hand to the true Relation thereof long agoe sent you Nihil veritas erubescit nisi solumodo abscondi Truth neuer blusheth but when she is hid She feareth nothing but not to bee brought to her tryall Hee who knoweth his coyne is pure gold will neuer refuse to offer it to the Goldsmiths Test because he can loose nothing by it but shal haue allowance for it Besides your friends boasting at the Conference your owne promise in the Conference deepely ingageth you to assoyle the arguments then vrged against your halfe Communion whereunto at the present you returned not so much as half an answer pleading for your selfe the short scantling of time which gaue you not space to wield yonr Catholike buckler Scitum est enim culpam conijcere intempus cum vltra addere si maximèvelis non possis The Romane Oratour told you it is a handsome put-off to lay the blame vpon the time when an aduocate hath neuer a word more to say for his Clyent But veritas temporis filia Truth is Times Daughter she will iustifie her Mother If in so long a tract of time as hath run since our meeting in Noble-street you had fully and punctually satisfied those arguments then left vntouched you had salued your cause and credit and made it appeare you were not wanting to time but time then to you But now sith you haue broken so often day after day and moneth after moneth and by this time yeere after yeere being fo oft challenged of your promise yea vpbraided also by S. P. L. and the Lord T. and others and in fine your resolution is to giue no resolution of those doubts I will be bold to tell you that time will now no more beare your blame but you and your cause must beare it off with head and shoulders You cannot now goe backe Lis contestata est praelium condictum The field is pitched the weapons are chosen The question agreed vpon is the Communion in one kind the proofes must bee Scripture and the perpetuall custome of the Church If by both your Romish practise be conuinced to be sacrilege in the highest degree then write hereafter your braggs in redinke and let your lines blush for shame and do you your selfe ingeniously confesse concerning sacrilege as Papinian did concerning fatricide that it is as difficult and dangerous a matter to defend the murder of a brother as to commit it But on the contrarie if by the euidence of Scripture and coustant practise of the Catholike Christian Church you can iustifie your Romish dry communions you shal not only gaine your pretended Catholicke cause but me also your Proselyte D. F. THE PARTICVLAR CONTENTS OF THE SEVERALL Chapters of this Booke Chap. 1. THe state of the question concerning the Communion in both kinds is set downe out of the Harmony of Protestant Confessions on the one sida and out of the Canons of the Councels of Constance Basil and Trent on the otherside Chap. 2. The first Argument for the Tenent of the Reformed Churches drawne from Christs Precept and example in the celebration of the Sacrament confirmed by the testimony of Pope Iulius the first Chap. 3. The second Argument for the Communion in both kinds drawne from the essence and perfection of this Sacrament confirmed by Vasquez the Iesuite Chap 4. The third argument drawne from the Analogie of the signe to the thing signified confirmed by Gratian the Canonist Chap. 5. The fourth argument drawne from the nature of a banket or supper confirmed by Aquinas and Vasquez Chap. 6. The fift argument drawne from the expresse precept of drinking at the Lords Table confirmed by the testimonie of Pope Innocen the 3. Chap. 7. The sixt argument drawne à Pari confirmed by Bonauenture the Schoole Diuine and others Chap. 8. The seuenth argument drawne from the condition and propriety of a Will or Legacie confirmed by Iansonius c. Chap. 9. The eight argument drawne from the end of the Sacrament confirmed by Iac. Rehing being then a Iesuite Chap. 10. The ninth argument drawne from the example of Saint Paul and the Corinthians confirmed by Becanus the Iesuite Chap. 11. The tenth argument drawne from the vniforme and constant practice of the Christian Catholicke Church in all Ages Sect. 1. The testimonies of the practice of the Church from Christs assention to 100. yeeres Sect. 2. Testimonies in the second Age from 100. to 200. Sect. 3. Testimonies in the third age from 200. to 300. Sect. 4. Testimonies in the fourth Age from 300. to 400. Sect. 5. Testimonies in the fifth Age from 400. to 500. Sect. 6. Testimonies in the sixth Age from 500. to 600. Sect. 7. Testimonies in the seuenth Age from 600. to 700. Sect. 8. Testimonies in the eighth Age from 700. to 800. Sect. 9. Testimonies in the ninth Age from 800. to 900. Sect. 10. Testimonies in the tenth Age from 900. to 1000. Sect. 11. Testimonies in the eleuenth Age from 1000. to 1100. Sect. 12. Testimonies in the tewelfth Age from 1100. to 1200. Sect. 13. Testimonies in the thirteenth Age from 1200. to 1300. Sect. 14. Testimonies in the fourteenth Age from 1300. to 1400. Sect. 15. Testimonies in the fifteenth Age from 1400. to 1500. Sect. 16. Testimonies in the sixteenth Age from 1500. to 1600. Sect. vltima The confirmation of this argument by the confession of Papists of eminent learning and worth Thom. Aquin. Dionysius Carthousianus Ioh. Eccius Cassander Soto Ioh. Arborius Ruardus Tapperus Alsonsus a Castro Slotanus Salmeron Gregorie de Valentia and Suarez Chap. 12. Papists obiections for their halfe communion from Scripture answered and retorted Chap. 13. Papists obiections from Councels answered and retorted Chap. 14. Papists obiections from sundry pretended rites and customes of the Church answered and retorted Chap. 15. Papists obiections from reason answered and retorted Chap. 16. The Contradictions of Papists in this question noted and the whole truth for vs deliuered out of their owne mouthes The Contens of the Conference Of the necessitie of Episcopall gouernment Of ordination by Presbyters or Priests in case of necessitie Of the distinction of Bishops and Priests iure diuino Of differences amongst Papists in matter of faith Of the immaculate conception of the Virgin Marie Of the authoritie of Generall Councels aboue the Pope ècont Of prayer for the dead Of the authoritie of originall Scripture Of the Communion in both kinds Of the Popes Supremacy Of mingling water with wine in the Sacrament Of the perfection of Scripture AN ADVERTISEMENT to the Reader IT falleth out often with Students in controuersies as with people in the market who taking money with them at their going from home and espying in the fayre some Merchandize they like when they haue driuen the Price and are drawing out their purse they find it either pickt or the strings cut In like maner these Students meeting with some pregnāt testimonies alleaged out of the ancient Fathers or later Writers in Apologies for
expresly commandeth all to drinke of the Cup and lest any man might cauill saying that that precept belonged only to Priests Saint Pauls ordinance to the Corinthians testifies That the whole Church ordinarily or in common vsed both kinds In the Saxonik Article 15. All men know that the Lords Supper was so instituted at the first that the whole Sacrament was giuen to the people as it is written Drinke you all of this The custome of the ancient Churches both Greeke and Latine are well knowne therefore we must confesse that the prohibiting of one part thereof is vniust It is vnlawfull to violate the last wil and Testament of men if it be lawfully made why then doe the Bishops violate the Testament of the Sonne of God sealed with his blood In the Bohemian c. 14. Christ said in expresse words Take eate this is my body and in like manner when he gaue them the Cup by it selfe and distinctly said Take Drinke ye all of this this is my blood therefore according to this Commandement the body and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ ought to be distributed and receiued by all beleeuers in common In the latter Heluetian confession cap. 21. we dislike these who haue takeÌ„ away one part of the Sacrament viz. the Cup of the Lord from the faithfull for they grieuouslly offend against the Lords institution who said Drinke ye all of this which hee spake not in so expresse words of the bread The Doctrine and practice of the reformed Churches as it is expressed in these Confessions is solidly and learnedly iustified against the Romish aduersaries by Luther Melancton Caluin Iewel Chemsius Plessis Bilson Riuet Moulin Chamierus Humfrey and others from whose Hiues I haue taken much hony yet not vpon trust nor without trying it but tracing the diligent Bees in the Paradice of God the holy Scripture and the Garden of Ecclesiasticall Writers euen to each flower whence they gathered it CHAP. II. The first Argument drawne from Christs Precept and example in the celebration of this Sacrament WHatsoeuer Christ commanded and did in the first celebration of this Supper ought continually to be obserued and practized in the Church But Christ in the first celebration of the Supper gaue the Cup and commanded it to bee giuen to all there present that before had receiued the bread Therefore the giuing of the Cup to all Communicants at the Supper ought perpetually to bee obserued and practised in the Church The proposition is gathered out of Luk. 22. 19. This doe ye in remembrance of me and 1. Cor. 11. 25. This do ye as oft as you drink in remembrance of me and ver 26. as oft as you eate of this bread and drinke this Cup you shew the Lords death till he come In which words the Apostle euidently implyeth that the Commandement this doe in remembrance of me extends euen to Christs second comming And verily if Christs precepts and actions in the first celebration of this Sacrament were not a law binding the Church to doe the like in all succeeding ages neither the Apostles themselues nor the Church after them should haue had any warrant at all to celebrate the Lords Supper after his death Which to affirme were absurd impietie or as Saint Augustine speakes in a case of farre lesse importance most insolent madnesse The assumption is set down in the very letter totidem verbis Mat. 26. 27. He tooke the Cup and gaue it to them saying Drinke you all of this Mark 14. 23 And he tooke the Cup and when hee had giuen thanks he gaue it them and they all drank of it Certainely I perswade my selfe that our Sauiour expressed the note of vniuersality viz. in deliuering the Cup to all saying Drinke you all of this and not so in giuing the bread of set purpose to preuent that abuse which the Romish Church of late hath brought in by taking away the Cup. As in like manner the Apostle saith of marriage It is honorable in or amongst all men Heb. 13. 4. and he saith not so of virginity or single life although it bee most true that single life or virginity is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is pretious or honorable because the holy Ghost foresaw that some heretikes would denie marriage to bee honourable amongst all and prohibite it to some men viz. the Cleargie Which two texts of Scripture the Romanists lewdly peruert and ridiculously contradict themselues in the interpretation of them extending all to the Laietie in the one and excluding the Cleargie and extending all to the Cleargie in the other and excluding the laietie Marriage is honorable among all say they that is all saue Priests Drink you all of this that is all saue the people In restraining all in both places they make of omnes non omnes and so contradict the text and by expounding all sometimes of the people not Priests sometimes of Priests and not people they contradict themselues For the restriction of all in this place to Priests administring onely I forbeare the further refuting of it because all the arguments that follow in generall ouerthrow it and in particular and expressly it is refelled in the Conference annexed hereunto This whole argument is confirmed by the testimonie of Pope Iulius set downe in the Canon Law and therefore deliuered ex Cathedra De consecrat dist 2. There hee proues that bread and wine onely ought to be giuen in the Sacrament and not milke because Christ the master of Truth when he commended the Sacrament vnto his Disciples at his last Supâ—…er gaue milke to none but bread the cup only The contrary practice viz. of them that giue milke in the Sacrament how repugnant it is to the Euangelicall and Apostolicall Doctrine and custome of the Church will easily bee proued from the fountaine of truth from whom the ordination of these mysteries did proceed The Pope in this place drawes an argument from Christs institution and practice at his last Supper both affirmatiuely and negatiuely Christ gaue bread and wine to his Disciples therefore wee ought so to doe he gaue not milke therefore wee ought not Christ is the Fountaine of truth he is the Master of truth hee is the Author of the Sacrament therefore inferreth the Pope and in this particular infallibly nothing must bee done in the administration of this Sacrament otherwise then Christ did and commanded at his last Supper The Romanists cannot confirme the Popes argument but they must needs confirme ours in this point they cannot infirme or weaken ours but they must needes weaken his and not his onely but that renowned Doctor and glorious Martyr Saint Cyprians also who fighteth with the same weapon against the heretiques called Aquarij wherewith we doe against the papists No man may vnder colour of new or humane constitutions depart from that which Christ our Master did and taught and a little
that this manner of receiuing to shew forth Christs death was necessary onely till such time as the Church in the Councell of Constance had otherwise ordained for the Apostles Canon extendeth to Christs second comming As oft saith hee as you eate this Bread and drinke this Cup you shall shew forth Christs death till he come againe Therefore till his second dâ—…ng euen to the end of the world this Iniunction is of force CHAP. X. The tenth Argument drawne from the example of Saint Paul and the Corinthians THat which Saint Paul deliuered from Christ to the Corinthians touching the administration of the Eucharist ought perpetually to bee obserued in the Church But S. Paul from Christ deliuered to the Corinthians the communicating of the faithfull in both kinds Therefore the communicating of the faithfull in both kinds ought perpetually to be obserued in the administration of the Eucharist in the Church The Proposition is vncontroleablâ—… because an example of the Apostle and the Primitiue Churches hauing warrant from Christs word is a safe president to all succeeding Churches The Assumption is contained in the 1. Cor. 11. from verse the 23. to the 29. I receiued of the Lord that which I deliuered vnto you c. After this preface hee relateth this institution of the Sacrament in both kinds vers 24 25. and from the 26. to the 29. hee teacheth in what manner they ought to communicate in both kinds and how they ought to fit and prepare themselues thereunto S. Pauls authority writing by diuine inspiration ought to sway with all religious Christians how much more when it is backed and seconded with some Command Precept Order or at least Warrant from Christ himselfe That which I deliuered vnto you saith he I receiued from the Lord and therefore you may safely follow what not I but the Lord hath prescribed This whole Argument is confirmed by Becanus who confesseth that the Apostle deliuered the Communion in both kinds I confesse that both kinds were instituted by Christ I confesse that both were deliuered by the Apostle Tollet vpon the sixth of Iohn saith There is no question of it It was an ancient custome obserued in the Church from the times of the Apostles to communicate in both kinds In this assertion there is no controuersie at all No controuersie at all indeed for it is the Protestants plea generally and the Romanists themselues admit of it but yet come in with a strange non obstante See the Councell of Constance sess 13. The Synod declareth decrees and defines that although Christ after supper instituted and administred to his Disciples this venerable Sacrament in both kinds viz. of bread and wine and though this Sacrament were receiued in both kinds in the Primitiue Church Hoc tamen non obstante notwithstanding all this the Councell giues order to the Contrary The Prince by his Prerogatiue sometimes in his Proclamations appoints and commands in some particular Acts to bee done contrary to some former Statute or Act but wee neuer reade of a non obstante against the Kings Prerogatiue how much lesse against the expresse Command and Law of the King of Kings Wherfore this Councel deserueth to be branded for euer either with the infamous name of non obstantiense Concilium which Luther giues it or In-constantiense for breaking their publike faith giuen to Iohn Hus and Ierome of Prage and burning those blessed Martyrs because they were not able to confute them CHAP. XI The eleuenth Argument drawne from the vniforme and constant practice of the Catholike Church in all ages THe words vsed in the institution Drink you all of this ought to be expounded according to the vniforme and constant practise of the Catholike Christian Church But the constant and vniforme practise of the Catholike Church extendeth them to the Laytie as well as to the Clergy Therefore the words of the institution extend to the Laiety as well as to the Clergy The Proposition was assented vnto by Master Euerard in the Conference held with him neither thinke I any Christian will sticke at it who seriously weigheth Christs promises to his Church to leade her by his Spirit into all truth to be with her vnto the end of the world to build her vpon a rocke against which hell gates should neuer preuaile The Assumption can no otherwise so certainely be prooued as by induction and particular instances in euery Age which God willing shall be brought and made good against the aduersaries exceptions in the Sections following SECT I. Testimonies of the practise of the Christian Church in the first Age. From Christs Ascension to the first 100. yeeres following AFter the writings of the blessed Apostle Saint Paul whose testimonie in the ninth argument is discussed I alleadge for the practise of the Church in this first age Dionysius Areopagita Martialis Lemouicensis Clemens Romanus and Ignatius Antiochenus For albeit I assent thus farre to our learned Critickes that these Authors are not altogether currant there is some drosse in Ignatius more in Martialis and most of all in Clemens and Dionysius is vndoubtedly post-natus 300. yeeres at lest yonger then his age is set in the Romane register yet for the reasons following I thought fit to produce these Authors and ranke them in the first age First because our aduersaries vsually so ranke them and alleage them against vs for fathers of the first age and surely if their testimonies bee good and ancient when they seeme to make against vs they are to bee accounted as good and ancient when they make for vs. Secondly because we cannot make authors but must take such as we finde these are the only authors that are extant out of whom testimonies may be alleadged for this first age Therefore as the sage Senatour of Capua when the people vpon a iust distaste giuen by the Magistrates had a purpose at once to casheere them all aduised them Before you remoue these choose fitter in their places and when diuers were named vnto them and they could like of none in the end hee perswaded them to keepe the old officers till they could agree to name better in their roomes so I would desire our Critikes to name vs more approued authors in this age then these are and if they can name none then to let these hold their places and the estimation they haue had for many hundred yeeres Thirdly because I hold it no good Topick to argue à parte ad totum affirmatiuely in this manner There are some false passages or corruptions in an author therefore the author is spurious and of no credit If we may thus fillip off ancient Writers wee shall haue but a few left If there are as no doubt there bee diuers dead boughes superfluous stemmes in these Writers of so long standing let our Criticks prune them off not cut the trees downe by the roots Poliat lima non exterat saith Fabius let the pluimer smooth the timber
Ignatius onely to prooue the practise of the Primitiue Church and thus much Bellarmine confesseth whereupon I adde that this confessed practise of the Primitiue Church was grounded on our Lords precept drinke you all of this for the Church so neere Christ cannot bee supposed to haue swarued any way from his institution by adding any thing vnto it or taking away from it certainely Ignatius and the Churches wherein he bore sway obserued the order and practise of Saint Iohn his master and if Saint Iohn administred the Cup in all Churches to the people so did the rest of the Apostles for they varied not from Christ or among themselues in celebrating the Lords Supper And what the Apostles did ioyntly no Christian doubteth but they did by the direction of the holy Ghost according to our Lords will and commandement And thus wee see this example amounteth to a precept and the practise in Ignatius his time ought to bee a president for all future times SECT II. Testimonies of the Practise of the Christian Churches in the second Age. From 100. to 200. Anno Dom. 150. IVstin Martyr in his second apologie thus writeth They which are called Deacons among vs giue to euery one that is present of the consecrated Bread and Wine And when he hath related the whole manner of the celebration of the Eucharist as it were to preuent a cauill that might be made and is now made by Papists the Martyr heere sheweth the practise of the Church but maketh no mention of the precept of our Sauiour as that they did so in deed but were not bound so to doe he further addeth for the close as they report that Iesus commanded them or as they haue deliuered vnto vs Iesus his command giuen vnto them Bellarmine his answere Bellarmine repineth at this so expresse a testimony of so ancient a Father and so renowned a Martyr and therefore laboureth to disparage it some way or other Si non aliqu â nocuisset mortuus esset Yet all that he saith to it is but this that those last words of the Martyr which mentioneth Christs precept belong not to the Communion but to the Consecration The Refutation This solution will no way beare water First it is euident to any that reads the whole place that Iustin Martyrs words wherein he mentioneth Christs precept belongeth both to the Consecration and to the Communion For after he had spoken of the Communion he subioyneth these words And therefore they cannot bee seuered from the Communion The series or method of the passage in Iustin is thus hauing rehearsed the words of the Institution This is my body doe this in remembrance of me and this Cup is the new Testament drinke you all of this he addeth and he commanded that they onely should participate as had been before washed in the lauer of Regeneration and lead such a life as Christ prescribed them These words that they onely should participate clearely conuince the Cardinall and demonstrate that Iustin Martyr extendeth Christs command both to the Consecration and to the Commumunion it selfe which in Christs precept cannot be deuided both being enioyned in this one precept doe this in remembrance of me that is Consecrate and Communicate Secondly howsoeuer the Cardinall by any tricke of sophistrie shall dismember the whole sentence and pull these words As Christ commanded from the rest and refer them to which part of the sentence he pleaseth yet he can neuer smoother the light of truth shining in these words The Deacons deliuer or minister to euery one of the consecrated bread and wine The practice then of those times maketh for vs against the Church of Rome The Deacons then as the Ministers now deliuered the Sacrament to the people in both kindes Anno. 152. Laurence Deacon to Pope Sixtus cryed out to him as hee was led to his Martyrdome Whether goest thou father without thy sonne whether hastest thou Priest without thy Leuite try whether thou hast chosen a fit minister to whom thou hast committed the dispensation of our Lords blood Wilt thou denie me to bee a copartner with thee in the effusion of thy blood who hast made me a copartner with thee in the celebration of our Lords blood This giueth such light to Iustin Martyrs words and so fully accordeth with them that Tiletanus the defender of the councell of Trent confesseth that it is manifest that in this age the vse of both kinds was common to all Anno 180. Saint Irenaeus Bishop of Lions and Martyr in the fourth booke against heresies and 34. cha proueth the resurrection of the flesh and eternall life by an argument drawne from the faithfulls eating Christs flesh in the Eucharist and he presseth his argument in this manner How doe they viz. the heretiques say that the flesh should be vtterly corrupted and neuer rise againe which is nourished with the body and blood of Christ and a little after Our bodies by participating the Eucharist or Sacrament of our Lords supper are not now corruptible or shall not vtterly be corrupted and come to nothing because they haue the hope of theresurrection Irenaeus speaketh of all Christians people as well as Priests for all faithfull Christians haue hope of a blessed resurrection and he saith that they are nourished with the bodie and blood of Christ by participating of the Sacrament of his supper Papists answer The Romanists seeke to auoyde these and the like passages by their doctrine of concomitancie auerring that the blood of Christ is not seuered from his body and consequently that the Laietie take the blood in the body and are nourished therewith to eternall life and this say they is all that can bee gathered from Irenaeus his words They are nourished with the blood of Christ which they receiue together with his body not with the blood of Christ which they take by it selfe in the Cup. The Refutation This answer of theirs is weake and insufficient First because it is built on a weake and ruinous foundation viz. the reall and carnall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament vnder the accidents of bread and wine which I haue else where by Scriptures and Fathers refelled See the fisher caught in his owne net part 2. That the doctrine of concomitancie is builded vpon the reall and carnall presence is not denied by the Romanists for they make the one the ground of the other Secondly albeit wee should grant that the Laiety in some sence receiue the blood of Christ in the bread yet they receiue it not so as Christ commandeth for they receiue it not by drinking No man drinketh in eating or eateth in Drinking Thirdly the blood of Christ which wee receiue in the Sacrament we receiue not as subsisting in his veines or as being a part of or ioyned vnto his body but as shed for vs In which quality and manner it is impossible to receiue the blood of Christ together with and in the body by naturall
said to the same Drinke yee all of this to whom before he said Take eate this is my body Fifthly and lastly if it were sufficient reason to redeliuer the Cup in these times to the Laietie who haue been deseruedly depriued of it namely to arme them against eminent persecution why should not the faithfull people of God especially those who neuer incurred the censure of Excommunication or suspension be much rather admitted to drinke of the Cup to arme them against as great or greater conflicts of temptations The sinnew of Saint Cyprians reason is in the word militaturis Those that are to fight the Lords battels are to be strengthened thereunto by taking the Cup of Saluation or drinking the Lords Blood But I assume all Christians in all ages were are and shall be militantes or militaturi such as haue fought doe fight or shall against their ghostly and bodily enemies therefore according to Saint Cyprians military discipline they are to be strengthened and armed thereunto by participating of the Lords Cup. The answere of Bellarmine to the second testimony of Saint Cyprians 63. Epistle commeth not home to the marke by many bowes for albeit the maine scope of that Epistle be to prooue the necessitie of administring the Sacrament in Wine against the corrupt custome of the Aquarij certaine heretikes that administred it in meere water yet on the by he discouereth the practise of the Church in his time to Communicate in both kinds and in the words alleaged be expresly faith that the Cup was ministred or deliuered to the people which is all we produce this passage for SECT IIII. Testimonies of the practise of the Church from 300. to 400. Anno. 314. IN the councel held at Ancyra Deacons that had sacificed vnto Idols are forbidden to exercise any sacred function and in particular nec panem nec calicem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to offer or deliuer bread or the Chalice The Chalice then by their Deacons was deliuered to whom but to the people for Priests administer to Deacons but Deacons neuer to Priests Anno. 316. In the Councell held at Neo-Caeserea can 13. country Priests are forbidden in the presence of a Bishop or the Priest of the citie to deliuer the sanctified bread or Cup to any Here we see the Cup as well as the bread was deliuered at the communion the words are nec panem nec calicem porrigere Anno 325. In the acts of the Councell of Nice set out by Gelasius Cyzicenus we haue a most expresse testimonie of the beleife and practise of the Church in that flowrishing age Let vs vnderstand by faith that in that holy Supper the Lambe of God that takes away the sinnes of the world is offered without blood by the Priests and that wee taking his pretious body and blood doe verily beleeue that they are symboles or pleadges of our resurrection Anno. 337. Iulius the first as we read in Gratian de conse dist 2. condemneth the practise of such who gaue the people a bit of bread dipped in wine for the whole Communion alleaging against this corrupt custome the practise of our Sauiour who when he commended his body and blood to the Apostles he commended the bread and the Cup apart This ancient Pope concludes from our Sauiours practise that the people ought to receiue the holy elements of bread and wine a part consequently that it is not sufficient to giue them the bread dipped Now if it be not sufficient to giue them the bread dipped in the wine Iulius would haue held it much lesse sufficient to giue them drie bread If our Sauior as he rightly conceiueth enioyned that all ought to partake of the elements apart certainly hee enioyned that the people should receiue both and not bread onely or wine onely by concomitancie Anno 340. Athanasius in his second Apology maketh it plainer that the vndeniable custome in his age was for the people to receiue the Cup. This saith he is the vse of this Cup and no other in this Cup you lawfully or of right drinke before or to the Laity This you haue receiued for an Ecclesiastical Cannon it belongs to you alone to drink the blood of Christ before the Laietie Anno 355. Hilarius Pictauiensis de trinitate lib. 8. writeth thus There is no place left of doubting cōcerning the truth of Christs flesh and blood for both by our Lords owne profession and our faith it is truly flesh and truly blood and these being taken and drunke doe worke this effect that Christ is in vs and wee in Christ Saint Hilarie spake of all Christians and saith that they receiue the flesh of Christ hauriunt that is take a draught of his blood which cannot bee without partaking the Cup. For although the doctrine of concomitancie were admitted whereby our aduersaries suppose that the people take the blood of Christ in the body yet certainely there they cannot haurire sanguinem take a draught of blood or drinke it because it is not there in a liquid forme or so that it may be sucked or drunke Anno 365. Cyril Catechesi Mystagogicâ 4. Vnder the forme of bread Christs body is giuen vnto thee that taking the body and blood of Christ thou maist be of one body and blood with him And a little after After thou hast participated of the body of Christ draw neere also to the cup of his blood Anno. 366. Macarius Egyptius hom 27. By offering bread and wine in the Church he gaue vs a patterne to take his body and blood Anno 370. S. Basil in his 289. epistle to Patricia exhorts her frequently to participate the Sacrament of Christs body and blood saying It is good and profitable euery day to participate the holy body and blood of Christ. And in his moralls chap. 22. hee propoundeth this question what is the proper dutie of a Christian and he answereth immediately to haue no spot or wrincle in his Conscience to be holy and vnblameable and so to eate the body and drinke the blood of Christ. Our aduersaries doe well to conceale this testimonie of Saint Basil because it is so direct and full to the point that it admits not any collourable answer He saith that it is the proper dutie of a Christian and therefore not of a Priest onely not to eate Christs body onely and receiue his blood by concomitancie but expresly to drinke it and this hee teacheth to be as necessarie a duty of all Christians as to clense themselues from sinne and to be holy and vndefiled Anno. 372. Gregory Nazianzen surnamed the Diuine S. Basils bosome friend in his 42. oration inuites all to drinke the blood of Christ who look for life by him without any doubting or shamefast feare Eat his body and drinke his blood if thou desirest life and in his second oration he testifieth that his sister Gorgonia after she had Communicated laid vp some part of the
potatur abluitur sanctificatur Who can expresse how great mercie it was by that most holy effusion of his pretious blood to redeeme mankind and to giue to his members the most holy mysterie of his quickning body and blood by the partaking whereof his body which is the Church is nourished as with meat and drinke is washed and sanctified These and other passages of Gregory are so cleare and bright that they dazeled the eies of Estius a great Parisian Doctor who handling this question professedly acknowledgeth that Saint Gregory among other fathers is expresly for the Commmunion in both kinds Anno Dom. 620. The Seruice Booke commonly called Ordo Romanus The Romane order set forth by Gregory or vnder Pope Gregory with his allowance sufficiently discouereth the present practise of the Romane Church in their dry Masses to be a disorder and shamefull abuse For there they may reade and blush to reade in the Rubricke these formes set downe at the Communion Wee humbly beseech thee that wee which haue taken the body and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ thy Sonne may be filled with grace and heauenly benediction and after the Communion Let thy body O Lord which we haue taken and thy blood which we haue drunke sticke to our bowels that no blot of sinne may remaiue in vs who haue beene refreshed by these pure and holy mysteries Anno 630. Saint Isidore as in other things so in this treadeth his master Gregories steps de diuin of fic lib. 1. c. 15. The fourth prayer is brought in for the kisse of peace vt omnes that all being reconciled by charitie may ioyne in the worthie participation of Christs body and blood omnes all People therefore as well as Priests vnlesse they will haue the people to be out of charity all that are in charity must communicate together in the mistery of Christs body and blood But Gods people are or ought to be in charity and therefore to be admitted by Saint Isidores rule as well to the Cup as to the bread at the Lords Table Anno. 633. In the fourth Councell of Toledo Can. 6. All the people are appointed one good fryday to aske pardon for their sinnes that being clensed by the compunction of repentance they may be thought fit one Easter day to receiue the sacrament of Christs body and blood And in the seuenth Canon it is appointed that after the Lords prayer and the blessing of the people the Sacrament of Christs body and blood bee receiued after this manner the Priest and Leuite is to communicate before the Altar the rest of the Clergie in the Quire the rest of the people without the Quire See also 57. Canon Anno 675. In the eleuenth Councell held at Toledo the fathers determine that such who receiued the Cup in extemity of sicknesse but refused the bread because in regard of the drines of their throat they could not swallow it downe should not therefore bee cut off from Christs body The decree runneth thus The infirmity of humane nature in the very passage out of this life is accustomed to be oppressed in such sort with drought that the sick are not able to take downe any meat to refresh them no nor scarse any drop of drinke to strengthen them which thing we haue obserued in the departure of many who desiring the wished foode of the holy Communion to sustaine them in their last iourney haue yet cast away the Eucharist giuen them by the Priest not out of infidelitie but because they could not swallow any thing down beside a small draught of the holy Cup such as these therefore ought not to bee separated from the body of Christ. The Councell speaketh of the Laiety refusing bread at the Priests hands which they could not take downe and yet receiuing the Cup and in this case of necessitie the Councell dispenceth with their refusing the bread but findeth no fault with them for taking the Cup. Nay vpon that point excuseth them from infidelitie and saueth them from excommunication How doth this Councel clash and crosse shins as it were with the Councel of Constance and Trent In these the people are condemned for taking the Cup in that they are acquitted for it In them the Priest is censured that giueth them the Cup in this the people are absolued from censure in refusing the bread because they Communicate in the Cup. In the same yeere in the Councell at Braccara they are blamed that ministred not wine to the people in the Sacrament but either milke or grapes Can. 2. Non expressum vinum in sacramento dominici calicis offerre sed lac pro vino dedicare aut oblatis vuis populo communicare In the same Councell they are blamed also Qui intinctam Eucharistiam populis pro complemento communionis porrigerent Who deliuered to the people a piece of bread dipt in wine for the whole Communion which custome how repugnant it is to the doctrine of the Gospell and custome of the Church may easily be proued from the fountaine of truth who gaue the Cut by it selfe saying Drinke yee all of this as he tooke the bread by it selfe saying Take eat c. SECT VIII The Testimonies of the practise of the Church from 700. to 800. IN this age wee haue foure concurrent witnesses and contestatours beyond all exception Beda Greg. 2. Greg. 3. Alcumus We will produce them in order And first Venerable Beda Anno 720. Venerable Beda the honour of England and mirrour of his time witnesseth as followeth Christ washeth vs daily from our sins in his blood when the memory of his passion is celebrated or recounted at the Altar where the creatures of bread and wine by the vnspeakable sanctification of the Spirit are changed into the Sacrament of his flesh and blood and therby his body blood is not powred out by the hands of Infidels to their destruction but is receiued or is taken by or into the mouth of the faithful to saluation In this testimony I note first that he teacheth not a substantiall change of the elements of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ but a sacramentall onely agreeable to the harmony of Protestants Confession Se condly that Beda either alludes vnto or transcribes herein the words of S. Gregory aboue alleaged which I haue there proued to be most pregnant to our purpose Anno 726. Gregory 2. in his Epistle of Images to Leo Isaurus A man that hath sinned and confessed after they haue well chastened and punished him with fasting let them impart vnto him the pretious body of our Lord and giue him his holy blood to drinke Anno 731. Gregory 3. in his former Epistle to Boniface forbiddeth at the Lords Table more then one Cup to be vsed saying It is not a fitting thing to put two or three Chalices on the Altar No doubt the reason why more Chalices were put on the Altar was for the vse of
cannot say that he speakes of Priests only for he speakes of all faithfull that either are already or are to bee made members of Christs body Neither can they shift off this passage as they doe some others by granting that the people may but denying that they ought to communicate in both kinds For he presseth very farre the necessitie of thus communicating without which he supposeth neither communion with Christ nor eternall life can be obtained Neither lastly can they euade by their doctrine of concomitancy saying that the people participate of the blood in the body when they receiue the consecrated Hoste For he speaketh distinctly of eating and drinking bread and drinke and sacraments in the plurall number which cannot possibly be vnderstood of participating the bread onely or communicating in one kind after the Popish manner Anno 840. Haymo Bishop of Halberstat relateth the manner of the faithfull to haue been in his time daily to eate the body of Christ and to drinke his blood and paraphrasing vpon these words of the Apostle 1. Cor. cap. 10. The Cup which we blesse is it not the Communion of the blood of Christ He saith the Cup is called the Communion because all communicate of it and partake of the blood of the Lord which it containeth in it Surely if the word fidelis or faithfull carryeth not the Layetie yet the word omnes or all must needs the faithfull then and all of them in Haymoes time were as well admitted to the Cup as to the bread Anno 849. Valafridus Strabo speaking of the suspension of scandalous persons from the Communion calleth the Lords Supper Sacraments in the plurall number in regard of the two elements or kinds in which it is administred Those saith he that wander from the members of Christ by the enormity or faeditie of capitall crimes by the iudgement of the Church are suspended from the q Sacraments lest by the vnworthy receiuing them they should be entangled in a greater guilt as Iudas Here by capitall offenders to vnderstand Priests were a capitall offence as if they alone were the greatest offenders in the Church and to haue the rod of Ecclesiasticall censures to bee spent vpon them onely Therefore the Romanists will they nill they to saue themselues from the lash must put the capitall offender vpon the Laiety and consequently confesse that they who for their crimes were at some times suspended from the Sacraments were ordinarily when they were free from such crimes admitted to both the Sacraments as Strabo calleth them that is both the elements the wine as well as the bread For the same Strabo in his twentieth Chapter stirreth vp himselfe and all good Christians to the continuall participating of the body and blood of Christ without which we cannot liue so far forth as some greater blots or blemishes in body or mind do not withhold or hinder from it Anno. 868. In a Councell held at Wormes vnder Lewis the second we find a Canon to this purpose If any man shall marry a widow which had a daughter by her former husband and shall after lye with this her daughter let that marriage by all meanes be dissolued and let that man vndergoe the pennance of the Church so that for three yeeres he be suspended from the body of Iesus Christ and his blood He who vpon a special reason is debard from the Communion of the body and blood of Christ and that for a certain time must needs be supposed before that time to haue beene admitted to communicate in both kinds and after his penance of three yeeres done cannot be denied againe admittance to the Lords Table I desire then to know what incestuous crime all the Laiety vnder the Papacy haue committed that for these two hundred yeeres euer since the Councell of Constance they haue suspended them from the Sacrament of Christs blood Anno. 869. Regino discribeth the manner of Pope Adrians deliuering the Communion to King Lotharius and his followers in both kindes then which we cannot desire a nobler president or fairer euidence of the custome of the Church in that Age Thus then Regino The Pope inuites the king to the Lords Table taking the body and blood of our Lord in his hands the King takes the body and blood of our Lord at the hands of the Pope Then the Bishop turning himselfe to the followers of the King deliuers the Communion to each of them in these words If thou hast not shewed thy selfe a fauourer or an abbetter of King Lothar in the obiected crime of adulterie neither hast giuen thy consent thereunto neither hast communicated with Waldrand and other persons excommunicated by the Apostolick See let the body and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ be healthfull to thee vnto eternall life Anno 875. Bertramus or as some write his name Ratramus in his booke of the body and blood of Christ dedicated to Carolus Caluus writeth thus you demand whether the body of Christ and his blood which in the Church are receiued by or with the mouth of the faithfull be his body and blood mystically or in truth And a little after he resolueth thus If yee looke inwardly it is not the liquor of wine but the blood of Christ which is tasted by the minds of the faithfull when it is drunke and acknowledged when it is seene and liked when it is smelt vnto This Bertram speaks so plainely through this whole booke for the entire Communion and against the Popish carnall presence of Christ in the Sacrament that the Romish Inquisitors were in a quandary what to doe with this Author whither quite to prohibite the reading of him or to deuise some colourable excuse and euasion for such passages in him as hold no good quarter with their Trent Faith Papists answer to the testimonies of the writers alleadged in this former Age. Before most of these testimonies our aduersaries draw Timanthes his courtain and answer them with silence Onely to Paschasius and Haymo Cardinall Bellarmine pretends to giue an answer either because for shame hee could do no lesse being so often vpraided with them or because like a new Alcumist he hoped out of the iron that wounded him to draw an oyle to cure the wound of his cause To the testimonie out of Paschasius his answer like Cerberus consists of three heads First he saith that the place in Paschasius seemes to be corrupted Secondly he saith that Paschasius doth not expound the words of our Lord as they are in Matthew but as they seeme to be spoken of Christ when the sacrament is administred in the Church His reason is In the institution of the Sacrament there were no other Ministers present distinguished from other beleeuers and therfore Christs words as they were vttered then no way admitteth Paschasius explication Drinke ye all of this as well Ministers as other beleeuers Thirdly hee saith that the words of Paschasius make much
the sacrament must be made compleat before the Priest vse it Durand his conclusion falls short vpon the Priest but his reason stretcheth to all people as well as Priests For all ought to receiue the entire Sacrament sacramentally and if one kind onely be an imperfect Sacrament to the Priest in regard of the signe it must needs bee imperfect also vnto the people vnlesse they will say that the sacrament presents lesse to the Priests then to the people or that the Priests aprehend lesse in it then the people surely that which is but halfe a Cup to one cannot be a whole one to an other that which is empty or incompleat to one cannot bee compleat and full to another Anno 1240. Halensis howsoeuer he some way inclines to that opinion that it is sufficient to receiue the sacrament in one kind yet he confe◅eth that there is more merit and deuotion and compleatnesse and efficacie in receiuing in both Albertus Magnus in 4. Sent. dist 8. deliuers this generall rule sacramentum Ecclesiae nihil in gratia causa◅ quod non ex similitudine significat The sacrament of the Church causeth nothing in grace which it signifieth not by similitude that is it produceth nothing which it presenteth not And from thence inferres that the vnity of Christs mysticall body is not perfectly caused and signified but by a double signe and therefore by vertue or in regard of the sacramēt we ought to haue both Let the Reader note that Albertus saith not according to the new euasion of the Iesuites virtute sacrificij oportet habere vtramque but virtute sacramenti not that both kinds are requisite to the sacrifice but to the sacrament The sacrament by the doctrine of Albertus wants so much of his efficacie as it doth want of its significancie but the receiuing vnder the forme of bread onely beareth no similitude nor hath any signification of the spiritual drink of Christs blood The Romanists therefore in taking away one of the signes from the Laiety consequently depriue asmuch as in them lieth the Laiety of the grace represented by that signe and conferred with it And yet Aegidius Coninck a moderne Iesuite and professor of Diuinity at Louaine maketh this audacious assertion out of the Chaire of his Schoole Diuinity Although more grace may be conferred by receiuing in both kinds notwithstanding the Church vpon good reason careth not for that and doth more respect the reuerence of the Sacrament then the profit of the receiuers c. Anno 1260. Aquinas yeeldeth three reasons of the institution of this sacrament vnder a double forme the first is For the perfection of it because sith it is a spirituall meale or refection it ought to haue spirituall meat and spirituall drinke secondly for the signification of it for it is a memoriall of the Lords passion whereby his blood was seuered from his body and therefore in this sacrament the blood is offered by it selfe Thirdly for the healthfull effect of it for the body is offered to shew that it is of force to saue the body and the blood is offered to shew that it is of force to saue the soule The halfe Communion therefore in Aquinas his learning wants perfection significancie and efficacie Bonauenture thus indeuoreth to cleere the matter In the sacrament there are two things efficacy and significancy concerning efficacie neither kinde is of the integritie of the Sacrament but either is the whole concerning signification so the two signes are of the integritie of the Sacrament or integrall parts of the Sacrament because the matter of the Sacrament is expressed in neither kinde by it selfe but in both together and a little after To make it represent perfect redemption and thereby a perfect refection the body ought to be signified in the bread and the soule in the wine the seate whereof is in the blood Anno 1280. Richardus de Mediauilla and Petrus de Tarantasia who afterwards was aduanced to the Popedome and changed his name into Innocentius the fourth testifieth that the Sacrament was administred in both kinds to the better sort of the Laietie howsoeuer they entertained the vulgar and meaner sort with a drie Communion thus Cassander relates their words The Sacrament may lawfully bee giuen in both kinds to greater personages or men of qualitie where there is no feare of error of spilling the blood because such men know how to obserue due reuerence and caution The Papists answer I finde no answere in particular made by any to the passages aboue alleaged but in generall their answere is that the Schoole-men might write more freely before the Councell of Constance had decreed the contrary And they adde that some if not all of these Schoole-men approoue of the administring of the Communion vnder one kinde to the Laietie The Replie The Councell of Constance by their decree could not make that which was before false to be then the truth or that which was in Gelasius his time sacrilege to be then pietie What Androcles spake sometimes of the Athenian lawes The lawes had need of a law to mend them may truely be said of this Canon in the Councell of Constance that it needs a Canon to rectifie it for it depraues Christs institution it checks the Primitiue Church it controules the practice of the whole Christian world for 1200. yeeres and more euen till the middle of this age wherein Sacrilege stole in by degrees A curious eye may tracke these fellons of the holy Chalice First vnder colour of preuenting abuses in spilling the Cup they take it away from the vulgar and meaner sort of people not daring to offer this indignitie to the better sort to them as we heare out of Mediauilla they deliuered the Sacrament in both kinds afterwards vpon this pretext that the blood was in the body and the whole Sacrament in either kind they nimmed the Cup from the lesser Churches as Linwood informes vs It it granted saith he onely to Priests that celebrate in such small Churches to receiue the blood vnder the forme of wine Going cleere away with this their Sacrilege in lesser Churches they aduenture vpon the greater And by Aquinas his confession the Sacrament was administred in one kind but in some Churches in his daies For in diuers Churches saith hee it is prouidently obserued that the blood should not be giuen to the people but that it should be receiued only by the Priest In the end when they had as farre as their authoritie stretched robbed all assemblies of the Laietie in depriuing them of the Cup they after inacted a generall law in the yeere of our Lord 1414. to warrant this their publike Sacrilege This thirtenth age resembleth the riuer Iordane which is sweet at the spring but bitter and brackish in the fall of it and in the end runneth into the dead Sea Abbas Vrspergensis Matthew Paris and Vincentius who flourished in the beginning and
this point For he professeth that it were more conuenient the Communion were administred vnder both kinds then vnder one alone and that the Communion vnder both kinds is more agreeable to the Institution and fulnesse thereof and to the example of Christ and to the Fathers of the Primitiue Church Artiâ—… 15. Eccius though in short and briefe tearmes yet comes home to the question saying Wee confesse it was the vse in the Primitiue Church to administer in both kinds to the Laiety For the generalitie of this custome if antient Records had failed vs wee haue enough in the writings of moderne Papists to conuince the denyers therof Suarez saith somewhat to this point Slotanus presumes further and saith more and Salmeron goes beyond him and saith enough and yet Alphonsus exceedes him and saith more then enough Suarez The Christian people were wâ—…t frequently to communicate vnder both kinds Frequently they might communicate yet but in few places There Slotanus addes We doe not deny that the custome of communicating in both kinds was obserued in very many Churches and continued so not onely in the time of persecution and martyrdome but also in the peaceable daies of the Church This custome might be in very many Churches yet not generall therefore Salmeron addes further We doe ingeniously and openly confesse that it was a generall custome to giue the Communion to the Laiety in both kinds as the manner is at this day among the Greekes and was in antient time among the Corinthians and in Africa Generall the custome might be yet not vniuersall without exception and in all places Therefore to put the matter out of all question Alphonsus a Castro addes yet further We beleeue it is not against Christs Institution to giue the Communion to the Layetie in both kinds For we learne out of the writings of many Saints that in old time this was the practise for many ages amongst all Catholikes For the continuance of this custome which was the last point what more pregnant testimonies can we desire then these following of Cassander Soto and Gregory de Valentia Cassander and Tapperus witnesseth for one thousand yeeres in these words Touching the administration of the most holy Sacrament of the Eucharist it is euident enough that the Easterne Church euen vnto this day or that the Westerne or Romane Church for one thousand yeeres after Christ and more in the solemne and ordinary distribution of the Sacrament deliuered both the kinds of bread and wine to all the members of Christs Church which is manifest by innumerable testimonies of antient Writers both Greeke and Latine Tapperus calleth it a custome of longest continuance Soto witnesseth thus for twelue hundred yeeres and more not onely amongst the heretikes but also among the Catholikes the manner of giuing the Communion to the Layetie in both kinds for a long time was of force in somuch as it was not vtterly abolished in the dayes of Aquinas Now Aquinas by Bellarmines exact calculation was borne in the yeere of our Lord 1224. and died in the yeere 1274. Betweene the birth of Aquinas and the Councell of Constance there passed 90. yeeres which time Greg. de Valentia after a sort giues vs ouer and aboue We doe not deny saith he that both kinds were antiently administred to the people as appeares out of S. Paul Cyprian Athanasius Hierome and others And truly when the contrary custome of communicating vnder one kind onely began in some Churches it appeares not but it began not to bee a generall custome in the Latine Church much before the Councell of Constance Nor then neither For Tapperus saith that in some Churches they vsed both kinds euen vnto the Councell of Constance Who seeth not in the frequency and pregnancy of these testimonies out of the mouth of our aduersaries the obseruation of Budaeus to be verified that such is the force of truth that she breakes out of mens mouthes against their wills and stealing amongst lyes is perceiued by the hearers when the speakers think they haue her safe enough in their owne power CHAP. XII The Papists Arguments drawne from Scripture answered and retorted SECT 11. THe first argument vrged by our aduersaries for their halfe Communion is drawn from the types and figures of the old Testament I will propound it in Bellarmines owne words that they may not cauill as they vse to doe that wee marre their arguments in relating them Thus Bellarmine disputeth against vs Most of the figures of the Eucharist in the old Testament signifie eating vnder one kind it is not therefore probable that Christ would command the eating of both kinds For that which is figured ought to answer the figure The first figure was of the Tree of life in the midst of Paradise which Paschasius in his booke of the body of our Lord chap. 7. teacheth to haue been a type of the Sacrament of the Eucharist but it was manifest there was no drinke ioyned to that Tree The second figure was of the Paschall Lambe Exodus the 12. The third figure Manna Exodus 26. The fourth was shew-bread Exodus 25. The fifth the sacrifices in which the flesh was eaten but the blood was not drunke To this Argument we say First that these figures were types of Christ himselfe and not necessarily or properly of the Sacrament of the new Testament For types are shadowes representing the substance and the body not properly other types Christ interpreteth Manna to be himselfe Ioh. 6. I am the true bread that came downe from heauen S. Paul calleth Christ our Paschall Lambe and saith The Rocke that followed them was Christ. And S. Iohn Apoc. 2. by eating of the Tree of life in the Paradise of God vnderstandeth not the sacramentall eating which cannot be in heauen where there are no sacred elements but the spirituall feeding on the flesh of the Sonne of God Secondly if we admit that the types and figures of the old Law were representations of the Sacrament of the new we answer then that the types and figures of the old Testament must be equally compared with the Sacrament of the new part of them must be referred to the part of these For example the Shew-bread and Manna and the flesh of the Lambe and the Tree of life prefigured one part or kind in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to wit the Bread and the Riuers of Paradise and the Waters that Flowed from the Rocke and the Drinke-offerings and the striking the blood of the Lambe vpon the doore-postes represented the mysticall effusion and drinking of Christs blood in the Sacrament There was no drinking of the Tree of life but there was drinking of the Riuers of Paradise there was no drinking of Manna or of the Shew-bread but there was drinking of the Waters that issued out of the Rocke at Horeb. And S. Paul testifieth of the Hebrewes 1. Cor. 10. vers
Sacrament To coyne new Fathers is a vsuall practise and therefore of no transcending merit but to coyne new Canons of generall Councels and to forge records of such antiquitie as is the true Councell of Ephesus can be no lesse then a worke of superarrogation To the allegation out of the Councell of Constance we answer first that it was no generall Councell The Easterne Church of as large or larger extent then the Westerne sent no Patriarch or Bishop thither Secondly this Councell is impeached by the Romane Church it selfe Bellarmine de concil cap. 7. k speaking of this Councell of Constance saith this Councel so much as concerneth the first sessions is disallowed and repealed in the Councels of Florence and Lateran Albertus Pighius is yet hotter against this Councell saying that it decreed against the order of nature against manifest Scriptures against the authoritie of all antiquitie and against the Catholicke faith of the Church What credit is then to be giuen to this erroneous and perfidious Councell Which both adulterated the Christian faith by heretical decisions and brake their morrall faith by bloody crueltie exercised against Iohn Hus and Hierome of Prague to whom safe conduct to the Councell and backe againe was promised If the Romanists themselues reiect this Councell in point of the Popes Supremacie why may not we in point of the Sacrament Lastly out of this very Councell wee may draw an inuincible argument against the halfe Communion The institution of Christ and practise of the Primitiue Church ought to sway more with euery good Christian then any constitution of a late Councell neuer generally approued of by the Church of God But the Communion in both kinds hath the institution of Christ and the practise of the Primitiue Church for it as is confessed by the Fathers in this Councell Therefore euery good Christian ought to communicate in both kinds the prohibition of the Councell of Constance to the contrary notwithstanding To the allegation out of the Councell of Basil our answer is the stronger by how much the authoritie of this Councell is weaker or rather of no validitie at all First there lyeth against it the same exception which we tooke before against the Councell of Constance that none of the Bishops of the Easterne Churches were present at it and in this regard it cannot bee held for an Occomenicall or generall Councell Secondly while the Fathers of this Councell sate at Basil the Pope fearing least some thing might be done to his preiudice called an other Councell at Ferrara and ◠in this regard the Councell of Basil cannot be esteemed a generall or totall Councell no not so much as of the Westerne or Romane Church Thirdly the Acts of this Councell are repeated in the Councell of Florence and Lateran Pighius writes as bitterly against it as against the Councell of Constance and Cardinall Bellarmine writing of it saith There is nothing of this Councell ratified and allowed but certaine orders about benefices the Councell it selfe is reiected and condemned in the Councell of Lateran Sess. 11. No maruell then if Protestants account the decrees of this Synode no better then drosse when by the Roman test it selfe they are proued to bee no good mettell Wherefore as the Romane Oratour makes a Dilemma touching Brutus and Antonie being in Armes one against the other if Brutus bee a preseruer of his country Antonie is an enemie if Antony be a Consul Brutus is an enemie so may we say of those two Councels of Basil and Lateran if the Councell of Basil bee Catholick Lateran is hereticall if Lateran be Catholick the Councell of Basil is hereticall Lastly be this Councell of Basil of what authoritie it may be the Romanists loose more by it then they gaine For though the halfe Communion were after a sort established in this Councell yet the Bohemians petition for the intire Communion was yeelded vnto and signed in this Councell whence we thus argue against them If the Papists arguments drawne from danger of irreuerence inconueniences examples or testimonies of antiquity and pretended consequences of Scripture were necessary and concludent the Councell of Basil could not lawfully grant to the Bohemians and Morauians the vse of the Cup but the Councell of Basil might lawfully and did yeeld to the Bohemians and the Morauians the vse of the cup Therfore the reasons of the Romanists drawn to the contrary from the heads aboue mentioned are not necessarie or concludent CHAP. XIIII The Arguments of Papists drawne from ancient pretended rites of the Church answered and retorted THere is no more certaine signe of a bad cause then extorted testimonies and wyer-drawne arguments such as our aduersaries for want of better insist vpō in this question For the truth neuer wanteth voluntarie witnesses to depose for her nor arguments that offer themselues in her defence as the Poets faine that stones came of their owne accord to the building of Thebes Such are those proofes which the texts of scpriture without any forcing and the free deposition of all ages before alleaged haue furnished vs withall On the contrarie our aduersaries straine antient rites and customes weakely proued and peruersely applied to excuse their sacrilege They tell vs of reseruing the Sacrament for a long space of carrying it home to mens houses giuing it to infants and impotent persons on their death-bed to Priests put out of their ranck for misdemeanour and lastly of a Communion of such things as were before consecrated All which obseruations are as headlesse arrowes shot at randome Falces petebamus we demand sithes and they answer vs with mattocks Our question is of the publike and generall practise of the Church their answer is of priuate customes our question is of the lawfull vse of the Lords Supper their answer is of abuses and corruptions our question is of the depriuing the Laietie of the Cup their answer is of Priests our question is of fit and worthie receiuers qualified to communicate in both kinds their answer is of children excommunicate persons or men lying on their death-beds This might suffice to wash away their varnish of antiquitie Yet lest they should accuse vs as Fimbria did sometimes Scecuola quòd non totum telum corporereceperimus that wee receiued not the ful thrust into our body I wil bring in their great Cardinal laying amaine at vs in this wise SECT I. From the reseruation of the Sacrament thus he disputeth against vs That the Sacrament was accustomed antiently to be reserued we haue proued by the testimonies of Fathers Councels Now that it was reserued in one kind onely and consequently that the communicants receiued in one kind onely it is manifest because sometimes they reserued it for a very long time Sophronius in his spirituall meddow relates of the keeping of it for a whole yeere but wine especially in a small quantitie could not be kept so long because within that time it would be corrupted The answer First
bread and blessed it yet hee turned it not into his body as in his last Supper but as the manner is hee blest the meate he eate thereby teaching vs to say Grace before meales Wid. cont Wicklif Carthus in Luk. 24. Vid. Iustinian supr c. 12. Gerson the Assaylant Christ our Lord in the sixth of Iohn speaking of the fruit of the Lords Supper teacheth one kind to be sufficient to saluation saying he that eateth this bread shall liue for euer And if any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer Tapperus the Defendant Ruardus Tapp In this Chapter Iohn 6. Christ speaketh not of the sacramental eating and drinking of his body and blood Tap. in expli art Louaniens art 15. Idem habet Gabriel Biel. lec 84. super Canone Missae Cusanus epist. 7. ad Bohemos Caiet in 3. part quest 80. Ions c. 59. concordiae Wald. alij Hosius the Assaylant Iames in the Church of Ierusalem deliuered and kept the Communion in one kind For in the second of the Acts in the description of the exercises of the Church of Ierusalem there is rehearsed breaking of bread and no mention at all made of wine Iustinianus the Defendant Iustin. on the first to the Corinthians vers 10. The Apostle by breaking of bread vn derstandeth not the ordinary breaking of bread such as that was whereof S. Luke maketh mention Acts the second whereby the necessity of the hungry was prouided for Cochlaeus the Assaylant Acts 27. Saint Paul taking bread gaue thanks to God in the sight of all and when hee had broken it he began to eate Here is an example of the Communion in one kind for there is no mention made of wine Lorinus the Defendant S. Chrysostome Oecumenius Beda others expounders of this place by bread vnderstand vsuall and common bread And I am also of the same mind For I cannot beleeue that this mysterie being the greatest of all other was celebrated in the sight of profane persons Lor. in Act. 27. COVNCELS The second Combate Whether Councels make for or against the halfe Communion The Antagonists Stanist Hosius and Dominicus à Soto Tho. Caietan and Gabr. Vasquez Iesuite Alph. Salmeron Iesuite and Rob. Bellarmine Iesuite Edm. Campian Iesuite and Andr. Dudithius B. of Quinq Eccles. Hosius the Asaylant THe Councell of Ephesus decreed that the Communion should be giuen in one kind onely to the Laitie in opposition to the heresie of Nestorius who held that vnder the bread in the Sacrament Christs body was without his blood Gabr. Vasquez the Defendant VNto the time of the Councell of Constance where the vse of the Cup was first takē away there arose an error about the integritie or whole humanitie of Christ vnder either kinde wherefore it cannot be said that there was any law made in the Church for the taking away of that error Vasquez cap. 4. disp 216. Caietan the Assaylant Nestorius and Pelagius affirmed that the Communion ought to be kept in both kinds though vpon a diuerse reason Nestorius because he held that vnder the bread the body onely was contained and vnder the forme of wine his blood onely Pelagius because he beleeued that infants could not bee saued without Communion in both kinds To oppose both which heresies it is very likely that the Councell of Ephesus decreed that the Communion shuld be administred in one kind Caietan in 3. Tho. quest 80. art 12. Soto the Defendant Caietan referreth the beginning of the custome to the Nestorians and Pelagians as also another custome of giuing the Sacrament to Infants But as for the second of these customes wee haue shewed before in the ninth Article that it is not likely the Pelagians had any such custome because they taught that Infants might attaine euerlasting life without any Sacrament neither were the Nestorians in the Councell of Ephesus taxed with any such error but with this that they beleeued not the body of Christ in the Sacra ment to bee vnited to the Deitie Soto in 2. dist 91. art 12. Salmeron the Assaylant Two general Councels held in the bowels of Germany to wit the Councell of Constance and Basil with a great consent of Bishops decreed that the Cup should not be giuen to the Laietie now we know that the authoritie of Generall Councels is vncontrowleable He doth wrong to the holy Ghost who despiseth or goeth about to abrogate their Decrees Bellarmine the Defendant The Councell of Constance for so much as concernes the former Sessions is repealed in the Councell of Florence and the last Councell of Lateran Nothing in the Councell of Basil is ratified and approued saue onely certaine orders about benefices which for peace and vnities sake Pope Nicolas approoued But the Councell it selfe is repealed in the Councell of Lateran last Session Bell. de Concil cap. 7. Vasquez disput 215. c. 3. Basiliense Concilium nullius est authoritatis in hac re The Councell of Basil is of no authority in this point Campian and Norrice the Assaylant The Councell of Trent teacheth that he who inioyeth the least particle of either kinde receiueth not a mangled or imperfect but an absolute compleate entire and perfect Sacrament true Author and Giuer of life the whole refection of Christs body and blood Norrice Antidot contro 50. This Councell of Trent is highly extolled by Campian The Synode of Trent the older it groweth the more it shall perpetually flourish Good God! What varietie of Nations was there What choyse of Bishops of the whole world What lusture of Kings and Common-wealth What marrow of Diuines What holynesse What teares What fasting What flowers of Vniuersities What tongues c. Andreas Dudithius the Defendant What good could be done in that Councell wherein voyces were numbred but not wayed If the merits of the cause hee speaketh of the Communion in both kindes or reason might haue carried it or if but a few had ioyned with vs wee had won the day But when the number onely could beare sway in which wee came short though our cause was exceeding good wee were faine to sit downe by the losse c. In summe the matter came to that passe through the wickednesse of those hungrie Bishops that hung vpon the Popes sleeue and were created on the sudden by the Pope for the purpose that that Councell seemed to be an assembly not of Bishops but of Hobgoblins not of men but of Images moued like the statues of Dedalus by the sinewes of others Dudith Quinque-Eccles episc ad Maximilianum 2. Caes. REASONS The third Combate Whether Reason maketh for or against the halfe Communion The Antagonists Mart. Becanus Iesuite and Domin à Soto Ioan. Hesselius and Gabr. Vasquez Iesuite Rob. Bellarmine and Guli Durand Alph. Salmeron and Thom. Aquinas Becanus the Assaylant IF whole Christ bee no lesse contained vnder one kind then vnder both it is all one whether wee receiue in one kind or in both For alwayes wee receiue the
Lay-man that communicateth in one kind recipit gratiam 4. receiueth grace but in 4. degrees Nugnus in 3. partem Thom. quest 80. art 12. Thus hauing remoued all rubs and obstacles out of the way wee haue passed clearely throughout all Ages from the time of Christ and his Apostles and in euery hundred yeere since produced euidence against the Church of Rome And finally by verdict of some Doctors of chiefe credit among themselues found her to be guiltie of sacrilege in taking away the Cup from the Laiety at the Lords Table If any demand where this Cup may be found I answer as we read in o Genesis it is found with Beniamin I meane the Reformed Churches Etymon filij dextrae chrildren of Christs right hand by which hee distributeth to his people the bread of life and wine of Immortalitie his most pretious body and blood There is yet palpable darknes in Egypt but there is light in Goshen In Rome vnder the Papacie the people are fed with Huskes of legendary fables or at the best with mustie bread of old traditions and sowred with the leauen of heresie And all their publike Communions are dry feasts but in the Reformed Churches the people are fed with the flowre of Wheat the sincere Word of God and drinke of the purest iuyce of the Grape the blood of our Redeemer in the holy Sacrament What shall wee therefore render to the Lord for all the benefits which hee hath bestowed vpon vs we will take the Cup of Saluation and continually call vpon the name of the Lord. So be it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Finis Deolaus sine fine Cassander tract de Communione de vtraque specie pag. 1019. edit Paris 1616. Veteres omnes tam Graeci quà m Latini in ea sententia fuisse videntur vt existimauerint in legitima solemni celebratione Corporis sanguinis Domini et Adminiratione quae in Ecclesia fideli populo è sacra mensa fit Duplicem sâ—…ciem panis vini esse adhibendam atque hunc morem per vniuersas Orientis Occidentis Ecclesias antiquitus obseruatum fuisse tum expriscorum Patrum Monumentis tum ex vetustis diuinorum mysteriorum formulis apparet Et post Ad hoc inductifuerunt exemplo mandato Christi qui instituendo huius Sacramenti vsum Apostolis fiâ—…lium Sacramenta percipientium personam repraesentantibus quibus dixerat Accipite edite idem mox dixit bibite ex hoc omnes quod ex veterum sententia interpretatur Radbertus tam ministri quà m reliqui credentes All the Ancients both Greeke and Latine seeme to be of opinion that in the lawfull and solemne celebration of the Sacrament of Christs body and blood and administring it to the people that both kinds to wit bread and wine ought to be vsed at the Lords Table And it appeares both out of the workes of the ancient Fathers and the old Rites and formes of the diuine mysteries that this custome was obserued in all the Easterne and Westerne Churches And a little after Hereunto they were induced by the Example and Command of Christ who in the institution of this Sacrament speaking to his Apostles then representing the persons of all faithful Communicants said Take and eate and presently after said to the selfe-same Drinke ye all of this which Radbertus according to the mind of the Ancients expoundeth as well Ministers as other beleeuers FINIS A RELATION OF WHAT PASSED IN A CONFERENCE BETWEENE DAN FEATLY Doctor in Diuinity and Mr. Euerard Priest of the Romish Church disguized in the habit of a Lay-Gentleman vnexpectedly met at a Dinner in Noble street Ian. 25. 1626. LONDON Printed by F. Kyngston for Rob. Milbourne and are to be sold at the Greyhound in Pauls Churchyard 1630. THE SPECIALL POINTS of the Conference OF the necessitie of Episcopall gouernment to the essence of a Church 2 Of ordination by Presbyters 3 Of the distinction of Bishops and Priests iure diuino 4 Of differences among Papists in matter of faith 5 Of the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary 6 Of the authoritie of a Generall Councell aboue the Pope 7 Of prayer for the dead 8 Of the authority of the originall Scriptures and corruption in the vulgar translation 9 Of the Communion in one kind 1. The state of the question opened 2. The necessitie of communicating in both kinds 3. Popish obiections answered 10 Of the Popes supremacie 11 Of mingling water with wine in the Sacrament 12 Of the perfection of Scripture THE CONFERENCE L. F. I Pray you Doctor Featly resolue mee whether thinke you a Church may be without a Bishop or no D. Featly Your L. propoundeth a question that little concerneth you any way or any member of the Church of England For in England we haue God bee blessed Bishops and those besides many learned Priests very well able to iustifie that Calling If I might bee so bold I would aduise your L. not to trouble your selfe with such curious questions of small or no moment to you wherein learned men without hazarding of their saluation may haue different opinions L. F. I hold it a matter of great moment and desire you not to decline it but plainely to deliuer your iudgement thereof D. Featly I professe Madame with submission to more learned iudgements that I euer held and doe hold that a Church cannot bee without a Priest or a Pastor but it may bee and sometimes is without a Bishop properly so called The Church of Geneua as also the Reformed Churches in France and the Low-Countries and diuers in Germany are true Reformed Churches and yet they haue no Bishops such as you meane Although some of them would after our manner haue them if they could Discipline or a precise gouernment of the Church is not simply of the essence of the Church And therefore albeit it be granted that these Churches haue not the best gouernment nor the Apostolicall discipline in all points yet because they haue the Apostolicall doctrine sincerely taught and beleeued in them and the Christian Sacraments rightly administred I beleeue that they are true Churches L. F. Ought there not to bee Bishops in euery Church by the Law of God D. Featly What if there ought This doth not proue that in case there be no Bishops in some Countries as there ought to be that therefore there are no Churches I say that by the Law of God congregations ought to meet in publike Churches to serue God in his House yet if the vse of publike Churches bee taken away from the faithfull or they be not permitted to resort vnto them as in time of persecution it hath been and in some places is at this day the Pastors and their flocks may meete in Cryptis that is in priuate and secret places as they did in the Primitiue Church And the faithfull thus meeting continue a true Church though they haue neither a Temple allowed them nor Tythe to the Ministers nor
Alexandriae per totam Aegyptum siâ—…desit Episcopus consecrat Presbyter August ex vtroque Test. mixt quaest 101. D. Mort. Apol. Cathole 21. Presbyter alter alteram ordinare potest non in Ecclesia bene composita sed in statu collapso deplorato maximè in casu necessitatis * * False vid. Vntruth 3. in the Appendix to this Conference * * Infrain Appendice D. Field of the Church lib. 3. cap. 29. Howsoeuer we dislike the Popish manner of praying for the dead which is to deliuer them out of their feigned Purgatory yet wee doe not reprehend the Primitiue Church nor the Pastors nor guides of it for naming them in their publike prayers thereby to nourish their hope of the resurrection and to expresse their longing desire of the consummation of their owne and their happinesse that are come before them in the faith of Christ. * * See the place of Bellarmine cited in the Appendix g Can. 6. Si quis dixerit in Ecclesia cathol Non esse Hierarchiam diuinâ ordinatione constitutam quae constat ex Episcopis presbyteris ministris anathema sit Can. 7. Si quis dixerit Episco pos presbyteris non esse superiores anathemasit See the history of the Councell of Trent lib. 7. p. 478. 480 The Legates consulting among themselues answer that there were cause to declare that a Bishop is superiour to a Priest verum quo iure declarato non esse opus But by what right the Councell need not determine A little after the Doctors in the Councel were diuided about the Hierarchy some placing it in Orders only naming the Orders of Deacons Priests and Bishops and others following For Aerius placed it in iurisdiction a third sort placed it in both and the reasons of their direct opinions are there to be seene The contrary to this assertion is maintained by the learned in the Romish Church vid. Pagn In praef in suam ver sionem Ariam Montanum praef Bibl. Reg. Ignatium Leuitam contra Lindanum alios Pontificios prae omnibus Hieron apologiam pro Hebraicâ Veritate in Prologis Comm. in Zach. cap. 8. vid. Decret 1. part dist 9. ca. vt veteres citat Bellar. plures alios in hanc sententiam de verbo Dei lib. 2. cap. 11. 10. Benedict Parisiensis theologus aliquot millia locorum in lat vulg versione correxit ad veritatem hebraicam graecam edit Paris an 1552. 1558. sed postea prodijt noua editio ibid. 1573. omissis omnibus illis emendationibus cui praefixa est satis insulsa praefatio Iacobi fabri Sorbonici D. h h Certe vix dubitari potest quin sicut Latina Ecclesia constantior fuit in fide retinenda quà m Graecaâ—…ita etiam vigilantior fuerit in suis codicibus à corruptione defendendis Bell. de Verb. Deil. 2. c. 11. h h This Bellarmine must needs say vnlesse he contradict himselfe For a little after in the same chapter he confessâ—…th that in foure cases we may correct and mend the vulgar Latine Translation by the Greeke and Hebrew Fountaines De Verb. Dei lib. 2. cap. 11. sect 17. See Hieron Apolog. ad Pam. Interpretum vâ—…tio quae apud suos purissâ—…o orationis cursu labuntur apud nos vitijs scateâ—…t â—…dem cont Heluid cap. 6. Multo purior manare credenda est sontis vnda quà m riui * * In hunc locum Ignat. exceptioni Bellarm. primae An Ignatius hoc loco corruptus item secundae ac tertiae Item Baronij deprauationi fraudi respondet Nic. Vedelius exercit 2. in epist. ad Philadelph Morn de Eucharist lib. 1. c. 10. 11. vbi de hoc toto argum agit plenissimè k k Quomodo ad Martyrij poculuÌ„ idoneos faciemus si non eos primùm in Ecclesia ad Bibendum poculum Domini iure communicationis admittimus Cypr. epist. 54. ad Cornet l l Cur quidam in calice sanctificando plebi ministrando non faciunt quod Dom fecit docuit m m Ad bibendum sanguinem omnes exhortantur qui volunt habere vitam n n Aut integra sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceantur Quia diuisio vnius eius demque mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio non potest prouenire o o Quid sit sanguis non iam audiendo sed bibendo didicistis p p Sanguis non in manus fidelium sed in ora funditur These books of Gregory are cited by Papists against vs vnder his name though they be iustly suspected to be counte feit in learned Diuines iudgement * * See an answer to these pretended ancient Rites supra c. 14. l l It is now two yeeres and more since Master Euerard hath had this Scedule in his hand vnto which he hath been sundry times importuned to answer but hath not performed * * M. Euerard should haue taken notice that the Apostles were not at this time fully ordained Priests though they had been once sent to preach For after his resurrection Ioh. 20. Christ breathed on them the holy Ghost and said Whose soeuer sinnes yee remit c. whereby hee fully indued them with Priestly power Secondly the Apostles at this Supper were Communicants not Ministers of the Sacrament Christ was then the Priest and Minister onely in that action and therefore the Apostles supplying the place of meere Communicants it followeth that whatsoeuer Christ then commanded them he commanded all Receiuers after them * * If neither precept of eating or drinking belong to the Laiety the Laiety are not at all bound to receiue this Sacrament * * Shamefull vntruth and notorious ignorance See the Appendix num 〈◊〉 item Chamierum de Euch. lib. 8. cap. 〈◊〉 de panis distributione quaestio nulla est nec dubitatur omnibus esse fidelibus distribuendum si qui se bene praeparatos offerant * * Waldensis tom 2. cap. 91. fol. 162. edit Salmant 1557. Prolixe probat ex August Cypriano Bernando bibere spiritualitur intelligendum Caietanusin 3. partem Thom. q. 80. verba Christi Ioh. 6. ad literam intelliguntur ad Manducationem spiritualem * * This answer he contradicteth in his last answer infra vid. A. * * From the proper acception of the obiect onely and not the act the corporall and substantiall presence of Christ in the Sacrament cannot be inferred For spiritually and figuratiuely a man may feed vpon Christs body by faith though his body be not present on earth * * See this answer refelled by Vasquez tom 3. in 3. partem disp 116. Nisi manducaueritis c. Haec verba non tantum reseruntur ad rem ipsam sumptam sed ad modum sumendi cam nam manducate bibite si verba propriè vsurâ—…entur cuiuis speciei conuenire non possunt Neque enim sanguis sub specie panis bibi dicitur sicut neque corpus sub specie vinimanducari vt optimè