the Fathers is named a memorie or commemoration as we finde in Eusebius here also alleged by M. Iewel Euseb. in Demonst. lib. 1. the worde Memorie or commemoration excludeth the truth of passion and death for now Christe suffereth Rom. 6. nor dieth no more the truth or real presence of the body which on the Crosse suffered and dyed for vs it excludeth not For with and by the holy Oblation and participation of that flesh and bloude saith S. Augustine we celebrate the memorie of the Sacrifice that was made vpon the Crosse. So that the substance of the Sacrifice of the Crosse and of that of the Aulter is one and the same the flesh and bloude of Christ onely the manner of Oblation is diuers Which if these Gospellers would once confesse as S. Augustine here witnesseth and Christes Church hath euer beleeued and they them selues be not ignorant of we should not haue neede to write so
many bookes and the worlde should sone drawe to a better quiet As for the two other testimonies alleged out of Eusebius and S. Gregorie Nazianzen they prooue not that for which they be alleged which is that the Ministration of the Communion is of them called a sacrifice wherby M. Iewel would exclude the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe For first as touching Nazianzen by what Logique maketh he this Argument good He calleth the holy Communion * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exemplar magnorum Mysteriorum the Figure or sampler of the great Mysteries Ergo the Ministration of the Communion is called a Sacrifice Verily in this Argument is neither reason nor good Logique What though Eusebius say thus being truly translated Christe after al the Sacrifices of Moses Lawe hauing sacrificed a maruelous sacrifice and a passing Hoste vnto his Father offred it vp for al our saluatioÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hauing deliuered vnto vs also a memorie to offer it vp continually vnto God * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a Sacrifice so it is to be translated not in stede of a Sacrifice as Maister Iewel hath turned it Wil he conclude of this that Eusebius calleth the Ministration of his Communion a Sacrifice No no his purpose was not so much to proue the ministration of their Communion to be called a sacrifice as to disproue the Sacrifice of the Aulter which Eusebius in my Answer alleged calleth in respect of Christes body and bloude offered in the same the Sacrifices of Christes table To that ende he semeth to haue alleged Eusebius A memorie of the Sacrifice of the Crosse excludeth not the Sacrifice of the Aulter bicause he nameth that which Christ deliuered vnto vs to offer vp daily vnto God a memorie As though Christes body and bloud could not be really present in these holy Mysteries if that which we doo be a memorie or coÌ„memoratioÌ„ of that which Christ did Yeas forsoth M. Iewel The Sacrifice that we offer when we doo that which Christ at his last Supper coÌ„mauÌ„ded vs to do is the memorie of the body and bloud of Christ and in respect of the thing offered and sacrificed the very and true body and bloud of Christ it self And this is accordiÌ„g to the doctrine of S. Augustin Aug. cont Faust. lib. 20. cap. â—â— who saith as is afore rehersed The Christians do celebrate the memorie of the Sacrifice of the Crosse now performed which Eusebius in respect of the thing offered calleth the maruelous Sacrifice and passing hoste with the holy Oblation and Participation of the body and bloude of Christe If they doo it with the Oblation and participation of the body and bloude of Christe then is the body and bloud of Christe present then is it offered and participated which Eusebius for that cause calleth theâ— Sacrifices of Christes Table Eusebius also saith M. Iewel calleth this a Sacrifice of praise In deee as I declared before Eusebius speaketh of diuers Sacrifices Of the Sacrifice of the Crosse of the sacrifices of the table of Christ of the Sacrifice of praise of prayers of a contrite harte And what if he speake of the Sacrifice of praise wil it thereof folow M. Iewel by your new Logique that the Sacrifices of Christes table be not taken in Eusebius for the body and bloude of Christ And I pray you may not the selfe same in one respect be a Sacrifice of Praise M. Iewels common custom to disproue one truth by an other truth and also in an other respect the Sacrifice of Christes body and bloud When wil you leaue your common woont to disproue one truth by an other truth If one should say vnto you concerning a sorte of your Ministers standing before you at a visitatioÌ„ Sir these felowes be no Ministers of Gods worde and holy SacrameÌ„tes for they be handy Craftesmen would you not answer him Sir your reason is naught for they be Ministers and honest Craftesmen both No better is your reason where you say This Sacrifice is a Sacrifice of Praise and of thankes geuing or it is a memorie and a sampler of the bloudy Sacrifice ergo it is not the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe it is not a true and a very Sacrifice For there is no inconuenience in attributing these names and termes vnto the most blessed Sacrament and Sacrifice of the Aulter diuers respectes being considered A plaine testimonie for the Sacrifice of the Aulter But M. Iewel how happed it that where you founde in Eusebius Sacrificium laudis the Sacrifice of Praise the Greeke whereof also you would needes to be noted in the margent of your booke though with addition of an article more then is in the Doctour you saw not among the manifold sacrifices there reckened this Sacrifice so expressely set foorth and coÌ„mended with these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb. lib. 1. de Demonst in fine That is to say we sacrifice the diuine and honorable and most holy Sacrifice We sacrifice the pure Sacrifice after a new manner according to the newe Testament By which description that which we cal the Sacrifice of the Aulter is plainely signified Againe how could you not see the manifest mention of the Aulter A testimonie for material Aulters whereon this Sacrifice is offred there a litle before expressed And least you might auoide the force of that cleare testimonie by expounding it of the spiritual Aulter of mans harte remember that he speaketh of such an Aulter as might not by Moses lawe be set vp but onely in Iewrie and that as there he saith in one only Citie of that Prouince As for the spiritual Aulters of mens hartes Moses Lawe did neuer forbid An Aulter saith Eusebius of vnbloudy and reasonable sacrifices 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is now erected according to the new Mysteries of the new Testament ouer al the worlde both in Egypte and in other nations c. What can be vnderstanded by this Aulter builded in witnesse of the abrogation of Moses Lawe of his Aulter at Hierusalem and of his vncleane Sacrifices as there Eusebius discourseth and that according to the new Mysteries of the newe Testament but the external Aulter of the Church whereupon the body and bloud of Christe In Apologetico in forme of bread and wine the external Sacriâ—fice as S. Gregorie Nazianzen calleth it is offered and the most holy and dreadful Mysteries are celebrated Hath Satan the enemie of this Sacrifice so blinded your harte with malice against the same that you saw the sacrifice of Praise of Praiers and other mere spiritual Sacrifices and this most Diuine most high and most special Sacrifice of the Churche could not see so euidently and with so expresse colours set forth in the same place What can be said in your excuse Either you saw this much in Eusebius your selfe or you trusted your Greeke frende of Oxford whose helpe for the fuller stuffing of your great
a Mysterie in this Proposition Christe was not sacrificed at the Table really but onely in a Mysterie Onely in a Mysterie If he meane nothing els thereby but to exclude the bloudy manner of sacrificing as in deede properly to speake the sacrificing of lyuing thinges is with bloudeshed and slaughter in that respecte we graunte also that at the Table Christe was not really so sacrificed but in Mysterie only For at the Table we knowe he was not stickte with a knife as the brute beastes in the olde Lawe were nor let bloude with thornes nailes or speare as he was on the nexte morow vppon the Crosse. Mary where the exclusiue particle Onely is added though in a right sense we might beare with it as it is referred to the mystical manner of sacrificing yet we say it is strangely vsed in this place where it may haue relation to two thinges either to the body and bloud of Christe being the substance of the Sacrifice or to the manner of sacrificing But if by his terme Onely in a Mysterie he exclude the Real presence of Christe him selfe and meane that his very body and bloude as muche to say Christe him selfe bicause of the vnitie of the two natures was not in Christes handes and vppon the Table in deede when hauing taken breade he gaue thankes blessed Lucae 22. brake it and said this is my Body and concerning the Cuppe this is my Bloude â—e is not nowe in the Aulter Only when we consecrate doing that Christe did and bad vs to doo but that he was there then and is here now at the Diuine Celebration in a figure signe token signification memorie representation or Mysterie Onely or that a figure signe token or Mysterie Onely is present and sacrificed and not very Christe him selfe If this be his meaning herein we dissent vtterly from him and he dissenteth from the Churche of God from that the holy Ghoste hath taught his Churche from that al faithful Christen people hath euer beleeued from that Christe him selfe professed saying this is my body this is my bloude to be shorte from that which hath bene of late by certaine learned men against him and his felowes sufficiently and substantially prooued But what neede we to demaunde of M. Iewel what he meaneth by his clowdy wordes No clowde can hyde his Sacramentarie heresie it is euident as wel by that he saith here as by that he hath said and writteÌ„ in sundry other places according to the purport of the Caluinists doctrine vnto which sect he hath adioyned him self and by his open profession that he standeth in his Negatiue and holdeth opinion that Christe offered not him selfe really at his last Supper Now the affirmatiue part which is that Christe offered him selfe at that Supper really truly and in dede and made a real Sacrifice though it be in my Answere already proued yet here further for theire sake who breake not out of the Churche by their own stubbornnesse and wilful malice but be lead a syde by simplicitie and ignorance thus we prooue If Christe offered not vp him selfe really and in dede in a Sacrifice at his last Supper he leaft his new Lawe in worse state then was the condition of them who liued in the time of the Lawe of Nature or in the time of the Lawe written But in worse state he leafte it not Ergo he sacrificed him selfe at the Supper truly really and in dede The Minor or second Proposition is such as no Christen man I iudge wil deny or doubte of The first Proposition which is conditional shal sone appeare true to him who considereth that the good and godly people lyuing vnder the Lawe of Nature before any Lawe was written Cyprian Sermone de ratione circuÌ„cisionis by the inspiration of God as S. Cyprian witnesseth offered vp real sacrifices in which they protested their faith and trust in Christe to come by whose Sacrifice to be made vpon the Crosse they looked and hartily desyred to be saued So did Abel offer vp Sacrifice to God of the best of his flocke Gen. 4. Gen. 8. So did Noe offer vp Sacrifice of the cleane beastes that had ben with him in the Arke Gen. 22. So Abraham after that he had for so much as in him was offered vp his onely sonne Isaac did in stede of him sacrifice the Ramme that was tyed by the hornes among the brambles So did other iust and good men of that time offer vp the like sacrifices to the same ende As for the time of the lawe written who is so ignorant that knoweth not that real sacrifices of sundry beastes beside other thinges were commaunded to be offred vp for diuers particular endes yet al to one chiefe ende to foresignifie and prefigurate the most perfite Sacrifice of Christe to come Al these sacrifices although offred in a figure and signification of benefite that then was to come yet were they real and true sacrifices notwithstanding as consisting of real and true substances And thus we see that by Gods prouidence in the time of both Lawes of Nature and of Moyses real sacrifices were offred vp vnto him in figure and token of the Redemption to come Now then if Christe leafte to the newe lawe which he ordeined no real Sacrifice a Sacrifice being the chiefest worship that man can do vnto God but endued it with a sacrifice that is offred onely in a figure how did he not leaue it in worse case then the lawe of nature or the lawe written And certaine it is that he leaft it without any such Sacrifice onlesse he offering him selfe really at his Supper did beginne and institute it after the order of Melchisedek For in any time or place els instituted and commaunded it is not founde Concerning inward and mere spiritual sacrifices they be common to al times and lawes as it is before proued If M. Iewel and the mainteiners of this new Gospel put vs in mynde of bread and wine and tel vs that the substance of bread and wine is our real Sacrifice being the signes and figures of Christes body and bloud in the Lordes Supper to that we answer that bread and wine are not appointed and ordeined by Christe to be the real Sacrifice of the Churche and if they were then were the state of the new Testament no better then that of the olde TestameÌ„t whereas the new farre passing the olde in euery degree of worthinesse as S. Paule in sundry places declareth the Sacrifice frequented in the newe lawe ought to surmount the Sacrifices of the olde lawe Then hath the Churche made a very meane exchange with the Iewish Synagog For if we haue no better substance in our dayly Sacrifice then a peece of bread and a smal portion of wine how was not a goate a lambe an Oxe as good if not better and more worth Christe hath not so solenderly dealt with the heires of the newe Testament as to leaue so base and
vnworthy a sacrifice vnto them base and vnworthy I say in comparison of the high dignitie that God through his sonnes death hath called them vnto but by his almighty power and according to his passing great mercy and loue hath geuen no worse thing then him selfe to be their true and real Sacrifice Some one wil say perhappes I woulde beleue this doctrine the rather if it were confirmed with the testimonie of an Auncient learned Father Let vs heare then what S. Chrysostome saith touching this point Chrysost. in 1. Cor. 10. Ho. 24 A cleare testimony for the Sacrifice of Christe in the Churche His wordes be these In veteri quidem Testamento cùm imperfectiores essent quem Idolis offerebant sanguinem cum ipse accipere volait vt ab Idolis nos auerteret Quod etiam inenarrabilis amoris signum erat Hic autem multò admirabilius magnificentius facrificium praeparauit quum sacrificium commutaret pro brutorum caede se ipsum offerendum praciperet In the olde Testament when men were more vnperfecte Christe him selfe would take that bloude which they offered vp vnto Idols to th ende to turne them from Idolatrie Which thing was a signe of an vnspeakeable loue But here in the newe Testament he hath prepared a much more maruelous and honorable Sacrifice both in that he changed the Sacrifice and also for that in stede of the slaughter of brute beastes he commaunded his owne selfe to be offered Here we haue by testimony of this auncient Father the abolishing of the worse sacrifice and the appointment of a better That was made of brute beastes this of Christe him selfe Now consider good Reader whether reason wil beare it that the worse and baser sacrifice should be both real and also in figure and signification for so were al the Iewes sacrifices and the better be in figure or mysterie onely and not real as M. Iewel wil haue the Sacrifice of the Churche to be But that our Sacrifice is real and that it is Christe him selfe and that he is really and in deede sacrificed the woordes aboue rehersed and others of the like force in that place of S. Chrysostome doo plainely auouche For first let this be examined that as he saith Christe commaunded for the slaughter of brute beastes now in the new Testament him selfe to be offered Of what Sacrifice can this be meant but of that which he both made and instituted him selfe at his last Supper and gaue charge to be frequented and done vntil he come For as touching the Sacrifice of the Crosse though he suffered him selfe to be taken and to be crucified and to be offred vp with shedding of bloude vnto death yet he commaunded not so muche to be done for then had the wicked workers of his death ben giltlesse Lucae 22. This commaundement then of offering vp Christe him selfe 1. Cor. â—1 is vnderstanded to haue ben geuen at the Supper when after that he had consecrated his body and bloude he said doo ye this in my remembrance And therefore S. Chrysostom speaketh thus vnto Christe in his Liturgie or Masse Chrysost. in Liturgia Memoriam igitur agentes huius salutaris mandati c. We kepe the memorie of this healthful commaundement If M. Iewel replye and say that Christe commaunded at the supper a memory onely to be celebrate of the true and real Sacrifice vpon the Crosse to that we answer That this Sacrifice whereof we speake is a memorie of that we confesse but that it is a memorie onely so as the real presence of Christ be excluded that we deny and to the contrary S. Chrysostome saith that he commaunded se ipsum him selfe to be offred vp Christe coÌ„maunded him selfe to be offred vp Neither can M. Iewel shifte the mater from him by expounding this worde him selfe of the signe or figure of him selfe meaning the bread and wine as the Sacramentaries doo For if that which is now daily in the Churche offered vp at the Aulter were but bread and wine the signes of Christes body and bloude S. Chrysostome woulde not ne could not iustly haue said that Christe hath prepared for vs of the newe Testament multò admirabilius magnificentius Sacrificium a much more maruelous and honorable Sacrifice For how can we conceiue a peece of bread and a cuppe of wine to be in respecte of sacrifice a thing muche more maruelous and magnificent or honourable then a shepe a goate and an Oxe bothe these and those signifying al one thinge that is Christe him selfe Nay thinges compared with thinges are not the beastes of a farre more price I trow M. Iewel wil not set a greater price vpon the bread and wine vsed in this Sacrifice for that they signifie a more pretious thing then the brute beastes did in the sacrifices of the olde lawe to wit Christe already come whereas they signified Christe to come For so he should diuide Christe and imagine him to be better and worthier in the newe Testament then he was in the olde Verely though redemption perfourmed be to vs better then redemption promised yet Christe before and after the perfourmance that is to say Christe now come and then to come is one Christe and of one worthinesse It foloweth therefore by al meanes that either S. Chrysostome said vntruly affirming Christe to haue prepared for the new Testament a farre more wonderful and magnificent Sacrifice then were the sacrifices of the Iewes whiche I suppose M. Iewel wil not be so shamelesse as to say what so euer he thinke or that we haue now in the Sacrifice of the Churche Christe him selfe truly really and in deede and that he him selfe is really offred vp vnto his Father by Priestes of the new Testament VVitnes for the true and real bloud of Christ in the Sacrament according to the commaundement he gaue at his supper saying doo ye this in my remembrance And that it is the real and true bloude of Christe which we haue in the Sacrifice of the Aulter whereby the real Sacrifice touching the thing sacrificed is proued it is most clearely affirmed by S. Chrysostome in the place before alleged For thus he speaketh there Quid hoc admirabilius Chrysost. in prior ad Cor. Hom. 24. dic quaeso quid amabilius Hoc amantes faciunt cùm amatos intuentur alienorum cupiditate allectos suae verò contemnentes proprijs elargitis suadent vt ab illis abstineant Sed amantes quidem in pecunijs vestibus possessionibus hanc ostendunt cupiditatem in proprio sanguine nemo vnquam What thing I pray thee is more maruelous then this What more louing He speaketh of the bloud that is in the chalice which he saith to be the same that ranne out of Christes syde This is a thing that louers doo when they beholde them whom they loue to be allured with the desire of other mens thinges and to set litle by theirs they geue them their owne
the Sacramentes of the Olde Testament promised the Sauiour Suche signes as geue saluation be meete Sacramentes of the Newe Testament of such kinde of signe or figure speaketh S. Dionyse where he vseth the terme Symbolical speaking of the Sacrifice of the Body and Bloude of Christe Ansvver to Pachymeres As for that M. Iewel allegeth out of Prchymeres the Paraphraste who saith The Priest commeth to the Bread and the Cuppe whereof he would faine conclude that the inuisible substance of the Sacrifice is not the body and bloude of Christe it standeth him in litle stede For in deede it is bread and wine when the Priest first commeth vnto them to celebrate the Sacrifice But when the wordes of Christe be comme vnto them as S. Ambrose saith that is to say Ambros. de Sacramēt lib. 4 cap 5 when the Priest hath duely pronounced the wordes of Consecration then are they made the body and bloude of Christe and so the Sacrifice of Christe And that Pachymeres was of this beleefe it is cleare by his owne woordes whiche M. Iewel either knewe not and so speaketh ignorantly or knewe wel yenough yet dissembled and so doth maliciously Bicause for some credite of his purpose he cited his woordes in Greke though by casting in one woorde of his owne which he founde not in the texte after his common woonte he hath some deale falsified the sentence I wil also here truely cite the woordes in Greke by which Pachymeres sheweth him selfe to be Catholique in this point and quite contrary to M. Iewels Sacramentarie doctrine They be these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pachymee in Dionys. Eccles. Hierarch cap. 3. pag. 136. As muche to say in English There be many that cast their eye vpon the holy signes onely as they who are not hable to conceiue any higher thing But the Bishop him silfe is caried vp vnto those first samplers or natural thinges to wit the pretious body and bloude it selfe of our Lorde beleuing that the thinges which are set forth that is to say the bread and wine be changed into them by the holy and almighty Ghoste Lo M. Iewel here haue you the cleare testimonie of Pachymeres him selfe for his true and Catholique beleefe touching the truth of Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament Which beleefe is not onely that the pretious body and bloude of our Lorde are of a right beleeuer beholden and conceiued in the Sacrament verely present which the Lutherans do acknowledge but also that the bread and wine are by the power of the holy Ghoste Transubstātiation into the same conuerted and changed whiche neither ye nor Luthers scholers doo beleeue and so by Pachymeres transubstantion is auouched After al this M. Iewel disposeth him selfe to dally at an Argument of his owne mery heads forging M. Ievvel forgeth Argumēt◠bearing the Reader in hand it is myne And this Argument forsooth is such and so vnskilful as a yong Sophister saith he would neuer haue framed it What any yong Sophister would doo I knowe not But now certaine it is that be it wel or otherwise it is framed by as olde a Sophister as your selfe are M. Iewel If it be vnskilfully framed the blame is yours for yours it is not myne Here that you be so ful of your Argumentes which vntruely you father vpon me and so busy with your Logique I answer you as S. Augustine answered Iulian the Pelagian Heretique dealing with him as you doo with me not onely in this place but in manner in your whole booke Quantùm tibi places tantùm grauibus Lectoribus displices Augustin contra Iulian lib. 3. cap. 7. quod peius est fingis me dicere quod non dico concludere sicut non concludo caet Looke saith he how much you stande in your owne conceite so muche you are out of conceite with the graue Readers and which is worse you feine me to say that which I say not to conclude so as I conclude not If you would needes shewe your cunning in Logique and dispute after the rules of that arte why rehersed you not the whole Antecedent Though in this place I frame no Argume at al but onely recite the saying of S. Dionyse applying it to my purpose yet if the whole should be disposed in fourme of an Argument this is the Argument that thereof might be concluded the circumstance of the place considered The Bishop or Priest by reporte of S. Dionyse standing at the holy Aulter An Argument gathered out of S. Dionyse for the Sacrifice after he hath geuen praises to God for his Diuine workes commeth vnto the mystical Sacrifice excusing him selfe for that he taketh vpon him to offer vp the healthful hoste or Sacrifice that is farre aboue his worthinesse whereof Christe at his last Supper hauing consecrated his body and bloude said by way of commaundement and commission Luc. 22. Doo ye this in my Remembrance But this healthful Sacrifice whereof Christ so said and which he required to be offered is the Sacrifice of his body and bloude vnder the formes of bread and wine Ergo by witnesse of that Auncient and most worthy Father the Bishop or Priest offereth vp Christes body and bloude and consequently Christ him selfe For where the body of Christe is there also is whole Christe bicause of the inseparable vnitie of both natures And if Christe be thus offered to whom is he offred but to the Father Albeit I confesse that Christe is offered to him selfe also as being God and to the holy Ghoste to the whole most blessed Trinitie If you had thus set forth the Argument M. Iewel and dealt simply and truly you should not haue needed to trouble the reader with so much Sophistrie and Logique as here for confutation of your owne forged reason you haue bestowed Bicause you knewe your selfe not hable to auoide the force of the whole Antecedent slyly you answer to that parte of it onely where it is said the Priest excuseth him selfe as though I had layd the chiefe grounde of the authoritie in that clause onely And thereof you take occasion to enter into a needelesse common place proouing by certaine testimonies which no man euer denied that sundry holy thinges are to be done not presumptuously and rashly but reuerently and with feare and trembling as namely when we offer vp the Sacrifice of Praise when we baptise when we preache or heare Gods holy worde when we pray and cal God our Father For the reuerent and hūble demeanour that we ought to shewe in doing these holy thinges you allege S. Basil S. Dionyse S. Paule S. Cyprian But what of al this wil it thereof folowe Ergo though the Priest standing at the Aulter and comming to offer the Mystical Sacrifice excuse him selfe not for praying preaching praising or baptizing but for offering the healthful hoste that farre passeth his degree euen the same that Christe offered at his laste Supper whereof he said This is my Body
the Euangelist by Polycarpus S. Iohns scholar He declareth it with these wordes Eum qui ex creatura Panis est Lib. 4. cap. â—3 accepit gratias egit dicens Hoc est Corpus meum Et Calicem similiter qui est ex creatura quae est secundùm nos suum Sanguinem confessus est Noui Testamenti nouam docuit Oblationem quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens in vniuerso mundo offert Deo De quo in duodecim Prophetis Malachias sic presignificauit Malac. 1. Non est mihi voluntas in vobis dicit DOMINVS exercituum munus non suscipiam de manu vestra He tooke that which by creation is breade and gaue thankes sayinge This is my Body And likewise the Cuppe ful of that Creature whiche is here with vs and confessed it to be his Bloude and thus taught the newe Oblation of the Nwe Testamente whiche the Churche receiuinge of the Apostles dooth offer to God through the whole worlde whereof Malachie one of the twelue Prophetes did prophecie thus I haue no likinge in you saith our Lord almightie neither wil I take Sacrifice of your handes bicause from the risinge of the Sunne to the going downe of the same my name is glorified amonge the Nations and Incense is offered to my name in euery place and pure Sacrifice for that my name is greate amonge Nations What can be vnderstanded by this newe Oblation of the Newe Testamente other then the Oblation of that which he saide to be his Body and confessed to be his Bloude And if he had offered Breade and Wine onely or the Figure of his Body and Bloude in Bread and Wine it had beene no Newe Oblation for suche had beene made by Melchisedech longe before Neither can the Prophecie of Malachie be vnderstanded of the Oblation of Christe vppon the Crosse forasmuche as that was doone but at one time onely and in one certaine place of the worlde in Golgoltha a place without the gates of Hierusalem neare to the walles of that Citie Concerninge the Sacrifice of a contrite and an humbled harte and al other Sacrifices of our deuotion that be mere Spiritual they can not be called the Newe Oblation of the newe Testament forasmuche as they were doone as wel in the Olde Testamente as in the Newe neither be they altogeather pure Wherefore this place of Ireneus and also the Prophecie of Malachie wherewith it is confirmed must needes be referred to the Sacrifice and Oblation of the Bodie and Bloude of Christe daily throughout the whole worlde offered to God in the Masse which is the external Sacrifice of the Churche and proper to the Newe Testament which as Ireneus saith the Churche receiued of the Apostles and the Apostles of Christe Iewel Here at laste M. Harding hath founde out the name of a Sacrifice that vvas not denied him But the Sacrifice that he hath so long sought for and hath so assuredly promised to finde hitherto he hath not founde For Ireneus not once nameth neither the Masse nor this Real Oblation of the Sonne of God vnto his Father Malac. 1. Thus onely he saith God hath vtterly misliked Martialis ad Burdegalenses and refused the olde Carnal Sacrifices of the Iewes and hath taught vs to offer vp the New Sacrifice of the new Testamente according to the Prophecie of Malachie This Sacrifice M. Harding imagineth Tertul. contra Iudaeos can be none other but the offering vp of Christ in the Masse These Conclusions be very suddaine The Olde learned Fathers could neuer vnderstande so much One of M. Hardings ovvne Nevve founde Doctours Tertul. contra Marcio lib. 4. Martialis saith thus Oblatio munda non tantùm in Ara Sanctificata offertur sed etiam vbique The pure Sacrjfice which Malachie meaneth is offered not only vppon the Holy Aultare or Communion Table but also euery where M. Harding saith Hieron in 1. cap. Malach It is offered onely vppon the Aulter Martialis saith It is offered euerywhere and not onely vpon the Aultare Certainely if Malachie meante the Sacrifice that may be offered in al places Hieron in Zacha. li. 2. cap. 8. and vvithout an Aultare as Martialis saith then he meante not the Sacrifice of the Masse Tertullian saith That the Prophete Malachie by that pure Sacrifice meant the Preaching of the Gospel the offering vp of a Contrite Harte Aug. contra aduer Legis Prophet cap. 20. and praier proceeding from a pure Conscience S. Hierom likevvise expoundeth the same of the Sacrifice of Praier and openeth it by these VVordes of the Prophete Dauid Let my Praier be directed as incense before thy sight S. Augustine calleth the same Sacrificium Laudis Gratiarum actionis The Sacrifice of Praise Contra Liter Petilian lib. 2. cap. 86. and of Thankesgeuinge Harding What truth thou arte like to find in M. Iewels Reply to the rest of this Diuision thou maist sone coÌ„ceiue Reader seing he maketh his entrie with so shamelesse and so open a lye Here at the last saith he M. Harding hath found the name of Sacrifice And but here at the laste good Sir As though expresse mention of Sacrifice were not conteined in sundry testimonies before alleged Where be your eyes Nay where is your fidelitie Where is your sinceritie Where is your honestie Where is your shamefastnesse Doth not S. Dionyse in the last Diuision before this name the Sacrifice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hesych li. 1. cap. 4. that is aboue his worthynesse Doth not Hesychius say that Christe at his Supper sacrificed him selfe Doth not Eusebius reporte vnto you the dreadful Sacrifices of Christes Table I leaue the reste Diony Ecclesiast Hierarch c. 1. p. 3. For shame M. Iewel if you haue no way to escape the iust request of your promised Subscription but by lying yet haue some regarde of your estimation that the very simplest of the worlde espye not out your so grosse lying And now touching the chiefe point of this Diuision what thinke you to auoide the strength of S. Irenaeus testimonie for the Sacrifice bicause he nameth not the Masse expressely nor the real Oblation of the Sonne of God vnto his Fatherâ— Why Sir then wil you not staÌ„d to the mater but cowardly flie away and lurke in termes How be it the real Oblation of the Sonne of God vnto his Father if you wil needes put the trust of your cause in termes if you remember be not the wordes of your owne Chalenge If this Argument be good that here you make S. Irenaeus not once nameth the Masse nor real Oblation of the Sonne of God vnto his Father Ergo by him the Sacrifice of the Churche can not be auouched why may not this also be as good Not one of the foure Euangelistes saith expressely that Christe offered or sacrificed him selfe vpon the Crosse nor once nameth that Sacrifice of Christe Ergo Christe was not sacrificed for vs vpon the Crosse If this Argument
be offered not by Bonde menne as before but by Free menne In like sense vvriteth Angelomus Angelomê° Antiâ—â—â—m lib. 3. Mandatum nouum scribo vobis non alterum sed ipsum quod dixi Vetus idem est Nouum I write vnto yowe a Newe Commaundemente None other but that I called the Olde the selfe same is the Newe And it is called a Nevve sacrifice saith Chrysostome Chrysost. contra Iudaeos lib. 3. Bicause it proceedeth from a Newe minde and is offered not by fiere and smoke but by Grace and by the Spirite of God And in this consideration Irenaeus thinketh Dauid said vnto the Children of the Church of Christ Irenae lib. 4. cap. 1. O sing vnto the Lord a New Song M. Hardinge saithe further The wordes of Malachie maie in no wise be taken for the Oblation of Christe vpon the Crosse. For that saith he was donne at one time onely aâ—d in one certaine place in Golgotha without the Gates of Hierusalem and not in euery place Yet M. Hardinge maie easily vnderstande that the Remembrance of that Sacrifice and Thankesgeuinge for the same maie be made at al times and in al places And therefore Eusebius as it is noted before Eusebius de demon lib. 1. c. 10. calleth our Sacrifice Magni illius Sacrificij Memoriam The Remembrance of that greate Sacrifice and the Thankesgeuinge which vvee yelde vnto God for our Saluation Dionysius calleth it Ecclaesia Hierar cap. 3. Augustin in Psal. 75â— Hiero. in Psal. 147. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Figuratiue Sacrifice And S. Augustine saithe Cùm credimus in Christum ex ipsis reliquijs cogitationis Christus nobis quotidiè immolatur VVhen vvee beleeue in Christe euen of the very remanentes of our Cogitation in vvhat place so euer vve be Christe is Sacrificed vnto vs euery day Likevvise S. Hierome saithe Cùm audimus Sermonem Domini Caro Christi Sanguis eius in auribus nostris funditur VVhen vve heare the vvorde of the Lorde the Fleash of Christ and his Bloude is povvred out into our eares And vvhereas M. Hardinge saithe further that the Spiritual Sacrifices of our deuotion cannot altogeather be called pure Esai 64. and therefore can not be the Sacrifices of the Nevve Testamente Psal. 50. it must needes be confessed that al our righteousnes in respecte of many imperfections Euseb. de demon li. 1. cap. 6. Orationis sacrificiuÌ„ quod MuÌ„dum dictum est Tertul ad ScapulaÌ„ maie be coÌ„pared as the prophete Esay saithe vnto a filthy clovvte Yet in respecte of Goddes mercie and in Christe the Prophete Dauid saithe Thou shalt vvashe me and I vvil be vvhiter then the snovve Hovve be it herein I vvil remit M. Hardinge to the iudgement of them vvhoes Authorities he can not vvel denie Eusebius calleth our Praiers Mundum Sacrificium A Pure Sacrifice Tertullian saithe VVee make Sacrifice vnto our God for the safetie of our Emperours Pura prece vvith a Pure Praier S. Hierome speaking of the Sacrifice of Christian Praiers saithe thus A pure Sacrifice is Offered vnto me in euery place not in the Oblations of the Olde Testamente but in the holynes of the Puritie of the Gospel To be short S. Paule saithe Hiero. in Zachar. lib. 2. c. 8. Volo viros precari in omni loco leuantes manus Puras I vvoulde that menne should praie in al places lifting vp Pure handes vnto God Touchinge the Sacrifice of the Lordes Table In sanctitate EuaÌ„gelicae Puritatis Eusebius vvriteth thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He gaue vs a RemeÌ„brance in steede of a Sacrifice to offer vp coÌ„tinually vnto God And this he calleth IncruentuÌ„ et Rationabile sacrificiuÌ„ The vnbloudy 1. Tim. 2. Eusebius de demoÌ„stra lib. 1. and Reasonable Sacrifice This saith Iraeneus is the Sacrifice of the Nevve Testament This Sacrifice the Churche receiued of the Apostles and the same the Apostles receiued of Christe that made al thinges Nevve Harding Concerning the Sacrifices of our deuotion say I in my Answer that be mere spiritual they can not truly be called the newe oblation of the new Testament bicause they were offered vp to God in the olde Testament as now they be in the newe By this M. Iewels shifte is quite auoided who hath nothing to answer to this place of S. Ireneus reporting Christe after that he had consecrated his body and bloude to haue taught vs the newe oblation of the newe Testament but that it is the pure sacrifice that Malachie speaketh of that is to say a contrite harte or preaching of the Gospel or prayer or praise and thankesgeuing or he can not tel what This obiection saith M. Iewel serueth wel to control the olde Fathers namely Tertullian S. Augustine S. Hierome No No M. Iewel it controlleth the olde Fathers nothing at al. It controlleth our yong Fathers such as you and your felowes be who haue most rashly most vnlearnedly most wickedly and Antichristlike abolished out of the Churches of England the most blessed Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe and now being vrged and pressed with this manifest place of this Auncient and learned Father who affirmeth it so clearely ye haue not what to answer Your whole booke of Replie conteineth nothing in effecte but wyly sleightes vaine shiftes shamelesse lyes and fowle corruptions of the Doctours and Councels aboue al measure But of such Merchandize you make your shew no where more then in this Article in which you impugne the Sacrifice And of al your Diuisions of the same Article hitherto in this Diuision the vanitie of your shiftes appeareth most Yet you wil not geue ouer Irenaeus corrupted by M. Ievv but that at least to the ignorant people it may seme you haue ynough to say for your selfe you come againe to S. Irenaeus for helpe and he helpeth your cause nothing at al. Wel what saith he Iren. lib. 4. cap. 34. Oblationes hî c Oblationes illic c. The head of the sentence you haue lopped of This is the whole It is the kinde of Oblations that is reiected for ther were Oblations both there among the Iewes and ther be Oblations also here There were sacrifices among that people there be sacrifices in the Churche But the Kinde or forme is changed onely for somuch as they be not bonde men that offer now but freemen What conclude you of al this M. Iewel What maketh this against the real Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe Mary say you Thus answereth Irenaeus to my Obiection What was my Obiection This is that I said in effect as is before rehersed that the mere spiritual sacrifices of our deuotion can not truely be called the New Oblation of the New Testament bicause they are common to them of both Testamentes How say you is not this true And what haue you to the contrary in this saying of S. Irenaeus The kinde or forme of their and our sacrifices is changed you
iustly we may say 2. Cor. 3. to wit that this Sacrifice compared with that of the Lawe ought alone to be called pure Then folowe the wordes which M. Iewel hath by falsifying and fowle corruption abused to his purpose Non enim per fumum ac nidorem non per sanguinem ac redemptionis precia sed per spiritus gratiam offertur For it is not offered by smoke and gresy sauour Chrysosto oratioee 2 contra Iudaos not by bloude and prices of redemption but by grace of the spirite With these wordes he rendreth the cause why the Sacrifice of the Churche is of Malachie called pure and not why it is called Newe ChrysostoÌ„ misreported by M. Ievvel as M. Iewel hath peruerted the sentence Compare good Reader this Repliers wordes with S. Chrysostomes wordes and thou shalt espye what a corrupter and falsifier he is of the Doctours Wherefore seing he can finde no helpe at S. Chrysostomes handes whom here he hath much iniured and misreported nor at the handes of any other Doctor nor can shewe vs what Sacrifice that is which S. Ireneus calleth the newe Sacrifice or newe Oblation of the newe Testament that Christ taught when he said of the bread and Cuppe this is my body this is my bloude but the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe with right he may be required to subscribe and yeelde Which wil be best for him to doo least the time come when not yeelding he shal be taken prysoner and for his heresie and impenitent harte be caste into the owtward darkenes Matt. 22. where shal be weeping and gnasshing of teeth Bicause M. Iewel harpeth so much vpon the prophecie of Malachie and putteth the confidence of his cause therein and hath taken his aduantage of S. Chrysostome by falsifying his wordes let vs see how litle cause he had so to doo and how muche S. Chrysostome being truly alleged proueth in that very place which M. Iewel bringeth treating of Malachie the Catholique assertion Whereas Moyses forbad sacrifice to be made in any other place Deut. 16. but in that place whiche our Lorde had chosen and Malachie saith that the pure Sacrifice is to be offered vp in euery place from the East to the West that these two should not seme to be repugnant S. Chrysostome saith that Moyses spake of one Sacrifice and Malachie prophecied of an other To prooue this he asketh this question Vnde hoc declaratur Whereby is this declared There for declaration and proufe hereof among other thinges he bringeth the argument of the place For saith he Malachie foretolde that this worship should be celebrated not in one Citie as the Iewish sacrifice was but from the rysing of the Sunne to the going downe Then folowe these woordes CoÌ„clusioÌ„s gathered out of S Chrysost. against M. Ievv Praeterea ex Sacrificij modo siquidem puram illam appellans declarauit de qua loqueretur Furthermore this is declared by the manner of the Sacrifice for in that he calleth that oblation or worship pure he hath declared of what oblation or worship he spake This much S. Chrysostome there Hereof and of that S. Chrysostome saith in that place these Conclusions may be gathered against M. Iewel The First Concusion Malachie in S. Chrysostomes iudgement speaketh of suche a Sacrifice as for commendation whereof he might seme repugnant to Moyses But in respecte of those which are mere spiritual Sacrifices of which onely M. Iewel wil Malachie to be expounded as of a contrite harte of prayer of praise and thankesgeuing Malachie can not seme repugnant to Moyses bicause Moyses neuer forbad them Ergo the Sacrifice that Malachie speaketh of is not to be vnderstanded of mere spiritual sacrifices The .2 Conclusion Malachies prophecie is of such a Sacrifice after the mynde of S. Chrysostome as the celebration whereof should abandon and quite put away the Priesthoode and Sacrifices of the Iewes But the mere spiritual Sacrifices of our deuotion whereto only M. Iewel draweth the prophecie of Malachie haue not that power and effecte For they continued with their Sacrifices as they do with ours Ergo Malachie is not to be vnderstanded of the mere spiritual Sacrifices The .3 Conclusion S. Chrysostome speaking of â—â—e Sacrifice mentioned by Malachie vseth these wordes Praedixit hanc culturam celebrandam he fortolde that this worship should be celebrated not in one citie c. But of any of the mere spiritual sacrifices of our deuotion no learned Father euer said that it is a worship to be celebrated nor are these termes coÌ„uenient for them or for any of them for they are not properly to speake a worship by vs to be celebrated but thereby and therewith we doo celebrate and worship God Ergo Malachie by S. Chrysostomes doctrine speaketh not specially of the mere spiritual sacrifices of mannes harte but of an other Sacrifice outwardly celebrated The .4 Conclusion The Sacrifice that Malachie prophecied of S. Chrysostom saith it is such as is declared what it is by the manner of it But a thing can not be declared what it is by the manner onlesse the manner be external and sensible so as it may be perceiued by sense and the mere spiritual sacrifices of mans inward deuotion be not such Ergo Malachie meant not of them but of an other Sacrifice The .5 Conclusion Malachie by the exposition of S. Chrysostome speaketh of that Sacrifice which properly is Nostrum that is to say ours belonging to vs that be of the newe Testament But the Sacrifice of a contrite harte of Praiers Praise and thankesgeuing be theirs of the olde Testament as wel as ours Ergo of that kinde of Sacrifice he spake not That I make an ende of Conclusions the sixth and last Conclusion may be this By interpretation of S. Chrysostome the Sacrifice that Malachie prophecied of is pure in the most excellent degree of purenesse But the spiritual Sacrifices proceeding from the harte of man be not pure in the highest degree of purenesse Ergo it is an other kinde of Sacrifice which Malachie foretolde So then it is M. Ievvel reasonably required to yeelde if M. Iewel can not declare and clearely prooue vnto vs that Malachie prophecying of a mere spiritual Sacrifice of mans deuotion might reasonably seme to S. Chrysostom to be repugnant to Moyses that such a sacrifice should abolish the Iewes sacrifices that it is called a worship to be celebrated by vs that it is declared what it is by the external manner of it that in proper and right speache it ought to be called our Sacrifice or the Sacrifice of the newe Testament and to conclude that it is most singularly and most excellently pure if I say he can not make good these pointesâ— as to euery man of meane iudgement and learning most certaine it is he can not iudge discrete Reader how good reason we haue to require him to yeelde and to deceiue the worlde no more by alleging the authoritie of
by a figuratiue speache onely as it is said the rocke was Christe For though the Fathers vse sometimes figuratine speaches yet thereof it foloweth not that S. Cyprian in this place of his Epistle to Cecilius spake figuratiuely in saying that Christe is the Sacrifice That he spake truly and meant according to the proprietie of the speach it is cleare by his owne wordes in the same Epistle For els hauing mencioned the Sacrifice of Melchisedech which consisted of bread and wine he would neuer haue said these wordes Quam rem perficiens adimplens Dominus panem calicem mixtum vino obtulit Cypria ad Cecil lib. 2. epâ—â—stola 3. qui est plenitudo veritatem praefiguratae Imaginis adimpleuit Our Lorde offered bread and cuppe mixte with wine perfiting and fulfilling the thing that Melchisedech did Christe his suppâ—â— fulfilled the figuâ—â— of Melchisedeâ—â— and he that is the fulnes fulfilled the truth of the forefigured Image Now if Christe at his Supper for thereof S. Cyprian speaketh offered not a true Sacrifice of his body and bloude in deede and therefore a true and real Sacrifice vnder the formes of bread and wine but onely a signe and figure or an Image representing his body and bloude How then was he the fulnesse How did he fulfil the truth of the forefigured Image For if al were but a signe and token Fulnes 〈◊〉 perfourmance memorie or representation that he offered then was not he the fulnesse neither fulfilled the truth For signes if they be onely signes be empty and void of the truth neither is fulnesse but where the very thinges be present And by such interpretation S. Cyprian should make the Sacrifice of Christe at his Supper no better then that of Melchisedech was and which is absurde the truth of a forefigured image should be but a figure and fulnesse should be voide of the thing fulfilled How be it to proue the Sacrifice by witnesse of S. Cyprian I stayed not my selfe vpon these wordes In Sacrificio quod Christus est M. Ievvel aÌ„svvereth as he thinketh good to a word or tvvo aÌ„d leaueth the chiefe substance vnaÌ„svvered specially but vpon the large processe of that whole Epistle Whereof I tooke what seemed to make good proufe of that I entended And I pray you Sir why answer you not to the other manifest wordes What Sacrifice is that which as S. Cyprian saith Christe first of al offered vp vnto his Father and coÌ„maunded the same to be offered in his remembrance What Sacrifice is that in doing whereof the Priest doth the office of Christe truly What Sacrifice is that in offring vp whereof the Priest doth by imitation the same thing that Christe did What is that true and perfite Sacrifice that he offreth vp to God if he beginne to offer right so as he seeth Christe him selfe to haue offered If you could haue named vs any other besides the Satrifice of the body and bloud of Christe is it to be thought you would haue conceeled it to so great hinderance of your cause That whereby your Chalenge is fully answered and the Catholique Doctrine plainely auouched you ouerhippe and dissemble and vppon a peece of a sentence by your selfe falsified and by your wrong translation wreathed from S. Cyprians meaning you bestowe many woordes and muche of your common stuffe which consisteth of your Phrases pyked out of your Notebookes and here without trueth or iudgement shuffled together Iewel And that the vveaknes of M. Hardinges gheasses may the better appeare vnderstande thou good Christian Reader that the Holy Catholique Fathers haue vsed to say that Christe is Sacrificed not only in the Holy Supper but also in the Sacrament of Baptisme S. Augustine saithe August expositioÌ„ inchoatâ— ad Rom. Holocaustum Dominicae Passionis eo tempore pro se quisque offert qno eiusdem Passionis Fide dedicatur The Sacrifice of our Lordes Passion euery man then offereth for him selfe when he is Confirmed in the Faithe of his Passion And againe Holocaustum Domini tunc pro vnoquoque offertur quodammodo In eod cùm eius nomine Baptizando signatur Then is the Sacrifice of our Lorde In a Manner offered for eche man In eod when in Baptisme he is marked with the name of Christe And againe Non relinquitur Sacrificium pro peccatis Chrysost in epist. a Hebraeos hom 16 Ambros. de poeniâ— li. 2. ca. 2 id est non potest denuo Baptizari There is leafte no Sacrifice for Sinne that is to say He can be no more Baptized And in this consideration Chrysostome saithe Baptisma Christi Sanguis Christi est Christes Baptisme is Chtistes Bloude And likevvise S. Ambrose In Baptismo Crucifigimus in nobis Filium Dei In Baptisme wee Crucifie in our selues the Sonne of God Harding Concerning the Sacrifice made in Baptisme August iâ— expositioÌ„e inchoatae in epistol ad Rom. whereof you tel vs out of the Auncient Fathers That euery one at that time for his synnes offereth vp the Burnt sacrifice of our Lordes Passion when in the faith of the same Passion he is dedicated as S. Augustine saith and that in Baptisme we crucifie in vs the Sonne of God as S. Ambrose saith Ambros. de poenit li. 2. ca. 2. by their owne woordes they teache vs to vnderstande this spiritually and not as the woordes sounde in proper speache For S. Augustine in that place qualifieth the manner of his vtterance and calleth his reader backe from absurde imagination by this woorde quodammodo Quodammodo asmuch to say in a manner And S. Ambrose likewise saith not simply that in Baptisme we crucifie Christe but that we crucifie him in vs. Crucifigimus in nobis Filium Dei We crucifie in vs the Sonne of God saith he Whereby they meane that in Baptisme we put on Christe that to sinne we die with Christe and are buried with him into death and are made conformable to the similitude of his death and that the effecte vertue and benefite of his Passion by Baptisme is applyed vnto vs. And bicause as Moyses sprinckled with bloude the booke of the Olde Testament Leuit. 4. the Tabernacle Hebr. 9. and the Vessels of Ministerie right so Christe with his owne Bloude cleanseth our myndes which be the bookes of the Newe Testament by interpretation of S. Chrysostome Chrysosto in epist. ad Hebraeos Homi. 16. and with the same bloude sprinckleth vs who are his Tabernacle for him to dwel in and to walke in as he saith him selfe and his Vessels to serue him in holy Ministeries which great benefite is chiefly deriued vnto vs in Baptisme In consideration hereof forasmuch as vpon the Crosse onely his pretious bloud ranne out of his body and then was he in him selfe sacrificed these Fathers feared not to say * Ambros. the one that in Baptisme we crucifie in vs the Sonne of God * August the other that when we are baptized we offer
vp the Burnt sacrifice of his Passion To conclude then if certaine Fathers in a figuratiue speache and with a qualification say that when one is baptized he offereth vp the Sacrifice of Christes Passion or that in him selfe he crucifieth Christe which is true in a right sense M. Iewel may not thereof conclude that Christe at the celebration of the Supper is not truly offered For if he reason thus Christe is after a manner offered of vs when we are baptized Ergo he is not offered of the Priest in the Sacrament of the Aulter M. Ievv setteth one tru◠against a◠other Forasmuch as in Baptisme he is onely by grace and in the blessed Sacrament really and in substance Euery man of meane vnderstanding may soone espy the fondnesse of the Argument But not being hable directly to impugne this assured truth he maketh such a proffer towardes it as he can by setting one truth against an other truth The .11 Diuision The Ansvver OVR aduersaries crake much of the sealing vp of their newe Doctrine with the Bloud of such and such who be written in the booke of lyes not in the booke of life whome they wil needes to be called Martyrs Verily if those Mounkes and Friers Apostates and renegates wedded to wiues or rather to vse their owne terme yoked to Sisters be true Martyrs then must our Newe Gospellers pul these Holy Fathers and many Thousandes moe out of Heauen For certainly the Faith in Defence of whiche either sorte died is vtterly contrary The worst that I wishe to them is that God geue them eies to see and eares to heare and that he shutte not vp their hartes so as they see not the light here Math. 25 vntil they be throwen away into the outwarde darkenes where shal be weeping and grintinge of teeth Iewel This talke vvas vtterly out of season sauing that it liked vvel M. Harding to sporte him selfe vvith the Scriptures of God and a litle to scoffe at the vvordes of S. Paule 1. Cor. 9. VVhich thing becomming him so vvel may be the better borne vvithal Philip. 4. vvhen it shal please him likevvise to scoffe at others S. Paule calleth vviues Heb. 13. sometimes Sisters sometimes Yokefellows and thinketh Matrimonie to be Honorable in al Personnes 1. Timo. 4. and the forbidding of the same to be the Doctrine of Diuels Neither doth it any vvay appeare that euer honest godly Matrimonie either displeased God or vvas thought vncomely for a Martyr and vvitnesse of Gods Truth Harding Here M. Iewel you leaue my Conclusion and being grieued with certaine termes you shew your selfe much offended and fare as if your soare were touched in the quicke But sir what neede you of al the Gospellers to take this mater so hote You are not yet married pardye Marye if perhaps your fansie lye to a woman and you determine to take her to your wife wel mote you doo God send you good lucke I intende not to forbyd your Banes M Ievvel here digresseth from the purpose into a cōmō place to defend Priestes Mariages But what meant you in this place to vnlade your common stuffe that you haue gathered together in defence of Priestes marriage What iust occasion had you to treate thereof What feared you that the bulke of your booke would not arise huge ynough vnlesse you brought vnto it such heapes of vnnecessary common places Or thought you rather that your companions marriages should be taken as they be in deede for detestable horedome and abominable Inceste except they were by you defended Or brought you in al this vnceasonable talke only to please your felowes the Apostates and their strompets Verily the terme yoked to Sisters which is a badge of your owne liuerie vsed by me as it were by the way speaking of an other mater ministred not sufficient occasion to enter into so large a discourse in defence of your filthy yokinges Why did you not rather reprooue me for calling the Registre of your stincking Martyrs the booke of lyes Why did you not proue your Lecherours married Monkes and Friers the chiefe Apostles of your Synagogue not to be Apostates Why answered you not the point that if they be true Martyrs then must you pul those holy Fathers whom I alleged for the Sacrifice out of heauen For both can not be placed there the faith in defence whereof either sorte dyed being quite contrary This parte of my talke was not al together out of ceason And wherein I pray you do I sporte with the Scriptures and scoffe at the woordes of S. Paule for therewith you burthen me What bicause hauing said of your Monkes and Friers that they were wedded to wiues I corrected my terme saying rather to vse your owne māner of speach that they were yoked to sisters is this sporting with the Scriptures of God Is this scoffing at S. Paules wordes You should first haue proued your Apostates strompettes to be their lawful wiues and then might you better haue framed an obiection against me Now that practise being cōtrary to the Scripture which commaundeth vowes to be kepte and performed Psal. 75. what Scripture haue ye for such yoking What reliefe haue ye for it of S. Paule Though in dede faithful and godly wiues be together with vs that beleeue the children of God and in the primitiue Churche the name of Brother and Sister was cōmon among the beleuers yet how prooue you that S. Paule calleth wyues sometimes Sisters sometimes yoke-fellowes Is it not shame for you who professe so great skil in the Latine tongue and haue such a helper at hand for the Greeke tongue to grounde your selfe vpon the corrupte translation of your English Bible Were it true that S. Paule called wyues sometimes Sisters sometimes Yokefelowes for which ye haue nothing to allege but the English Bibles translation yet how are ye hable to prooue the yoking that is betwene your blessed Brothers and Sisters that is to say betwen your holy Prelates Priests Monkes Friers and Nonnes who haue bounde them selues by solemne vowe to the contrary to be true wedloke VVhat meant S. Paule by A sister vvoman 1. Cor. 9. By you quotation you appoint your Reader to the .9 Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians What is there that maketh for you S. Paule saith Haue not we power to leade about a sister woman with vs as the other Apostles and the brethren of our Lorde and Cephas What meaneth he by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 August li. de opere Monachorū cap. 4. Ambro. in Commen Theophyl in Cōmen Hiero. cōtra Iouin lib. 1. sororem mulierem a Sister woman but a faithful or a Christian woman For as the men that beleued were called Brothers so the wemen were called Sisters As for your Translatour who turneth it a Sister to Wife whether for the Greeke he haue deliuered true English or no let other iudge certainly he hath deliuered vs a false sense For as S.
Nettes neither forsake the great House that is to say the Churche for their sakes who be Vessels made to dishonour Now in case ye also by like rule wil say that they at whose handes the Catholique Churche suffereth suche thinges be not of your side then trie your owne mynde amend your errour imbrace vnitie of sprite in the band of peace Iewel Certainely the holy Fathers and Martyrs of God vvil say unto you VVee knovve not your Priuate Masses vvee knovve not your Halfe Communion vvee knovv not your Strange Vnknovven Praiers vvee knovve not your Adoration of Gorruptible Creatures vve knovve not this Sacrificing of the Sonne of God vvee knovve not your Nevve Religion vvee knovve not you God open the eyes of your Hartes that ye may see the miserable state ye stande in and recouer the place that ye haue loste and finde your Names vvritten in the Booke of Life Harding In the ende of this Diuision by a Rhetorical fiction you make the holy Fathers The holy lerned Fathers tale to M. Ievv and hi◠Cōpanion◠and Martyrs of God to say vnto vs as your blasphmous harte doth phontasie But as we feare not that any suche thing by them shal be tolde vs so were they now lyuing doubtelesse thus would they saye vnto you and them of your sectes as neuerthelesse in their bookes and learned workes they also doo now in effecte say vnto you daily We knowe not your strange state that is without external Sacrifice and Priesthod and consequently without a Lawe We knowe not your eating of common bread and drinking of common wine at your newe founde Suppers in steede of receiuing the true body and bloude of Christe We knowe not your Iustification by your special Faith onely We knowe not your perilous doctrine of Predestination We knowe not your new manner of baptizing without holy oile and other auncient rites and Ceremonies We knowe not your chaungeable new deuised Cōmunions We knouwe not your monstrous Supremacie of Princes in Ecclesiastical maters that is to say the keyes of the kingdom of heauen the supreme Cōmission to feede Christes lambes and shepe and the whole auctoritie that Christe gaue to S. Peter and his Successours so to be vnited by a forced Parlament to the Crowne of a laye Prince that it be made a mater of inheritaunce so that the Prince for the time being be head of the Churche and supreme gouernour in al thinges and causes as wel spiritual as temporal be it man or woman or childe sucking at the Nourses breste We condemne your negatiue Diuinitie which denieth mannes freewil merites of good workes done in grace Prayers made to our blessed lady the Apostles Martyrs and other Saintes to be intercessours for vs to God Prayers for the dead We deteste your wicked and incestuous mariages of Priestes Monkes Friers and Nonnes and of al such as haue made solemne vowe to liue without the vse of wedlocke We deteste your impietie in that ye refuse to adore and doo godly honour to the body and bloude of your Creator in the Sacrament of the Aulter We detest your pulling downe of Aulters your robbing of Churches your schismes and heresies and rebellion against your lawful Princes we detest your prophane contempte of al good religion and godlynes we detest your wickednes we detest you As for you M. Iewel I pray God to touche your harte so as you may be induced rather with some shame of the worlde to recant your heresies and repent to saue your soule then with desperat continuing in that you haue taken vppon you by your foolish and arrogant Chalenge to keepe the vaine estimation of deceiued men and finally to lose your foule for euer The .12 Diuision The Ansvver LEauing no smal number of places that might be recited out of diuerse other Doctours I wil bring two of two woorthy Bishops one of Chrysostom the other of S. Ambrose confirming this Trueth S. Chrysostomes woordes be these Chrysosto in epist. ad Heb. homi 17. Pontifex noster ille est qui hostiam mundantem nos obtulit ipsam offerimus nunc quae tunc oblata quidem consumi non potest Hoc autem quod nos facimus in commemorationem fit eius quod factum est Hoc enim facite inquit in mei commemorationem He is our Bishop that hath offered vp the Hoste whiche cleanseth vs. The same doo we offer also nowe whiche though it were then offered yet can not be consumed But this that we doo is done in Remembraunce of that whiche is done For doo ye this saith he in my Remembraunce S. Ambrose saith thus Ambros. In Psal. 38. Vidimus Principem Sacerdotum ad nos venientem vidimus audiuimus offerentem pro nobis sanguinem suum sequamur vt possumus sacerdotes vt offeramus pro populo sacrificium etsi infirmi merito tamen honorabiles Sacrificio Quia etsi Christus non videtur offerre tamen ipse offertur in terris quando Christi Corpus offertur We haue seene the Prince of Priestes come to vs we haue seene and hearde him offer for vs his Bloude Let vs that be Priestes folow him as we may that we may offer Sacrifice for the people being though weake in merite yet honourable for the Sacrifice Because al be it Christe be not seene to offer yet he is offered in earth when the Body of Christe is offered Of these our Lordes woordes which is geuen for you and which is shedde for you and for many here S. Ambrose exhorteth the Priestes to offer the Body and Bloud of Christe for the people and willeth them to be more regarded then cōmonly they be now a daies for this Sacrifice sake though otherwise they be of lesse desert Iewel This allegation argueth no greate abundance of stoare For Chrysostome in these vvoordes bothe openeth him selfe and shevveth in vvhat sense other Ancient Fathers vsed this vvorde Sacrifice and also vtterly ouerthrovveth M. Hardinges vvhole purpose touching the same For as he saithe wee offer vp the same Sacrifice that Christe offered so in most plaine vvise and by sundrie vvordes he remooueth al doubte and declareth in vvhat sorte and meaning vvee offer it He saithe not as M. Hardinge saithe wee offer vp the Sōne of God vnto his Father and that verily and in deede but contrary vvise thus he saithe Chrysost. in Epist. ad Hebr. Hom. 17. Offerimus quidem sed ad Recordationem facientes Mortis eius Hoc Sacrificium Exemplarillius est Hoc quod nos facimus in commemorationem fit eius quod factum est Id ipsum semper offerimus Magis autem Recordationem Sacrificij operamur VVe offer in deede but in remembrance of his Death This Sacrifice is an Examlpe of that Sacrifice This that we doo is donne in remembrannce of that that was done VVee offer vp the same that Christe offered Or rather wee worcke the Remembrance of that Sacrifice Thus vvee offer vp Christe That is to say an
other man I am sure S. Chrysostome maketh directly for the real Sacrifice can perceiue In these wordes I say whiche be here alleged in my Answer to the Chalenge Nay how can they not seme most plainely and directly to auouche our doctrine touching the Sacrifice Doth he not set Christe and Priestes that be now together in the office of offering He hath offered we offer also now saith he Doth he not auouche the hoste that Christ offered and the hoste that Priestes now offer for thereof he speaketh to be one and the selfe same hoste And that no man should doubte what hoste he meant saith he not it is that which cleanseth our sinnes that which then being offered to witte vpon the Crosse with shedding of bloude with death to cleanse synnes and to redeme the worlde can not be consumed What hoste can this be but the body of Christ but Christe him selfe For nothing could cleanse our synnes but he who onely is the Lambe of God Ioan. 1. that taketh a way the synnes of the worlde Thus then the substance of the hoste that Christe our Bishop offered and of that we offer is one and the selfe same So it is clearely proued by these wordes of S. Chrysostome that it is not onely a memorie an example a similitude a figure or resemblance of Christes body that we offer in our daily Sacrifice but the selfe same hoste in substance that Christe offered to cleanse vs which is the substance of his owne body and bloud for it was not a figure that he offered for vs but his true and real bodye But as the substance of his and our Sacrifice is one so the ende and effecte by S. Chrysostome in this place The ende of Christes Sacrifice and of ours is diuers He offered him selfe to death to cleanse the synnes of the worlde to redeme mankinde We offer him in remembrance of that his death to be partakers of his redemption But hereof I speake more particularly in my preface before this Roioindre S. Chrysostome say you remoueth al doubte and declareth in what sorte and meaning we offer the Sacrifice How so good sir tel it vs I pray you for I accompt it wel worth the learning Mary say you he saith not as M. Harding saith we offer vp the Sonne of God vnto his Father and that verely and in deede First it is a strange thing to me that a man should remoue al doubtes and declare the certaintie of thinges by not saying as you replye Nexte what if he say not in expresse termes that we offer vp the Sonne of God vnto his Father Wil you now go from the matter and flie for refuge to your owne precise termes Consider I praye you how this vaine wrangling becommeth the Person of the Great Minister of Sarisburie M. Iewels obiection is but a vaine vvrangling Whereas S. Chrysostome saith that we offer vp the selfe same Hoste that Christe our Bisshop hath offered which cleanseth vs from our synnes is it not as muche as if he had said we offer vp the Sonne of God What hoste is that which cleanseth vs Is it not Christe onely Who is Christe Is he not the Sonne of God And to whom is Sacrifice done but to God Al this set together how much varieth he from S. Chrysostome who saith that we offer vp the Sonne of God vnto his Father If you sticke to that other worde verely and in deede remember you haue by your translation made S. Chrysostome in this very place so to speake your selfe We offer in deede be the wordes Now that you haue tolde vs what S. Chrysostome saith not which helpeth your cause nothing at al you shewe vs what he saith And here you bring in certaine peeces and maimed sayinges out of him being a fraid to allege the whole sentences as they lye in that learned Doctor least you should marre altogether as you should haue done if you had suffered him to tel his owne tale Bicause the place is somewhat long I had rather referre the Reader vnto the .17 Homilie vpon the Epistle to the Hebrewes where it is written then here to reherse the whole But let vs see what you pike out of that Homilie for your purpose M. Iuels promise vpon S. Chrysost. hovv it is ê‘formed and how much it relieueth your cause Remember what you haue promised to shewe out of S. Chrysostome that he remoueth al doubte and declareth in what sorte and meaning we offer the Sacrifice You allege out of the said Homilie foure sentences or rather foure peeces of sentences The first is this Offerimus quidem c. We offer in deede Chrysost. Hom. 17. in epist. ad Heb. but in remembrance of his Death These wordes by your interpretation declare in what sorte we offer the Sacrifice Wel be it so I wil not muche contende with you so that you meane by this sorte the excluding of the bloudy manner of oblatioÌ„ But here I must put the reader in mynde what foloweth immediatly in that auncient Father Whiche you haue vntruly conceeled Vna est hostia non multae The hoste that we offer daily for there he speaketh of the dayly Oblation is one it is not many If it be bread made by the handes of a man that we offer and wine pressed out of the grape for the Real Oblation of the body and bloud of Christe ye denie albe it the same properly can not be called an Hoste how can you say it is one Hoste that we offer daily and not many Hostes seing that euery day we take newe bread and newe wine for our Sacrifice In our Sacrifice vve haue the sampler and the true thing it selfe vvhich Christe offered Your second peece of a sentence is this Hoc Sacrificium exemplar illius est This Sacrifice is an example of that Sacrifice But what foloweth Id ipsum semper offerimus We offer alwaies the selfe same thing And what thing is that There he sheweth It is the Hoste that cleanseth vs which Christe our Bisshop hath offered So then we see it called both the real thing it selfe that was offered and the sampler of the thing In that he calleth it a sampler thereby he putteth vs in minde the order and manner of offering it now to be different from the manner of the oblation of the Crosse. For there it was bloudy here vnbloudy there with suffering the tourments of death here with commemoration representation and application of his death there the thing offered visible in proper forme here inuisible vnder the forme of bread and wine Your thirde peece of a sentence taken out of S. Chrysostome is this This that we doo is done in remembrance of that that was done Which wordes declare the thing that we doo to be donne in remembrance of the Death of Christe And they folow immediatly vpon that he said of the cleansing Hoste whiche our Bishop Christe offered and we also offer the same So that
ioyly Sacrifice For Melchisedek being a King as he was like it is that he prouided biefe veale and mutton pigge goose and capon baakte boiled and roste For such victuals are mete for the prouision of an Armie And did Melchisedek sacrifice al these thinges This is more then euer I read or heard of before or you either I am bold to say For your credites sake you should haue alleged but one Doctor of good same olde or new that so writeth Bicause ye haue none to allege we take it for a forgerie of your owne shoppe set out to thintent bread and wine only named should not represent to the memorie of men the body and bloud of Christe whereof the bread and wine were figures Verely Eusebius writeth lib. 5. De Demonstrat that he neuer offered bodyly Sacrifices that is to say thinges that had liuing bodies but only bread and wine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The like is reported in S. Hierome Epist. ad Euagrium As for Iosephus that learned Iewe Iosephus we admit him for an eloquent writer of a storie not for an assured teacher of Diuinitie And yet his authoritie being admitted Melchisedeks feasting of Abrahams people inferreth no Argument against his Sacrifice in bread and wine For why might he not do the duetie of a Priest first satisfying the mysterie and the duetie of a liberal Prince afterward in refresshing that weary and hungry cōpanie And therefore touching the worde Protulit Protulit whereby you would proue that Melchisedek brought forth bread and wine and your other prouision of victuals I can not tel what for Abrahams menne you take great paines in vaine As we are wel hable to proue obtulit I meane that Melchisek offered to with bread and wine so we denie not protulit that is to say that he brought those thinges forth But good sir I pray you in what schoole learned you to make this Argumēt Melchisedek brought forth bread and wine to refresh Abrahā and his men ergo he offered not bread and wine to God in sacrifice Whereas the scripture after mētion made of bred and wine Genes 14. forthwith addeth erat enī Sacerdos Dei altissimi for he was the Priest of God the highest onlesse that cause be vnaptly applied we must vnderstand that he was wont to offer vp those thinges to God which then he brought forth vnto Abraham geuing the same to him for meate to God for Sacrifice That Melchisedeck offered and made his sacrifice in bread and wine Bicause you seme coouertly to denie that Melchisedeck offered bread and wine in Sacrifice which some of your syde let not openly to denie which you also would doo but that by your Chalenge you haue bounde your selfe to admitte the olde Doctours for that the worde of the texte is protulit and not obtulit I thinke it good to put you in mynde of learned Fathers two or three by whom it is auouched that he offered and that he made his Sacrifice in bread and wine Arnobius In Psal. 109. Arnobius who lyued aboue thirtien hundred yeres past saith Panem vinum solus obtulit in sacerdotibus Melchisedech alone among Priestes offered bread and wine S. Cyprian saith Cyprian lib. 2. Epist. 3. Melchisedeck was the Priest of the highest God and panem vinum obtulit offered bread and wine S. Hierome saith Hieron in Psal. 109. that he offered bread and wine Melchisedech obtulit panem vinnm be his wordes The same he hath in his epistle written for Paula to Marcella S. Ambrose saith it with the same wordes expressely in two places De Sacramentis lib. 4. cap. 3. lib. 5. cap. 1. And al these vse the worde obtulit which you can not away with in the sense of sacrificing If you demaunde for other witnesses of Melchisedecks Sacrifice in bread and wine it may please you to reade Eusebius lib. 5. De Demonstratione Euangelica S. Augustine in Psal. 33. Concione 1. and in many other places S. Chrysostome in the Homilie de Proditione Iudae Damascen lib 4. cap. 14. Cassiodorus in Psal. 109. To be short few Doctors can be named in whom this Sacrifice is not most plainly auouched So that you would neuer haue douted of it had you ben learned much lesse denied it had you not ben impudent As for that you allege out of Tertullian and S. Ambros who say that Melchisedek obtulit Abrahamo panem vinum offered to Abraham bread and wine Obtulit for dedit it relieueth your cause neuer a whit For there the worde obtulit signifieth as much as exhibuit or dedit gaue or presented and thereof your selfe being so good a Grammarian as you are could not be ignorant So much the more you shewe your selfe a false handler of this high Mysterie in twise putting in your false parenthesis not to God but as though Melchisedek had not offered to God any Sacrifice at al. Iewel S. Paule compareth Christe vvith Melchisedek Ambros. de Sacrament li. 4. cap. 3. In that like vnto Melchisedeck he was the kinge of Iustice In that he was the Prince of peace◠as Melchisedek was And in that he had neither Father nor Mother For so is it likewise writtē of Melchisedeck But of the Sacrifice of Breade Hebrae 7. and VVine he speaketh nothing Yet notvvithstandinge the Auncient holy Faethers oftentimes resemble the same presente of Melchisedek vnto the Sacrifice that Christe made vpon the Crosse. And in that respecte S. Cyprian saithe Christe offered the same thinge that Melchisedek offered That is to say as M. Hardinge him selfe must needes expounde it The same thinge in perfourmance of Trueth vpon the Crosse that Melchisedeck had before offered in a Figure So saith S. Augustine Illis Petra Christus Vnto them the Rocke was Christe August in Ioan. tractat 26. And yet not Really and in deede but onely by vvay of Signification bicause it Signified and Represented Christe Harding S. Paule speaketh not of it ergo it is not a cōmon Argument vvith the Ministers and here vsed by M. Iewel I graunt that whereas S Paule extolleth the Priesthod of Christ which is after the order of Melchisedek aboue the Leuitical Priesthod speaking of certaine thinges wherin Christe and Melchisedek were like speaketh nothing of the Sacrifice of bread and wine What of that Wil ye thereof conclude that Melchisedek did not offer vnto God bread and wine What a fond and Ministerlike kinde of Argument is this S. Paule spake it not Ergo it is not S. Paule saith not in al that Epistle that Christe was conceiued of the holy Ghoste borne of the virgin Marie shal it be lawful for vs therefore to denie it We may wel thinke that therein S. Paule vsed the counsel Ioan. 16. that Christ once vsed when he said I haue many thinges to tel you that ye can not beare away now S. Paule sheweth so much him selfe Epistola ad Euagrium In principio To. 3. operum
of thinges to come August in Psal. 80. The redde Sea is consecrate in the bloude of our Lorde faith S. Augustin Againe Baptisme saith he is redde being consecrate in the bloude of Christe August in Ioan. Tract 11. The meaning hereof is As our sinnes be taken away and cleansed in baptisme taking vertue and effect of the bloud of Christ through faith So to the Iewes was forefigured the bloude of Christe in the redde Sea Baptisme is redde with the bloude of Christe and is consecrate by the same Thus it is said bicause it is ordeined by Christe to be a meane whereby the effecte and merite of his bloud is through â—aith imparted into vs. This much weighed and considered it may soone to any man appeare how litle reliefe M. Iewel shal finde in these pharses The .14 Diuision The Ansvver OF al other Oecumenius speaketh most plainely to this purpose vpon this place of S. Paule alleged out of the Psalme Oecumen in Epist. ad Heb. cap. 5. Psal. 119. Tu es Sacerdos in aeternum secundùm Ordinem Melchisedech Thou arte a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedek His wordes be these Significat sermo quod non solùm Christus obtulit incruentam hostiam siquidem suum ipsius corpus obtulit verùm etiam qui ab ipso fungentur Sacerdotio quorum Deus Pontifex esse dignatus est sine sanguinis effusione offerent Nam hoc significat in aeternum Neque enim de ea quae semel à Deo facta est Oblatio Hostia dixisset in aeternum sed respiciens ad praesentes Sacrificos per quos medios Christus sacrificat sacrificatur qui etiam in Mystica Coena modum illis tradidit huiusmodi Sacrificij The meaninge of this place is saithe he that not onely Christe offered an Vnblouddy Sacrifice for he offered his owne Bodie but also that they which after him shal doo the office of a Priest whose Bishop he vouchesaueth to be shal offer without shedding of Bloud For that signifieth the worde For euer For coÌ„cerning that Oblation and Sacrifice which was once made by God he would neuer saye In aeternum for euer But he saide so hauing an eye to those Priestes that be nowe by the mediation of whom Christe sacrificeth and is sacrificed who also in his Mystical Supper taught by tradition the manner of suche a Sacrifice Concerning the Prophecie of Malachie for proufe of this Oblation though the place of Irenaeus aboue recited may stande in steede of many auctorities yet I wil not let to rehearse the sayinges of a Father or two for confirmation of this Article Chrysostome saith very plainely In omni loco Sacrificium offertur nomini meo In Psal. 95. SacrificiuÌ„ purum Vide quà m luculenter quámque dilucidè Mysticam interpretatus est Mensam quae est Incruenta hostia In euery place a Sacrifice shal be offered to my name and that a pure Sacrifice See how plainely and clearely he interpreted the Mystical Table which is the Vnbloudy Sacrifice Iewel Here mighte I iustly take exception against this Doctour as findinge him vvithout the compasse of the firste sixe hundred yeeres Hovv be it He saithe not That the Prieste hath power or Authoritie to Sacrifice the Sonne of God nor seemeth any vvaie to fauer M. Hardinges purpose Therefore vve shal not neede to touche his credite Harding In this Diuision M. Iewel you set forth as it were in a moustre a number of authorities and not one to the purpose Yet fewe thinges excepted you tel vs litle here that you haue not tolde vs before One apte and plaine testimonie would haue holpen your cause more then al this impertinent and confuse number It is not harde for one that is furnished with stoare of Notebookes of common places as you are to fil the paper with heapes of allegations This kinde of writing as to the ignorant it maketh a false shewe of stoare of learning so to the learned bringeth assured euidence of lacke bothe of truth and iudgement You are much beholding to your Phrases and metaphorical speaches For in them at least as in a smooddering smoke you trust to conuey your selfe away that the weakenesse of your parte appeare not openly as it should if you would directly answer to the pointes wherewith the truth of our syde is confirmed By this you shewe your selfe to be mynded not to yeelde and to subscribe according to your promise what so euer and how muche so euer be proued against you Concering Oecumenius in my Answer alleged Oecumenius you might iustly take exception against him you say for that he falleth without the compasse of the first six hundered yeres As though an Author allowed by the best learned of the Churche for the speace of an vnknowen time should be of lesse credite then an other that wrote one hundred yeres before him As though also after the first six hundred yeres the holy Ghoste forsooke the Churche and therefore least it vnfurnished of good and learned teachers Of what age he was I trowe it is not certainely knowen but that he is of great antiquitie it is certaine Neither can ye refuse him for a Papist bicause he was of the Greke Churche which your selfe haue cleared of Papistrie Wel touching his credite forasmuch as vpon a braue shewe of a confidence in your cause you are so good Mayster vnto him as not to take exception against him we take that ye geue Let it then stand for good and allowed as in deede M. Ievvel speaketh directly against his ovvn knovvledge touching Oecumenius there is no cause but so it should Bicause you pretend in worde knowing the contrary in harte that this testimonie of Oecumenius maketh no proufe for the Sacrifice against your Chalenge whether it be so or no let it he briefly examined First saith he not that Christe him selfe offered an vnbloudy Sacrifice By the epipheton Vnbloudy added to Sacrifice is it not manifest that this Sacrifice was distincte and diuers from the Sacrifice that he made vpon the Crosse which was bloudy Nexte least any man might happen to doubte what the substance was which was offered vnbloudily by Christe doth not this Author declare it by his plaine Parenthesis saying for he offered his owne body That Christ offered his ovvne body vnblouddily Is it not cleare then that Christes body was the substance which he offered vnbloudily Note then good Reader that the substance which was offered bloudily vpon the Crosse and vnbloudily at the Supper for that was the time when the vnbloudy Sacrifice was made by this testimonie is al one to wit the body of Christe the body of Christe I say and not onely thankes geuing praises and remembrance of his Death whereunto onely you M. Iewel would draw it Thus it is euident that Christe him selfe offered to his Father not onely a bloudy but also an vnbloudy Sacrifice Let vs see whether by Oecumenius it may appeare
Simplici Sacrificio Christi dedicauit Sacramentum He dedicated the Sacramente of Christe in Breade and VVine which is not a Bloudy or loathsome but a Pure and a Simple Sacrifice This Remembrance and Oblation of praises and Rendring of thankes vnto God for our Redemption in the Bloud of Christe is called of the olde Fathers An Vnbloudy Sacrifice and of S. Augustine The Sacrifice of the Newe Testament Iustinus Martyr saith Esaias non pollicetur Cruentarum Victimarum instaurationem sed veras Spirituales Oblationes laudis Gratiarum actionis Esaias promiseth not the restoaringe of Blouddy Sacrifices but True and Spiritual Oblations of Praises and Thankesgeuing S. Chrysostome saith Non iam Sanguinem aut adipem offerimus c. VVe offer not now the fatte Chrysos in Epist. ad Hebr. Homil 11. or Bloude of Beastes Al these thinges are abolished And in steede thereof there is brought in a Reasonable or Spiritual dewtie But what is this dewtie that we cal Reasonable or Spiritual That it is that is offered by the Soule and Sprite Harding What needeth al this longe processe vppon the woorde Incruentum Vnbloudy Go to the purpose M. Iewel By the place alleged out of S. Chrysostome it is euident that he vnderstandeth Malachies prophecie of the vnbloudy Sacrifice which Christ offered at his Mystical Table in his Last Supper and is now daily offered by Priestes according to his Institution Examin the woordes wel See how plainely and clearely saith he the Prophete hath interpreted the Mystical Table Chrysos in Psal. 55. which is the vnblouddy Sacrifice Yet so plaine and cleare as it is you can not see or rather you wil not see it And by al your witte and cunning you endeuour so to dasel the eyes of others that they may not see it But why doo you turne al your long talke onely to the woorde M. Ievvel turneth al his Reply to the vvorde vnbloudy leauing other mater that he is not wel hable to answer Vnbloudy Why doo you not aswel speake of the Mystical Table Can ye not away to heare thereof Say what you liste of the terme Vnblouddy and allege so many sentences of Doctours as woulde fil a whole booke yet must S. Chrysostome to al men of learning appeare to expounde the Prophecie of Malachie of that whiche is vnbloudily sacrificed at the Mystical Table What Mystical Table can ye name vs now in the Churche but that whereon the Body and Bloude of Christe are sacrificed whereof it is named an Aulter Aulter Table and from whens they are of the faithful receiued for whiche it is named a Table Verily this place presseth you so that you are faine to flee as it were out of the feelde And yet least you should seme to flee away cowardly by long needeles talke vpon the woorde Vnbloudy as it were by holding vp your shilde you make a shewe as though you faught stil. In effecte two thinges you go about to prooue The first is that the Sacrifice of our Prayers and deuotion of mynde is called of the Fathers Vnbloudy The second is that the Ministration of the holy Communion which terme is very common with you is called also an vnbloudy Sacrifice Touching the first you haue taken great paines to litle purpose For it is by noman denied Touching the second what so euer you meane by your Ministring terme of the Ministration of the Holy Communion we say that the Hoste of the Mystical Table whiche is none other but the body and bloude of Christe is both of S. Chrysostome here and otherwheres of the learned Fathers called the vnbloudy Sacrifice not for that it representeth and reporteth vnto our myndes the Sacrifice of the Crosse as you say for in that respect it ought rather to be called representatiue or commemoratiue but for that being the same in substance with that whiche was offered vppon the Crosse with shedding of bloude Bloudy and vnbloudy referred to one subiecte it is here offered vnbloudily And so both these termes Bloudy and Vnbloudy be referred to one subiect or thing offered whereby the diuersitie of the manner of offering is signified Furthermore whereas you say that the Christians Sacrifices be mere spiritual and procede wholy from the harte if you meane that al our Sacrifices be such and that no external thing is offered in any of them it is vntruely spoken For the Sacrifice of Christes body and Bloude is not so mere spiritual that it may be said to proceede onely from the harte of the offerer but it requireth an external action of the Minister to wit an external pronouncing of the sacramental woordes This is my body c. Besides this external breade and wine be also necessary without the which this Sacrifice can not be made And herein after that by the power of the wordes of our Lorde by the Priest pronounced there is made the Diuine chaunge of the substāce of the bread and wine into the body and bloude of Christe August de ciuita Dei li. 10. c. 20 then is there as S. Augustine calleth it the true Sacrifice as S. Gregorie Nazianzen termeth it Nazian in Apologetico 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the external Sacrifice of the newe Testament Consider wisely with thy selfe good Christian Reader whether M. Iewel be to trusted or no in that he traueleth so much to abolish the mystical Table the vnbloudy Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ vvhether M. Ievvel be to be trusted which is the most honorable and the chiefe Sacrifice of the Church Whereas S. Chrysostom declareth diuers kindes of Sacrifices to be among the Christians as there were in olde time among the Iewes M. Iewel acknowlegeth al saue that which is most worthy and chiefe In an Homilie that he wrote vpon the .95 Psalme he reckeneth in order ten kindes of Sacrifices Ten kīdes of Sacrifices which be sitting saith he for the grace of the Gospel That I may speake of the first and chiefe after that the others be accompted the second is Martyrdom the thirde is the Sacrifice of Prayer the fourth is of Iubilation or ioyful synging out a loude the fifth of Iustice the sixth of Almose geuing the seuenth of Praise the eighth of Compunction the ninth of Humilitie the tenth of Preaching eche one of these there he prooueth by Scripture These nyne M. Iewel can finde in his harte to confesse But the first Satan and he may not abyde And that is the Sacrifice wherein Christe him selfe is offered Which Sacrifice of S. Chrysostom in that Homilie is called by these names Chrysost. in Psalm 95. Tom. 1 Mystica mensa coeleste summeque venerandum Sacrificium Spirituale illud mysticum donum hostia salutaris salutare donum The mystical Table the heauenly and most honorable Sacrifice That spiritual and Mystical gifte The healthful hoste the healthful gifte And we that should not doubte what thing this first and chiefe Sacrifice is with
the Sacrifice of the Churche whereof we treate were nothing elles but Prayers Praises thankes geuing and a remembrance and had no substance at al which consisteth without and besides the minde of man then might we graunt that al Aulters of Stoane or Timber were needelesse But seing that the Auncient learned Fathers make often mention of Aulters in their Churches and of their Sacrifices thereon it foloweth necessarily that their Sacrifices consisted not wholly of Prayers Material Aulters thankes and of suche other deuotion of the minde but of some such thing also which required a place wherevpon it may be laid What that thing is Optatus that auncient and learned Bishop of Mileuitum in Afrik doth declare Optatus libro 6. geuing withal an euident recorde for the vse of Aulters Thus he saith writing against the Donatistes Quid tam sacrilegum quà m Altaria Dei in quibus vos aliquando obtulistis An external Aulter argueth the real presence and an external Sacrifice frangere radere remouere Quid enim est Altare Dei nisi sedes Corporis Sanguinis Christis What greater Sacriledge can there be then to breake rase and quite remoue away the Aulters of God vpon which your selues once offered For what other thing is an Aulter then a seate both of the Body and of the Bloude of Christe These termes of breaking rasing and remouing do conuince the Aulters were material as made of Stoane or Timber The vse also is expressed manifestly which is to be a seate for the body and bloude of Christe to be laid vpon when they be consecrate and sacrificed Whereof may be gathered an Argument of the real presence and of the external Sacrifice For a seate serueth to place real and external substances and not mere spiritual thinges of which sorte contrition of harte Praiers thankes and praises are If I thought it needeful in this place to allege auctorities for proufe of this vse of material Aulters it were easy to allege no smal number for the same out of the most auncient Fathers and Councels The thing being so cleare and so wel knowen of al that haue any skil of antiquitie it may suffice to ioyne the testimonie of S. Augustine with that of Optatus Who speaketh bothe of building of Aulters in Churches whereby it is certaine they were material and also of sacrificing vpon them August de Ciuitat Dei li. 22. cap. 10. His wordes be plaine Nos autem Martyribus nostris non Templa sicut Dijs sed memorias sicut hominibus mortuis quorum apud Deum viuunt spiritus fabricamus Nec ibi erigimus Altaria in quibus sacrificemuâ— Martyribus sed vni Deo Martyrum nostro sacrificium immolamus As for vs saith he we buylde for our Martyrs not Temples as for Goddes but Memories by Memories he meaneth Chappels or Churches builded in the memorie of Martyrs as for dead men whose Spirites be lyuing with God Neither do we there set vp Aulters that on them we may sacrifice to Martyrs but to God onely we offer Sacrifice Aulters auouched who is the God bothe of Martyrs and of vs also By this saying it is witnessed vnto vs that the Aulters erected in Martyrs Churches were material as the Churches were and that on them Priestes made Sacrifice vnto God Whereas then M. Iewel admitteth none other kinde of Sacrifice in the newe Testament than such as for offering whereof any material Aulter is not required and S. Augustine speaketh of a Sacrifice that is offered vnto God vpon the material Aulters by this we vnderstand this newe doctrine of M. Iewel touching the Sacrifice to dissent from the olde Doctrine of S. Augustin Consider wel of it Christian Reader how safe it is for thee to forsake the Churche to contemne S. Augustine Optatus and al other the olde learned Fathers in whose workes we finde often mention of material Aulters and the Sacrifice therevpon daily offered and to pinne thy faith on M. Iewels sleeue who as thou seest hath no sure grounde but onely denieth al and for colour of some defence shuffleth together by heapes patches and peeces of the Fathers sayinges whereby a confusion is sought no certaintie is taught If he wil replye against this Table and Aulter saying that the Fathers cal the Aulter a table as to gete some auctoritie vnto his remoueable Communion Table he is wont commonly to translate a Table for an Aulter it may please him to vnderstand that the Fathers do truely cal it by bothe names according to the double vse of the Euchariste which is ministred vpon the same For the Euchariste is bothe a Sacrament and a Sacrifice As it is a Sacrament so is it our heauenly foode and sustenance As it is a Sacrifice so is it our daily offering Vnto the which two vses S. Cyprian hauing respecte saith of the bread and Chalice consecrated by solemne blessing Cyprian De Coena Domini that it is bothe a medicine and also a Sacrifice to heale our infirmities and to purge our iniquities Therefore the Fathers cal it a Table in consideration we receiue from thens our substantial foode And for that cause it is alwaies couered with a white linnen cloth They cal it an Aulter for that we offer vpon it the heauenly Sacrifice of Christes body and bloude and for that cause also it is fastened to the place where it standeth Wherefore the Table doth not exclude the Aulter nor doth the Aulter exclude the Table But bothe are one in deede and yet double in respecte of the double vse of the thing wrought vpon it So that to turne the Aulter into a Table is but a seely shifte and a poore refuge This muche being now knowen it wil be easy to perceiue that the authorities by him alleged be to be vnderstanded either of the Aulters Sacrifices smoke and other Ceremonies vsed in the olde lawe or of mere spiritual Sacrifices which require none other Aulter than the harte of man Chrysost. Homil. in Psal. 95. So is the saying of S. Chrysostome here to be taken The gifte of the Gospel whereby is meant what so euer man offereth to God now in the state of the new Testament ascendeth vp vnto God without bloude without smoke without Aulter and without the other Ceremonies for so is it in the author Who seeth not by these wordes the filthy shedding of bloude the stincking smoke and therefore also the Aulter of the Iewes in the olde lawe to be signified Our Sacrifice is pure and cleane without the smoke of burnt grease and fleshe and so without that Aulter whereon such thinges were burnt BVt what is to be said vnto the autoritie alleged out of the second Councel of Nice M. Iewel here craueth help at the second NiceÌ„ Councel vvhich otherâ—wheres he despiseth what Sacrifice or Aulter meaneth we Christians in a manner can not tel saith Leontius cited in that Councel What M. Iewel wil you craue helpe to
time ye shal not be angry with vs but with that holy learned Father S. Augustine if we accompte your scattered troupes not for the Churche of Christe nor any parte thereof but for Dennes of theeues and Synagogues of Antichriste Neither doo ye sacrifice vnto God the Sacrifice of Praise in the body of Christe which the Churche doth as S. Augustine saith for ye acknowledge no Sacrifice of the body of Christe at al in whiche God is chiefly praised and thanked for his benefites The Singular Sacrifice that S. Austine speaketh of is the Sacrifice of the Eucharist Furthermore what Sacrifice is that whereof the sacrifices of Israel according to the flesh were significations which S. Augustine here calleth the Singuler Sacrifice that Israel after the spirite offereth vp now What other is it then the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe after an vnbloudy manner daily offered in the Churche For of the Sacrifice of the Crosse ye can not expounde it bicause the same is done once already and is not now offered vp Neither can ye vnderstande it of mere spiritual Sacrifices for they are not Singuler neither offered onely now that is to say in the time of the newe Testament but are common to the faithful personnes and times of bothe Testamentes By this it is euident that the Sacrifice of Praise which Israel after the spirite that is to say the Churche offereth vp vnto God not after the order of Aaron but after the order of Melchisedek as S. Augustine writeth is the Sacrifice of the Euchariste in whiche the body and bloude of Christe is offered vp vnder the fourmes of bread and wine Genes 14. in which Melchisedek made his Sacrifice forefiguring this Your thirde authoritie which you haue somedeale corrupted by nipping away certaine wordes and by false translation maketh for proufe of our Sacrifice it helpeth your Negatiue nothing at al. The whole sentence truly translated August li. 83. quaestion q. 61 is this Christe hath commended vnto vs a likenes of his bloudy Sacrifice for of that he speaketh there to be celebrated in remembrance of his Passion to the ende we may see now that which Melchisedek offered vnto God to be offered in the Churche of Christe through the whole worlde Here are touched three Sacrifices the Sacrifice of the Crosse Three Sacrifices the Sacrifice of the Aulter the Sacrifice of Melchisedek On the Crosse Christe was sacrificed truly according to the truth of substance of the thing sacrificed and of the manner of sacrificing which was by shedding of bloude and killing the hoste that was to be sacrificed In the Supper then and in the Aulter now he is truly sacrificed as touching the truth of the substance of the thing that is offered that is to say the body and bloude of Christe For he said Luc. 22. This is my body this is my bloude doo ye this in remembraÌ„ce of me 1. Cor. 11. But not according to the truth of such manner of sacrificing For he is sacrificed vnbloudily and in Mysterie The body that now is offered is a liue body For it is the same in the Sacrament that hong vpon the Crosse and that is now in heauen But though Christes body be now a lyue in the Sacrament and the bloud in the Body yet neither is the body of vs offered bicause it is a lyue and now to be killed nor the bloude bicause it is in the body as againe to be shed but bicause the body was once killed and the bloude once shed that which is now done is done in remembrance of that And hereof it commeth that this Sacrifice is oftentimes called of the Fathers in respecte of the bloudy Sacrifice of the Crosse as it is in the thirde fourth and fifth testimonie of S Augustine here alleged to be sene a likenes an Image of that Sacrifice a memorie or Sacrament of memorie From the affirmation of which likenes Imageâ— memorie SacrameÌ„t representation or figure to inferre the denial of a true presence and Sacrifice is besides al rules of Logique and reason sithens both stand wel together And yet this is in maÌ„ner the only kinde of reason and Argument that M. Iewel vseth through his whole Reply and otherwheres Which kind of ArgumeÌ„tes they must needes vse if they wil vse any at al who by opening the truth of any question by due distinctions see their false doctrine confuted and therfore make their apparent aduantage of confusion Which Confusion is soonest wrought by heapes of vndiscussed authorities without declaration of the circumstances patchedly and by peece meale alleged and iumbled together as M. Iewel is woont to doo Likenes aÌ„d Image how they signifie in the nevv testameÌ„t being spoken of the sacrament And remember good Reader that whereas S. Augustine here alleged speaketh of a Similitude or likenes he meaneth not euery common kinde of likenes but a likenes that is a Sacrament of the newe Testament Which is a holy effectual and visible signe of inuisible grace If thou take away the body and bloude of Christe from this likenes it shal lacke the inuisible grace and so shal it not be such a likenes as S. Augustine here speaketh of Image An Image also which terme he vseth likewise in the newe Testament considered in Christe or his Sacramentes doth not signifie a bare figure voide of the thing whose Image it is But rather signifieth the true thing it selfe exhibited in the fourme of an other thing and not in proper shape De Cons. Dist. 2. Hoc est quod dicimus So is Christe Imago Patris the Image of his Father appearing in the fourme of man So is the Sacrament of Christes body the Image of the same body crucified yea the body of Christe in the Sacrament inuisible is a Sacrament and sampler of the same body visible For so S. Augustine speaketh Caro videlicet carnis sanguis est sacramentum Sanguinis carne sanguine vtroque inuisibili spirituali intelligibili signatur visibile Domini nostri Iesu Christi corpus palpabile plenum gratiae omnium virtutum diuina Maiestate The flesh of Christe in the Sacrament is the sacrament of his flesh and the bloude is a sacrament of his bloude By his flesh and bloude bothe inuisible spiritual intelligible is betokened the body of our Lorde Iesus Christ that is visible palpable ful of the grace of al vertues and diuine Maiestie Neither maketh it ought for M. Iewel that S. Augustine calleth this Sacrament a Sacrament of remembrance SacrameÌ„t of remeÌ„â—brance Bicause it were not a Sacrament of remembrance fitte for the newe Testament onlesse the body and bloude of Christe were really conteined therein according to the saying of Christe Lucae 22. this is my body this is my bloude For we haue no warrant of the Scripture that bread and wine is the Sacrament of remembrance The .6 authoritie taken out of S. Augustine de Ciuitate
vnto God the most holy Sacrifice of the Euchariste in the steede of our Lorde And here is to be noted that we make this Sacrifice and offer it vp vnto God not as of our selues and in our owne persons but vice Domini in the steede of our Lorde Christe it is that consecrateth In this Sacrifice vvhat is Christe vvhat are vvee that offereth that sacrificeth He is the Priest and the Sacrifice Neuerthelesse we that haue receiued the holy Order of Priesthode by lawful imposition of handes do also in our degree consecrate and sacrifice But how As ministers in the person of Christe in the steede of our Lorde Christ onely and alone we confesse is the true Priest Priestes are Christes vicares in ma◠making this Sacrifice For by the Oblation of his owne body he onely hath done the office of the true Mediatour and hath reconciled vs to God And with that body he appeareth before his Father now in heauen Wee are vicarij Sacerdotes his Vicars and vicegerentes in this behalfe and doo the office of Priesthode in steede of him Eusebius saith notably that the euent and issue of Dauids Prophecie Thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedek is seene in this that Christe perfourmeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the thinges that belong to the Sacrifice which is among men Oecumen in Epist. ad Heb. cap. 5. yet to this day by his ministers We are but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ministers and by the mediation or meane of these ministerial and vicare Priestes Christe sacrificeth and is sacrificed saith Oecumenius To further proufe hereof S. Basil saith in Liturgia Basil. in Liturgia speaking vnto Christe For thine vnspeakeable and incomprehensible goodnesse without any chaunge and turning thou hast bene made man and hast ben called our hye Bishop huius ministratorij incruenti Sacrificij consecrationem nobis tradidisti and thou hast deliuered vnto vs the consecratiō of this Ministratorious and vnbloudy Sacrifice Lo he calleth this Sacrifice the Ministratorious Sacrifice bicause in making it weare but Ministers of our Lord and doo his steede Vnbloudy he calleth it bicause it is offered vp without bloudshed being the same that was offered vpō the Crosse with bloudshed And here appeareth the vaine cauil of M. Iewel who referreth the terme vnbloudy Vnbloudy spokē of the Sacrifice of the Aulter onely to the mere spiritual sacrifices of our deuotion In offering whereof we are not only Ministers of Christe but being endewed with grace we offer vp such kinde of Sacrifice in our owne person This muche haue I thought good here to inculcate and make plaine the rather bicause bothe the folowers of M. Iewel ceasse not to vtter vnsemely and lewd talke against Priestes saying in scorne that they make God and bicause M. Iewel him selfe in the beginning of his Replie to this Article maketh so much a doo for that a Mortal and a Miserable man should offer vp the Immortal Sonne of God vnto his Father Replie page 555. Where he saith further that God neuer appointed any suche Sacrifice to be made by any Mortal Creature As wel he might finde faulte with Kinges and Iudges of the worlde for that being mortal and miserable men they take vpon them to rule and iudge whereas in deede and truth Christe onely is King of al and Iudge of al. For to me al power is geuen in heauen and in earh saith he Matth. 28. And S. Iohn saith Iohan. 5. Omne iudicium dedit Filio God hath geuen al iudgement to his Sonne In the former testimonie of S. Basil Povver to consecrate by Christ deliuered vnto the special Priestes only it is to be considered that he saith to Christe in his Masse thou hast deliuered the Consecration of this Sacrifice vnto vs meaning when Christ said Doo ye this in my remembrance Wherby we vnderstand M. Iewels general and common Priestes quite excluded Elles let him shewe if he can where euer Christe deliuered power to consecrate the body and bloude of Christe to the Laye people that be not Priestes but as al Christian folke in general men wemen and children are S. Hierome saith writing to Heliodorus Hieron ad Heliodor Absit vt de ijs quicquam sinistrum loquar qui Apostolico gradui succedentes Christi corpus sacro ore conficiunt per quos nos Christiani sumus God forbid that I should speake any sinistre or euil thing against them who succeding in degree of the Apostles doo with their sacred mowthe consecrate the body of Christe by whom also we are Christians Againe in his Dialogue against the Luciferians he saith Hieron Cōtra Luciferianos that one Hilarius coulde not consecrate the Euchariste bicause he was but a Deacon If one that hath receiued the holy order of Deaconship can not consecrate and make this Sacrifice but to doo this it must be a Priest as S. Hierome teacheth How shal we beleeue M. Iewel who telleth vs here that euery faithful Christian man hath authoritie to make it and to offer it The policie of Satan and M. Iewel is to abandon the external Priesthode To vvhat ende tendeth M. Iewels doctrine against the blessed Sacrifice and to set the lay people a worke bearing them in hande they haue authoritie to make and offer vp this Sacrifice to thintent they may bring to passe first that the most holy and dredful Mysteries be contemned nexte that when there is none that hath authoritie to consecrate the body and bloude of Christe and to remitte synnes the remembrance of Christes Death vanish away and the people remaine fast bounde in the bandes of their synnes Our Lorde who came to dissolue the workes of Satan confounde the wicked attemptes 1. Ioan. 3. and damnable doctrine of Satans Minister The Churches determination touching this point I trust so many as feare God and haue care of their soules in this weighty mater wil litle regarde what he saith but rather consider how muche safer it is to hearken vnto the determination of the Chuche in the great general Councel of Laterane vttered by these wordes Hoc vtique Sacramentum nemo potest conficere Concil Lateranen nisi Sacerdos fuerit ritè ordinatus secundùm claues Ecclesiae quas ipse concessit Apostolis eorum successoribus Iesus Christus Noman can make or consecrate this Sacrament except he be a Priest duely ordered according to the keyes of the Churche Mat. 16. which Iesus Christe him selfe hath graunted vnto the Apostles Ioan. 20. and their Successours Here I haue sayd yenough of the outward Priesthode and that this Sacrifice can not be made but by a Priest laufully ordered and consecrated with due laying on of handes But whereas M. Iewel geueth auctoritie to euery faithful Christian man that is to say to Laye men wemen boyes gyrles and children for they be conteined vnder the name of Faithful Christian men to make and offer vp
Priesthod 209. a The Priesthod of Christe continueth stil both in heauen and in the Churche 235. b Internal Priesthod 241. b External Priesthod 242. a. Authoritie to create Priestes leafte to the Churche 242. b Deriuation of Priestly duetie 243. a Special Priesthod 244. b. seq Priestes Christes vicars and substitutes in making this Sacrifice 50. a. 247. a. Both Priest and people offereth and howe eche 25â— a The people offer by geuing assent to the Priestes action and applying their deuotion Ibid. Real Priesthod in the Church now ergo real Sacrifice 11. b Christen men how they be Priestes in general and also kinges 12. b. Priest in english a name common to Presbyter and Sacerdos 13. a. VVhy S. Paule calleth rather Priests then Sacrificers 14. a. Priestes haue authoritie to offer vp Christe vnto his Father 49. a. 50. a. b. 90. a. b. 143. b. 144. a. 190. b. 216â— a. Continuance of Priestes necessary 49. b. Priestes succede the Apostles in degree 49. b. 64. a. Iust punishment merciful 179. b R. REal presence 42. a. 72. a. 92. b. 105. b. 107. b. 111. b. 112. a. Real presence and Sacrifice auouched by S. Chrysostom dissembled by M. Ievvel 72. a Real Sacrifice 35. b. 42. a. 253. a The name of a Renegate ansvvered 182. a. VVho is a Renegate Ibid. b ReparatioÌ„ repairing or renuing and RepresentatioÌ„ of Christes Death 219. a. Robert King of Dednam and Robert Debnam of Elsbergholt haÌ„ged for felonie Foxes Martyrs 181. a. S SAbbatum olde and nevv 8. b. 9. a Real Sacrifice in the Churche 11. b. 105. b The substance of the Sacrifice in both Testamentes diuers 20. b The substance of bread and vvine hath no place in our Sacrifice 21. a The effectes of the Sacrifices of both Lavves diuers Ibi. b. seq Real and true Sacrifice and Sacrifice in dede 35. b The Sacrifice of the Aulter a true and real Sacrifice 36. b. 80. a. 98. b Difference betvvene a true and the true Sacrifice 40. b The Sacrifice that vve offer is the PassioÌ„ of Christ and why 41. b. Christes body neuer ceassed nor shal ceasse to be a Sacrifice 42. a The fruictes of this Sacrifice 44. b. 45. a. The Sacrifice of Christe auouched in the Gospel by S. Augustines iudgement 45. b Sacrifice spred ouer the vvorlde Ibi. In the Sacrifice of the Aulter al the conditions of Malachies prophecie are founde 51. a Sacrifices common to both Testamentes 51. a The Sacrifice of the Aulter succede al the Sacrifices of the olde Lavv. 51. b. The properties attributed to this Sacrifice by Malachie 63. a Sacrifice auouched by S. Chrysostome 72. b. 78. b. 105. b. 114. b. 119. b. 189. a. 192. a. 214. b. 226. b. The Sacrifice of the Supper and the Sacrifice of the Crosse one and diuers in diuers respectes 74. a. 78. b. This Sacrifice auouched by the Nicâ—n Councel 217. a. Hovv Christe sacrificeth 221. b Ten kindes of Sacrifices 226. b Three Sacrifices noted by S. Augustine 237. b Sacrifices of tvvo sortes invvarde and outvvard 239. b This Sacrifice is external 241. a Sacrifice taken tvvo vvaies 74. a This Sacrifice called Spiritual and vvhy 79. a Three kinds of Sacrifices of the new Testament by Eusebius 93. a A memorie of the Sacrifice of the Crosse excludeth not the Sacrifice of the Aulter 98. a Reasons for this Sacrifice 108. a. 137. b. 190. b. This Sacrifice is a meane to deriue the effect of Christes Death vnto vs. 121. a. This Sacrifice called the tradition of God 131. b. sequent VVhy the Fathers spake at the beginning secretly of this Sacrifice 132. b. And in the Preface 33. a In what sense the Sacrifice is Symbolical or Figuratiue 135. a S. Dionyse for the Sacrifice 137. a S. Gregorie Nazianzene for the external Sacrifice 138. a The Sacrifice of the Aulter the Sacrifice of Praise 145. a The Singular Sacrifice 145. a. 236. b. 237. a Our Sacrifice is the pure Sacrifice and why 151. a S. Cyprian euident for the Sacrifice 156. a The Sacrifice after Melchisedeks order both on the Crosse and also at the Supper 157. b A plaine argument for the Sacrifice out of S. ChrysostoÌ„ 190. b. seq The ende of Christes Sacrifice and of ours 192. b Yf Christ leaft no real Sacrifice to his people the new Law was left in worse case then the olde c. 104. b. 105. a Our Sacrifice a much more maruelous and honorable sacrifice then al other 105. b The substance of the Sacrifice on the Crosse and Sacrifice on the Aulter al one 113. b The Sacrifice why of Malachie called the pure Sacrifice 151. a The Sacrifice of Prayse how general it is 144. b Sacrifice Priesthod Law go so together that the bettering of either of them doth infer the bettering of the other 197. a The differeÌ„ce of Christ being in the Sacrament and in the reading of the storie of the Gospel 199. a The Sacrifice not to be consecrate but only by the Special Priestes 245. b. seq 248. a. In this Sacrifice what is Christe what are we 247. a This Sacrifice both Commemoratiue and real 253. a In this Sacrifice the Churche is offred 257. a Spiritual Sacrifice as a contrite hart and such like not the proper Sacrifice of the new testameÌ„t 140. b Sacerdotes that is Sacrificers be now properly in the Churche 13. b The terme Sacerdos Priest vsed of the Fathers and how 7. a. seq 11. b. The olde terme Sacrificer vsed after the destruction of Ierusalem 14. a. The terme Sacrificer vsed by S. Dionyse 15. a. VVhy S. Paule calleth the publike persones of the Churche Priestes rather then sacrificers 14. a Sacrament and Mysterie do not importe a signification of absence of the thing reported to be sacrificed c. but the secret maÌ„ner of sacrificing c. 77. b. VVhy the Sacrament is geuen vs in forme of bread and wine 82. b. 83 a. The Sacrament called by the name of bread and vvine 85. b The Sacramentaries Argument It is a signe of the bodie ergo not Christes true bodie stark naught 83. b. The true and real bloude of Christe in the Sacrament 107. a Sacrament of Remembrance 239. a If al be taken away that hath no proufe of Scripture what inconuenience vvil folovve 4. b. A Shifte of the newe Gospellers against the Fathers testimonies for the Sacrifice 8. a. 218. a Sicuti as in the CanoÌ„ reporteth not equalitie but likenes 124. b. 258. b Signes of two sortes significatiue onely and exhibitiue 83. b. A Syster woman vvhat it meaneth in S. Paule 166. b. seq Spiridion made bishop after he had ben married 171. b Spiridion not proued by Sozomenus to be a married Bishop 172. a. Spiritual Sacrifices Spiritual Priesthod 250. a. The reproche of Straggling alone answered 67. a. sequent T. TAble 225. b. 230. a Temple 9. b Thinges signifying and thinges signified called by the same names and hovv 111. b. 112. a. b Thinges implied though not vttered in expresse Termes 66. b. Thraso his parte played by the Chalenger rather then by the defender 261. b. The olde translation of the testament not controlled by Catholikes 70. a Translatours of the Bible into English false harlots 167. b Tertullian no martyr 172. b How the Churche speaketh vvith al tongues 200. b Transsubstantiation 29. a. b. 33. a. 84â— b. 92â— b. 112. a. 136. a. â—ne Truth put away by an other truth M. Iewels common custome 16. b. 17. b. 26. b. 27. b. 32. b. 59. a. 98. b. 165. a. 195. a. 198. b. 202 b. 223. a. 227. b. 233 a. 239. b. Truth not excluded by Image 161. a V. VNbloudy Sacrifice 37. a. b. 41. a. 52. a. 77. a. b. 78. a. 102. a. 214. a. b. 227. a. b. Vnbloudy shedding of bloude 76. b 77. a. b. Vnblouddy Death 16â— b. Vnbloudy spoken of the Sacrifice of the Aulter 247. b Christe offered his ovvne body vnblouddily 215. b Blouddy and vnblouddy referred to one subiecte 226. a. Vntruthes vttered by M. Ievvel three at once 20. b. 113. a. 147. a. An impudent vntruth and lye that can not be excused 30. aâ— 34. b. 171. a. 177. a. Vse and obseruation of of Sabbatum Pascha Altare c. double olde and nevve 8. b. 9. a W. VVHy Christ gaue his body and bloud vnder the formes of bread and vvine 30. a. VViat beheadded 183. b. VViued Apostares and their vvysedom 168. a. VViclef 242. b. VVordes vsed of the Fathers to expresse the manner of this blouddy Sacrifice 77. a. VVilliam Cowbridge Foxes Martyr 181. a VVilliam Flovver Foxes Martyr Ibid. a. Y. Yoke fellovve man 168. a. Liber iste lectus est approbatus à viris sacrae Theologiae Angâ—ici Idiomatis peritissimis quibus sicut ipsi Authori M. N. Thomae Hardingo tutò credendum iudico Quâ—re sine scrupulo edendâ—n esse existimo magnam ex hoc argumento vtilitatem spero Cunerus Petri Pastor S. Peâ—â—i Louanij 23. Augusts An. 1567.
taught by Christe to offer vp Christe vnto his Father Ergo to offer vp Christe vnto his Father we haue auctoritie Ergo the Priest hath auctoritie c. The Minor or second proposition of this Syllogisme you denye I doubte not For nought els with reason is here to be stickt at 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb. de DemoÌ„str EuaÌ„g lib. 1. That proposition then thus I proue by Eusebius whom I alleged in my Answer We haue ben taught saith he to offer vp vnto our Supreme God the dredful Sacrifices of Christes table by his Bishop highest of al. Whereat doo you cauill The proposition that you denye and we affirme being this The Priest hath auctoritie to offer vp Christe vnto his Father what lacketh here that answereth not the purport of your owne precise termes We haue ben taught by Gods bishop highest of al saith Eusebius Ergo The Priest hath auctoritie Require you the worde to offer Beholde here it is put expressely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 .i. offerre Cal you for the name of the Father Looke in Eusebius and you shal finde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as much to say vnto God that is ouer al. there haue you the Father of Christe plainely yenough expressed onlesse you denie that the Father of Iesus Christe is God ouer al. How be it we acknowledge this sacrifice to be offered not only vnto the Father but also vnto the Sonne in as much as he is God and vnto the holy Ghoste Now for Christe you haue here expressed the dreadful or honorable Sarifices of Christes table But you wil say I heare the dreadful sacrifices of Christes table but Christe him selfe I heare not Truth it is Christe him selfe to be offered you heare not in expresse termes but those termes which to our vnderstanding do import Christes body and bloud you heare and therfore Christ him selfe bicause of the vnioÌ„ of both persons For what other thing may we with any reason vnderstand by the dreadful Sacrifices of Christes table but the body and bloude of Christe What cause had Eusebius to make mention of Christes table Math. 26. but to put vs in mynd of that table Lucae 2â— wherevpon Christe at his last Supper consecrated and offered his pretious body and bloud 1. Cor. 11. saying this is my bodie which is geuen for you this is my bloude whiche is shed for you as the Scripture teacheth vs Wherevpon the bread Cyprian de coenae Domini that Christe gaue vnto his disciples changed not in shape but in nature by the omnipotencie of the worde is made flesh as S. Cyprian writeth Wherevpon is laid the lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the worlde Concil Nicen. Optatus lib. 6. Iren. lib. 5 as we finde it reported by the Fathers of the first Nicen Councel Wherevpon the vowes of the people and the members of Christ be borne as the Ancient Father Optatus speaketh From whence our flesh is nourrished with the bloude and body of Christe as S. Ireneus saith Chrysost. in 1. Cor. Hom. 24. From whence Christe hath geuen vs his flâ—sh to fil vs withal as S. Chrysostome preacheth But M. Iewel vnderstandeth by the Sacrifices of Christes table spoken of in Eusebius the Sacrifice of thankes geuing For whereas I say in my Answer that the Body and bloude of Christe are called of Eusebius the Sacrifices of Christes table bicause at the table in his last Supper he sacrificed and offered the same he controlleth me for so saying and skoreth it vp in the margent for his 222. Vntruth shewing this cause why For saith he Eusebius calleth it the sacrifice of thankes geuing M. Ievvel belyeth Eusebius wherein he deserueth an vntruth or rather a manifest lie to be scored vp vpon him selfe For neither nameth Eusebius a sacrifice in that place which he would if he had meant the sacrifice of thankes geuing but sacrifices in the plural number yea expressely the dreadful or honorable Sacrifices of Christes table neither nameth he there expressely the sacrifice of thankes geuing at al And neuer was it heard before that any olde or late learned catholike writer called thankes geuing indefinitely the dreadful Sacrifices of Christes table For to geue thankes it is not dredful neither is it peculiar to the mystical table but common in respect of al times places and seruices Certaine it is as it shal be euident to al that wil peruse that place of Eusebius that by the dreadful Sacrifices of Christes table he meant the body and bloud of Christe How be it he speaketh so thereof vsing the termes of memorie signes and tokens as it was most conuenient for that time when the Christians lyued among the Painimes and Infidels to whom those secretes were not to be reueled Math. 7. accordingly as Christe forebad a holy thing to be geuen to dogges and precious stones to be caste before swyne By which way of vtterance the olde learned Fathers intent was not to exclude the true presence of the most holy thinges but to coouer them from the vnworthy Painimes prophane vnderstanding and to insinuate vnto the beleuers the mystical and secret manner of their presense To returne to Eusebius In the later parte of his first booke De demonstratione Euangelica discoursing vpon the excellencie of the newe Testament in comparison of the olde hauing declared the figuratiue sacrifices of Moyses lawe to be abolished Three kindes of Sacrifices of the nevv Testament mencioned by Eusebius Euseb. li. 1 de demoÌ„strat and that lawe it selfe to haue his ende by the comming of Christe into flesh at length he speaketh of three kindes of Sacrifices of the new TestameÌ„t prouing ech one to haue ben forespoken of by the Prophetes They are the Sacrifice of the Crosse the Sacrifice of the Aulter and the mere spiritual Sacrifices The which we cal the Sacrifice of the Crosse he nameth the maruelous oblation and passing Sacrifice which Christe offered vnto his Father for the saluation of vs al. He termeth it also in respcte of the thing sacrificed the * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fleshly presence of Christ and his framed body that God fitted for him alluding to the woordes of the Psalme * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Corpus aptasti mihi thou ô God hast framed or fitted to me a bodye That which of vs is commonly called the Sacrifice of the Aulter Psal. 39. he calleth in respect of the action of offering 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The memorie of this Sacrifice of the Crosse celebrated vpon a table He calleth it also in respect of the thing offered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Diuine honorable and holy Sacrifice And terming it also the pure Sacrifice alluding to the Prophecie of Malachie he saith that we sacrifice it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after a new manner according to the new Testament Which can not be vnderstand of any other then of the Sacrifices of the Aulter Furthermore in respect
of the body and bloude being two thinges that are offered he calleth it the Sacrifices of Christes table as now the Churche coÌ„monly calleth it the Sacrifice of the Aulter Touching the third kinde of sacrifices he nameth them first in general by the terme of vnbodyly and spiritual sacrifices Afterward particularly he calleth them the sacrifice of praise of praiers of lifting vp the haÌ„des of a contrite harte The sacrifice of thankes geuing by these very termes he nameth not In dede I confesse that where he saith we sacrifice the memorie of the great Sacrifice meaning that of the Crosse celebrating it according to the mysteries deliuered vnto vs by Christe There he saith further that we offer vp vnto God by godly hymnes and prayers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eucharistiam pro salute nostra the Euchariste for our saluation whiche peraduenture M. Iewel had rather to cal the thankes geuing for our saluation To shewe that the first and chiefe kinde of sacrifice was prophecied of in the time of the olde Testament he allegeth the Prophete Dauid Psal. 39. saying Oblationem sacrificium noluisti corpus autem aptasti mihi Oblation and sacrifice thou refusedst and had framed me a body For the sacrifices of the third kinde Psal. 49. he allegeth the knowen scriptures offer vnto God the sacrifice of praise and render vnto the highest thy vowes and cal vpon me in the day of â—ribulation Psal. 140. Psal. 50. and I wil deliuer thee Againe The lifâ—ing vp of my handes is an euening sacrifice Item A contrite spirite is a sacrifice to God c. In this order is to be placed the sacrifice of thankes geuing which M. Iewel strangely and absurdly auoucheth to be that whiche Eusebius calleth by the name of the Sacrifices of Christes table Now concerning the second kinde of Sacrifice The Sacrifices of Christes table vvhat they are that Eusebius speaketh of which is the sacrifice of th'Aulter or as the termeth it the dreadful Sacrifices of Christes table whiles he allegeth the prophecies of Dauid and of Esay for it he sheweth clearely that he meant not thereby the sacrifice of thankes principally or praise for the Sacrifice once made vpon the Crosse nor the Ministration of the holy Communion of which M. Iewel confusely expoundeth Eusebius but the holy Mysteries of Christes table to wit the Body and Blounde of Christe vnder the formes of bread and wine offered at the table in remembrance of Christes death Which I confesse neuer the lesse alwaies to be offered not without the Sacrifice of thankes and praise and with that Sacrifice we doo thanke and praise God most principally The saying of Dauid propheciyng of the Sacrifices of this table Psal. 22. as Eusebius allegeth is this Parasti in conspectu meomensam aduersus eos qui tribulant me Impinguasti in oleo caput meum calix tuus inebrians me quà m fortissimè Thou hast prepared before mine eyes a table against those that trouble me thou hast anointed my head with oile and thy Cuppe maketh me dronke after a most stroÌ„g wise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expressely and manifestly in these wordes saith Eusebius is signified the mystical Chrisme or ointment and the dreadful or honorable Sacrifices of Christes table Verely this soueraigne praise that Dauid after the mynde of Eusebius geueth vnto the mystical Cuppe of our Lordes table can not seme to be attributed vnto the Cuppe of the Sacramentarie Suppers which conteineth in it no better thing then common wine It is the bloud of Christe not a suppe of common wine that doth moist and inebriate a man in that most strong wise wherof Dauid prophecied The Hebrew worde importing signification of great abundance maketh muche for this sense and quite contrary to the Sacramentarie doctrine From Dauid he goeth to Esay the Prophete alleging among other thinges a saying out of him signifiyng that the Lorde of bostes should do maruelous thinges in al nations What those thinges are the prophete declareth They shal haue pleasant drinke saith he they shal drinke wine They shal be annointed with an ointment in this hil Vpon these wordes of Esay thus saith Eusebius These maruelous thinges that Esay speaketh of did promise not to Israel but to al nations the annointing of a good sweete smelle and of ointmeÌ„tes by reason whereof bicause of the annointing of the ointment they obteined to be called Christians that is to say the annointed Then folow the wordes which declare what he meant by the Sacrifices of Christes table Furthermore saith he this prophete prophecieth vnto the Gentiles of the pleasantnes of wine secretly signifying the Mysterie of the new Testament of Christe which is manifestly celebrated at this time among al nations Thus Eusebius in that place expounding the prophecies of Dauid and of Esay promising the inebriating Cuppe and gifte of wine vnto the Gentiles of the blessed Sacrifice of Christes table which as it is called a table for that the heauenly foode is thence ministred vnto vs so it is called also an Aulter in respect of the oblation and Sacrifice there made and solemnized doth plainely signifie what he vnderstode by the Sacrifices of Christes table soothly not the sacrifice of thankes geuing principally which semeth to the vnlearned to consist onely in wordes but the Sacrifices of the body and bloude of Christe and consequently Christe him selfe And therfore that place of Eusebius is in my Answer to the Chalenge rightly and aptly to my purpose alleged as the whiche proueth against M. Iewel that the Priest hath auctoritie to offer vp Christe vnto his Father Yet if M. Iewel wil not ceasse to cal for his owne termes August Epist. 174. not being content with termes equiualent I thinke good to answer him as S. Augustine answered Pascentius the Arian crying importunatly for the terme Homusion to be shewed him in the Scriptures Quid est contentiosius quà m vbi de re constat certare de nomine What is a more contentious parte then to striue about the name when the thing it selfe is certainely knowen But now M. Iewel bringeth in S. Augustine Eusebius and S. Gregorie Nazianzen to witnesse with him that the ministration of the holy Communion is called a Sacrifice bicause therein thankes and Praises be offered vp vnto God for the Sacrifice made vpon the Crosse. To this I answer that these Fathers can not be shewed so much as once to haue named the Sacrifice of the Ministration of the Communion nor that this Ministration of the CommunioÌ„ is in any of their workes expressely called a Sacrifice He should haue done wel if he had made it cleare what he meaneth by this holy CommunioÌ„ and what by the Ministration of the same That the Ministration of the Communion is a Sacrifice I trowe it is a speache neuer heard of in the Churche of God before these Ministring prelates came to teache vs a new faith If he vnderstand by the holy Communion the new deuise of