Zuinglians Caluinists Anabaptists Trinitarians and the like chalenged by the said Church of disobedience and do all appeale ioyntly and seuerally from her to only scriptures praysinge highly the sufficiency and excellency therof and refusinge all other meanes eyther of tradition or ancient exposition for vnderstandinge of the sense and true meaninge And when we alleadge the Catholike Doctors and Pastors of euery age as spirituall Gouernours and Conselors vnder God in the Church for explaninge his diuine will and meaninge in this behalfe they refuse all and only will be interpreters and expositors themselues and this not only against the Catho Church which they ought to obay but one sect also against another for their particular opinions and diuersityes which by this meanes are made irreconciliable and indeterminable as experience teacheth vs. For when I pray yow will Luther Zuinglius or their followers come to any accord eyther with vs or amongst themselues by only canonicall scriptures expounded after each partyes particular spiritt iudgement and affection The like I may aske of Anabaptists Arrians English Protestants and Puritans or of any other Sectaryes that yow can name vnto me which neuer agreed by this way nor euer will And this is the first paradox of Martyn Bucer that only scriptures are sufficient to teach euery man 32. The second is yet worse yf worse may be to witt that there is no Church on earth which erreth not as well in faith as manners Which yf yt be so then erreth also in faith the true Church of Christ and is a lyinge Church and may lead vs into error and heresie And of this yt followeth againe that we can haue no certainty of any thinge in this life and that almighty God doth damne vs very vniustly for heresie wherinto we may be brought by his true Church and spouse which on the other side he hath commaunded vs to heare and obay vnder payne of damnation yt followeth also that S. Paul did falsely call the Church the pillar and firmament of truth for as much as yt may both deceaue and be deceaued Christs promise also was false when he assured his Church that he would be with her by his spiritt of truth vnto the worlds end and that the gates of hell should not prevaile against her All these absurdityes impossibilityes and impietyes do follow of this second paradox besides infinite others which any meane capacity may deduce of himselfe 33. The third paradox also is no lesse monstrous to common sense and reason then the two former to witt that vvhatsoeuer good worke any man doth or may seeme to doe before iustification a sinne and prouoketh Gods wrath But I would aske this new opiniatour or paradox-defender how he would answere to that of Exodus where yt is said of the Egyptian mid-wyues â— infidells no doubt quia timuerunt obstetrices Deum aedificauit illis domos God gaue them aboundant children for that vpon feare of offendinge almighty God they disobayed their King Pharao in sauinge the Hebrues children doth God vse to reward sinne or to prayse that which prouoketh his wrath Againe the Prophett Ezechiell sheweth vs how God did temporally reward Nabuchodonozor and his army with the spoyle of Egypt for that they had serued him faithfully in chastizinge of Tyrus And S. Hierome vpon that place hath these words By that Nabuchodonosor receaued this reward for his good worke we learne that gentills also yf they do any good thinge shall not leese their reward at Gods hands and how can God be said to reward that which offendeth him The Prophet Daniell also to the same Nabuchodonosor an infidell gaue this counsell peccata tua eleemosymis redime redeeme thy synnes with almes which he would neuer haue done yf yt had byn a synne prouoked Gods wrath to giue almes or to performe any such other morall vertue before iustification especially being styrred holpen thervnto by Gods especiall help which may be before iustification as Martyn Bucer in this paradox supposeth And lastly not to stand any longer in this which is of it selfe so euident I would aske friar Martyn whether Cornelius the centurion being yet a gentile did sinne and prouoke Gods wrath in prayinge and giuinge almes before his conuersion Yf he say yea as needs he must accordinge to his doctrine the text of scripture is against him for the Angell said vnto him Thy prayers and almes deeds haue ascended vp and haue byn called into remembrance in the sight of God Vpon which words S. Augustine in diuers of his works doth call the said almes-deeds of Cornelius before he beleeued in Christ Iustice and the gifts of God which he would neuer haue done yf they had byn synnes and prouoked Gods wrath as this new-fangled friar hath taken vpon him to defend 34. And this shal be sufficient for this sixt disputation of Martyn Bucer which is fiue tymes as much as Fox setteth downe of the same for that he relateth only the time and place of the said dispute togeather with the conclusions afore mentioned that Sedgewicke Yonge and â—erne were opponents to Bucer therin but all the rest he remitteth to a larger discourse at another tyme supplyinge the breuity of this Bucerian disputation with another dispute betweene custome and verity which he calleth A fruitfull dialogue gathered out saith Fox â—f the Tractations of Peter Martyr and other authors â—â— a certayne reuerend person of this realme teachinge all men not to measure Religion by custome but to try custome by truth c. â—5 And this was another diuise of those â—ayes of Innouations and noueltyes to dazell â—â—mple mens eyes as though Custome and Veriâ—â— the handmayd and maistresse were so fallen out that one impugned the other could not agree or stand togeather any longer and consequently custome and antiquity must needs â—ue place to nouelty the fraud and folly of which diuise may in very few words be disâ—ouered and their true frendshipp and agreement easily be declared yea their in separable â—â—herence to be such as in our case of the conâ—â—ouersie about the reall presence for in this â—â—int they are made to braule and full out they cannot possibly be separated For yf verity in this matter haue not antiquity and custome with yt yt is nouelty and by consequence not verity at all And on the otherside custome in points of Christian faith and beleefe yf yt be generall and of long tyme for otherwise yt cannot properly be called custome in the subiect we handle may not possibly be found in our Christian Church without verity for that otherwise the whole Church should vniuersally admitt a falsity continue yt by custome which to imagine were folly and madnesse yea most insolenâ— madnes yf vve beleeue S. Augustine whose words are Disputare contra id quod tota per orbeâ— frequentat Ecclesia insolentissimae insaniae est It is a most insolent
contrary And wheras I do vse the words of externall true and proper sacrifise yow must remember therby the fraud of these new heretiks who as before about the reall presence did go about to delude all the sayings of holy Fathers and other testimonyes of Antiquity that spake of Christs reall being in the Sacrament by running to the words spiritually sacramentaly by faith and the like so heere fyndinge the whole torrent and streame of Christian antiquity to stand for this Christian sacrifice to mention reuerence auouch the same these fellowes for auoydinge their authorityes do runne from the proper externall sacrifice wherof we treate vnto the internall and inuisible sacrifice of the mynd wherof K. Dauid saith that a contrite spiritt is a sacrifice to God And when this cannot serue they run also to improper and metaphoricall externe sacrifices such as are mortification of the body Rom. 12. sacrifice of thankesgeuinge Psalm 49. Sacrifice of almes deedes Hebr. 13. and other such good works which by a certayne analogy or proportion with the nature of proper sacrifices are called also sacrifice in scriptures by the Fathers but improperly To these then do our Protestants runne when they are pressed with the authorityes of auncient Fathers that name the vse of Christian sacrifice in the Church and will needs make vs beleeue that the Fathers ment not properly of any true visible or externall sacrifice but eyther of inward or inuisible sacrifice of the hart mynd and good desire or els of outward metaphoricall sacrifice of pious and vertuous workes 35. But all these are fraudulent shifts to ouerthrow one truth by another For as we do not deny but that there is an inward and inuisible sacrifice of our mynd in dedicatinge of our selues to God and to the subiection of his Maiestie without which the externall sacrifice is little worth to him that offereth the same And as we graunt that all good works be sacrifices in a certayne sort by some similitude they haue with true proper sacrifices for that they are offered vp to God in his honour yet do we say that this is from our purpose in this place who talke of a true proper externall sacrifice offered vp to God after a peculiar sacred rite or ceremonyes by peculiar men deputed to this office in acknowledgement of Gods diuine power maiestie and dominion ouer vs protestation of our due subiection vnto him such as were the externall sacrifices in the law of nature offered vp by patriarks and heads of familyes and by Priests of Aarons order vnder the law of Moyses and by Christ and his Priests accordinge to the order of Melchisedech in the new law and for so much as both the internall metaphoricall sacrifices before mentioned of good affection desires and holy works are not peculiar to any law but were lawfull and needfull vnder all lawes and in all tymes and require no particular kind of men or ministers to offer them but may be offered vp by any man or woman whatsoeuer therfore do we exclude all these from the name of the sacrifice which heere is meant by our description and comprehendeth as yow see an externall visible oblation made by him or them who are peculiarly deputed by God to this office which are Priests So as when soeuer our aduersaryes do slipp from this proper signification of a sacrifice to the other eyther internall or metaphoricall which may be offeted by all sorts of people and therevpon do say that all men are Priests they runne as vow see quite from the purpose as they do also for examples sake when to auoyd the necessity of externall fastinge they runne to the internall fastinge of the mynd sayinge that true fastinge is to fast from sinne which as we deny not in that sense of spirituall fastinge so is it notwithstandinge a plaine shift and runninge from the purpose and cannot stand with many places of the scripture which must needs be vnderstood of the externall fast as when Christ is said by the Euangelists to haue fasted 40. dayes togeather and S. Paul affirmeth that he and his fellow Apostles fasted frequently It cannot be vnderstood I say of fastinge only those tymes from sinne for that Christ fasted alwayes from sinne without exception and so do all good men both fast and facrisice also by offeringe vp good desires and pious actions to almighty God dayly and hourely without distinction of men or tymes 36. But this is not the proper visible externall sacrifice which heere we meane which was instituted by God as peculiar to Christian people vnder the law of the ghospell for an externall worshipp vnto him besides the internall and testification of their inward subiection loue and piety towards him which sacrifice comming in place of all others that went before both in the law of nature and of Moyses that prefigured and foresignified the same and being but one and singular insteed of them all and their great variety is to be esteemed so much more excellent then they all as the law of the ghospell is more excellent then those lawes and truth aboue shaddowes the sacred body of Christ God and man himselfe to be preferred before the bodyes of beasts byrds and other such creatures vvhich vvere but signes and figures of this 37. And in this sense do both scriptures fathers councells and all holy Christian antiquity speake and treat of this most diuine venerable and dreadfull sacrifice wherof as of the highest and most principall mystery and treasure left by our Sauiour in his Church there are so many testimonyes as before hath byn signifyed that yt shall not be possible for me in this place and with the breuity which is necessary to alleage the least part therof yet some few generall heads shall I touch which the learned reader may see more dilated by diuers Catholike wryters of our dayes and he that hath not commodity or tyme to do that may geue a ghesse by that which heere I shall sett downe 38. First then for that this holy sacrifice of the Christian Church was so principally intended by almighty God for the new law as hath byn said many things were sett downe by the holy Ghost in the old Testament both prefiguringe and prophecyinge the same as first the sacrifice of the King and Priest Melchisedech in bread and wyne Gen. 14. which all the auncient Fathers by generall consent do apply to the sacrifice vsed now in the Christian Church and yt were ouerlong to alleage their particular authorityes lett S. Augustine speake for all Primum apparuit saith he sacrificium Melchisedech quod à Christianis nunc offertur Deo toto orbe terrarum The first sacrifice appeared in Melchisedech which now is offered to God by Christians throughout all the world And in another place Vident nunc tale sacrificium offerri Deo toto orbe terrarum Christians do see the like sacrifice to that of
in order and with licence as the rest did whose aunswere Fox relateth in these words then quoth Philpott I had rather be absent altogeather so insufferable was all order or temperate manner of proceedinge to this disorderly man and so Q. Mary sent a wryte the next day to dissolue the conuocation And such as had disputed saith Fox on the contrary part were driuen some to sly some to deny and some to dye though to most mens iudgements that heard the disputation they had the vpper hand c. These are hereticall bragges as yow will better see afterwards when we come to examining of arguments And as for dyinge none of the forsaid disputers died to our knowledge but only Philpott in his madd moode Cheyney Elmour and Haddon gott Bishopricks other dignityes vnder Q. Elizabeth And so much of this disputation in the conuocation house Eight ninth and tenth Disputation §. 8. 41. These last three disputations I do ioyne togeather for that they were held successiuely in Oxford vpon three seuerall dayes in the moneth of Aprill anno 1554. with Cranmer Ridley and Latymer vpon the forsaid three questions of the reall presence Transubstantiation and the sacrifice of the masse The names saith Fox of the vniuersity Doctors and graduates appointed to dispute against them vpon the said questions were these of Oxford Doctor VVeston prolocutor Doctor Tressam Doctor Cole Doctor Oglethorpe Doctor Pye Maister Harpesfield Maister Fecknam Of Cambridge Doctor Yonge Vice Chauncelour Doctor Glynn Doctor Seton Doctor VVatson Doctor Sedgewicke and Doctor Atkinson to witt six of each vniuersity all meeting at Oxford togeather to this effect Thus farre Fox who describeth also the manner and forme of this disputation much more reasonable orderly indifferent then all the former disputations vnder the Protestants yf we beleeue Fox himselfe who saith that in the middle of the Doctors there were appointed foure to be exceptores argumentorum wryters of the arguments to vse his words and a table sett in the middest and foure notaryes sittinge with them So as by his relation there were eight indifferent men chosen to register whatsoeuer passed yet yf he relate truly the manner of arguinge was not so orderly and schoolelike as might haue byn wherby yt came to passe that scarce any argument was prosecuted to the end and the answeringe was such as comonly was wholy from the purpose as by diuers examples yow shall see afterwards declared as also we shall examine what arguments Cranmer could alleage against the reall presence vpon the fourth day of disputation to witt the next day after Latymer had ended For that Doctor Harpesfield answeringe for his degree defended the question of the reall presence and Maister Cranmer was courteously inuited to the said disputation and suffered to say what he would or could against that verity was fully answered notwithstandinge Fox will needs beare vs in hand to the contrary as his fashion is 42. And wheras the said Doctor Harpesfield in his preface did much commend the diligent readinge of scripture with prayer and conferring one place with another but yet said that this was no secure way or meane for euery particular man to resolue himselfe of the sense therof but must rather beleeue the body of the Catholike Church therin then his owne â—udgement Fox saith that Maister Cranmer in his reply reprehended that direction sayinge vvheras yow referre the true sense iudgement of the scriptures to the Catholike Church as iudge therof yow are much deceaued c. And Fox himselfe addeth this marginall note Yf Maister Harpesfield when he saith we must not follow our owne heads and senses â—ut giue ouer our iudgement to the holy Catholike Church had willed vs to submitt our selues to the holy Ghost he had said much better So Iohn But I would aske him who shal be iudge what the holy Ghost teacheth vs For that is the question For yf a particular man readinge the scripture with prayer and conferringe place with place only may be presumed to attayne therby the true meaninge of the holy Ghost which notwithstanding cannot be certayne for that an heretike may vse the same meanes how much more may the vniuersall body of the Church vsing the selfe-same meanes also as many of her learned members no doubt do how much more I say may shee be thought and presumed to attayne to the true sense of the holy Ghost seing that she hath a speciall promise of his infallible assistance to that effect which particular men haue not though heretiks are wont proudly to presume thereof And so yow shall see yt appeare also in these disputations when we come to discusse the particulars 43. And heere it is to be noted that presently vpon the end of this Oxford disputation vnder Q. Mary it was reported that others should be held at Cambridge betweene the Doctors of that vniuersity and the residue of the Protestant preachers that were in prison wherof they being aduertised by the warninge of Doctor Ridley as yt seemeth by Fox and castinge their heads togeather vpon the matter determined to refuse all disputation except it were before the Queene and priuy Councell or before the houses of parlament to which effect they sett sorth a publike wrytinge and protestation with certayne reasons of excuses mouinge them thervnto subscribed by Hooper Farrar Taylor Philpott Bradford Rogers Saunders and some others And their cheefe excuse was for that matters had byn determined by parlament before they were disputed of not consideringe that in K. Edwards dayes the same course with farre lesse reason was held and determined by Parlament before the Protestants disputations in Cambridge Of diuers other Disputations held besides these ten §. 9. 44. These ten disputations I thought good to sett downe for that they were held vpon the first chaunges of Religion in England within the space of 4. or 5. yeares as before hath byn said diuers others I do passe ouer though some of them were as sollemne as these as that of K. Henry the 8. against Lambert vvherin Doctor Cranmer disputed for the reall presence and the Lord Cromwell gaue sentence against him as we haue shewed before in Lamberts story That also which was held on pretended in the beginninge of the raigne of Q Elizabeth at Westminster betweene nyne persons of the Catholike parte and as many of the Protestant preachers newly come from beyond the seas Those of the Catholike side were siue Bishopps to witt Doctor Iohn VVhite Bishopp of VVinchester Doctor Baynes of Lichsield Doctor Scott of Chester Doctor Oglethorpe or Carliele Doctor VVatson of Lincolne with foure other Doctors adioyned vnto them Doctor Cole Deane of London Doctor Langedale Archdeacon of Lewis Doctor Harpesfield Archdeacon of Canterbury and Doctor Chadsey Archdeacon of Middlesex And for the Protestant parte were Doctor Scory an Apostata friar Doctor Cox before mentioned that fledd the realme vnder Q.
sectaryes of our tyme do follow him in that assertion then can they haue no ground or certainty this way but each man and woman must seeke other grounds and proofes and stand vpon their owne iudgements for triall of the same which how well the most part of people can do being eyther yonge simple vnlearned or otherwayes so busyed in other matters as they cannot attend thervnto euery man of meane discretion will consider and consequently they must needs be said both to liue and dye vvithout any ground of their faith at all but proper opinion and so perish euerlastingely 9. The famous Doctor S. Augustine handleth this matter in a speciall booke to his frend Honoratus deceaued by the Manichies as himselfe also sometymes had byn and he intituleth his booke De vtilitate credendi of the profitt that commeth to a man by beleeuing the Church and points of faith therin taught without demaundinge reason or proofe therof which the Manichies derided and said that they required nothinge to be beleeued of their followers but that which first should be proued to them by good proofe and reason and not depend only of mens creditt but the holy Father scorneth this hereticall bragg and oftentation of theirs and commendeth highly the contrary custome of simple beleeuinge vpon the creditt of the Catholike Church for that otherwise infinite people should haue no faith at all and exhorteth his frend Honoratus to take the same course first to beleeue and after to seeke the reason His discourse is this Fac nos nunc primum quaerere cuinam Religioni animas nostras c. Suppose that we now first of all did seeke vnto what Religion we should commit our soules to be purged and rectified without all doubt we must begin with the Catholike Church for that she is the most eminent now in the world there being more Christians in her at this day then in any other Church of Iewes and Gentills put togeather And albeit amongst these Christians there may be sects and heresies and all of them would seeme to be Catholiks and do call others besides themselues heretiks yet all graunt that yf we consider the whole body of the world there is one Church amongst the rest more eminent then all other more plentifull in number as they which know her do affirme more sincere also in truth but as concerninge truth we shall dispute more afterward now yt is sufficient for them that desire to learne that there is a Catholike Church which is one in yt selfe whervnto diuers heretiks do feigne and diuise diuers names wheras they and their sects are called by peculiar names which themselues cannot deny wherby all men that are indifferent not letted by passion may vnderstand vnto what Church the name Catholike which all parts desire pretend is to be giuen 10. Thus S. Augustine teachinge his frend how he might both know and beleeue the Catholike Church and all that shee taught simply and without asking reason or proofe And as for knowing and discerning her from all other Churches that may pretend to be Catholike we heare his marks that she is more eminent vniuersall greater in number and in possession of the name Catholike The second that she may be beleeued securely and cannot deceaue nor be deceaued in matters of faith he proueth elswhere concluding finally in this place Si iam satis tibi iactatus videris c. Yf thou dost seeme to thy selfe now to haue byn sufficiently tossed vp and downe amonge sectaryes and wouldst putt an end to these labours and tormoyles follow the way of Cath. discipline which hath flowen downe vnto vs from Christ by his Apostles and is to flow from vs to our posterity 11. This then is the iudgement and direction of S. Augustine that a man should for his first ground in matters of faith looke vnto the beleefe of the greatest most eminent Church of Christendome that hath endured longest embraceth most people hath come downe from our fore-fathers with the name of Catholike not only among her owne professors but euen among her enemyes Iewes infidells and heretiks and so is termed held by them in their common speach as the said Father in diuers others places declareth at large Which rule of direction yf we will follow about these three articles of faith now proposed the reall presence Transubstantiation and Sacrifice of the masse yt is easily seene what ground we haue for their beleefe in this kind of proofe so highly esteemed by S. Augustine which is the authority of the vniuersall Cath. Church For that when Luther and his followers began to oppose themselues in our dayes no man can deny but that our beleefe in these articles was generally receaued ouer all Christendome as well Asia and Africa where so euer Christians be as Europe and so vpward tyme out of mynd neither can any beginning be assigned to these doctrines in the Cath. Church but only a certayne definition and determination of some Councells about the name of Transubstantiation as after shal be declared 12. Now then hauinge found out this first ground which S. Augustine and other Fathers do make so great accoumpt of which is the authority and beleefe of that Church that generally is called Catholike Yf we passe further and see what grounds this Church had or hath to admytt the same which yet is not needfull or possible to all sortes of men for that only can be done by the learneder sort we shall find that she hath such grounds as may conuince any man that is not obstinate and indurate to the contrary And first to begin with the article of the reall presence what ground proofe or Theologicall demonstration can there bee which the Cath. Church hath not for her beleefe in that high mistery which as it was to be one of the cheefest most sacred and admirable of Christian Religion so was yt meet that yt should be confirmed by all the principall wayes that any article of faith could or can be confirmed that is to say both by scriptures of the ould and new Testament and the true exposition therof by auncient Fathers that liued before this controuersie began with Sacramentaryeâ— by authority and tradition of the Apostles and their successors by testimony of auncient Fathers from age to age by consent and agreement practise and vse of the vniuersall Church by the concourse and approbation of almighty God with euident and infinite miracles by confession of the aduersaryes and other such generall heads of arguments which Catholike diuines do produce for this truth for iustifyinge the Churches faith therin 13. And out of the scriptures their demonstration is not single or of one sort only but in diuers manners as to the height and dignity of so diuine and venerable a mystery was conuenient For that out of the ould Testament they shew how yt was prefigured and prophesied and in the new both promised
Christs institution This is my body which can haue no other probable exposition but that the bread is chaunged into his body And so yt is expounded by all the forsaid Fathers and others that before this controuersie fell out interpreted the same words of our Sauiour 31. These grounds then had the English Catholiks in K. Edwards dayes to stand in the defence of this doctrine that is to say the cleere words of scripture so vnderstood by all antiquity togeather with the assertions and asseuerations of all the Fathers the determination of Councells presently vpon the controuersie first moued and namely of that great famous Lateran Councell wherin concurred both the Greeke and Latyn Church there being present the Greeke patriarks of Constantinople and Hierusalem 70. metropolitan Archbishops and aboue a thousand and two hundred other Fathers of diuers states degrees compare this with a meeting of some twenty or thirty ministers impugninge the same All which hauinge disputed the matter and considered as well by scripture and by ancient tradition of the Fathers and vniuersall Cath. Church what had byn held before did with full agreement determine declare this matter accursinge whosoeuer should from that tyme foreward deny that doctrine of Transubstantiation Which decree of that Councell being receaued generally vvithout contradiction throughout the Christian world hath byn confirmed by seauen other Councells since that tyme as before we haue shewed And let the discreet reader vveigh vvith himselfe vvhich party hath more security for yt selfe eyther the Catholike that followed all this authority consent of antiquity or our new Protestants that vpon fresh imaginations of their owne heads diuised a new doctrine contrary to all this antiquity And thus much of this article for a tast of that which may be alleaged for yt Groundes for the sacrifice of the masse §. 2. 32. The third question proposed to be handled in the foresaid disputations was about the sacrifice of the masse to witt whether the selfe-same body of our Lord whose reall presence is proued in the first question be not only a Sacrament in the Christian Church as yt is receaued vnder a signe of bread and wyne by the Priest and communicants but a sacrifice also as yt is offered to God the Father by the Priest vpon the Altar and whether this externall and visible sacrifice be appointed by Christ to be iterated and dayly frequented in the Church vnto the worlds end and this both for an externall worshipp peculiar to Christians whereby they are distinguished from all other people as also for propitiation of sinnes by applyinge the meritt and vertue of the other bloudy sacrifice of our Sauiour on the Crosse once offered for all and euer auayleable as S. Paul at large declareth in his epistle to the Hebrewes for sanctifyinge the redeemed this then being the question and this being a doctrine so generally receaued throughout the Christian world both in the Greeke Latin AEthiopian Armenian and other Christian Churches as there was no doubt or question therof when Luther and his ofspring began yt fell out in England that vnder the child King Edward his raigne name authority that the L. Seymour protect our and his followers with some few Priests that were weary of massinge and desirous of marriage but cheefly Cranmer and Ridley Hooper Latymer and others bad heads of the cleargy in those dayes tooke vpon them to pull downe this publike vse of sacrifice and afterward to examine and call in question the doctrine therof At which chaunge and suddayne innouation neuer seene in England before from the first day that Christian Religion entred vnder the Apostles as all the realiues and contreyes round about remayned astonished so diuers notwithstanding of the lighter sort enclyned to noueltyes applauded to them followed their diuise others more prudent and respectiue to their owne saluation consideringe that there went more in this matter then the pleasure and fancyes of a few particular men stood constant in that which before they had receaued and that which generally they saw and knew to be in vse throughout all Christendome without cōtradiction which could not be by S. Austens rule but that yt must needs come downe from the Apostles themselues for so much as all opposite doctrine to that which was first planted by them receaued from them could neuer be so generally admitted without contradiction 33. Wherfore entringe into due consideration of this matter whilst all the ruffe ran the other way for 5. or 6. yeares space vnder that King Child and those other little tyrants that bare sway and one destroyed the other by Gods iust iudgement vnder him These good men the Catholikes I meane fell to search what grounds they had or might find out for this so receaued a doctrine practise as this of the masse and sacrifice was And first they found that wheras the first insult of heretiks was against the very name of the masse as a new diuised thinge without reason or signification they found I say that it was a very ancient and vsuall word for the externall sacrifice of Christians vpon the Altar in the Latyn Church for twelue hundred yeares past and downeward in place wherof the Grecians haue vsed the word Liturgie Synaxis and the like and this vse is not only to be shewed by the testimonyes of particular Fathers as Saint Ambrose S. Augustine S. Leo S. Gregory Victor Vticensis Cassianus and other but by whole Councells also as by that of Rome vnder Pope Siluester the first of 275. Bishops held almost 1300. yeares gone the second fourth of Carthage held the next age after and the Councell of Agatha in France the same age the Councell of Ilerdum and Valentia in Spaine and of Orleance in France all aboue 1000. yeares gone which was sufficient matter against the vanyty of heretiks that condemned the name the words for example of S. Ambrose sayinge Missam facere coepi orare in oblatione Deum I began to say masse and to pray to God in the oblation of the sacrifice and those of S. Austen In lectione quae nobis ad missas legenda est audituri sumus We shall heare or this matter more in the lesson which is to be read vnto vs at masse These speaches I say this practise of so ould learned holy Priests as these and their fellowes were did preuayle more with the grauer sort of English people then the lightnesse inconstancy of Cranmer Ridley and such other licentious Priests as for liberty fell to Apostasie 34. And this for the name of the masse But for the nature and substance therof which conteyneth the externall true and proper sacrifice of the Christian Church they found such store of euident proofes and most graue authorityes as might stay confirme and satisfie any mans mynd that were not willfully bent to the
furious Circumcellians that vvere ready to murder men vpon zeale of their heresie 5. I lett passe another disputation vvhich the said Father had some 10. or 11. yeares after that by the order of Pope Zozimus of Rome in the Citty of Caesarea in Mauritania vvith one Emeritus a Donatist B. of that Citty all the vvhole people of the Citty togeather vvith diuers Bishopps being present but little good could be done vvith him his obstinacy vvas so great and peruerse The acts of that disputation are extant in S. Austen often mention therof is made by himselfe by Possidonius in his life And this for the Donatists 6. But vvith the Arrians I find the same Father to haue had sundry disputations also as namely once vpon the yeare of Christ 422. the Gouernour Bonifacius hauinge many Gothes in his campe vvho vvere of the Arrian sect they had also an Arrian Bishopp that gouerned them named Maximinus vvho in their opinion vvas very learned and therfore they made instance that he might dispute vvith S. Augustine vvhich the good Father accepted for he refused none and so they had their meetinge and disputation and the acts thereof are extant in his vvorks togeather vvith a certaine booke of his ovvne added thervnto for explication of diuers points vvherof these heretiks vvere vvont to vaunt aftervvard as though they had gott the victory vvhich happened to the same Father in another combatt held the very same yeare vvith one Conte Pascentius of the same Arrian sect vvho vvas cheefe fifchall or treasourer of the Emperor and most arrogantlie chalenged to dispute vvith S. Austen but yet in priuate vvithout notaryes in respect of the Emperiall lavves that did forbidd publike disputations in fauour of sects and heresies VVhich disputation S. Augustine accepted and the same vvas held priuatly in the presence of many noble and learned men but the heretikes vvould not yeld but rather published soone after as their fashion is that they had the victory vvhich S. Austen vvas forced to refute by many seuerall epistles and by settinge forth the disputation it selfe as yt is to be seene in his vvorks 7. And this may suffice for a tast of some disputations held at diuers tymes and in diuers countreyes vvith heretiks of sundry sects in the ancient Church And I might recite many more as that of Maximus a learned Catholike monke in Africa vvho vpon the yeare of Christ 645. held a very famous disputation against one Pyrrhus Archbishop of Constantinople a great pillar of those heretiks called Monothelits that held one only vvill and not tvvo to be in Christ our Sauiour vvhich disputation being made in the presence of many Bishopps and of the gouernour of that Country named Gregorius Patricius the hereticall Archbishopp vvas so confounded as he left his heresie vvent to Rome and gaue vp a booke of his pennance to Pope Theodorus and vvas receaued by him into the Catholike communion againe and that vvas the euent of that disputation 8. And not full 20. yeares after this againe to vvitt vpon the yeare 664. vvas that great disputation also in England betvvene the English and scottish Bishops about the obseruation of Easter in the presence of tvvo Kings Oswyn and Egfrid his sonne Kinges of Northumberland and of the Mercians the cheefe disputers on the Scottish Bishopps parte vvere Colman and Cedda and of the English Agilbertus Bishopp of the VVestsaxons and VVilfrid and the issue of this disputation vvas that Kings Osvvyn vvas conuerted to the vnion of the Roman Church and caused the vse thereof to be practized in his countrey 9. And so vve see by these examples and many more that might be alleaged that disputations in points of Religion are sometymes necessary do much good vvhen they are taken in hand vvith equall and due conditions and conuenient lavves for indifferency in tryinge out the truth for that othervvayes they may be pernicious haue byn refused by anciēt Fathers as vve read of one reiected by Saint Ambrose in Milayne vpon the yeare of Christ 286. vvhen Auxentius the Arrian-Bishopp being puffed vp vvith pride arrogancy by the fauour of the Empresse Iustina infected vvith the same heresy had not only prouoked S. Ambrose to publike disputation but had further procured that Valentinian the yong Emperour being yet a child not baptized but only Cathecumenus did make a publike edict to commaund the said disputations to be held vpō such a day in his publike court or consistorie before himselfe the said Empresse certaine learned Pagans and Ievves being appointed for iudges in that matter But S. Ambrose by the counsell of diuers Bishopps gathered togeather vvith him refused to come to those disputatiōs vvryting a booke to the Emperour Valentinian for his excuse shevvinge the iniustice and vnequality of the order and of those tymes and persuadinge him to recall the said lavv And yf he vvould haue that controuersie in religion betvveene them and the Arrians treated againe he should follovv therin the excellent example of his predecessor Constantine the great vvho suffered Priests and Bishopps only to handle that matter in the Councell of Nice and so vvas this disputation broken of presently there happened a thing of great admiratiō saith Paulinus in the life of S. Ambrose vvhich vvas that a certaine principall learned Arrian acerrimus disputator inconuertibilis ad fidem Catholicam being a most eager disputer and esteemed not possible to be conuerted to the Catholike faith being deceaued at it seemeth of his hope and expectation to dispute in this conflict vvent to the Church to heare at least vvhat Ambrose could say out of the pulpit in his sermons vvhere seing an Angell to speake as it vvere in his eare he vvas by that miracle not only conuerted to be a Catholike but became also a most vehement defendor of that faith against the heretiks 10. To returne then to our purpose of disputation yt is of great moment hovv and in vvhat tyme and place and vvith vvhat lavves and conditions they are made vvherof yovv vvill see the proofe and experience also in these ten that heere vve are to present vvherof six being held vnder the gouernemēt of Protestants and 4. vnder Catholike magistrates yovv shall see complaints on both sides of inequality vsed but he that shall read and consider them in differently and vvithout passion euen as they are sett dovvne by Fox himselfe for vve could gett no other records therof for the present he shall easily see no small differences to appeare For that the disputatiōs both at Oxford and Cambridge in K. Henryes dayes vvere only certaine ostentations of light skyrmishes a farre of so vainly and fondly performed as they haue no substance in them at all And so he vvill see that shall read these examinations The other vnder Queene Mary though the first of them in the conuocation-house vvherin Protestants only vvere opponents
againe exhibited and confirmed and this not by exposition of their owne heads only as sectaryes do but by intendement and interpretation of the grauest and most ancient Fathers that haue liued in the Church of God from age to age who vnderstood so the said figures and foreshewinges of the old Testament As for example the bread and wine misteriously offered to almighty God by Melchisedeck King and Priest who bare the type of our Sauiour Gen. 14. Psalm 109. Heb. 7. The shew-bread amonge the Iewes that only could be eaten by them that were sanctified Exod. 40. c. Reg. 21. The bread sent miraculously by an Angell to Elias whereby he was so strengthened as he trauayled 40. dayes without eating by vertue only of that bread These three sorts of bread to haue byn expresse figures of this Sacrament and of the trew flesh of Christ therein conteined do testifie by one consent all the ancient Fathers as S. Cyprian lib. 2. epist. 3. Clem. Alexand. lib. 4. Strom. Ambros. lib. 4. de Sacram. cap. 3. Hier in cap. 1. ad Titum Chrysost. hom 35. in Gen. August lib. 2. cont litteras Petii cap. 37. Cyrill Catechesi 4. Mystag Arnobius Eusebius Gregorius and many others 14. Three other figures there are not expressed in the forme of bread but in other things more excellēt then bread as the paschall lambe Exod. 12. Leuit. 23. The bloud of the Testament described Exod. 24. Heb. 9. And fulfilled by Christ Luc. 22. when he said This cupp is the new Testament in my bloud and againe This is my bloud of the new Testament Matth. 26. The manna also sent by God from heauen was an expresse figure of this Sacrament as appeareth by the words of our Sauiour Ioan. 6. and of the Apostle 1. Cor. 10. Out of all which figures is inferred that for so much as there must be great difference betweene the figure and the thing prefigured no lesse yf we beleeue S. Paul then betweene a shaddow the body whose shaddow yt is yt cannot be imagined by any probability that this Sacrament exhibited by Christ in performance of those figures should be only creatures of bread and wine as Sacramentaryes do imagine for then should the figures be eyther equall or more excellent then the thing prefigured yt selfe for who will not confesse but that bread for bread Elias his bread made by the Angell that gaue him strength to walke 40. dayes vpon the vertue therof was equall to our English-ministers Communion-bread and that the manna was much better 15. And yf they will say for an euasion as they do that their bread is not common bread but such bread as being eaten and receaued by faith worketh the effect of Christs body in them and bringeth them his grace we answeare that so did these figures and Sacraments also of the ould Testament being receaued by faith in Christ to come as the ancient Father and Preachers receaued them And for so much as Protestants do further hould that there is no difference betweene the vertue efficacy of those old Sacramēts and ours which we deny yt must needs follow that both we they agreeinge that the Fathers of the old Testament beleeued in the same Christ to come that we do now being come their figures and shaddowes must be as good as our truth in the Sacrament that was prefigured if it remaine bread still after Christs institution and consecration But Catholike Fathers did vnderstand the matter farre otherwise and to alleage one for all for that he spake in the sense of all in those dayes Saint Hierome talking of one of those forsaid figures to witt of the shew-bread and comparinge yt with the thinge figured and by Christ exhibited saith thus Tantum interest c. There is so much difference betweene the shew-bread and the body of Christ figured therby as there is difference betweene the shaddow and the body whose shaddow yt is and betweene an Image and the truth which the Image representeth betweene certaine shapes of things to come and the things themselues prefigured by those shapes And thus much of figures presignifications of the old Testament 16. In the new Testament as hath byn said are conteyned both the promise of our Sauiour to fullfill these figures with the truth of his flesh which he would giue to be eaten in the Sacrament as also the exhibition and performance therof afterward the very night before his passion with a miraculous confirmation of the same by S. Paul vpon conference had therin with Christ himselfe after his blessed assension The promise is conteyned in the sixt Chapter of S. Iohns ghospell where our Sauiour foretelleth expressely that he would giue his flesh to vs to be eaten for that except vve did eat the same vve could not be saued that his flesh vvas truly meat and his bloud truly drinke and that his flesh that he would giue vs to eat vvas the same that vvas to be giuen for the life of the world All which speaches of our Sauiour expounded vnto vs in this sense for the reall presence of his flesh in the Sacrament by the vniuersall agreeinge consent of auncient Fathers must needs make great impression in the hart of a faithfull Christian man especially the performance of this promise ensuing soone after vvhen Christ being to depart out of this world and to make his last will and Testament exhibited that which heere he promised takinge bread brake and distributed the same sayinge this is my body that shal be deliuered for yow which words are recorded by three seuerall Euangelists and that with such significant and venerable circumstances on our Sauiours behalfe of feruent prayer washinge his Apostles feet protestation of his excessiue loue and other deuout and most heauenly speaches in that nearnesse to his passion as well declared the exceeding greatnesse of the mistery which he was to institute whervnto if we add that excellent cleare cōfirmation of S. Paul who for resoluing doubts as it seemed had conference with Christ himselfe after his ascension for before he could not he being no Christian when Christ ascended the matter will be more euident His words are these to the Corinth Ego enim accepi à Domino quod tradidi vobis c. For I haue receaued from our Lord himselfe that which I haue deliuered vnto yow about the Sacrament and do yow note the word for importinge a reason why he ought specially to be beleeued in this affayre for so much as he had receaued the resolution of the doubt frō Christ himselfe And then he setteth downe the very same words againe of the Institution of this Sacrament that were vsed by Christ before his passion without alteration or new exposition which is morally most certayne that he would haue added for clearinge all doubts yf there had byn any other sense to haue byn gathered of them then the plaine words themselues
Melchisedech to be offered to God ouer all the World And all the other sacrifices signes and oblations mentioned before as prefiguringe the reall presence of Christs sacred body and true flesh in the Sacrament are applied by the selfe same Fathers whome before we haue named to the prefiguration also of this diuine sacrifice conteyninge the selfe same thinge which the Sacrament doth but in a different sort in respect of diuers ends the one as yt is receaued by the communicants the other as yt is offered vnto God the Father 39. After these prefigurations there follow the predictions of Prophetts as that of Esay 19. and 66. where is forteold the reiection of the Aaronicall priesthood and sacrifice and a new promised vnder the Christians The prophesy of Daniell also where it is foretould that in the last age of the law of grace by the comminge of Antichrist iuge sacrificium that is the dayly sacrifice shall cease Of this I say is inferred by the ancient Fathers that vntill Antichrists comminge there shal be a perpetuall and dayly sacrifice amonge Christians which is most of all confirmed by the prophesie of Malachias in these words Ad vos ò sacerdotes c. To yow ò priests that despise my name and do offer vpon my Altar polluted bread and do sacrifice the beasts that are blind lame and weake I haue no more likinge of yow saith the lord of hosts and I will not receaue at your hands any gifts for that from the east to the west my name is great amonge the gentills and they do sacrifice vnto me in euery place and do offer vnto my name a pure oblation for that my name is great amonge the gentills saith the lord of hostes Out of which place the Fathers do shew first that heere the priesthood and sacrifice of Aaron was to be reiected a new priesthood and sacrifice accordinge to the order of Melchisedech erected amongst the gentills wherby ordinarily are vnderstood the Christian people conuerted chiefly from gentility who were to succeed in their place and that with such certainty as the present tense is put for the future accordinge to the manner of prophesies and the Antithesis or opposition betweene the two sacrifices the one reiected the other promised doth make the matter more plaine for that as the Iewes sacrifice could not be offered but in one place to witt in the Temple of Hierusalem so shall the Christian sacrifice be offered vp in omni loco that is euery where without respect of places from the east to the west The Iewish sacrifices were many and of diuers sorts but the Christian sacrifice that should succeed in place therof was to be but one The Iewish sacrifices were polluted not so much in respect of great quantity of beasts bloud powred out therin and for that they offered defectuous beasts as for the wickednesse of them that offered the same but the Christian sacrifice was to be cleane vnspotted not only in respect of the vnbloudy manner wherin yt was to be offered vnder the formes of bread and wyne but especially for the excellency of the thinge yt selfe offered being the most pretious body of Christ himselfe and for that the demeritt of the offerer cannot take away the worth of the offeringe 40. These circumstances then considered and that the heretikes heere cannot runne to their shift of inward and inuisible sacrifices for that these could not be vnderstood by the Prophett as new sacrifices that should succeede to the ould for that these were alwayes in vse with good men duringe the tyme of the old sacrifice also and were lawfull yea commaunded in all tymes to witt to haue inward piety and deuotion giue almes and the like these things I say considered togeather with the expositions of holy Fathers as well vpon these as vpon other places of the old Testament there can be no probable doubt but that this externall sacrifice of the Christian was prophesyed by the holy Ghost longe before the comminge of Christ. 41. Secondly the same is proued out of diuers places of the new Testament And first out of S. Iohns ghospell where as our Sauiour promised in mysterious words the institution of this blessed sacrifice as before hath byn seene so also did he signifie that this sacrifice should succeed in steed of all sacrifices that went before For wheras the Samaritan woman at the well speakinge of the schisme betweene the Iewes Samaritans about adoring in the Temple of Ierusalem and in the hill Garizim of Samaria which word of adoringe must needs in that place signifie sacrifycinge as yt doth also in other places of scripture as Gen. 22. Act. 8. and els where for that the controuersie betweene the Iewes and Samaritans was about the vse of sacrificing as the highest externall act of adoration our Sauiour aunswereth to her question that the houre was now come when neyther in that hill of Samaria nor in Ierusalem they should adore that is to say vse any more sacrifice but that a new adoration in spiritt and truth should succeed the former which adoration being vnderstood of sacrifice as the circumstance both of the place and matter do enforce yt followeth that Christ did heere promise a new sacrifice that should be spirituall and true spirituall both in comparison of the bloudy sacrifice that went before for that the consecration of Christs holy body in this sacrifice is made by speciall worke and operation of the holy Ghost true also and in truth it may iustly be said to bee for that yt is the fullfillinge of all precedent sacrifices and the truth of all former figures 42. There ensue the places of Saint Mathew S. Marke S. Luke and S. Paul about the institution and first celebration of this vnbloudy sacrifice of Christ in his last supper where yf we admitt that which all the circumstances of the places themselues do plainly insinuate or rather inforce the continuall exposition and tradition of the auncient Church doth teach vs to witt that Christ our Sauiour hauinge consecrated his sacred body did offer the same vnto his Father as a most gratefull sacrifice in his last supper then must yt follow that the words hoc facite in meant commemorationem do this in remembrance of me implyed a precept not only of receauinge and communicatinge the body of Christ but to offer vp the selfe same also to God in sacrifice after the example of Christ himselfe which is that we call the sacrifice of the masse to proue that th' Apostles vnderstood these words I meane do this in remembrance of me so and in this sense not only the most ancient Fathers as hath byn said do testifie the same but the ancient liturgies or ritualls also of the Apostles and their schollers as namely of S. Iames S. Clement and S. Dionysius Areopagita do make the matter manifest concerning the Apostles practise in this behalfe to witt that they
I said not but that we sacrifised to God in the memoryes of Martyrs which we most frequently vse to do after that only rite which God in the manifestation of the new Testament hath comaunded vs to sacrifice vnto him 47. By all which testimonyes is euident that the Church of God in the first foure ages after the Apostles did both offer an externall sacrifice which was the same that Christ had offered before and this after a peculiar rite insinuated by Christ to the Apostles and deliuered by them to their posterity which peculiar rite is more expressed in the liturgies before mentioned and that all this is done by the authority and example of Christ himselfe in his last supper and by tradition of the Apostles which is inough to settle any pious mans conscience Now then thirdly wheras I should by order passe to the consideration of ancient Fathers sayings testimonyes about this matter they are so many and copious as I should be prolix and weary to the reader in producing so many as may be alleaged no one article or mystery of our faith being so often handled or inculcated by them as this of the Church sacrifice For better comprehendinge wherof I shall as for the mystery of the reall presence before heere note only vnto thee certayne generall heads whervnto the said Fathers testimonyes may be reduced as first that euery where in their wrytings speakinge of this oblation made in the masse they vse the words sacrificium hostia victima offerre immolare sacrificare all which are words that peculiarly and properly do signify sacrifice which is certayne that the said Fathers would neuer so comonly haue vsed no more then the Protestants do vse them now of their supper if they had meant no otherwise then the Protestants do for other Sacraments as Baptisme for example they do not call eyther sacrifice host or victime nor that the act of Baptizinge is offerringe immolation or sacrifice as they do the act of celebratinge masse wherof you may read all the Fathers generally as S. Hyppolitus Martyr Orat. de Antichrist S. Ambrose in psalm 38. Nissen orat de resurrect Chrysost. hom 24. in 1. Cor. hom 17. in epist ad Hebraeos Cyrill lib. de adorat Aug. l. 2. quaest Euang. q. 8. l. 4. de Trinit cap. 14. 48. The second head is of those authorityes that do compare this Christian sacrifice with the sacrifices of the Iewes affirminge the one to be of the flesh of beasts spotted the other of the pure and immaculate flesh of Christ which they would neuer haue done in like manner yf they had not meant properly of true externall sacrifices offered by Christians in the new law wherof yow may see at large Tertullian lib. contr Iudaeos cap. 1. Iustin. in Triph. Chrysost. in psalm 95. Cyprian lib. de vnitat Ecclesiae Ambros. in cap. 1. Lucae Nazianz. orat 2. de paschat Aug. lib. 17. de Ciuitat Dei cap. 20. S. Leo. serm de passion and many others 49. The third head is of those authorityes that compare this dayly sacrifice of the Christian Church offered in euery place throughout the world with the only sacrifice of Christ offered once for all vpon the Crosse wherin for differēce sake they vse the words cruentum incruentum sacrificium that is bloudy and vnbloudy sacrifice for distinguishinge the māner of the oblatiō the one vpon the Crosse the other vpon many Altars in the Church at once till the worlds end otherwise holding the thing it selfe offered to be the very same in th' one other sacrifice See S. Chrysost. hom 24. in 1. Cor. hom 2. ad 2. Tim. Cyprian lib. 2. ep 3. Ambros. in psalm 38. Nissen orat 1. de resurrect Aug. lib. 3. cont Donatist cap. 19. lib. 20. contr Faust. cap. 21. Isichius in Leuit. cap. 8. and others 50. The fourth head is of those that affirme this our dayly sacrifice to be propitiatory both for the liue and dead as well those that are absent as present and that for both these sorts of people yt ought and was accustomed to be offered in their dayes which doth euidently proue yt a true sacrifice for that a Sacrament only doth profitt only those that do communicate and receaue the same and no Protestant will say that their communion is offered vp for those that are absent quicke or dead as the ancient Fathers do euery where say that our host Eucharist was offered vp in their dayes and consequently they held yt not only for a Sacrament but also for a sacrifice whereof yow may see S. Chrysostome hom 79. ad Pop. Antiochen where he saith yt was offered for Bishopps and Gouernours of the Church hom 72. in Matth. for sicke men lib. 6. de Sacerdotio for the dead For which effect see S. Augustine lib. 22. de ciuit cap. 8. in Enchirid. cap. 110. lib. 9. Confess cap. 12. where he professeth to haue offered sacrifice of the masse for his mother S. Monica 51. The fifth head is of those places wherin the Fathers do vse the words Altar Priests and Priesthood as proper peculiar and appropriated to true sacrifices For as the Protestants of our tymes do not vse these words for that they hould not their supper to be a sacrifice but rather do fly them though neuer so much vsed by the said Fathers and in place therof do vse the words table minister mynistry and other such like of their new Religion so neyther would the Fathers haue vsed the same words yf they had had the same meaning that Protestants haue For that well knew the said Fathers how to expresse their meaninge in proper words and therfore when they say that Altars amonge Christians are sedes corporis Christi the seats of the body of Christ and that in their dayes Christians did adgeniculare aris Dei knele downe at the Altars of God quod obsculabantur altaria that they kissed the Altars and that the office of Christian Priests is to sacrifice vpon the said Altars yt is euident what they meant to him that will vnderstand them wherof more may be read in S. Cyprian lib. 1. ep 9. Euseb. lib. 1. demonstr Euang. cap. 6. Athan. in vita Anton. Nazianz. orat in Gorgon Nissen lib. de baptisimo Chrysost. hom 53. ad Pop. Antioch hom 20. in 2. Cor. Hieron lib. cont Vigilant dial cont Lucifer Aug. lib. 8. cap. vlt. and others 52. The sixt consideration out of the Fathers may be their lyturgyes or forme of diuine seruice or masse for offeringe of this sacrifice in those dayes of which sort of liturgyes there are extant vnto this day diuers as that of S. Iames the Apostle S. Clement scholler and successor of S. Peter of S. Basill S. Chrysostome S. Ambrose which albeit in all particular forme of prayer do not agree with our forme and canon of masse at this
day yet in the substance of the sacrifice they do as also in many other particular circumstances vsinge the words of oblation sacrifice victime signes singings blessings eleuations and other such rites which Protestants cannot abide And for the cannon and forme of our masse which is vsed at this day in the Latyn Church most parts therof are to be seene in S. Ambrose his books de Sacramentis and the whole order as now yt is hath endured without alteration from S. Gregory the first downeward wherof yow may see Alcuinus Amalarius VValfridus and other ancient authors in their books de diuinis officijs 53. By all which generall heads yow may easily see the multitude of testimonyes that may be alleaged out of the Fathers yf we should prosecute euery one of these in particular how great reason Martyn Luther had to except against them all or rather to defy them all when first he begaÌ„ to write against this sacrifice Hic non moramur saith he si clamitant Papistae Ecclesia Ecclesia Patres Patres heere we care not though Papists cry Church Church Fathers Fathers And againe Heere I do professe against them that vvill cry out that I do teach against the rite of the Church and ordinances of Fathers that I vvill heare none of these obiections And in another place against our K. Henry of England much more immodestly and wickedly when the King alleaged the authorityes of ancient Fathers for the masse this shamelesse fellow answered Thomisticos asinos c. I say that these Thomisticall asses haue nothinge to bringe forth but only a multitude of men and vse of antiquity And a little after he saith expressely that he careth not though a thousand Augustines and a thousand Cyprians be brought against him So as this first Father and chiefe Captayne of our Protestants did easily graunt as yow see that the whole consent of ancient Fathers was against him Ponderations Upon the Premises §. 4. 54. All which being considered there remayneth only to weigh what a discreet man may thinke or do in this important case For first heere is all the antiquity of the Christian Church on the one side that testifyeth vnto vs not only what was beleeued and exercised in their dayes but vpon what grounds also both of scriptures of the old and new Testament and by Christs owne institution fact and ordination and by the practise and tradition of the Apostles themselues Then is there the continuance of all ages since throughout all countreyes and nations of Christendome as hath byn said There is the agreement of all generall Councells The consent of all Ecclesiasticall historyes wherin as there is continuall mention of both publike and priuate exercise of this externall Sacrifice So is there no memory at all of any tyme synce the Apostles wherin yt began or that euer any contradiction doubt or question was about the same for 1200. yeares togeather after Christs assension which must needs haue happened yf the vse therof had not byn prescribed and left by Christ and his Apostles themselues For what men or people would haue attempted to begin or bring in so great a matter as this or who would haue receaued yt without opposition yf yt had not byn established euen from the beginninge I adde also another coÌ„sideration of no little importance which is that yf Christ had left his Church people without a particular externall sacrifice wherby they should be distinguished from all other people the Christian Church vnder the law of grace should be inferiour to the Church of the patriarks vnder the law of nature and vnto the Prophetts vnder the law of Moyses for that both of those Churches and people had an externall dayly sacrifice wherby to honour God besides the internall sacrifice of their mynd neyther can yt be said that Christs owne sacrifice on the Crosse once offered for all is this dayly sacrifice apprehended by vs in faith for that they also beleeued in him and their sacrifices were acceptable only by faith in him to come And therfore as Christs one sacrifice then to come was no impediment why their dayly sacrifices which tooke their valour from this one of Christ should not be dayly offered amonge them so the same sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse being now past should not take away our dayly sacrifices offered in remembrance therof and for the applying of the infinite valour of that one sacrifice vnto vs from which this other dayly sacrifice taketh his sufficiency 55. Furthermore the very outward forme of all Christian Churches there buildinge with Crosses Altar Iles and the like the foundinge of monasteryes Chappell 's oratoryes the ceremonyes in foundinge them their statutes for sayinge of masses for the dead which were in Britany both before our nation was conuerted and much more after the whole Canon of our Latyn masse-booke which is graunted by our aduersaryes and euidently proued to haue byn as yt is now for aboue a thousand yeares togeather and brought in by S. Augustine our first Apostle All these things I say do shew whether this were a matter to be called in question by a few libertyne Priests and auaritious noble men to be banished the realme vpon a soddayne vnder the name of a child Kinge that knew not what yt meant as yt was in K. Edwards dayes in our miserable countrey 56. Moreouer yf yow ponder with your selfe what manner of Priests they were for life learninge and vertue that acknowledged themselues to haue offered sacrifices vpon Altars in their dayes as S. Irenaeus S. Cyprian S. Ambrose S. Chrysostome S. Augustine S. Gregory and others of the first ages yea and for these â—ater ages since Berengarius mooued first the question about the reall presence as S. Anselme â— Bernard S. Thomas of Aquin S. Dominicke and almost infinite other Saints and holy men of whome all historyes do report wonderfull extraordinary tokens of almighty God his speciall fauours towards them and do compare them with the first marryed Priests and Apostata friars that were the first impugners of this sacrifice in England or round about vs we shall find a great difference And then yf we consider by what good spiritt or motiue Luther began the first contradiction in Germany which was by the diuells owne persuasion and personall appearance vnto him and disputinge against yt for yt seemed that he esteemed so much both of the man and the matter that he would not send an Embassadour vnto him as he did soone after to Zuinglius for impugninge the reall presence but go himselfe in proper person and that all this is confessed by themselues and testifyed by their owne wrytings All this I say being laid togeather may strengthen him that hath any faith at all to stand constant in the beleefe of the Catholike Church concerninge these articles For yf there be any certainty or ground in Christian Religion at all
can make that the selfe-same flesh of Christ can occupy diuers places at once and that yt be conteyned in no certayne place and that yt lacketh both the outward shape of flesh and proper manner of being c. And for beleeuinge of this he counteth vs madd-men as yow haue heard and so must he account also of necessity all those holy Fathers before mentioned who beleeued the same mystery as we do notwithstandinge the outward appearances of impossibility for comprehendinge wherof they fledd from sense and reason to faith and beleefe 14. And yet further then this the reader must vnderstand that for so much as the said reason and faith are not contradictory the one to the other but more eminent the one aboue the other as before hath byn shewed Catholiks do take vpon them to proue that no one of these difficultyes obiected by faithlesse Protestants is impossible or implieth contradiction in reason it selfe as by the ensuing considerations shall more particularly be declared notinge only to the reader by the way that yf the particular intrinsecall natures and essences of euery thing were cleerly knowen vnto vs â—s they are for example vnto Angells and other Saints that be in glory we should easily see what doth imply contradiction to the said natures and what doth not but for that God for our humility and greater meritt would haue vs not alwayes to see this therfore are we forced to ghesse at the same by way of discourse and reason and by one example to another as yow shall see in the ensuinge obseruations Fourth Obseruation How a body may be vvithout an ordinary naturall place §. 4. 15. One of the greatest difficultyes therfore obiected by the aduersary is that a true and naturall organicall body such as Christs is confessed to be in the Sacrament cannot be without the ordinary dimensions of a peculiar place which we deny in such sense as heere we shall declare For better vnderstandinge wherof is to be noted that three wayes a thinge may be in a place first naturally and ordinarily by extension and commensuration vnto the said place soe as euery part and part cell of the thinge placed do aunswere to each part of the place yt selfe which manner of being in place philosophers do call circumscriptiuely for that all places of the body so placed are so limited and circumscribed by the part of the place as neyther that body can be iâ— any other place nor that place admitt another body without penetratinge the one of the other which by ordinary course of nature is held for impossible 16. Another manner of being in place is more spirituall and hard to conceaue to witt when a thing is so in a place as the parts therof are not extended to the parts of the place as in the former example but yet that the whole thing is so defined and limited within the compasse of that whole place assigned thervnto as naturally yt cannot be in any other whilest yt is there as for example the soule of a man in the body thervnto assigned is so conteyned therin as yt is not elswhere and yet is it not so extended by commensuration as in the former example that one part of the soule aunswereth one part of the body and another another part but the whole soule which is indiuisible and hath no parts at all is wholy in the whole body and wholy in euery part and parcell therof which is a miraculous strange being yf yt be well considered notwithstanding naturall as all philosophers do graunt for that the whole soule of man is as wholy for example in the singar and foote as in the breast and head and yet is but one soule in all and nether many soules nor one soule diuided into parts And after the same manner is an Angell also in a place definitiuely and not circumscriptiuely that is to say wholy in the whole place which he occupieth wholy in euery part therof without multiplication or diuision in himselfe or extension vnto the parts of the place wherin yt is But for that the example of the soule is more familiar and euident to our sense and reason it doth better expresse the matter And yt is to be noted that yt doth somewhat imitate the being of God himselfe wholy and without diuision in all parts of the world and in all creatures therof without limitation change or multiplication but only yt differeth in this that the soule or an Angell being both creatures cannot be euery where as the creatour naturally is and he cannot be otherwise but yet by his diuine power the said creatures may be in diuers places at once as after shal be shewed 17. These two wayes then of being in a place as I haue said are naturall the first circumscriptiuely the second definitiuely But besides these two there is a third supernaturall and possible to Gods diuine omnipotency and not repugnant to reason yt selfe as after shal be shewed which is that one and the selfe-same thing may by Gods diuine power be placed in two different places at once that is to say that the selfe-same soule as yt is naturally wholy and entyrely in the head for example and in the foote so yt repugneth not to the same nature or essence of the soule to be putt in two different bodyes at once The like of an Angell in diuers places and the same also may be held of a naturall body ys God will haue yt so as in the next obseruation shal be proued And this way or manner of being in place for that the Cath. Church doth hould yt to be in the body of our Sauiour in the Sacrament is called by diuines a sacramentall being in place nor for that the true body is not really there as some hearinge the word Sacramentally vsed sometymes by the Fathers and Doctors do fondly apprehend but for that it is there after this speciall manner as we haue declared that is to say so as yt is also in other places at the same tyme. 18. Now then these three wayes or manners of being in place declared yt remayneth that we shew how yt is possible to Gods power and not repugnant to naturall reason that a true body which of his owne nature is in place only after the first manner of circumscription and commensuration or extension may by Gods power be in place also after the second and third way that is difinitiuely and Sacramentally without the first way of commensuration and extension to a place And first heere we shall shew the said possibility in the second way and then of the third in the ensuinge obseruation 19. The only cheefe ground or reason obiected by the heretiks why it may seeme to repugne or imply contradiction that a true organicall body togeather with his quantity such as Christs is in the Sacrament should be definitiuely without extension in place is for that yt appeareth contrary to the nature of
manner of Christs being there from that in heauen and as yt signifieth his being there vnder a Sacrament or signe but yet really we graunt also that he is there spiritually that is to say after a spirituall and not corporall circumscriptiue manner yet truly and really We graunt further that he is in the Sacrament by faith for that we do not see him but apprehend him present by faith but yet truly and really and not in faith and beleefe only And by this yow may perceaue our Sacramentaryes manner of disputinge iust like the Arrians of old tyme and of our dayes who seeke to enacuate all places alleaged for the vnity and equality of Christ with his Father by one only distinction of will and nature So as when Christ said for example Ioan. 6. my Father and I are one yt is true said they they are one in will loue but not in nature thus they deluded all that could be brought for naturall vnity except only the authority and contrary beleefe of the vniuersall Church wherby at last they were ouerborne 46. And the very same course held the Sacramentaryes of our dayes for whatsoeuer plaine and perspicuous places you bring them out of antiquity affirminge the true naturall substantiall body of our Sauiour to be in the Sacrament they will shift of all presently by one of these three words yt is true sacramentally yt is true spiritually and yt is true by faith only as though these could not stand with really or truly and heere of shall yow haue store of examples afterward in the aunswerings of Doctor Perne Cranmer Ridley and Latymer for the Sacramentary party to our arguments taken out of the ancient Fathers For when the said Fathers do auouch that Christ our Sauiours true naturall body is in the Sacrament they answere yt is true sacramentally and thinke they haue defended themselues manfully therby and when in other places the same Fathers do professe that the very same flesh that was borne of the virgin Mary and cruicified for vs is there they aunswere yt is true spiritually and by faith but not really And thus they do euacuate and delude all that can be alleaged But yf they cannot shew as they cannot any one Father that tooke or vsed the words sacramentally spiritually or by faith in this sense as opposite to really and truly in this mystery then is it euident this to be but a shift of their owne inuention to escape therby And so much of this obseruation The nynth Obseruation How Christ is receaued of euill men in the Sacrament and of good men both in and out of the same §. 9. 47. It followeth vpon the former declaration of the words sacrament signe and the rest that we explane in this place a certayne distinction insinuated by the ancient Fathers and touched in the Councell of Trent of three sorts of receauinge and eatinge Christ by this Sacrament First sacramentally alone the second spiritually only the third both sacramentally and spiritually togeather An example of the first is when euill men do receaue the Sacrament vnworthily for that these men thought they receaue the very Sacrament to witt the true body of Christ vnder the formes of bread and wyne yet do they not receaue the true spirituall effect therof which is grace and nourishment of their soule and of these doth S. Paul speake expressely to the Corinthians when he saith He that eateth and drinketh vnworthily videlicet the Sacrament doth eat and drinke iudgement to himselfe not discerninge the body of our Lord. And in this sense do the auncient Fathers vpon this place expound the Apostle as yow may see in the commentaryes of Saint Chrysostome S. Ambrose S. Anselme and other expositors both Greeke and Latyn and S. Austen in many places of his works doth expressely shew the same alleaginge this text of the Apostle for proofe therof Corpus Domini saith he sanguis Domini nihilominus erat illus quibus dicebat Apostolus c. It was notwithstanding the body bloud of our Lord which they tooke to whome the Apostle said he that eateth and drinketh vnworthily eateth and drinketh his owne damnation And to the same effect he saith in diuers other places that Iudas receaued the very selfe-same body of Christ that the other Apostles did and the same affirmeth S. Chrysostome in his homily intituled of the Treason of Iudas generally it is the vniforme opinion of all the auncient Fathers whensoeuer any occasion is giuen to speake or treat therof 48. The second manner of receauing Christ by this Sacrament is tearmed spiritually only for that without sacramentall receauinge of Christs body and bloud a man may in some case receaue the spirituall fruite or effect therof as yf he had receaued the same really and this eyther with relation to the Sacrament videlicet when a man hath a desire to receaue yt actually but cannot or without reference thervnto when by faith and grace good men do communicate with Christ and participate the fruite of his passion In which sense of spirituall communion or eating Christ S. Austen wryteth vpon S. Iohns ghospell Crede manducasti beleeue and thou hast eaten And to the same effect do our Fathers often speake when they treat of this spirituall metaphoricall eating only without relation to the Sacramet which manner of speaches the Sacramentaryes of our dayes do seeke to abuse as though there were no other eatinge of Christ in the Sacrament but by faith alone which is furthest of from the said Fathers meaninge though sometymes they had occasion to speake in that manner 49. The third member of our former diuision is to eat Christ both sacramentally and spiritually as all good Christians do when with due preparation disposition they receaue both the outward Sacrament and inward grace and fruite therof by obseruation of which threefold manner of receauing many obiections and hereticall cauillations will easily afterward be discerned And so much for this The tenth Obseruation Touchinge indignityes and inconueniences obiected by Sacramentaryes against vs in holdinge the Reall presence §. 10. 50. As by the former obiections of naturall impossibilityes yow haue heard this soueraigne mystery impugned both by the learneder sort of old and new heretiks so do the more simple ignorant insist insult most vpon certayne inconueniences indignityes and absurdityes as to them do appeare As for example that Christ in the Sacrament should be eaten with mens teeth go into the belly not only of men weomen but also of beasts yf they should deuoure yt that yt may putrifie be burned cast and fall into base and vnworthy places be troden vnder mens feet with the like which is a kind of argument plausible at the first sight vnto vulgar apprehensions and such as seemed to moue principally the most part of Iohn Fox his artificers and spinster-martyrs as may appeare by their rude clamours and grosse obiections
sett downe in the second Chapter of this Treatise though many waighty they were or might be Wherfore to speake breifely somewhat therof and for more breuity and perspicuity to draw the matter to some kind of order and methode yow must note that of these ten disputations only foure were in tyme of Catholike gouernement as before I signified that is to say the six-dayes conference in the Conuocation-house in the beginninge of Q. Maryes raigne the three-dayes seuerall disputation at Oxford with Cranmer Ridley and Latymer some monethes after And as for the first in the Conuocation-house the Protestants only did dispute for three continuall dayes togeather to witt Phillips Haddon Cheyney Elmour and Philpott and seuerall Catholike men were appointed to aunswere them And when in the end the Protestants were required to aunswere according to promise in their turnes the Catholike opponents for other three dayes they refused yt all sauing Philpott vpon certayne conditions to be heard yet further but Doctor VVeston the prolocutor reiected him as a man fitter to be sent to bedlam saith Fox then to be admitted to disputation c. For that he both was vnlearned and a very madd man in deed Wherfore out of this disputation little or nothinge is offered about this article of reall-presence for that the Catholike party disputed not at all 2. And as for the other three dayes disputation in Oxford the last which was with Latymer was very little for that he fledd disputation as there yow shall see and the few arguments that were made against him were rather in proofe of the sacrifice of the masse so as most arguments were alleaged in the former two-dayes conflict against Cranmer and Ridley which presently we shall examine though vnder K. Edward also one day of the Cambridge disputations was allowed to Catholike opponents to propose their argumeÌ„ts Doctor Madew being defendant for the Protestants and Doctor Glyn Maister Langdall Maister Sedg-wicke opponents for the Catholiks to as out of these foure disputations we shall note breifely some Catholike arguments that were alleaged aduertisinge the reader first to consider with some attention the points ensuinge 3. First that we haue nothinge of these disputations their arguments or aunswers but only such as pleaseth Iohn Fox to deliuer and impart with vs which most euidently do appeare to be mangled and vnperfect in many places without head or foote coherence or consequence which must proceed eyther of purpose to make matters obscure and therby to bring the reader into doubt and confusion or of lacke of good information and that the former is more credible then the second may be gliessed by the variety of impertinent notes in the margent scoffes and iests in the text yt selfe often tymes putt in to deface the Catholike party and to giue creditt to his sectaryes And consequently what faith may be giuen to his narrations but only where they make against himselfe is easy to be seene especially in that himselfe coÌ„fesseth that Ridley wrote in prison his owne disputations after they were past the same we may presume of the rest and then no man can doubt but that they would putt downe their owne parts to their vttermost aduantage or at least-wise with the smallest losse that they could diuise 4. Secondly yt is to be considered of the precedent reader that must aduenture his soule euerlastingely by takinge one part or other in this controuersie heere in hand how much yt may import him to stand attent to the places and authorityes alleaged out of scriptures Fathers for the truth to consider them well reading them ouer againe and againe weighing the true meaning sense of the wryter and not how sleightly or cunningly they are or may be shifted of by any witty wrangler for so much as this may be done with any wrytinge or euidence neuer so manifest yf the defendant will list to cauill the reader be so inconsiderate or carelesse of his owne perill as to be delighted or abused therwith 5. Thirdly in the allegation of Fathers testimonyes which heere are to ensue yt is to be weighed not only what they say but also how they say what phrases and speaches they vse and to what end and whether yf they had byn of the Protestants Religion they would haue vsed those phrases or no more then Protestant wryters do themselues at this day especially so ordinarily and commonly as the said Fathers do they being men both learned wise and religious that well knew how to vtter their owne mynds meaning what is proper improper speach withall not being ignoraÌ„t how great inconueniences must ensue of improper speaches in matters of faith where men are bound to speake precisely and warily and on the other side is â—o be considered also yf they were of contrary opinions to the Protestants and of that faith which we affirme them to be in this point of the reall presence what more effectuall speaches could they haue vsed to expresse yt then they do callinge yt the true body the reall body the naturall body of our Sauiour the same body that he tooke of the blessed Virgin and gaue vpon the Crosse the body vvherby he is vnited vnto vs in humanity and denyinge it expressely to be bread after the vvords of consecration though yt seeme to be bread to our eyes tast and that we must not trust our senses therin but yeld to Gods omnipotency and beleeue that as he hath vvrought infinite other miracles so hath he done this that we must adore yt vvith the highest adoration and other like phrases which neyther Protestants can abide or euer do vse in their wrytinges nor could the Fathers yf they had byn expressely of our Religion as we say they were diuise words more significant proper or effectuall to expresse the truth of our Catholike faith then yf of purpose they had studyed for yt as no doubt they did So as yf the auncient Fathers did vnderstand what they spake and that they spake as they meant then are the Protestants in a pittifull plight whose saluation or damnation dependeth in this whether we must vnderstand them S. Paul and Christ himselfe literally as they spake or by a figure only so as yf they vsed no figure then is the Sacramentary opinion to be held for heresie 6. Fourthly is to be considered also in this matter as els-where we haue noted that when any one of these auncient Fathers in what age soeuer is found to vse these effectuall words for vttering his meaning about this high mystery of Christs being present in the Sacrament he is to be vnderstood to expresse not only his owne iudgement and beleefe therin but the iudgement also and beleefe of the whole Church of Christendome in that age for so much as any Doctor neither then nor after did note him for error or â—emerity in speakinge wrytinge as he did which no doubt