but the poyson of Dragons vnhappily with Iudas Therefore sayth Paul sauor you those things which are aboue not the things which are on earth For this cup of the new Testament is not any where receiued but aboue in heauen Where the carkaâ—â—e is thither will the Eagles resort that is saith Austen into heauen whither froÌ„ hence Christ caried with him the body which hee tooke in the nature of man Had we no better ground to refuse that your corporal cating reall presence this were sufficient For where without question the flesh of Christ must bee locally present in your host before it can bee really pressed with teeth the sacred scriptures catholik fathers affirm that the true flesh of Christ is absent from earth verily present in heauen whither we must and may send our harts and faithes to be partakers of him our hands mouthes we can not sende therefore your late deuised doctrine must needes be dissident from the scriptures and vnknowen to the former purer church of christ I see saith Stâ—uen the heauens open and the sonne of man standing at the right hand of God whom the heaueÌ„s saith Peter must contain vntil the time that al things be restored Phi. As though he might not also be in earth Theo. Being ascended into heauen he is no more in earth if that be true which the Angels said to his Disciples This Iesus which is taken vp from you into heauen shall so come as you haue seene him go into heauen ergo when he ascended into heauen he was taken vp from them and not left with them and so the Lord himselfe before had taught them I came foorth from the father and came into the world now contrariwise I leaue the world and go to the father So that his ascending to the father was the leauing of the world and his abiding with the father imployeth his absence from the world The poore you alwaies haue with you but me sayth hee you shall not alwayes haue Nowe am I no more in the world but come to thee holy father ergo now Chriâ—t being with his father is no more in the world but remaineth in heauenâ— and as touching his humane nature is absent from the earth which not onely the scriptures pronounce but also the fathers with one voice professe Tertullian In the very palace of heauen to this day sitteth Iesus at the right hand of his father man though also God fleshe and blood though purer than ours neuerthelesse the very same in substaunce and forme in which he ascended Augustine Let vs shew the Iewes at this day where Christ is would God they would heare and take hold of him Hee was slaine of their fathers he was buried he rose againe and was knowen of his Disciples and before their eyes ascended into heauen and there now sitteth at the right hand of the father Let them heare this and lay hold on him Perhaps he will say whom shall I take holde of him that is absent howe shall I reach my hand vp to heauen to take hold on him sitting there Send thy faith and thou hast hold of him Thy father 's held him in the flesh hold thou him in thine heart Hee is both departeâ— and present he is returnâ—d whence he came and hath not left vs. His body hath hee caried to heauen his maiestie hath hee not withdrawen from the world Mee shall you not alwayes haue He spake this of the presence of his body For touching his maiesty prouidence inspeakeable and inuâ—sible grace it is true that he said I am alwayes with you to the end of the world But as touching the fleshe which the word took touching that by the which he was born of the virgin fastned to the crosse laide in the graue you shall not alwayes haue me with you And why because he is ascended into heauen and is not here there hee sitteth at the right hand of the father Cyrill Wee must here diligeÌ„tly marke that albeit hee haue withdrawen from hence the presence of his bodie yet in the maiestie of his Godhead hee is alwayes with vs euen as himselfe readie to depart from his Disciples promised behold I am with you at all tymes vnto the end of the world For the faithfull must beleeue though hee be absent from vs in body yet in his diuine vertue he is euer present with all that loue him with whome hee euer hath beene and will be present though not in bodie yet in the vertue of his Deitie Hee coulde not bee conuersant with his Apostles in fleshe after hee was once ascended to his Father yet for so much as Christ is truely God and man they should haue vnderstood that in the vnspeakeable power of his Godhead hee meant to bee alwayes with them though in fleshe hee were absent and by that onely meanes notwithstanding hee bee absent in fleshe hee is able to saue his Origen according to his diuine nature hee is not absent from vs but hee is absent according to the dispensation of his bodie which hee tooke As a man shall hee bee absent from vs who is euerie where in his diuine nature For it is not the manhood of Christ that is there wheresoeuer two or three bee gathered togither in his name neither is it his manhood that is with vs at all times vntill the ende of the worlde neither is his manhood present in euerie congregation of the faithfull but the diuine vertue that was in Iesu. Ambrose Steuen amiddest the Iewes saw thee O Lord absent Marie among the Angels sawe thee not being present Steuen sought not for thee on earth who sawe thee standing at the right hand of God Marie which sought thee in earth could not touch thee Steuen touched thee because he sought thee in heauen Therefore neither on the earth nor in the earth nor after the flesh ought wee to seeke thee if we wil find thee Gregory Christ is not here by the presence of his flesh which yet is nowhere absent by the presence of his maiesty The word incarnat both remaineth departeth He departeth from his in bodie and remaineth with his in diuinitie Wee must therefore brethren follow him thither in hart whither we beleeue him to be ascended in body If the fleshe of Christ bee not in earth nor on earth as these learned Fathers teach vs howe can it be locally closed in your massing waters If his humane nature be placed in heauen at the right hand of God there to remaine till the time that all thinges be restored and from thence not from any place els shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead howe vainely doe you suppose him to bee corporally present in your pâ—xes and really lodged in your bellies Phi. His bodie wee say may be present in many places at one time Theoph. This you
say but what ancient Father euer said so before you yea rather why forget you that this is often refuted by them as a leude and hereticall fansie Doeth not Sainct Augustine of purpose debate the matter and in euident termes giue this flat resolution against you Doubt not saieth hee the man Christ Iesus to bee nowe there whence he shall come to iudgement but keepe in minde and holde assured the christian confession that he rose from the dead ascended into heauen sitteth now at the right hand of his Father and from thence from no place else shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead And so shall he come by the very witnesse of Angels as he was seene to goe into heauen that is in the verie same forme substance of his fleshe the whâ—ch hee hath endued with immortalitie not bereaued of the former nature According to this forme of his manhood wee must not thinke him to bee diffunded in euerie place For we must beware that wee doe not so defende the God-head of a man that wee take from him the trueth of his body It is no good consequent that which is in God should bee euerie where as God himselfe is One person is both God and man and one Christ Iesus is both these euerie where as he is God in heauen as he is man Dout not I say that Christ our Lord is euerie where present as God but in some one place of heauen by the meanes of his true bodie And againe Let vs giue the same eare to the holy Gospell that we would to the Lord himselfe if he were present The Lord is aboue in heauen but the trueth is here which also the Lord is The body in which hee rose β can be but in one place â— his trueth is euery where dispersed Doeth not Vigilius a blessed Martyr and Bishoppe of Trident vpholde the verie same point against Eutyches and his accursed companions The fleshe of Christ sayeth hee WHEN IT WAS IN EARTH SVRELY WAS NOT IN HEAVEN AND NOWE BECAVSE IT IS IN HEAVEN CERTAINLIE IT IS NOT IN EARTH yea so farre it is from being in earth that wee looke for Christ after the flesh to come from heauen whom as hee is God the word we beleeue to be with vs in earth Then by your opinion either the worde is comprised in a place as well as the flesh of Christ or the flesh of Christ is euery where togither with the worde seeing one nature doeth not receiue in it selfe any different and contrary state Now to be contained in a place and to be present in euerie place be thinges diuerse and verie dislike and for so much as the word is euery where and the fleshe of Christ not euery where it is cleare that one and the same Christ is of both natures that is euerie where according to the nature of his diuinitie contained in a place according to the nature of his humanity This is the catholike faith and confession which the Apostles deliuered the Martyrs confirmed and the faithful persist in to this day Doth not Fulgentius handle the same question and precisely trace the steps of Sainct Augustine and Vigilius One and the same sonne of God hauing in him the trueth of the diuine and humane nature lost not the proprieties of the true Godhead and tooke also the proprieties of the true manhead one and the selfesame locall by that he tooke of man and infinite by that he had of his Father one and the verie same according to his humane substaunce absent from heauen when hee was in earth and forsaking the earth when hee ascended to heauen but according to his diuine and infinite substaunce neither leauing heauen when hee came downe from heauen neither departing from earth when hee ascended to heauen The which may bee gathered by the most certaine wordes of the Lord himselfe I ascend to my Father and your Father Howe coulde he ascende but as a locall and true man or howe can hee bee present with the faithfull but as an infinite and true God not as if the humane substance of Christ might bee euery where diffunded but because one and the same Sonne of God albeit according to the trueth of his manhead hee were then locally placed on earth yet according to his Godhead which in no wise is concluded in any place hee filled heauen and earth This true manhead of Christ which is locall as also his true Godhead which is alwayes infinite wee see taught by the Doctrine Apostolicall For that Paul might shewe the bodie of Christ as of verie man to bee contayned in a place he sayeth to the Thessalonians You turned to God from idolles to serue the liuing and true God and to looke for his Sonne from heauen declaring that hee surely shoulde corporally come from heauen whom he knewe to bee corporally raysed from the dead His conclusion is this Whereas then the fleshe of Christ is proued without question to bee contained in a place yet his Godhead is at all times euerie where by the witnesse of Paul c. These bee no wrested or maymed allegations but graue and aduised authorities of learned and auncient Fathers plainely concluding with vs against you that the fleshe of Christ is not absent onely from earth and nowe sitteth aboue at the right hande of GOD but also locally contayned in some one place of heauen by reason of the trueth of his bodie and therefore not dispersed in many places or present in euerie place as you would nowe make the world beleeue it is in your Masses Philand This was spoken of the shape but not of the substance of Christs bodie For Sainct Augustine sayeth Secundum hanc formam non est putandus vbique diffusus according to this externall shape and forme we must not thinke him euerie where diffused and yet the trueth and substaunce of his bodie may bee in many places at one time Theop. You forget that the rest say nature and substaunce as Vigilius Circumscribitur loco per naturam carnis suae Christ is circumscribed with place by the nature of his flesh and Fulgentius Secundum humanam substantiam derelinquens terram cum ascendisset in coelum according to his humane substaunce leauing the earth when hee ascended into heauen and againe Non quia humana Christi substantia fuisset vbique diffusa not as if the humane substaunce of Christ should bee euerie where diffunded By the which it is cleare that neither the forme nor substaunce of Christes bodie can be present in many places at one time And what doeth Sainct Augustine meane by the word forme but the perfection and trueth of mans nature as Ambrose Leo Chrysostome others doe What is sayeth Ambrose in the forme of God in the nature of God I demaund sayeth Leo what is ment by this taking the
Christ to teach and baptise all nations without exceptioÌ„ but we say none hath at this present nor ought to haue any such power within the Realme and vnlesse you will defende that soules in heauen doe nowe preach the Gospel and minister the Sacramentes we see not how the Apostles haue any actuall function or ecclesiasticall power on earth here or elsewhere These quarrels full of spite and voide of al trueth and common reason doe more than you thinke impaire the credit of your religion and learning but so great is your malice that it shutteth your senses kindleth your cholor whiles you would say somwhat to say you care not what be it neuer so vntrue or vntidy Phi. The Princes soueraignty is directly against the commandement commission giuen to Peter first then to all the Apostles of preaching baptising remitting retaining binding loosing ouer all the world without difference of temporall state or dependance of any mortall Prince therein Theo. That coÌ„mandement promise of our Sauior to his Apostles is no way preiudiciall to our doctrine nor beneficial to yours as also the charge which the preachers bishops of England haue ouer their flocks proceedeth neither from Prince nor Pope nor dependeth vpon the wil or word of any earthly creature therfore you do vs the more wrong so confidently to say what you list of vs as if your enuious reports were authentik oracles Phi. You make the Prince supreme gouernor in al spiritual ecclesiasticall thinges causes preaching baptising binding loosing such like be spiritual things causes ergo you make the Princes supreme gouernor euen in these things And here you may see that we iustly charge you with all the former absurdities though to shift theÌ„ vs off you say we do nothing but slander cauil Theo. And here you may see the truth of our speech vniustnes of your charge that as you began so you coÌ„tinue with spite full peâ—â—erting deprauing our words For by GOVERNORS we do not mean moderators perscribers directors inuentors or authors of these things as you misconster vs but rulers magistrates bearing the sworde to permit defende that which Christ himselfe first appointed ordained with lawfull force to disturbe the despisers of his wil testament Now what inconuenience is this if we say that Princes as publike Magistrates may giue freedom protection and assistance to the preaching of the word ministring of the Sacraments right vsing of the keies not fet licence from Rome Is that against Christs coÌ„mandement or commission giuen to Peter the rest or doth that proue all ecclesiasticall power cure of soules to proceed depend of the Princes right Phi. It keepeth the realme from obedience to general Councels which haue bin or shal be gathered in forraine countries It taketh away al conuenient meanes of gathering holding or executing any such Councels their Decrees as appeared by refusing to come to the late Councel of Trent notwithstanding the Popes messengers and letters of other great Princes which requested and inuited them to the same Theo. Princes ought to heare obey the truth proposed by priuate persons Preachers much more to reuerence the same declared by a number of faithful godly Bishops meeting in a general councel But the pleasures orders of other princes prelats be their assembly neuer so great the rulers of this realme are not bound to respect vnlesse their consents be first required and obtained Particular councels you may call without vs and as we are not acquainted with them so are we not obstricted to them Generall Councels you can not call without the liking and warning of all Christian Princes and common-wealthes and if you neglect or skippe any they may lawfully refuse and despise that which you shal then and there decree For that which pertaineth to all can not be good without the knowledge and consents of all Phi. To the Councel of Trent you were requested and inuited by messengers froÌ„ the Pope and letters of other great Princes Theo. To your Chapter at Trent we came not for many good and sufficient reasons The Pope tooke vppon him to call that Councell which he had no right to do None might haue voices in the Councel but such as were his creatures and sworne to bee true trustie to his triple crowne The conclusion and resolution of all thinges was euer reserued to him or his Legates This Realme and others were inuited to come but as suppliants to your Synod to stand at your curtesies and to suffer your selues to be iudges in your owne cause and yet you thinke much that wee refused to come Let a christian councell bee agreed on by all their consentes that haue to do with it let both sides haue like interest in the councell Let your Salua semper in omnibus Apostolicae sedis authoritate Forprising in all thinges the Popes power and pleasure be reiected and the Scriptures inspired from God be laid in the middest as the ballance and touchstone of truth which was the wont of former councels Let both partes bee sworne to respect nothing but in the feare of God to examine the faith seeke out the ancient canons of Christs church if we faile to meete you declaime against vs on Gods name as hinderers of peace despisers of general councels Otherwise no duety bindeth vs to resort much lesse to be subiect to your vnlawfull routes voide of al christian authority liberty truth indifferency Phi. Was the Councell of Trent vnlawfully called Theo. Proue it the Popes right to cal generall Councels that none must sit there but his feed sworne men lastly that he must rule raigne as he doth in all assemblies bee iudge against al law reason in his own cause though he be chiefe in resisting the truth oppressing the church then will we grant your conuenticle at TreÌ„t was orderly called But if these things be repugnant to christian equitie the sincere canons of Gods Church whereby the Catholike Councels of former ages were directed as apparently they be then had your Tridentine chapter neither the calling keeping concluding nor meaning of a generall Councel Phi. Who shoulde call Councels if not the Pope Theo. Shew what one generall Councell the Pope called for the space of twelue hundred yeares after Christ and then aske vs who should call them but he if you can not learn that vsurpation is no right and that generall Councels were called by Princes and not by Popes and therefore the Popes power to summon generall Councels if it bee any grewe very lately and is not yet olde enough to bee currant or Catholike Phi. To the Councell of Trent other Princes consented Theo. Certaine Friers were set there to wast day light wearie the wals with declaiming against the Gospell of Christ whiles your holy
Gods appointment ergo they beare it in all thinges where the sworde must or may be vsed as well spirituall as temporall Phi. No doubt where the sword must or may bee borne they beare it but howe proue you that in spirituall thinges and causes the temporal sword must or may bee vsed Theo. Pitch that for the question and trie how wel you shall speede with it Phi. Wee neuer denyed but in some sort the temporall sword might bee vsed for spirituall thinges and causes as namely to defend the fayth and Canons of the Church and to put them in execution This Princes may do and must doe with their royall power but they may not commaund what they list in ecclesiasticall causes as you would haue them Theo. You snarle stil when you see your selfe brought to the wall What we woulde haue Princes to doe shall soone appeare if you cease from slaundering and keepe to the matter Our tongues ake with telling you that we hold no such opinion and yet you neuer leaue grating at vs as if we did The point that nowe wee stande at is this whether in a Christian common wealth the temporall sworde as you call it that is the publike authoritie of the Magistrate must bee vsed to receiue establish and defende the true faith of Christ and wholesome discipline of his Church and to prohibite displace and punish the contrarie say nay if you dare Phi. Wee neuer ment it Theo. Then in all spirituall thinges and causes Princes onely beare the sword that is haue publike authoritie to receiue establish and defende all poyntes and partes of Christian Doctrine and Discipline within their Realmes and without their helpe though the fayth and Canons of Christes Church may bee pryuately professed and obserued of such as bee willing yet can they not bee generally planted and setled in any kingdome nor vrged by publike Lawes externall punishments on such as refuse but by their consents that beare the sword This is it that wee say refell it if you can Phi. This is not your opinion but ours Wee confesse Princes to bee defenders of the faith and assisters of the Church with their secular might and power you auouche them to bee supreme moderatours and directours of all spirituall thinges and causes without restraint Theo. Wee auouche you to bee Supreme lyars and that which is worse you thinke with facing in time to get some credite to your fabling You finde no such thing in our words nor deedes as you report of vs. We confesse Princes to bee supreme gouernours that is as wee haue often told you supreme bearers of the sworde which was first ordained from aboue to defend and preserue as well goodlines and honestie as peace and tranquillitie amongest men We giue Princes no power to deuise or inuent new religions to alter or change Sacraments to decide or debate doubtes of faith to disturbe or infringe the canons of the church The publike power and outward meanes which God hath vnited and annexed to their swords as namely to commaund by their Edicts and dispose the goods and bodies of such as resist them this power and meanes wee say must be conuerted and vsed first to the seruice and glorie of God next to the profit and welfare of their Realmes that is as much or rather more for thinges spirituall than temporall Phi. If you giue Princes no iudicial nor spiritual power in matters of religiō but an externall and temporall power to permit and establish that which God commaundeth howe can they bee supreme Theo. Supreme they be for that by Gods Lawe they bee not vnder the Popes checke and correction though to leade on the simple sort with a better shewe you conceale that superiority which the Pope chalengeth ouer Princes and enter your whole action for the Church which woord you knew was more gratious and will in no case bee brought to take our meaning right lest you shoulde bee driuen either to proue your assertion which you can not or to confesse ours which you will not And therefore you wrest the word supreme against the very grounds of our common fayth and rules of your priuate speach to make it seeme false and absurde and then as valiant Captaines you wrestle with the fansies which your selues haue deuised fighting thus with your own shadowes you thinke your Seminaries the only lights and lanternes of Christendome but you must go more syncerely to worke before you can winne the cause Phi. Supreme is superiour to all and subiect to none Theo. And so bee Princes superiour to all men within their Realmes and subiect to no man without their Realmes Phi. What superiour to Christ the Church and all Theo. Haue you neuer done with that idle and eluish obiection Wee compare not man with God nor bodies on earth with spirites in heauen but wee conferre mortall men with their like bearing flesh about them which the sworde may touch and in comparison of them wee say Princes are superiour to all men within their dominions Bishoppes and others and subiect to no man without their dominions Prelate nor Pope to bee commaunded corrected and deposed by their tribunals This is the supremacie which wee attribute to Princes that all men within their Territories shoulde obey their Lawes or abide their pleasures and that no man on earth hath authoritie to take their swordes from them by iudiciall sentence or martiall violence Leaue wrangling and rouing and speake directly to this question Phi. I will if you first graunt that your meaning is not so large as your woordes bee Theo. You would fayne seeme with your eloquent nifles to woorke some masteries but it will not bee Our woordes are no larger than our meaning and both be true Phi. Why supreme is superiour to al none excepted no not Christ himselfe The. And what are these phrases the most holy the most mightie the most blessed which you applie to the Pope do they except Christ or no Phi. If nothing else be added they doe not by rigor of comparison but common vse of speach vnderstandeth them of earthly men and alwayes excepteth first God with whom there can bee none compared and next his Saints which be farre from vs in an other and better life Theo. I crie you mercie You may salute your Romish Pharaoh when you will with the most mightie Priest the most blessed father the chiefe Pastor and many such loftie stiles and wee must come after with salt and spoones and conceaue that Christ is excepted though he bee not because your flatteries bee common and if wee to signifie that Princes by Gods lawe bee not vnder the Popes yoke defende them to bee superiour to all men at home and subiect to no mans Courts or Consistories abroade and therfore call them supreme Gouernours of their owne people and Countries you sounde alarme against vs as if wee went about to defeate Christ of his kingdome and disseism
is adored in the mysteries and on the Altar Why shoulde hee not bee adored in all places and in all his giftes and for all the monumentes of his grace and mercie bequeathed vs in this life that he may prepare vs for the next And if this rule bee generall howe great cause haue wee to adâ—re him in the water where hee clenseth vs from our sinnes and at the table where hee feedeth and strengthneth our soules and spirites with their proper nourishment which is the precious ransome that was paide to recouer vs from death and hell and to bring vs to his immortall light and blisse What Christian heart recounting his aboundant goodnesse and fatherly readynesse with his owne stripes to heale vs with his owne bloode to washe vs with his owne death to quicken vs will not bee resolued into prayers and teares to yeelde all honour and adoration to him that doeth offer vs these treasures at and on his table Phi. These bee goodly words to bleare mens eyes where in deede you denie him to bee present eyther at or on the Altar Theo. Wee confesse him to bee there present with all his giftes and blessinges to him that will beholde him with the eye of faith and reach out the hand of his soule to apprehende him in greater might and maiestie than you doe when you shroude him with your formes of breade and wine and pale him rounde with a pixe as it were with a sepulchre Mary locall dimension or inclusion within the compasse of the host or chalice wee appoint him none His trueth is annexed to the Sacramentes and his power vnited to the creatures after a wonderfull and inspeakeable manner by the mighty working of the holy ghost but yet wee must not direct his diuine honour and seruice to anie part of the Altar or circumference of the visible creatures wee must rather Lyft vp our hearts as the faithfull were alwayes admonished in this sacrament and take heede that wee doe not basely bende our eyes on the bread or wine to seeke Christ in them and vnderneath them much lesse worshippe them in steede of him which is the next way to dishonor him and deifie them against the very rules and Principles of our faith Phi. But S. Chrysostom saith We adore him on the altar as the Sages did in the manger and S. Nazianzene saith of his sister Gorgonia she called on him which is worshipped on the Altar Theo. What wordes soeuer Chrysostom and Nazianzene vse to expresse the place where Christ is serued and adored yet this is euident that they attribute adoration not to the visible element or sacrament but vnto Christ who may well be saide to be worshipped on the Table or altar for so much as there is the fruite force and eâ—fect of his heauenly grace and trueth proposed vnto all and from thence the prayers and thankes of all are offered vnto him by the religious heart and voice of the Pastor that standeth at the Lordes table to bee the mouth of al and yet you deale vntruely with both those fathers as you do almost with al the rest of the writers that passe your pen. Chrysostomes wordes are Tu non in praecepe id sed in Altarivides Thou seest his bodie not in a manger but on the Altar Now betweene seeing adoring there is good difference if you bee not so blinde that you can see nothing Phi. He speaketh it to that ende that we should adore it as the Sages did when they found him in a manger Theo. He hath some wordes tending to this ende that we should adore the body of Christ since the wicked and barbarous Magi did yeelde him that honour but he ioyneth no such wordes togither as you cite he saith not we adore him on the altar but let vs that be citizens of heauen at least imitate those Barbarians Phi. That is in adoring Christ. Theo. As if we doubted of that But where is on the altar which you haue added of your owne without your authors consent Phi. He sayeth thou seest him on the Altar Theo. But neither with corporall eyes nor vnder the formes of bread and wine And that well appeareth in the very same place when he saith Ascende igitur ad coeli portas tunc quod dicimus intueberis Climbe vp to the gates of heauen and then thou shalt see that which we now say To which end he told them before that becomming Eagles in this life they must fly vppe to heauen it selfe or rather aboue the heauens For where the carcas is saith Christ there wil the Eagles be The Lordes body is the carkas in respect of the death which hee suffered Eagles Christ calleth vs to shew vs that he must flie on high which will come to this body euer mount vpward haue the eye of his mind most bright to behold the sonne of righteousnes He that teacheth you to ascend to the highest heauens there to adore Christ neuer ment you should adore the hâ—st in the Priestes handes in steede of Christ and as hee neuer ment it so he neuer spake it though you haue plaied some ligier de main to make his wordes sound to that sense Phi. Nazianzenes sister called on him that is worshipped vpon the altar Theo. She did so but when she made her prayers to Christ there was neither Priest by nor pixe there that you should dreame shee made her prayers to the host Nazianzene saith shee went to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the dark of the night kneeling close to yâ— altar she did inuocate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 him that is honoured thereon not meaning the host which at that instant was not on the Altar but Christ who is truly said to be honoured on the altar or Table because his mercies are there layde foorth in the mysteries and the prayers and supplications of all the faythfull offered chiefely from that place vnto him though hee sit in heauen according to the materiall substance of his humane bodie Phi. He is honored on the Altar that is say you the Altar is the place whence honour is giuen vnto him what sleights you haue to auoyd the fathers Theo. Haue you no worse to enforce them and you shal do them lesse wrong than you doe When the woman of Samaria sayd to Christ Our fathers worshipped God in this hill did she meane that God was in the hill or that the worshippe was there dâ—ne vnto him When it was said to Moses Ye shal serue God vpon this mountaine was that mountaine before hand allotted to God or to his seruice So Christ is honoured on earth though hee bee in heauen because the earth is the place where hee is honored and serued And yet wee doubt not but Christ himselfe is also present euen in the mysteries and on the Altar or Table of the Lorde albeit not in that corporall and carnall manner which you conceiue
of a corporal substaÌ„ce for your shewes without substance were not yet known but by secret efficiencie prouing the presence of the diuine vertue This common bread chaunged into flesh and blood procureth life and groweth to our bodies so by the vsuall course of these things the weakenes of our faith is succoured and â—aught by a sensible argument that the effects of eternal life is in the visible SacrameÌ„ts that we be vnitâ—â— to Christ noâ— so much by a corporal as by a spiritual transitioÌ„ Ambrose Perhaps tâ—ou wilt say I â—ee the likenes I see not the truth of blood But it hath a resemblaÌ„ce For as thou tookest a resemblance of his death so doest thou drink a resemblance of his precious blood to this end that there should be no horror of blood and yet it might worke the price of our saluation and the grace of our redemption might remaine Therfore for a similitude thou receauest the Sacrament sed ver ae naturae gratiaÌ„ virtuteÌ„que consequeris but thou obtainest therby the grace vertue of the true nature Gelasius By the sacraments which we receiue wee be made partakers of the diuine nature they truely represent to vs the vertues and effects of that Principal mysterie Hilarius These things tasted taken bring this to passe that Christ remaineth in vs this is The vertue of that table to quicken the receiuers Leo In that mystical distribution of the spirituall nourishment that is giuen this is taken that receiuing the vertue of the heauenly meate we may be chaunged into his flesh who was made flesh for vs. Chrysostom Let vs come to the spirituall dugge of this chalice and suck thence the grace of the spirit Austen The Sacrament is one thing the vertue of the Sacrament is an other thing Euery man receiueth his part whereby grace itselfe is called parts and where the Sacraments were common to all grace was not common to all which is the vertue of the Sacraments And againe The Capernites thought he would haue giuen them his body but he told them hee would ascend to heauen no doubt hee ment whole When you shall see the sonne of man ascendingâ— where hee was before surely then shal you see that he doth not giue his body that way which you imagine surely then shal you perceiue that his grace is not consumed with biting Euthymius He doth change these things vnspeakably into his very body that quickneth and into his very precious blood and into the grace of them bothâ— We must therfore not looke to the nature of the things proposed at the Lords table but vnto the vertue of them Wherefore Theodoretes wordes are most true The signes which are seene Christ did honor with the names of his body and blood not chaunging the nature or substance of them but casting grace vnto nature And so did Ambrose meane when hee sayde If there bee so great strength in the word of the Lord Iesu that all thinges beganne to bee when they were not howe much more shall it bee of force that the mysticall elementes should be the same they were before and yet bee chaunged into an other thing The same in earthly matter and substaunce which they were before chaunged in vertue power and working whereby wee see they beare not onely the names but also the fruites and effectes of those thinges whose Sacraments they bee This is their doctrine touching the visible part of this Sacrament which is seene with eyes felt with handes and â—rused with teeth of that there is no doubt but it entereth our mouthes and resteth in our bowels and that for the causes which I before rehearsed aâ—â—er consecration is euâ—ry where called by thâ—m the Lordes body but that the naturall fleshe of Christ which is thâ— other and inwarde part of the Sacrament entereth the mouth or abideth the teeth or passeth downe the throate or loâ—geth in the stomack this is a position wholy repugnant both to Fathers and Scriptures Doe you not know sayth Christ that whatsoeuer thing from without entereth into a man can not defile him because it entereth not into his heart but into the beâ—lie Then by the iudgement of our Sauiour nothing can enter â—oth the hâ—aâ—t the bâ—lly but the flesh of Chrisâ— entereth into the hâ—art ergo 〈…〉 The bellie saieth Paul is for meates meates for the bellie and God will destroy both it and them the bodie of Chrâ—st Gâ—d wâ—ll not destroy it is therefore no meate for the bellie If not for the â—â—lliâ— then not for the mouth because eueâ—ie thing that entereth the mouth goeth into the bellie and so foorth to the â—raught But so basely to thâ—nk of the flâ—sh of Christ is apparent and 〈◊〉 wickednesse eâ—go the fleshe of Christ neither fillâ—th our bellies nor â—ntâ—râ—th ouâ— moâ—â—â—â— For nothing that entereth the mouth can either defile or sanctifie Meatâ—s saith Paul whiâ—h passe by the mouth doe not commend vs vnto â—od neither doeth the kingâ—om of God which is our sanctificationâ— conâ—â—â— of mâ—ats and drinkes but Christ with his blood doeth sanctifie the people and hee that â—atâ—th my flâ—sh drinketh my blood saith â—e remaineth in mee and I in him and hath eternall life ergo neâ—ther his fleshe nor â—â—s blood enter ouâ— mâ—utheâ— To be short Christ dwelleth not in bellies by locall comprehension but in our hearts by faith his flâ—he seedeth not â—ur bodies for a tiâ—e but our soules for euer his wordes were spoken not of our mouthes which beâ—leâ—ue not â—ut of our spirites which haue no fleshe nor boanes and consequently neither teeth to grinde nor iawes to swallow but onely â—aith and vnderstanding Lette all this bee â—â—â—de if the learned and auncient Fathers doe not conclude the same Chrysostome Care not for the nourishment of the bodie but of the spirit Christ is the bread which â—eeâ—â—th not the bodie but the soule and filleth not the belly but the minde Ambrose Christ is in that sacrament because it is the bodie of Christ. It is therefore no bodily but Ghostly meate NOT THIS BREAD which entereth into the bodie but the bread of eternall life is it that vpholdeth the substaunce of our soule Cyprian As often as we doe this wee wheâ— not our teeth to bite but we breake the sanctified bread with a sincere faith Cyril Let vs therefore as our Sauiour saith labour not for the meate which goeth into the bellie but for the spirituall foode which confirmeth our harts and leadeth vs to eternall life Austen It is not lawfull to deuoure Christ with teeth Prepare not your iawes but your harts We take but a morsel our hart is replenished Therfore not that which is seen but that which is beleued doth feed Why prouidest thou thy teeth thy belly Beleeue thou hast eaten Beâ—traÌ„ At
of Christ inwardly Tast therefore and see howe sweete the meate is but learne before what manner of tast it hath It beareth the tast of Angels foode hauing in it a mysticall and pleasaunt relesse which thou canst not discerne with thy mouth but mayest vnderstande with thine inwarde affection Holde readie the mouth of thy fayth open the iawes of hope stretch out the bowels of loue and take the breade of life which is the nourishment of the inwarde man Tast I saie the sweetenesse of this heauenly banquette but lothe the smatche of the earthlie fruites For from the faith of the inwarde man commeth the tasting of the diuine iuyce whiles by the taking of the healthful Eucharist CHRIST FLOWETH INTO THE BOWELS OF THE SOVLE OF THE RECEAVER AND THE RELIGIOVS MINDE ADMITTETH HIM INTO HER CHAST AND INNERMOST ROOMES There shall neede no long discourse to proue that these Catholike Fathers teach in the Lordes Supper a spirituall kinde of eating the fleshe of Christ by faith and vnderstanding as wee doe not a corporall with teeth and iawes as you doe The places bee manie the wordes plaine you can not shift them vnlesse you will desperatly take fleshe for spirite bodie for soule chamming for beleeuing earth for heauen yea a dumme and dead creature for the liuing and euerlasting sonne of God which were not onely sensible blindnesse but in excusable madnes Phi. The spiritual eating wee doe not deny but we adde to that a corporall because the soul may bee partaker of Christ by faith notwithstanding the mouth receiue the very flesh of Christ vnder the formes of bread and wine Theo. This is your onely refuge that is left and this will not helpe you For examine this answere a while and you shall soone see the weakenesse of it My flesh is truely meate saith Christ and my blood is truely drinke Hee that doubteth of this we holde him accursed you doe the like thus farre we agree Mary for what part of man soule or bodie this meate was prouided in this we dissent You say for the body no lesse than for the soule wee say for the soule and not for the body So saide Chrysostome before vs. This meate feedeth not the body but the soule So saide Ambrose It is no bodilie but Ghostlie meate So said Augustine Prepare not your iawes but your harts thence is this super commended so saide Cyprian This is the proper nourishment of the spirit and not common to the flesh Now that which is eaten is meate And therefore if Christ bee no meate for the bodie but onely for the soule assuredly Christ is not eaten of our bodies but of soules only Next you confesse that the mortall and sinnefull bodies of men may not bee substantially nourished with the glorious and immortall flesh of Christ and eating is altogither in vaine euen of the flesh of Christ it selfe without norishing al the fathers with one consent teach this to be the end of caring the fleshe of Christ that we should be thereby norished to life eternal Why then striue you for a corporal eating where your selues dare not defend any corporal norishing Why distract you eating frō norishing by referring them one to the body the other to the soule which the Fathers alwayes ioyned applied to one the self same part of man Many mothers saith Chrysost. deliuered their infants whē they are born to other norces which he would not do but norisheth vs with his own body And in the same place where he saith Ipsum vides ipsum tangis ipsum comedis thou seest him thou touchest him thou eatest him addeth Ea namque re nos alimur quam Angeli videntes tremunt For we are nourished with that thing which the Angels tremble when they behold And so the rest of the Fathers call it not onely meate to eate but nutrimentum alimoniam norishment food to keepe the receiuer in plight and good liking So that that part of man doth not eat the fleshe of Christ which is not norished with it And since you dare not auouch that our bodies are really nourished with the flesh of Christ why shoulde you hold that our mouthes do reallie eate him Lastly with what one meate can you fit both the bodies and soules of men That which entereth the body must bee locall and corporall That which feedeth the soule must bee spirituall and intellectuall The soule hath no locall receites nor corporall instrumentes for her kinde of eating but onely faith and vnderstanding So that if the fleshe of Christ in this mysterie bee materiall and locall how canne it feede the soule If it bee spirituall and intellectuall howe can it bee chammed with teeth or closed in the streites of the stomack Local not local corporal not corporal be plaine contradictions and by no meanes incident to the naturall flesh of Christ. One it must needs be both it cannot be though you would sweate out your hearts with wrangling And that Christ is not eaten with teeth or mouth the Ghospell in plaine wordes auoucheth with vs. Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath eternall life my flesh is meat indeed my bloud is drinke in deed hee that eateth my fleshe and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him saith our Sauiour The wicked liue not by Christ neither abide in Christ and therefore by the verie determination of the Lorde him-self they neither eate his flesh nor drinke his bloude Runne nowe to your distinction of corporall and spirituall eating when you will but so long as these wordes stand written in the Ghospell he that eateth me euen he shall liue by me the Godly will soone conclude that SVCH AS LIVE NOT BY CHRIST DOE NOT EATE CHRIST and so that corporall eating of Christes flesh which you would erect common to the faithfull and faithlesse to be no kind of eating at al notwithstanding they receiue the materiall and external elementes of this mysterie Phi. In spite of all your places and proofes there is a Sacramentall eateing of Christs flesh with mouth and iawes besides your spirituall eating it with faith and spirite which you could not doe vnlesse it were really present therefore you doe not well to beguile the simple in this sort with refuting one trueth by an other whereas the fathers confessed both Theo. In spite of all your late deuises euasions the flesh of Christ is not truely eaten with Capernites teeth or Iesuits iawes neither do the fathers auouch any such thing saue in that sense which I last declared that the signes so called are eaten of the wicked with their mouthes and throates but of the flesh it selfe and bloud of Christ they plainly affirme the contrarie S. Augustine expounding the wordes of our sauiour hee that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud remaineth in me and I in him saith
to the ministers of the word and Sacramentes Apolog. cap. 4. Sect. 21. God hath alreadie by his law prescribed which way he wil be serued that Princes may and must command in their realms though the Pope say nay Princes be not supreme to do what they list in religion but only free from the Popes iurisdiction The feare of God and not the practises of Popes must keepe Princes from doing euill The other toucheth our duetie to the Prince not the Princes duety vnto God The Prince beareth the sword vnder and not aboue God Apolog. cap. 4. Sect. 22. Epist. 55. The spirituall regiment of the soule is properlie Christes and not the piests The Preachers functioÌ„ excelleth the Princes in perfection comfort but not in power to commaund or meanes to compell The same god forceth by the Princes sword that teacheth by the preachers mouth * Iohn 3. * Heb. 12. The kingdom is not aboue the Church though the Prince punish wicked priests The true sheepeheard is only Christâ— the rest are his seruantes and not the owners of the sheepe * 1. Pet. 5. Princes in their vocatioÌ„ be shepheards and beare the staffe to compel where the voice will not serue 1. Chron. 11. Psal. 78. The Prince is bound to obey the preachers worde if he speak truth and so is the Preacher bound to obey the Princes Lawes if they be good 1. Thes. 4. Aug. Epist 166. Princes be no iudges of Religion S. Cyprians words alleadged without his meaning Cypr. lib. 1. Ep. 3 Cyprian allowed the people to reiect their Bishop if hee were vnworthy Lib. 1. Epist. 4. Cypr. lib. 1. ep 4. Though the Bishop of Rome tooke his part Apolog. cap. 4. Sect. 22. The Prince not free from Christes Preceptes Princes must hear the word and receiue the Sacraments in such sort as God hath appointed The Preacher is prescribed how he shall minister the Sacramentes not how hee shall depose Princes We deny this argument Excommunication made a wrest to lift Princes out of their seates The seruant must not thinke himselfe superiour to all that his master may commaund In vaine seeke they reasons to make the Priest superiour to the Prince whom God himselfe hath made subiect to the Prince Apol. cap. 4. Sect. 23. They harp on Christs priesthoode as if they were Christes own fellowes in his priestly dignitie Christ hath no higher title than the king of glorie and Prince of the world to come Apolog. cap. 4. Sect. 23. The communion of Saints consisteth not in obedience to the Pope Nor in externall rites and ceremonies The true communion of the church The communion of the Church not dissolued by the varietie of rites Epist. 118. Euseb. lib. 5. câ— 26. Ibidem Euseb. lib. 5. ca. 23. The Church from the beginning had diuersitie of rites Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 22. Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 22. Heb. 12. Apolog. cap. 4. Sect. 23. The Popes pride first decaied the West Churches Cyprian lib. 3. Epist. 13. A number of watchmen in the Church better than one Apol. chap. 4. sect 24. Vsurpers and forrainers The Iesuits cauill at the word Forrainer God is no forrainer to men Soules in heauen be no forrainers Soules in heauen exercise no iurisdictioÌ„ ecclesiasticall nor spirituall on earth Apol. Cap. 4. sect 24. Princes beare the sword in these causes to see that permitted and defended in their realms which Christ commanded None but Princes can giue freedom and protectioÌ„ to these spiritual functions and actions Apolog. Cap. 4. Sect. 25. Generall couÌ„cels were woÌ„t to be assistaÌ„ts vnto Princes not tribunals aboue princes A generall councel must haue the consent of al christian couÌ„tries The late councel of Trent a mere factioÌ„ of the Popes sworne to take his part and content to refer all things to his power Concil Triden Sess. 25. decres de reformatione cap. 21. Item Sess. 7. Such wronges were neuer offered in the Councell of ancient times The Prince for 1200. yeres called general Councels and not the Pope The poore Friers were 18 yeares disputing whether the Pope and his Cardinals were conspiring against the godly Apolog. cap. 4. Sect. 25. We yeld more subiection to Christ his Apostles than they do The Apostles we reuereÌ„ce obey as the messengers of Christ. Distinct. 34. ¶ Lector caus 15. q. 6. ¶ autoritate in gloss Pig Hierar lib. 1. cap. 2. 1. Thes. 2. 1. Thes. 2. Râ—m 1. We owe communion not subiection vnto Councels Reuelat. 22. Cypr. ad Quirinum Peter claimed no subiection to his tribunall In sententijs Concilij Cartha The Popes councels are tyrannicall Many before vs haue refused forraigne tribunall Cypr. in sententijs Concil Car. Ibidem Ibidem Polycrates Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 25. Augustine Concil African cap. 29. Concil African cap. 105. The Britons Gaâ—frid Monemutens lib. 8. ca. 4. Lib. 7. indict 1. Epist. 30. This Bishop of Rome claimed no Tribunall ouer other countries Greg. Lib. 4. Epist. 38. No Tribunall ouer the whole church but onelie Christ. Gregor lib. 6. Epist. 24. The Popes Tribunall made him first forget both God man A Tribunal fit for the diuell him selfe Distict 40. ¶ Non nos glos ibideÌ„ ¶ quis enim Caus. 17. quaest 4. ¶ Si quis Sacrilege to doubt of the Popes fact or dispute of his iudgement Distinct. 19. ¶ Sic omnes Distinct. 22. ¶ Omnes Heresie to mutter against the Popes pride Extrau Iohan 22. ¶ cum inter nonnullos glos ibide◠¶ declaramus Extra Iohan. 22 ¶ quia quondaÌ„ glos ¶ non vt Papa Extrau communium de maioritate obedient ¶ Vnam sanctam Manicheisme and Paganism not to obey the Popes worde Distinct. 81. ¶ Si qui sunt What saide Samuell more of God than the Pope here applieth to himselfe Caus. 25. quaest 1. ¶ violateres Ibidem glos ¶ Blaspheâ—aâ—e Cans 25. quaest 1. ¶ ideo permittente Ibidem No canons but what the Pope maketh or alloweth Ibidem Caus. 25. quaest 1. ¶ generali A breach of the faith to violate the popes decrees 1. Corinth 16. Distinct. 40. ¶ â—i Papa No man must finde fault with the Pope for leading men to hel by heapes Contra 2. Gaudentij Epist. lib. â— cap. 25. The Pope not Patriark ouer England Patriarks not erected by Christ but by consent of Bishops Hiero. in epist. ad Tit. cap. 1. Ibidem Hiero. Euagâ— tom epist. 2. Ibidem Hierom. IbideÌ„ The Patriarks grew by consent and custome Concil Nicen. Cap. 6. Concil Ephes. 1. Decretum postquaÌ„ Cypr. episc accessissent ad concil Patriarks alwayes subiect to Princes their ecclesiastical lawes Concil Chalced. actio 16. Nouel constit 131. Princes gaue Bishops their prerogatiues ouer others Constit. 123. The Prince coÌ„maunded the Patriarks by name This Realme not in the Popes ancient Prouince Inter August epist. 95. IbideÌ„ epist. 96. Beda hist. gentis Angler lib. 2. Câ— 2. The Pope affecting to be Christs vicar neglected his Patriaâ—kdom The Kings of this land
meaning is plainer as shall appeare when we come to the drift of their conclusion Neuer Catholike father saide the substance of bread was abolished by consecration as the Iesuits saie If the signes bâ—aâ—e tâ—e nâ—mes of the things themseluâ—â— â—hen the leâ—â—â—s authâ—â—â—ties are vnâ—uâ—ficient to conâ—lude thâ—t Châ—â—st is eaten wiâ—h our teeth We must ascâ—nd to heauâ—n before we eate Christ which with our mouthes we cannot If the fathers of â—â—ne that Christ is not eaten wâ—th teeth as they do â—hen these plâ—â—es must be â—nderstood of â—he signes and noâ— of the thâ—â—gs themsâ—lâ—es As many as theâ—e be â—â—â—es in the ball of myne eye 〈…〉 â—18 b 〈…〉 23. 〈◊〉 a â—dimant cap. 12. d 〈…〉 29. 〈◊〉 2 Cor. e Idâ—â— aâ— Câ—sar Mâ—nach f g Idâ—â— contra 〈◊〉 lâ—b 4. The Iesuâ—â—s hâ—ue no hold in these â—athers but only because they call theÌ„ signes by the names of the thingâ— which is as commoÌ„ with them as sand with the Sea h Cyriâ—l lib 4. cap. 14. in Iâ—h By cognato tacti◠〈…〉 ciâ—o Cyâ—il meaneth the suâ—stance of bread and wine nâ—t of Christs bodie i De censâ—â—râ—t â—ist § 2. quid sit * As â—â—ough in strict and 〈…〉 any thing could be druÌ„k both by the soule and the bodie k De cons. dist 2. ¶ species in hom Pascha l â—eo de ieiunio 7. mensis sermo 6. * Leoes wordes examined * But Eutiches against whome Leo spake imagined that Christes body had neither shape quantitie nor circumscription and so doe the Iesuites dreame of Christ in the Sacrament If Leo refel Eutiches he must also refel the Iesuits for they spoile Christ of the naturall conditions of a bodie as Eutiches did By this argument it is euident in what sense Theodoret Gelasius vse the word substaÌ„ce when they saie the substance of bread remaineth The Iesuites reiect the maior minor conclusion of the auncient fathers against Euâ—iches be they not then quarter masters in his shippe Gelas. contra Eutich If Christ consist of two substances diuine and humane the sacrament likewise coÌ„sisteth of two substaÌ„ces an heauenlie and an earthly Theod. dialog 2. If the sacrament be traÌ„ssubstantiated so must the humanitie of Christ be likeâ—wise changed Theodorets conclusion against Eutâ—ches Theod. dial 2. If Christs humane nature in heaueÌ„ keep his former substance so doth the bread which is an Image of that mystery Both their Seminaries cannot answâ—re this aâ—gumeÌ„t but by condemning Gelasâ—us and Theodoret foâ— hereâ—ikes or at least themselues De consecrat distinct 2. hoc est quod dico Therâ— must be two different substancâ—s in the Sacrament as there are in the peâ—son of Christ. Leoes words wâ—râ— intended against the Eutichians Hoc doth not signifie the selfe same bodie but the selfesame pointeâ— of â—aith or propoâ—tion of the image and the original The real presence had beene the next way to help Eutiches error The substaÌ„ce of it you affirme in wordes but you spoile â—t of all naturall shape quantitie and circumscription Christs bodie in the Sacrament is euen such a bodie as Eutiches did imagine Leo doth not saie that Christs bodie was enclosed in the host but they ought to beleeue that of Christs bodie in heauen which they saw in the elements receiued with their moutheâ— to wit the perfect continuance of their former substance We doe not interpret the fathers as pleaseth vs but we take heede that we subuert not their maine doctrine by some of their phrases which by their owne rules maie be reuoked to a good sense * If this be not lawfull in expounding the fathers I maruell what is You are angry because the fathers doe not serue your follies no better It cannot be now mistaâ—iâ—g they have so often beene tolde of thâ—ir error they still deferâ—d it as they did before Vide supra fol. 760. This is spoken of the thinges theÌ„sâ—lues ergo the Iesuitâ—s places must be ment of thâ— signes called by â—he names of Chrâ—sts bodie and blood â—r elâ—e there is a maniâ—â—st contradiction in the fathers Weâ—e we not wisely occupied to followe the Iesuits in this pointâ— Eating is in vaine without nourishing If then Christes flesh doe enter our mouthes it must nourish our bodies * We would not haue it so but if you vnderstand the fathers when they say the one why doe you peruert them in the other a Iust. Apol. 2. b Iren. lib. 4. cap. 34. c Idem lib. 5. d Ibidem * So Cyprian saith panis in carnem sanguineâ— mutatus 〈◊〉 vitam increâ—entum corporiâ—â—â— A man would thinke this were plaine enough for farre yonger scholers than the Iesuites would seeme to be Our resurrection doth not depend vpon the touching of Christes flesh with teeth for then the wicked should â—ise to eternal life Concil Nicen. 1. c Hom. 45. in Iohannem f Chrysost. hom 45. in Iohan. As Christ is seene touched so is he eaten and digested Both these speaches the flesh of Christ entereth our mouthes and increaseth the substance oâ— our flesh haue oâ—e and the selâ—esame construction Ambros. in 9. Lucae li. 6. § 〈◊〉 vir cui nomen Iairus h Idem in precatiâ— praeparaÌ„t ad Mâ—ssaâ—â— i Cypr. de caena Domini That eating of Christ in the SacrameÌ„t which wee teach the Church helde for a 1000. yeares theirs is not yet agreed on amongst themselues What manner of eating Christ in the Sacrament the fathers taught k Origen tract 35. in 26. Mat. l Idem in Leuit. hom 9. m Idem tract 35. in 26. Mat. n Athana in illud quicunque dixerit verbuÌ„ * Not corporally lodged in the stomacks but spiritually distributed to your soules o Cypr. de caena Domini This nourishment is proper to the spirit ergo not common to the bodie p Ambros. in oratio praeparan ad Missam 1. How hapned S. Ambrose had quite forgotten his mouth and his iawes in all this long praier before his approching to the mysteries q Aug. in psal 103. * Not the stomack nor the bellie r Idem tract 26. in Iohan. * The bodie is not regenerated the body therefore is not fed with the true flesh of Christ. s Idem in serm de corp saâ—guine Domini Ciâ—â—tur à Beda in 1. Cor ca. 10. t Aâ—st in serm de verbis Euangelij Citatur à Beda ibidem Idem in Euang Luc. serm 33. x Macar ho. 27. Euseb. Emissenus de cons. dist 2. ¶ quia corpus * Not with the hand of thy bodie * What shall the mouth haue if the inward man must swallowe the whole a Bertram de corpor sang Domini * Not accidents without a subiect b Ibidem c Ibidem d Ibidem e Ibidem The flesh of Christ then is neither pressed with teeth nor broken in peeces Ibidem g Paschas de corp sang Domini ca. 9. h Cap. 11. i Cap. 12. k Cap. 14. * Doe the Angels eat flesh
carnis t August in Euang Iohan. tract 50. What means we haue to take hold of Christ now absent in heauen u Ibidem How Christ is prâ—sent with vs and howe he is absent from vs. * There not here x Cyril in Ioan. lib. 6. cap. 14. Christ absent in flesh a Lib. 9. cap. 21. b Lib. 9. cap. 22. c Lib. 11. cap. 3. d Lib. 11. ca. 21. e Lib. 11. ca. 22. f Orig. tract in Matth. 33. His bodie absent from vs. His manhood is neither in all places nor at all times with vs. g Ambr. li. 10. super â—ucae cap. 24. de hora Dominicae resurrectionis christ is not to besought neither on earth nor in earth h Gregor in Euang homil 2â— i Ibidem homil 30. k Ibidem hom 29. The fathers themselues teach both partes of this consequentâ— Christ is in heauen ergo not in earth l August epist. 57. ad Dardanum That the substaunce of Christs bodie maie be in manie places at one time is a condemned heresie m August epist. ad Daâ—danum 57. * Nec aliunde quam inde * In eadem carnis forma atque substantia * If Christes manhood be in euerie place he looseth the truth of his bodie n In eadem epi. ad finem * In aliquâ— loco coeli o August in Iohan tract 30. He speaketh of the trueth of the gospel not of the truth of the bodie of Christ. * β Vno loco esse poâ—est p Vigilius contra Eutych lib. â— cap. 4. * That the flesh of Christ should be euery where was a sequâ—lâ— of Eutyches heresie * Christ maÌ„hood conâ—ained in a place * From this the Iesuits be vtterly fallen q Fulgent ad Thrasimundum Regem lib. 2. cap. 5. * Christs humane substance is not both in heauen earth at one time * If Christ be not locall he is no true man The body of Christ contained in one 〈◊〉 place not diffunded in manie * This without question is the Christian faith and not the Iesuits vbiquitie or multilocitie This is a bare shift of the Iesuits yet this is all the refuge they haue r Aug. epist. 57. s Vigil contra Eutych li. 4. cap. 4. t Fulgent lib. 2. cap. 5. ad Thrasimundum regeÌ„ u Ibidem Fourme is all one with truth and perfection a Ambros. lib. 7. epist. 47. b Leo epist 97. c Chryso in cap. 2. epist. ad Phil. sermâ— 6. d Aug. epist. 57. e Ibidem Per id quod homo is substaÌ„ce as well as shape Christ can haue no humane substance without humane shape f Aug. epist. 57. g Phili. cap. 3. h Fulgent ad Thrasimundâ—â— regâ—m lib. 2. cap. 5. i Theod. dial 2. It is no humane bodie that hath not shape as well as substance k Ambro. in 10. cap. ad Heb. Chrys. hom 17. in eadem epist. l Chrysost. de Sacerdotio li. 3. Chrysostome and Ambrose could not gainesay the rest and be Catholikes The Iesuites would drawe Chrysostome and Ambrose to be of Eutyches opinion These conditions of a true bodie the manhead of Christ maie haue wheresoeuer it be There is but one Christ that one Christ hath but one body which is not euery where m Aug. de essentia diuinitatis n Vigil contra Eutych lib. 4. cap. 4. The words of Ambrose and Chrysostome as the Iesuites conster them are against the verie grounds of our common faith How Chrysostome Ambrose must be vnderstood o Chrys. de Sacerdot lib. 3. Chrysostoms figuratiue vehement â—peaches much abused by the Iesuits p Ambros. lib. 10. in 24. Luc. q August epist. Iohan tract 1. Chrysostome himselfe excludeth the corporall vnderstanding of his words r Chryso de Sacerdot lib. 3. s Ibidem t Chrys. Ibidem The power of God must neuer be alleadged against his wil nor our faith which he hath commaunded vs to beleeue u Tertul. aduers Praxeam Gods omnipotencie a common refuge with heretikes When wee produce gods power for our fansies against his trueth wee make him a lyar and in subiection to our willes The Iesuits pretend god-power against the christian faith * Or if you do not see your selues condeÌ„ned in the great councel of ChalcedoÌ„ Act. 5. definitio 2. as heâ—eâ—iâ—s for not beleeuing it * A very witty excâ—ption Then you beleeue the Christian faith to be true euerie where sauing in the Sacrament and what is that but wilfullie and openlie to denie the faith where you list Whatsoeuer he can doe you bee heretikes in the meane time for contradicting the christian faith * Tertul. aduer Praeâ—eam The Iesuites incurre not onelie Impieties but impossibilities a August conâ—ra â—austum li. 20. cap. 11. b Cyril in Ioan. lib. 15. cap. 3. These fathers were not afraide to saie Christ coulde not be in manie places at one time The Iesuits whiles they would shunne Eutyches error runne headlong into contradictions yet stick in the same mire that Eutyches did c 2. Tim. 2. d Hebr. 6. e Aug. de ciuit Dei lib. 5. c. 10. f Ambr. lib. 6. epist. 37. g Ibidem What thingâ— are impossible to God and why Of contradictions one part is euer false and all falshood impossible to God A lie in worke is as bad as a lie in word as contrarie to the nature of God This is right Iesuitical skill to saie the bodie of Christ is and is not contained in a place * These bee worse than the Poets chimers The best gâ—ounds you haue for these thinges are dreames and miracles of your owne making * For none of these pointes haue the Iesuits so much as one auncient father * For none of these pointes haue the Iesuits so much as one auncient father * For none of these pointes haue the Iesuits so much as one auncient father * For none of these pointes haue the Iesuits so much as one auncient father * For none of these pointes haue the Iesuits so much as one auncient father * You be good at vndertaking but naught at perfourming It is enough for the Iesuâ—â—s to call themselues Catholiâ—es though they cannot shâ—w one writer for a thousand yeares that taught theâ—r transubstantiation * Which will say neuer a word for your purpose This is cited out of S. Austen by frier Walden tomo 2. de Sacramentis cap. 83 a diuine worke in D. Allens iudgement lib. 1. de Euch. sacâ— pa. 34â— This forgery with others was iudicially allowed by Pope Martin the fifth and his Cardinals in their Consistorie * This young Austen lacked not onely learning and trueth but Latine and witte * Had you not beene ashamed of your occupation you would haue printed iâ— The woordes did so plainly betray thâ—mselues that they haue since suppressed the booke for verâ—e shame Bede likewise forged by Walden * Citatura The. Walden tomo 2. vt supra cap. 82. * He neuer wrate anie such booke The credite of both these places lieth onely on frier Walden who
Call the booke howe you will so the wordes bee there Phi. There shall you finde them Theo. There we finde them not Phi. What Prints haue you Theo. Prints enow Alopecius at Cullen Heruagius at Basill Langelier at Paris Crinitus at Antuerp Gryphius at Lions Manutius at Rome In all these and diuerse others we finde no such wordis Phi. In deede I confesse the wordes were wanting till Pamelius a Canon of Bruges found them in an old written copie lying in the Abbay of Cambron In his edition printed at Antuerp by Stelsius you shall finde them Theo. And thinke you Philander that all other copies both printed written lacking those words Pamelius did wel to put them to Cyprians text Phi. He laid them down as he found them written in the copie which is kept at Cambron Theo. As though the blinde Abbay of Cambron were of greater credit authoritie than all the Churches and Libraries of Christendom Phi. I say not so Theo. What else do you say when you cite these words for Cyprians which no copie printed nor written hath besides that of Cambron There haue trauelled in the correcting setting forth of Cyprian at sundry times men of your owne religion not a few namely Remboltus Canchius Costerius Erasmus Grauius Manutius Morelius euerie one of these for their seuerall editions searching farre and neere and vsing the best written copies that coulde be gotten or heard of and they all agree that no such wordes are founde in their copies yea Pamelius himselfe hauing as hee confesseth the sight and helpe of eight other written copies from diuerse places founde these wordes in none but in Cambron copie Since then either Cambron copie must be corrupt or an infinite number of other written copies that haue beene viewed by these learned men of your owne side and are yet extant in diuerse Abbayes and Churches obedient to the See of Rome at this houre say your selfe in reason whether we ought to beleeue your Cambron copie before all the copies that haue beene perused and are yet remaining in Europe Phi. That were much but how could this copie be corrupted Theo. What a question that is How could whole books be thrust into the workes of Cyprian Ambrose Hierom Austen others ly forged vnder their names not in one or two but in the most part of the Abbayes and auncient libraries of the West Church Your Monkes and Friers that were so skilfull in committing these manifold forgeries were not to seeke how to corrupt your Cambron copie Phi. It helpeth Pamelius very much that Gratian 400. yeares agoe cited the very same words as out of Cyprian Theo. Gratian might be deceiued by the same or some other false copie as wel as Pamelius of al men Gratian him selfe is most corrupt in alleadging the Fathers but what if Gratian be forged as wel as Cyprian Phi. Nay then al shal be forged that liketh not you Theo. They that ventered on Cyprian others would neuer sticke to frame Gratian to their purpose Phi. This is but your suspicion Theo. Yes I haue some reason to chalenge this in your Canon law for a corruption The very same place of Cyprian is elsewhere alleaged at large by Gratian in his decrees where we find no such words and therefore this or that must needes be forged Againe â—ohannes Seneca who liued seuen skore yeares after Gratian ouer-skippâ—â—h this place without any glosse as not finding it in the decrees extant in his time Phi. You be deceaued there is a glosse vppon this place Theo. I am not deceaued there is none Looke to the lesser volume of your decrees printed by Iohn Petit and Thielman Keruer and you shall see there is none And he that in the bigger volume of your decrees thinking to preuent this obiection set a certaine glosse to the chapter Qui Cathedram shewed himselfe not to be his crafts maister for he grossely mistaking the wordes that follow Episcopi verò which are Gratians thinking them to be Cyprians put the summe of Gratians words as a glosse to Cyprians text which is nothing neare and so betrayeth him a willing but no skilful forgerer Last of all the relatiue that you most esteeme and I most withstand super quam on which chayre the Church is built is contrarie to the plaine wordes of Cyprian not many lines before cited by Gratian and confessed by Pamelius to be fouÌ„d in his Cambron copie super vnum illum edificat Ecclesiam vppon him alone meaning Peter Christ buildeth his Church So that either you must mend your booke and reade super queÌ„ on whom the Church is built or els make Cyprian so forgetful that with in eight lines he contradicteth himselfe refuteth his former saying Phi. May not the Church bee built on him and his successours Theo. If Peter alone were chosen by Christ to be the foundatioÌ„ that is the first stone that should be layed in the building of his Church how can that possibly bee extended to his successors Can you remoue Peter froÌ„ the foundation where Christ laied him not do him wrong Or can you change the foundation and not shake the building of the Church Phi. You tooke the foundation I perceaue for the first beginning Theo. And what call you that which is first layed in the buylding of an house but the foundation Phi. Did Cyprian meane so Theo. Cyprian expresseth his meanyng in this sort Though Christ after his resurrection gaue all his Apostles equall power yet for the declaratioÌ„ of vnitie with his owne voyce and autoritie did he dispose the originall of that vnitie to beginne in one which was Peter The rest of the Apostles were the selfesame that Peter was endewed with like fellowship of honor and power but the first beginning came from oâ—e that is Christ chose Peter alone to be the original or first beginning of his Church Now this is proper to Peters person to be the first Stone that was laied in â—he foundation of the Church and can not be deriued from him to his successour Phi. That priuilege died with Peter vnlesse it remayne in some successour Theo. Not so Peter as well after death as during life keepeth the same place which Christ gaue him in the building of his Church vnlesse you meane to exclude the Saincts cleane froÌ„ the Church of Christ. Phi. They be of the Church triumphant not militant Theo. And those be not two but one Church Ierusalem which is aboue is the mother of vs all Ye be now sayth Paul no more strangers and forreners but Citizens with the Saincts and of the howshold of God For you be come to the Citie of the Liuing God the heauenly Ierusalem and to the Church of the first borne written in heauen and to the spirits of iust men now made perfect Where you see the Saincts in heaueÌ„ be not remoued from the Church of God but we
of Rome coulde not erre which your selues dare not saie and yet you woulde wring it out of Cyprians wordes But God be thanked Sainct Paul hath preuented your wicked interprise Writing to the whole church of Rome and giuing them their due praise for their deuotion and zeale and entering at last into the reiection of the Iewes for their vnbeliefe hee warneth expresly the Romanes in these wordes Boast not thy selfe against the braunches and if thou boast thy selfe thou bearest not the roote but the roote thee Thou wilt say the braunches are broken off that I might bee graft in Well through infidelitie they are broken off thou standest by faith Be not high minded but feare For if God spared not the naturall braunches take heed lest he spare not thee Behold therefore the goodnes and seuerity of God toward them which haue fallen seueritie but towards thee goodnes if thou continue in his goodnes otherwise thou also shalt be cut off Whether the Apostle spake generally to the Gentiles and inclusiuely to the Romanes or namely to the Romanes and proportionablie to the rest it is all one to vs one of the twaine hee must needes Origen saith vppon these wordes of Paul I say to you Gentiles Now he plainely turneth his speech to the Gentiles but chiefly to those of the citie of Rome that beleeued S. Paul speaking to the Romanes no man may except the Romanes and they being included his admonition to them feare and beware least was vtterly superfluous if there coulde bee no daunger in them of swaruing from the faith and the condition implied otherwise if thou continue not and the commination annexed thou also shalt be cut off were both ridiculous and odious if it were not possible for them to fal or to be cut off Fight not therefore against the holy Ghost with broken reedes caught here and there out of the Fathers works Looke rather in time to this watchword which the apostle giueth you feare and take heede otherwise thou also shalt be cut off And marke his reason If the naturall braunches may be broken off much more the wild which were planted but in their steedes Phi. If that had beene the Apostles meaning doe you thinke the Fathers would haue gainesaide it Theo. I thinke they would not and I see they doe not and that maketh mee to interprete Cyprian in such sort as hee may agree with himselfe and not confront S. Paul Phi. His wordes do surely leane on our side Theo. They fit your humor and in that respect you be eger on them Otherwise I haue cleared Cyprian both of that speech of that intent And were you not vnshamefast wranglers you would perceiue that the ordinary vse of the phrase both in diuine and humane writinges doth acquite him of that opinion which you inforce vpon him But such is your profession you must go on as you haue begun Phi. If one alone had saide it we would not vrge it so often but S. Hierom hath likewise testified the same Know you that the Romane faith commended by the Apostles mouth will receiue no such deceites nor can be possibly changed though an Angell from heauen taught otherwise being fensed by S. Pauls authority Tom. 2. Apolog. aduers. Ruff. lib. 3. cap. 4. Theo. If S. Hierom say the same that Cyprian did he must be taken and vnderstood as Cyprian was and so you ease me of that labour Phi. He saith the same in effect but his words are more forcible Theo. That is your wilfulnesse in peruerting and racking the words of S. Hierom is more sensible For S. Hierom speaketh not one word of the persons that they shall neuer fall from the faith but auoucheth only that the doctrine which was first preached at Rome and then continued was so exact and perfect that an Angell from heauen might not bee heard against it And to this ende hee saide Scito Romanam fidem Apostolica voce laudatam istiusmodi praestigias non recipere etiamsi Angelus de coelo aâ—â—ter annunciet quam semel praedicatum est Pauli authoritate munitaÌ„ noÌ„ posse mutari Know you that the Romane faith commeÌ„ded by the Apostles voice receiueth no such delusions and that being armed with Pauls authority it may not bee changed if an Angell from hauen doe preach otherwise than once was preached Phi. You run againe to your former interpretation Non posse mutari it may not be changed in steede of it can not be changed Theo. Use which you will so you grant which I fully proued before that non posse doth vsually signifie as well that which is vnlawfull as that which is vnpossible Phi. I know non possum is vsed diuersely but how doth that answere S. Hierom Theo. You take hâ—lde of a word in Hierom which in all mens speech and writinges hath diuerse and sundrie significations by your owne confession and then you maruell why we doe not receiue the vntruest and vnlikeliest of them all for your pleasures without any farther proofe Non possum doth import that which is either vnpossible vnlawfull inconuenient or any waie impugnant to the ful persuasion and determination of our mindes as the places before alleadged doe manfestly declare and in all those accidentes our common speech is may be non possum I can not You would now by a text of Hieroms where he saith Romanam fidem non posse mutari etiam si Angelus de caelo c. The Romane faith may not or can not be charged though an Angel came from heauen infer that the Romanes vntill the worldes end can not possibly choose but abide in the same faith which was first deliuered them and that doe what they will to the contrarie they must be preserued in Christes trueth This is wee say a shamefull violence offered to Hieroms wordes against all learning against his meaning and against the spirit of God speaking in S. Paul First the wordes non posse mutari receiue both constructions a like that is either a change of the faith can neuer happen in the Romanes which is your sense or else their faith can not possibly bee changed without incurring infidelitie which is ours For it ceaseth to bee faith when once it is changed Next S. Hierom speaketh not of the persons but of the thing hee doth not say the Romanes can not change their mindes but the faith which was deliuered them in no wise may be chaunged And why Because it is the truth of God which neuer changeth Againe the authoritie of Paul writing to the Galathians which Hierom citeth doth not warrant that the Romanes shal not fall but onely that the faith once preached may not be changed though an Angell from heauen should attempt it especially since the Apostle commended the doctrine which they reserued to be the true christian faith What reason then haue you besides your parcial affectioÌ„ to the See of Rome to draw these words from their natiue sense
and chastise the bodies of such as offende Preachers may shut the gates of heauen against non-repentants Princes may roote them from the face of the earth and let them feele the iust vengeaunce of their sinnes in this worlde This is the power of Princes which wee say must bee directed by Bishoppes but is not subiected to their willes or Tribunals and though the Preachers charge concerne thinges which bee more perfect and excellent yet that is no reason why Bishoppes should corporally correct or depose Princes no more than if Philosophers or schoolemasters shoulde take vpon them to doe the like because they professe to trayne vp others in wisedome and vertue which farre exceede the feeding or clothing of the bodie which seeme to bee the Princes care And yet may you not rashly exclude the Princes function from caring for religion and vertue It is euident that God first ordained and authorized the sworde to punish error and vice and to maintaine trueth and integritie amongst men and therefore the Princes and the Preachers functions by Gods institution shoulde concurre euen in those Ghostly and heauenly thinges which you would chalenge to your selues the Preacher declaring the Prince establishing the word of trueth the Preacher deliuering the Prince defending the Sacraments of grace the Preacher reproouing the Prince punishing the sinnes and offences of all Degrees and States Howbeit wee must confesse the Preachers seruice in these cases excelleth the Princes for that the woorde in the Preachers mouth engendreth faith and winneth the soule vnto God to serue him with a willing mind whereas the sword in the Princes hand striketh onely a terror into men to refraine the outwarde act but refourmeth not the secrets of the heart Phi. When the temporall power resisteth God or hindereth the proceeding of the people to saluation there the spirituall hath right to correct the temporall and to procure by all meanes possible that the terrene kingdome giue no annoyance to the state of the Church Theo. What you want in proofes you make out in woordes Wee haue heard you I know not how often full solemnly affirme that the Spiritual power hath right to correct the temporal whereby you meane that the Pope may depose the Prince but as yet we see you not prooue it Your exquisite and affected vtterance which is the chiefest furniture of your booke and the best support of your cause can not turne hard into soft nor sower into sweete men must haue some better euidence for the depriuation of Princes before they beleeue it than your meretricious and deintie speach Pastours are you say to procure by all meanes possible that the terrene kingdome giue no annoyance to the state of the Church you shoulde haue added by all meanes possible and lawful for by periurie rebellion and slaughter of Princes though it bee possible yet is it not lawfull to procure the welfare of Christes Church If you receiue that addition and auouche it lawfull for Bishoppes to depese Princes you runne to the point which wee first beganne with absurdly presuming and neuer proouing the thing which is called in question Phi. The Church excelleth the terrene state and Domination as farre as the Sunne passeth the Moone the soule the bodie and heauen the earth By reason of which excellencie and preeminence aboue all states and men without exception of Prince or other our Lorde proclaimeth in his Gospel that whosoeuer obeyeth not or heareth not the Church must bee taken and vsed no otherwise than as an heathen Theo. You must needes bee cunning in counting howe many degrees a Priest excelleth a Prince Innocentius the third twelue hundred yeeres after Christ beganne this comparison and proueth it out of the Scripture full like a Pope Thou shouldest haue knowen sayth hee to the Emperour that GOD made two great lights in the firmament of heauen the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night Whereby is meant that GOD made two great lightes that is two great dignities which are the Priest and the Prince for the firmament of heauen that is of his vniuersall Church But that which ruleth the day to witte spirituall thinges is the greater that which ruleth carnall thinges is the lesser that wee should acknowledge as great difference to bee betweene Bishops and Princes as there is betweene the sunne and the moone Your gloze setteth downe and casteth by plaine Arythmetike howe much that amounteth to Therefore sayth hee since the earth is seuen tymes bigger than the Moone and the Sunne eyght tymes bigger than the earth it resteth that the Bishoppe bee fourtie seuen tymes greater than the Prince And yet aduising himselfe better for that his totall summe rose no faster hee sheweth out of Ptolomie that the sunne contayneth the bignes of the moone seuen thousande seuen hundred fourtie foure tymes and so many degrees iumpe is euery Bishoppe aboue euery Prince These paringes and offscouringes of your Decretals you haue swept together and vsing the name of the Church to make the matter more saleable though by the Church you vnderstande as they did the Bishoppe of Rome and his Colledge of Cardinals you perfume their follies with a fewe words of your owne and newe proclaime them for some precious wares but take backe the filth and slime of your vnlearned and ill aduised Canonistes wee looke for grauer and better authorities than either your or their flatteries Phi. Whosoeuer obeyeth not or heareth not the Church must bee taken and vsed no otherwise than as an heathen Theo. I coulde answere you that this place toucheth onely wronges and iniuries done by men to their brethren when as yet there were no Christian Princes And that in these woordes our Sauiour charged his Disciples not to breake the bonde of peace and vnitie with any brother that offered wrong vntill they had first secretly warned them then with witnesses and last of all publikely before the whole multitude of the faithfull where hee and they liued and if after so many lawfull warnings hee ceased not to afflict and vexe his brother the partie grieued should no farther be bound to communicate with him in brotherly loue and charitie no more than hee was with an Ethnike or a Publicane S. Ambrose giueth this note vpon the wordes In te Against thee Pulchrè posuit si peccauerit in te Non enim aequa conditio in deum hominemque peccare The Lorde very well added if hee sinne against thee for the same rule doeth not serue when hee sinneth against God that doeth when hee trespasseth man Saint Hierom likewise If our brother sinne against vs and in any thing doe vs wrong wee haue power to forgiue it yea wee must forgiue it but if a man sinne against God the matter is out of our handes Lest therefore in priuate quarrels and offences men should at their listes forsake the communion and felowshippe of their brethren our Sauiour will haue
persons excōmunicate and consequently your applying of scriptures that wee may not salute them nor keepe companie with them is a violent deprauing of these textes and refuted by the manifest practise of Christes Church And because wee bee come so farre I will adde somewhat touching the rest of your wise pretences Constantius Valens Valentinian the younger Anastasius Iustinian Heraclius Constantine the 4. and others were hereticall Princes Iulian an open Apostata and yet the Church of Christ endured serued and obeyed them not in temporall things only but in ecclesiasticall also so farre as their Lawes did not impugne the faith or corrupt good manners Phi. You inferre vpon our examples which we can auoyde when wee wil but you answere them not Theo. Our illation which you shall neuer auoyd proueth your examples to conclude for vs and not against vs. You shewe that Princes were remoued from the Sacraments which we graunt but that they were remoued from their kingdomes which we denie that you shewe not and so by your silence you confesse that to bee most true which wee affirme that hereticall and excommunicate Princes must haue their due subiection honour and tribute as they had before they fell to such impieties because they bee perils to their soules not forfeytures of their Crownes Other answere we neede not make you since this will suffice And yet if wee would examine your examples by the pole I coulde take many of them tardie A booke written in Chrysostomes name witnesseth that Babylas Bishoppe of Antioche excluded a Christian Emperour out of the Church for murdering a young Prince committed to him for an hostage and was martyred by the same tyrant for his constancie but this can not stand with the stories of the Church nor with your owne Author whom you alleage for the repentance and submission that you say this Emperour was after brought to by Fabian the generall sheephearde of Christendome Eusebius who wrate an hundreth yeeres before Chrysostome sayth that Babylas Bishoppe of Antioche died in prison vnder Decius an heathen Tyrant After Philip succeeded Decius who for hatred of Philip persecuted the Church in the which persecution Fabianus Bishoppe of Rome was martyred and Babylas Bishoppe of Antioche died in prison after the constant confession of his fayth With him agreeth Nicephorus Babylas sub Decio post confessionem fortiter obitam in vinculis discessit Babylas after hee had made a stout confession of his fayth dyed in Prison vnder Decius If hee died vnder Decius howe coulde hee bee slaine by Philippus or Numerius that were before Decius If hee deceased in Prison how can your Chrysostome say that hee was caried out of Prison to his death and slaine Can you reconcile these thinges and not giue one of your Authors the lie If that declamation were Chrysostomes hee wrate it when he came fresh from the Philosophers schooles as both the stile matter argue and before he was Bishoppe as his owne woordes declare For speaking of the place where Babylas was Bishoppe he sayth Nostri huius gregis curam gerebat he was Pastor of this our flocke and Chrysostome was Bishop of Constantinople not of Antioche Who pursued the saide Emperour by like excommunication for killing his Pastor since the Pastor was aliue after the Emperour was dead and died in prison without any violence neither can you tell neither neede wee care Of Philip Nicephorus sayth no such thing in the place which you quote hee repeateth only that which Eusebius long before reported in these words Of Philip the fame is that fauouring Christ and willing the night before Easter to ioyne with the multitude of Christians in their prayers hee was not suffered so to doe by the Bishoppe that then was vnlesse hee would first acknowledge his sinnes and keepe his place with the repentants Otherwise he could not be admitted because his sinnes were many And they say that hee gladly hearkened to the Bishop and shewed his syncere and religious mynde to God-ward by his deedes The ground of the whole in him that first wrate it is but hearesay the principall matter whether the Prince were remooued from the communion or neuer before admitted to the Lordes table very doubtfull The thing required at his handes was no more but to humble himselfe in the sight of God to whome all Princes must stoope with as great deuotion and submission as the poorest woormes that are on earth The conclusion may bee that Princes then were trayned to Godlinesse but that they were depriued of their kingdomes is a wicked and vngodly suggestion of yours Wee may with as good reason say a Frier many tymes doeth shriue the Pope Ergo a Frier may depose the Pope which I thinke your holy Father will not like of Saint Ambrose is the onely example in all antiquitie which fully proueth that a Bishoppe did prohibite a Prince to enter the Church and to bee partaker of the Lordes table which wee neither deny nor dispraise considering the cause and the manner of the fact The Prince for a tumult raysed by some of the inhabitants of Thessalonica caused his souldiers without finding or searching the doers to murder the people were they straungers or Citizens faultlesse or faultie to the number of seuen thousand After this execution at his next comming to the Church S. Ambrose stepped to the Church dore and sayd Thou seemest O Prince not to vnderstand what a monsterous slaughter of people is committed by thee neither doth rage suffer thee to weigh with thy selfe what thou hast done yet must thou know that from dust we came to dust we shal Let not therfore the brightnes of thy robes hide frō thee the weaknes of flesh that is vnder them Thy subiects are of the same metall which thou art serue the same Lord that thou doest With what eyes therefore wilt thou behold the house of this cōmon Lord with what feete wilt thou tread on his holy pauements Wilt thou reach these hāds dropping yet with the blood of innocents to receiue the most sacred bodie of the Lorde Wilt thou put that precious blood of his to thy mouth which in a rage hast spilt so much Christian blood Depart rather and heape not one sinne on an other neither refuse this bond which the Lord of all doeth ratifie in heauen It is not much and it will restoare thee the health of thy soule This strake the Christian Prince to the heart and turning about hee went home with teares and all the tyme that hee was kept out of the Church as a man in mourning hee woulde not put on his Imperiall robes but that Ambrose commaunded him to put off his kingly robes and to leaue his Imperiall throne in the Chauncel this is your venemous admixtion the storie sayth no such thing You falsely father it on S. Ambrose to make men beleeue that the Bishoppe might as well haue taken the princes scepter and sworde from
the Princes or nayle vp cloth of Tissue where the Prince is not and say it is a chayre of state would you bee so foolish as to regard either of them or shoulde you not dishonour the king if you did reuerence them since they bee not such thinges as the Prince accepteth or vseth for his but other mens counterfaites Phi. I speake of that Chaire where the Prince did sit and of that Seale which the Prince did send Theo. I knowe you did and therefore I refused your similitude as vnlike the matter in question betwixt vs because images are neither places of Christes presence nor witnesses of his will as Seates and seales are vnto Princes no nor ordayned allowed or admitted by Christ to haue any credite or vse about his heauenly person or pleasure but only proposed by men of a naturall and kind affection as they thought towards Christ though cleane without warrant and so without thankes from him For hee of purpose tooke his bodily presence from the eyes of men that hee might dwell in their heartes by fayth and to teach vs to honour him not by that proportion of face which the painter would drawe but by that abundance of loue grace and mercie which hee hath extended on vs and layde in stoare for vs and which no corporall eyes can behold nor colours expresse but onely the hearing of his woorde and woorking of his spirite can lighten and perswade the heart of man to conceiue and beleeue Phi. Is it not thankes woorthie with God to haue alwayes the shape of his sonne before our eyes that wee may honour him with our hearts Theo. To honour him with your heartes and to haue him at all times in your mindes is religious and requisite but to make light of those meanes which hee hath prescribed to nourish your fayth and continue the memorie of him-selfe to seeke out others of your owne fit to please your senses not to resemble his greatnes or goodnes this is neither acceptable vnto God nor profitable for your selues Phi. To remember Christ cannot bee euill Theo. Not to remember him till you looke on a picture can not bee good Your heartes ought alwayes to bee lifted vp vnto him that whether you eate or drinke wake or sleepe or whatsoeuer you doe in woorde or deede you may doe all in the name of the Lord Iesu giuing thankes alwayes for all thinges vnto God the father in the name of our Lorde Iesus Christ. You must not tary for the execution of this precept till you see an Image But all your actions woordes and thoughtes must bee directed to the prayse of his glory and honour of his name This if you put in bre you shall neede no painted nor carued Image to bring you in mynde of his mercies The benefites and blessings within you without you and on euery side of you which GOD for Christes sake bestoweth on you are so many that you can hardly forget him vnlesse you also forget the earth that beareth you the heauen that couereth you the day that guydeth your feete the night that giueth you rest the meates that you feede on and the breath that you liue by yea your owne bodies which hee woonderfully made and soules which hee preciously bought All these thinges and all other thinges in heauen and earth you must drowne in vtter obliuion before you can inferre that Images bee needefull to put vs in mynde of our dueties to GOD. And since without Images you can and must remember the Father that created and the Holy Ghost that â—anctified you why shoulde you forget the sonne that redeemed you more than the other except you haue Images at your elbowes to kindle you appetites But this is nothing to the worshipping of Images which you should proue to bee Catholike Though there were an historicall vse in painting the shape of our Sauiour yet is it no pietie to worshippe the picture Graunt it might be vsed for remembrance for religion it may not and therefore you are all this while besides the marke Philand You denie both the hauing and woorshipping of Images to bee Catholique Wee prooue the hauing of them to bee necessarie by the fruite and profite that commeth from them namely the instruction of the ignorant in the storie of their saluation the putting vs in often remembraunce of our Sauiour and the stirring vp our deuotion with more feruencie The worshipping of them wee proue with more facilitie for if hee that honoureth the Image honour the person himselfe thereby represented as S. Athanasius S. Basil S. Chrysostome and S. Ambrose doe affirme then the worship which is done to the Image of Christ passeth vnto Christ himselfe and by consequent if it bee lawfull to adore and honour Christ it is not vnlawfull to doe the like to his Image Besides wee can prooue that adoration of Images is a tradition deliuered from the Apostles and obserued in all Churches and that the Scripture it selfe supporteth vs in this point as the learned epistle of Adrian the Bishoppe of Rome to Constantine and Irene doeth largely shewe and for the credite of the cause wee haue a general Councell eight hundreth yeres old to say as much in euery point as I affirme and more Theo. Wee maruell not to see you so deepely deceiued and strongly deluded as you bee such is the iust iudgement of God on all that admit not the loue of the trueth but haue pleasure in vnrighteousnes You rest on the vanities forgeries of such as were enclined to the same error before you not examining their proofes nor considering their reportes but presuming their euident follies to bee pregnant authorities for you whith is euer the next way to seduce others and to bee seduced your selues As touching the shew which you make of Scriptures Apostolike Tradition Churches Fathers Councels it is a childish and friuolous vaunt The fathers which you quote are abused the Apostles and their Churches belied the Scriptures depraued and wrested the Councell which you call generall reiected as wicked and diligently refuted in the same age by the West Bishoppes Of these emptie and vnluckie Maskes the more you bring the lesse you wynne Phi. Wee loose nothing so long as you lode vs onely with words Theo. If your proofes bee vaine my woordes be true Looke you therefore to the soundnesse of that which you alleage otherwise your owne burden will ouerpresse you Philand The collection which I made out of Saint Basill and others is very sure Saint Basill sayth Honos Imaginis in ipsum prototypum redit The honour doone to the Image redoundeth to the principall that is thereby represented S. Athanasius Qui Imaginem adorat in ipsa Imperatorem adorat He that reuerenceth the Image honoureth therein the Emperour And S. Chrysostome Knowest thou not that hee which hurteth the Emperours Image defaceth the Imperiall dignitie it selfe And so S. Ambrose Hee that
peeces to set vp the image of himselfe which God ouerthrew with fire froÌ„ heauen not in defence of the brasen shape but of his holy name prophaned and illuded by this Apostata Phi. This image the Apostles sawe and suffered Theo. A memoriall of their masters act not abused by the people and erected before they came to preach the Gospell to that place they might suffer but they neuer taught men to make the like nor allowed any to worshippe that Phi. Wee thinke they learned the setting vppe of this image from the Apostles Theo. Eusebius sayth they did it of an heathenish custome and not of an Apostolike instruction His wordes are And no maruell that the Heathens which were healed of our Sauiour did him this honour for so much as wee haue seene the images of his Apostles Paul and Peter and of Christ himselfe drawen in colours and kept in tables which kinde of honour antiquitie of a custome which they vsed when they were heathens was wont to yeelde to such as they counted Benefactors Sauiors Phi. By that you see the images of Christ his Apostles were expressed in colours and reserued by the auncient christians long before Eusebius Theo. Eusebius doeth not report it as a thing either openly receiued in Churches or generally vsed of all christians but as a secrete and seldome matter rising from the perswasion and affection of some which whiles they were heathen had yeelded that honour to other of their friendes fautors to whom they were most beholding For had the Apostles deliuered any such tradition or the Primatiue church of Christ vsed any publike erection of images as you suppose would the councell of Eliberis in Spaine assembled about the time of Constantine the great in plaine words haue banished them out of their churches Placuit picturas in ecclesiis esse non debere ne quod colitur aut adoratur in parietibus dâ— pingatur We haue decreed that pictures ought not to be in the churches lest that which is worshipped or adored be painted on walles Woulde S. Augustine thinke you haue pronounced them worthy to erre which sought Christ his Apostles in pictures paintings if the people had bin taught that way to seeke him Sic omnino errare meâ—uerunt qui Christum Apostolos eius non in sanctis codicibus sed in pictis parietibus quaesierunt So they deserued to erre which sought Christ and his Apostles not in the sacred Scriptures but in paynted walles Or would Epiphanius haue rent the image which he found hanging in the church by Ierusalem and pronounced such painted imagery notwithstanding it represented Christ or one of his Sainctes to be contrary to the Scriptures to the religion of Christ. His words are When I entered the church to pray I found hanging there in the enterance of the saide church a stained and a painted cloath hauing the image as it were of Christ or one of the Sainctes When I sawe this that against the authoritie of the Scriptures the image of a man was hanged vp in the church I did teare it in sunder And I pray you hereafter to command that such cloathes repugnant to our religion be not hanged in the church of Christ. It becommeth your fatherhood rather to haue this care to banish this superstition vnfit for Christes church and for the people committed to your charge By this you may see that images were not receiued much lesse adored in the church of Christ whiles these ancieÌ„t fathers liued and that to remoue them and keepe them out of the church was then adiudged a seemely care for Christian Bishoppes agreeable with the Catholike profession and publike vse of the church of Christ in those dayes Phi. Gregorie the first you know was of an other minde that images should be suffered and not defaced in the church Theo. Gregorie liued 300. yeares after the councell of Eliberis and 200. after Epiphanius in which time the painting of stories was crept into the church as an ornament for the naked walles and a meane to set before the peoples eyes the liues and labours of the Sainctes and Martyrs but that pictures or images in the church shoulde bee worshipped or adored Gregorie did in most manifest words abhorre alleadging the law of God which we do that nothing made with hands should be adored or serued Phi. Not with diuine honor Theo. You meane with no part of that honor which God requireth of vs. Phi. What else They must not haue diuine honour in whole or in part Theo. Then must they haue none at all For God requireth bodily honor no lesse than ghostly as due to him and by his law excludeth all thinges made with handes from hauing either in saying Thou shalt not bow down to them nor serue them Phi. Bowing the knee is not diuine honour but such as wee yeeld to Parents Magistrates Theo. Bowing the knee is a part of Gods honor as also holding vp the handes and lifting vp the eyes To me saith God shall euery knee bow For this cause saith Paul doe I know my knees vnto the father of our Lord Iesus Christ shewing that the bowing of our knees is an honour due to God euen as the lifting vppe of our handes and eyes belongeth likewise vnto him As long as I liue sayeth Dauid I will magnifie thee on this maner and lift vp my handes in thy name I will sayeth the Apostle that the men pray euerie where lifting vp pure handes And so for the rest Vnto thee saith Dauid do I lift vp mine eyes thou that dwellest in the heauens And againe Mine eyes are euer vnto the Lord. And so of our Sauiour when he praied S. Iohn reporteth He lift vp his eyes to heauen and saide The outward honor therefore of eyes handes kneâ—s God requireth of vs as his due though chiefly and principally the heart which he will not suffer any man to haue besides himselfe howsoeuer he allow those that present his goodnesse and glorie in blessing and iudging as Parents and Magistrates to haue some part of his corporall but in no wise of his spirituall honour Phi. And so many images haue part of his external though not of his internal honour which is the higher of the twaine and meeter for the diuine maiesty Theo. It is not in your handes to make allowance of Gods honour to whome you list and againe God himselfe hath made a plaine prohibition in this case that images shall haue no part of his externall honour The wordes are as cleare as day light thou shalt not bow downe to them Phi. Not to the images of false Gods Theo. It is but lost labor to reason with such wranglars Haue not I mainly proued that this precept expressely forbiddeth the Image of the true God to be made or bowed vnto Why then take you vp those shifts againe which be false and refuted
reuerent estimation regard of them that they be not despised or abused although they be but signes So that water in baptism and the creatures of breade and wine in the Lordes supper which are the two examples here mentioned are to be reuerenced as things that be sacred by the word and ordinaÌ„ce of God but not to be adored and honored for the things themselues whose signes they are that were a miserable seruitude or rather the right death of the soule as Austen noteth And that the first teachers of truth remoued al Images as vnprofitable signes to serue God with the words before do plainly shew For speaking of the difference between the Iewes and the Gentils when they should be conuerted vnto Christ he saith ChristiaÌ„ liberty finding the Iewes vnder profitable signes to wit the rites Ceremonies of the Lawe did interprete the meaning of them and so by directing the people to the things themselues deliuered them from the seruitude of the signes but finding the Gentiles vnder vnprofitable signes for that they worshipped Images either as Gods or as the signes and resemblaunces of Gods ipsa signa fruâ—trauit remouitque omnia shee wholy remoued and frustrated the signes themselues that is shee would not suffer them to serue the true God with any such signes as bodily shapes and Images were Your honouring of Images is reproued as you see and not releeued by S. Augustines Rule And since the Lawe of God expressely and â—treitly chargeth you not so much as to bowe your bodies or knees to the likenesse of any thing in heauen or earth which is made with handes consult your owne consciences whether you may with your respects frustrate or with your routes ouerbeare the distinct and direct voice of God himselfe in his own Church And if you be not giuen ouer into a reprobate sense you wil say no. Now that which is against the Law of God can neither be Christian nor Catholike Your Doctrine therefore of bowing and kneeling to Images is repugnant both to the precepts of God and to the generall auncient resolution of Christs church your adoring them with diuine honour is a sacrilegious and flagitious as well noueltie as impietie Phi. You must not looke that we should defend the sayings doings of all that haue takeÌ„ part with the church of Rome If Thomas waded too far in worshipping Images if Gerson mistooke S. Augustine if the later Councell of Nice denied or strained some of the ancient Fathers you must not chalenge vs for their ouerâ—ightes The. We chalenge you for vaunting your selues to be Catholikes when in deede you doe nothing but smooth and sleike the corruptions and inuentions of later ages against the right ancient faith of Christs church The discent of Images with their adoration how late it began how often it varied how far at length it swarued froÌ„ the Primatiue original profession of the christiaÌ„ catholik faith we haue spent somtime to examine Let vs now approch to your praiers in a straÌ„ge toung which haue a great deal lesse shew of catholicism thaÌ„ images had yet are as egerly defended by you as images were Phi. In the Latine toung we haue praiers in a strange toung we haue none you rather that haue turned scriptures church seruice secretes for your pleasures into the English tongue make your praiers in a strange and vnwonted speach to catholik earesâ— The. To English meÌ„ the English toung is not strange Phi. I know they vnderstand it but I call it strange because they were not woont to haue the publike praiers of the Church in their mother toung Theo. In cases of religion we must respect not what men haue but what they should haue beene vsed to Cyprian saith well Consuetudo sine veritate vetustas erroris est Custome without trueth is but the long continuance of error so Tertullian Quodcunque aduersus veritatem sapit hoc erit haeresis etiam vetus consuetudo Whatsoeuer is against the trueth it must bee counted heresie though it be an old Custom The Councell of Carthage where Cyprian was resolued thuâ— The Lord saith in the Gospel I am trueth he said not I am custom Trueth therefore appearing let custom yeeld to truth Phi. That councel erred in neglecting the old custom which the church obserued Theo. But yet their generall assertion which I alleage was so strong that S. Augustine saith to those very wordes Plane respondeo quis dubitet veritatis manifestae debere consuetudinem cedere I plainly answere who doubteth but that custom must yeeld to the trueth appearing Phi. Neither doe we doubt of that but how proue you this to be a manifest trueth that the people of this Land must haue their diuine seruice in the English tongue Theo. It is the manifest precept of him that said I am trueth and witnessed in the Scripture which is the worde of trueth Philan. In what place there Theo. Make not your selfe so great a stranger in the Scriptures as if you knew not the place Phi. You meane the 14. Chapter of the first epistle which S Paul wrote to the Church of Corinth Theo. I doe what say you to it Phi. Mary this we say The reader may take a tast in this one point of your deceitfull dealing abusing the simplicitie of the popular by peruerse application of Gods holy word vpon some smale similitude equiuocatioÌ„ of certaine termes against the approued godly vse and trueth of the vniuersall Church for the seruice in the Latine or Greeke tongue which you ignorantly or rather wilfully pretend to be against this discourse of S. Paul touching strange tongues Theo. And hee that marketh your shifting and facing in this one point shall need no farther tast of your dealing Phi. If you like not that which we say refel it Theo. Can your selues tell what you say Phi. You shall well find that when we come to the matter Theo. First then heare what the Apostle saith and after you shal haue leaue to say what you will Instructing the Church of Corinth thus he saith And now brethren if I come to you speaking with strange tongues what shall I profite you If a truÌ„pet giue an vncertaine sound who wil prepare himself to the battel So likewise you by the tongue except you vtter words of easie vnderstanding how shal it be knoweÌ„ what is spoken For you shal speake in the aire There are for example so many kindes of tongues in the worlde and none of them is without sound Except I know the power and signification of the speach I shall be to him that speaketh barbarous and he that speaketh shall be barbarous to me Wherefore let him that speaketh a strange tongue pray thâ—t he may interpret For if I pray in a tongue not vnderstood my spirite praieth but mine vnderstanding is without fruit What is it then I wil pray with the
similitude image of that oblation to be celebrated for a remēbrance of his passiō in so much that we may see that which Melchisedec offred to God now sacrificed in the church of Christ throughout the world Emissenus Considering that Christ was to take his body from our eyes place the same in the heauens it was requisite he should institute the sacrament of his body and blood for vs at his last supper that it might alwaies be continued in a mysterie which was once offred for a ransom because the work of our redemption did neuer faile the sacrifice of our redemption might be perpetual and that euerlasting oblation of Christ on the crosse might remaine fresh in memorie and present for euer in grace Theodorete If Christ by his owne sacrifice on the crosse brought to passe that other sacrifices should be superfluous why doe the Priests of the new Testament execute the mysticall Lyturgie or Sacrifice It is cleare to them that are instructed in our mysteries that we doe not offer an other sacrifice but continue the memorie of that one and healthful Sacrifice For so the Lord himself commanded vs doe this in my remembrance that in beholding the figures we should remember the paines which he suffered for vs beare a louing heart towards him that did vs so much fauour and expect the receiuing of good things to come which he promised Theophilact Do we then offer vnbloody sacrifices No doubt wee doe◠mary by being a remembrance of the Lords death He was once offred and yet we offer him alwaies or rather we celebrate the memorial of that oblation when he sacrificed himselfe on the crosse Receiue this addition which they make and wee graunt you that oblation which they teach Christ is offered or rather a memorial of his death and oblation is celebrated This later correction doeth expound and interprete their former assertion You can require no plainer nor sounder doctrine They piese not Christ with their handes they shroud him not in accidences they pray not for him that God will vouchsafe to respect and accept him as hee did the giftes and external sacrifices of Abel Abraham and Melchisedec as you do in your Masses they neuer tolde vs the very fact and intention of the Priest were meritorious these bee your absurdities and blasphemies They did offer an vnbloody sacrifice not of flesh but of Spirite and mynd the selfe-same which Melchisedec did two thousande yeeres before Christ tooke flesh and therefore not the flesh of Christ a figuratiue sacrifice to witte Signes Samplars Similitudes and Memorials of his death and bloodshedding So that Christ is offered dayly but Mystically not couered with qualities and quantities of bread and wyne for those be neither mysteries nor resemblances to the death of Christ but by the breade which is broken by the wyne which is drunke in substance creatures in signification Sacraments the Lordes death is figured proposed to the communicants and they for their parts no lesse people than Priest do present Christ hanging on the crosse to God the father with a liuely faith inward deuotion and humble prayer as a most sufficiēt and euerlasting Sacrifice for the full remission of their sinnes and assured fruition of his mercies Other actual and propitiatorie sacrifice than this the church of Christ neuer had neuer taught You beleeue not mee Well what if your owne fellowes and friends teach the same What if the master of your Sentences what if the Glozer of your decrees what if the Ringleader of your Schoolemen make with vs in this question and euince that for twelue hundred yeres after Christ your Sacrifice was not knowen to the woorlde will you giue the people leaue to bethinke themselues better before they call you or account you catholikes Then heare what they say Peter Lombard in his 4. booke and 12. distinction I demaund whether that which the Priest doeth bee properly called a Sacrifice or an oblation and whether Christ be daily offered or els were offered only once To this our answere is briefe that which is offred and consecrated by the priest is called a sacrifice and oblatiō because it is a memorie representation of the true sacrifice holy oblatiō made on the altar of the crosse Also Christ died once on the crosse and there was he offred himself but he is offred daily in a sacrament because in the Sacrament there is a remembrance of that which was once done Now what this meaneth Christ is offred in a sacramēt we need no fairer interpretation thā that which your own gloze oftē repeateth Christ is offred in a sacrament that is his offring is represented a memorie of his passion celebrated It is the same oblation which he made * that is a representation of the same passion Christ is offered euery day mystically * that is the oblation which Christ made for vs is represented in the sacrament of his body blood With these concurreth Thomas of Aquine Because the celebration of this Sacrament is a certaine Image of Christs passion it maie conuenientlie be called the sacrificing of Christ. The celebration of this Sacrament is termed the immolating of Christ in two respects First for that as Austen saith resemblances are woont to be called by the names of those thinges whose resemblances they are next for that by this sacrament wee be made partakers of the fruite of the Lordes passion Here find you no reall locall nor externall offering of Christ to God his father by the Priest for the sinnes of the people which is your opinion at this daie you finde that the celebration of the Lordes supper maie be called an oblation first for that it is a representation of Christs death and sacraments haue the names of the things which they signifie next because the merits and fruits of Christs passion are by the power of his spirite diuided and bestowed on the faithfull receiuers of these mysteries Nowe boast of your Catholike doctrine that your pratling Sophists and wandering Friers inuented but yesterday now call for your souereigne Sacrifice not onelie repugnant to the sacred Scriptures and auncient fathers but reiected by the Mint-master of your sentences refuted by the conclusions of your Seraphicall Doctor shunned by your rude Gloze-maker and cleane thwart to the Canon of your ordinarie Masse If you speede no better in the rest of your causes a worse name than fugitiues will become you and your companions well enough without perill of slaunder or breach of charitie These foundations lying sure to wit that the creatures of bread and wine are offered to God for a thanksgiuing when they be sanctified and receiued according to his sonnes institution and that Christ himselfe is daylie offered and crucified in a mysterie because the breaking of his bodie and shedding of his blood on the crosse are proposed and renewed by the bread
receiuing the whole church of God crieth vpon it Domine noÌ„ sum dignus Deus propitius esto mihi peccatori Lamb of god that takest away the sins of the world haue mercie on vs. And for better discerning of this diuine meat we are called from coÌ„mon profane houses to Gods church for this we are forbiddeÌ„ to make it in vulgar apparel are appointed sacred solemne vestments Hier. in Epitap Nepot li. 2. adv Pel. ca. 9. Paulinus ep 12. ad Seuer Io. Diac. in vit D. Greg. li. 3. ca. 59. For this is the hallowing of Corporals chalices Ambr. 2. off ca. 28. Nazian Orat. ad Arianos Optatus li. 6. in initio For this profane tables are remoued altars consecrated Aug. Serm. de temp 255. For this the very priests themselues are honorable chast sacred Hier. ep 1. ad Heliodor ca. 17. li. 1. adv Iouin ca. 19. Ambr. in 1. Tim. 3. For this the people is forbidden to touch it with common hands Nazian orat ad Arian in initio For this great care solicitude is taken that no part of either kind fall to the ground Cyril Hieros mystag 5. in fine Orig. ho. 13. in ca. 25. Exod. For this sacred prouision is made that if any hosts or partes of the Sacrament doe remaine vnreceiued they bee most religiously reserued with all honour and diligence possible and for this examinatioÌ„ of consciences confession continencie as S. Augustine saith receiuing it fasting Thus do we catholiks the church of God discerne the holy body blood by S. Pauls rule not only from your prophane bread wine which not by any secrete abuse of your Curates or clearkes but by the verie order of your booke the Minister if any remaine after your Communion may take home with him to his own vse and therfore it is no more holie by your own iudgement than the rest of his meates but from al other either vulgar or sanctified meates as the catechumens bread our vsual holy bread Theo. I had thought we should haue had adoration of the sacrament proued here commeth hallowing of coapes corporals chalices Altars priestes pixes and not at al or last of al the hallowing of soules which in wisemens account deserued to goe alone or at least first in the Kalender For your often curious clensing of the outsides of coates cups stones handes such like implementes sauoreth of the Pharisees holines who supposed then as you do now that God is highly serued with such solemne prouision sacred solicitude though this be more than euer Christ at his last supper had care for or mind of for ought that we find by report of the Gospell Mary this is not our purpose You must proue your adoration of the sacrament let hallowing of Uestments and Altars alone till an other time and persue that which is denied Phi. So we do Haue you not here S. Austen S. Ambrose S. Chrysostom S. Nazianzene Theodorete S. Denys that the sacrament should bee adored Theo. Theodorete is not in your bookes that he is not sainted with the rest yet is he an ancient learned writer but take your pleasure The rest well deserue it and therefore I am not angrie with it though S. Paul extende the name sainct to the hearers as well as to the â—eachers to the liuing aswell as to the dead Phi. You would be saints The. God grant vs to be his seruants Phi. You must change your faith first The. Why We worship no creatures in steed of Christ as you do Phi. Wil that lying neuer be left Theo. Would God for your own sakes it were a ly but I feare it is 〈◊〉 true Phi. Christ wee adore creatures we do not Theo. The sacramentes you adore and those be creatures as in Baptisme the water in the Lords supper the bread wine Phi. We adore the B. sacrament of the Altar as wee learned of the catholike fathers creatures we adore none Theo. Of what fathers did you learn it Phi. I haue told you of S. Austen S. Ambrose S. Chrysostom S. Nazianzene Theodorete S. Denys Theo. Set Theodorete aside who writing in greeke vseth the word adoration for an externall regard reuerence such as we giue to the books vessels that are sanctified to diuine vses though more amply to the sacramentes ordained by God himself saith that the mystical signes themselues remaining in their former earthly substance are adored that is reuerently religiously handled as becommeth so great mysteries I say set him aside not one of the rest so much as toucheth that which you should proue Phi. They say the sacrament must be adored Theo. They say Christ must be adored Phi. Yea but in the mysteries and on the altar Theo. So Christ is to bee adored in heauen in his church most of al in our own hearts bodies will you thence collect that either heauen or the Temple or our selues are to be adored Phi. But neither heauen nor the temple are sacraments Theo. Yet Christ is adored in them though they be not in like sort with him so may Christ be adored in the misteries though the mysteries themselues may haue no such honor Phi. S. AusteÌ„ saith It is he that the Apostle saith should be damned that doth not by singular veneration or adoration make a difference betweene this meate all others Theo. S. Austen in that place speaketh not one word of adoration He saith The Apostle affirmeth it to be vnworthily receiued of theÌ„ qui hoc non discernebaÌ„t à caeteris cibis veneratione singulariter debita which did not discern it from other meates with the veneration that was properly or singularly due vnto it Phil. Uery wel Singular veneration is al one with diuine adoration Theo. In your corrupted iudgemeÌ„ts Phi. What els is it Theo. VeneratioÌ„ is a word that S. Austen fourdeth al the signes sacraments of the old new Testament adoratioÌ„ he reserueth only to God Of veneratioÌ„ he saith Qui veneratur â—ignum vtile diuinitus insâ—itutum non hocâ— vèneratur quod videtur transit sed illud potius quo talia cuncta referenda sunt Hee that reuerenceth a signe that is profitable and ordayned by God reuerenceth not the thing which is visible and transitorie but that rather to which all such signes are referred And so concludeth namely of baptisme and the Lordes Supper Quae vnusquisque cuÌ„ percipit quâ— referantur imbutus agnoscit vt ea non carnalâ— seruitute sed spirituali potius libertate veneretur Which two Sacramentes when euerie Christian receiueth he knoweth being once partaker of them whither to refer them that he may reuerence them with a spirituall libertie rather than with a carnall seruitude And least you should not vnderstand what difference he putteth betweene the corporall creature and the heauenly brightnesse in this and so in other sacramentes he saith farther
tooke a stocke for their father and a stone for their maker They thought they worshipped God and not the Image Philand But wee bee sure that Christ made this to bee him-selfe when hee sayde this is my body Theo. He sayd I am the doore I am the vyne and yet neither doore nor vyne are really and personally the sonne of God Philand Hee spake those things in parables and by way of resemblance this he spake in plaine trueth without all figures and therefore this must bee substantially turned into Christ though that bee not Theoph. You make your reall and corporall presence a refuge for your erroneous and absurde assertions But if that bee false as well as the rest then are you plunged ouer head and eares in the myre and sinke of sinne and heresie Phi. If God bee not in heauen wee shall neuer come there but if hee bee wee can not misse our way For hath the whole Church thinke you lyen in sinne and heresie till your newe doctrine came lately from Geneua Theo. In deede I thinke this reason is euen as good as the most of those which your friendes haue freshly sent vs from Rhemes but abuse not your selues with such stately follies GOD may well bee in heauen and is no doubt and yet you neuer come there for refusing the right way thither Philand Wee goe the same way that the whole church since Christes time went before vs. Theoph. This pride so bewitcheth you that you can not see howe farre you bee fallen from the fayth of Christes Church which was in auncient and vncorrupted ages Philand As though wee did not ioyne with them in this and all other poyntes of Religion Theoph. You ioyne with them as darke-night doeth with day-light Philand Haue wee not their full consent for those thinges which you impugne Theoph. As namely for adoration of the sacrament where you pretend the whole Church and shewe not one man that euer taught of the Sacrament that It should bee adored Philand Was not the whole Church taught to say vnto It and crie vpon It Domine non suum dignus Lorde I am not woorthie Theo. Prooue that this or any other inuocation or adoration was vsed TO IT as you say and you shall goe free for all Phi. Origen ho. 5. in diuers When thou eatest sayth hee and drinkest the body and blood of our Lorde hee entereth vnder thy roofe Thou also therefore humbling thy selfe say Lord I am not woorthy So sayde S. Chrysostome in his Masse Theoph. This they were taught to say but to what were they taught to say it Philand To the Sacrament Theo. Who sayth so besides you Phi. Origen and Saint Chrysostome Theoph. Perhaps they taught the people that kinde of prayer when they did communicate at the Lordes Table but did they teach the people to say so to the Sacrament Philand Euen thus to crie VPON IT and thus to say VNTO IT Lorde I am not woorthie Theo. We would gladly heare that of their owne mouthes wee trust not yours Philand Looke the places and you shall find it to bee as wee say Theo. We haue viewed the places and find you to be Lyars Phi. Are not those Origens words which we rehearse Theo. Origen hath the words which you cite but he teacheth not the people to direct them to the Sacrament Philand To whome then Theoph. To whome but to christ the sonne of God Phi. And he is in the sacrament Theo. Their assertions not your additions are the thinges we aske for That these and all other partes of diuine honor are due to christ no christian maie doubt but that the same maie be directed and applied to the host that is your blasphemie no father â—uer taught it Origen discussing the Centurions fact and faith telleth his audience that Christ entereth vnder the roofes of all beleeuers two waies first by his ministers then by his mysteries Intrat nunc Dominus sub tectum Credentium duplici figura vel more The Lorde euen at this daie entereth the roofe of those that beleeue after two sortes or manners For when holie and acceptable pastours of the Church to GOD enter our howsen euen then and there the Lord entereth by them and be thou so affected as if thou receiuedst the Lorde himselfe An other waie is when thou receiuest that holy meate and eatest and drinkest the bodie and blood of the Lord for then the Lorde entereth thy roofe also Thou therefore humbling thy selfe imitate the Centurion and saie Lord I am not worthie that thou shouldest come vnder my roofe This must be said as well when the preacher entereth our house as when we receiue the sacrament for it is plaine by Origen that christ commeth vnder our roofe in both these cases and we are not worthie in either of them or in any other case that the sonne of God should come vnder our roofe As then it were madnes to deifie the Preacher because Christ voutsafeth to come in him and with him or to salute him with the diuine honour due to christ and to say to a mortall man Lord I am not worthy so can it be no lesse impietie to saie to the dead creatures in which or with which we receiue christ from his table Lord I am not worthie Phi. Doe you thinke that Christ is none otherwise in the Sacrament than he is in a mortall man Theo. He is more truelie reallie and naturallie in those men that be his members than he is in the elements that be vsed at his table Phi. O shamefull heresie Is anie mortall man transsubstantiated into Christ as the elements are by power of consecration Theo. That which I saie is most true men are the members of Christ bread is not Christ abideth in them and they in him in the breade he doeth not he will raise them in the last day the breade he will not they shall raigne with him for euer the breade shall not And therefore take backe your shamefull error of transsubstantiating the elements into christ since he is more really in vs than in the pixe or the chalice and yet we are not substantiallie conuerted into him Phi. I will neuer beleeue this whiles I haue a daie to liue Theo. Neither doe I meane in this place to enter that discourse yet for the confirmation of it I send you to Chrysostome Cyrill and Hilarie who will teach you so much in plaine wordes that christ is in vs reallie naturallie corporallie carnallie substantiallie which of the Sacrament you shall neuer be able to prooue For the sacrament is no part of his mysticall bodie as we are and therefore we are knit vnto him euen by the trueth of his and our nature flesh and substance as members of the same bodie to their head the Sacrament is not but onelie annexed as a signe to the heauenlie grace and vertue of Christ mightilie present and trulie entering the soule of euerie man that
here on earth though after an inuisible manner which wee take to bee vnder the formes of breade and wyne Theo. That Christ is present with vs here on earth wee firmely beleeue to our great comfort Where two or three sayth our Sauiour are gathered together in my name I am in the middest of them and againe Loâ— I am alway with you vntill the ende of the worlde but that hee is corporally present vnder the formes of bread and wine that is neither auouched by Chrysostome nor admitted by vs it is your vaine and fruitlesse fansie Phi. How can his body bee present but bodily Theo. These woordes of Chrysostom inferre not that Christes body is present but that Christ is present And since Christ consisteth of two natures the diuine may bee present though the humane bee not Christ absent sayth Austen is also present For vnlesse hee were present hee coulde not bee helde of vs our selues But because it is true that hee saith Lo I am with you for euer vnto the end of the world hee is both departed and yet here Hee is returned whence hee came and hath not yet forsaken vs. For his body hee hath caried into heauen but his diuine maiestie hee hath not taken from the world Neither is his diuine power onely present with vs but also wee haue his humane nature many wayes with vs in this worlde Habes Christum in praesenti in futuro In praesenti per fidem in praesenti per signum Christi in praesenti per Baptismatis Sacramentum in praesenti per altaris cibum potum Thou hast Christ sayth Austen in this worlde and in the next In this world by faith in this worlde by the signe of Christ in this world by the Sacrament of baptisme in this world by the meate and drinke of the altar By these things wee haue him in this worlde not really locally or corporally but truely comfortably and effectually so as our bodies soules and spirites bee sanctiâ—â—ed and preserued by him against the day of redemption when wee shall see him and enioye him face to face in that fulnesse and perfection which wee nowe are assured of by fayth and prepared for by cleanesse and meekenesse of the inward man The whole Church therefore neuer cried vppon the Sacrament Lorde I am not woorthy Lord beè mercifull to mee a sinner Lambe of God that takest away the sinnes of the worlde haue mercy on vs You doe sinnefully slaunder them they did exactly and precisely distinguish the corruptible creature from the eternal creator and taught all men to lift vp their hearts from the elements which were before their eyes to him that is in heauen and shall come from thence and from no place else to iudge the world Saint Austen wil haue the rude ones to be taught that the Sacraments are Signacula rerum diuinarâ—m visibilia sed res inuisibiles in eis honorari Visible scales of things diuine but the things visible to be honored in them And as if the case were so plaine that no man could well doubt thereof he saith Si ad ipsas res visibiles quibus Sacramenta tractantur animum conferamus quis nesciat eas esse corruptibiles Si autem ad id quod per illas agitur quis non videat non posse corrumpi If we looke to the visible things or elements by which the Sacraments are perfourmed who can be ignorant that they are corruptible But if we looke to that which is doone by them who doth not see that that can not bee corrupted Saint Ambrose saith Venisti ad Altare vidisti Sacramenta posita super Altare ipsam quidem miratus es creaturam Tamen creatura solemnis nota Thou camest to the Altar and sawest the Sacraments placed on the Altar and maruelledst at the very creature yet is it an vsuall and knowen creature Origen purposely creating what part of the Sacrament did sanctifie the receiuer saith Ille cibus qui sanctificatur per verbum Dei obsecrationem iuxta id quod habet materiale in ventrem abit in secessum eijcitur Nec materia panis sed super â—llum sermo est qui prodest non indigne Domino commedenti illum Haec de typico Symbolicoque corpore The meate which is sanctified at the Lords table by the word of God and praier as touching the materiall partes which it hath goeth into the belly and so forth by the priuie neither is the matter of bread it that profiteth the worthy receiuer but the worde rehearsed ouer it This I speake of the typicall and figuratiue body For this cause the great Councell of Nice directed the whole Church to lift vp their vnderstanding aboue the breade and wine which they sawe and by faith to conceiue the lambe of God slaine for the sinnes of men and proposed and exhibited on the Lordes table in those mysteries Their woordes bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let vs not baselie bend our mindes on the bread and cup that are set before our eyes at the Lordes Supper but lifting vp our thoughtes let vs by faith beholde on or in the sacred table the Lambe of God taking awaie the sinne of the worlde Which admonition the Church euer after obserued by crying vpon the people to lift vp their hartes not to the Sacramentes which they saw but from them to him that liued and raigned in heauen whome they adored in equall degree with the father and the holie Ghost and whome they behelde and touched with the eyes and handes of their faith but not with their corporall limmes or senses Quomodo in caelum mittam manum vt ibi sedentem teneam Mitte fidem tenuisti Howe shall I sende vp my hande to heauen to reach Christ sitting there Sende thy fayth sayth Austen and THOV HOLDEST HIM fast enough Fide Christus tangitur fide Christus videtur non corpore tangitur non oculis comprehenditur By fayth sayth Ambrose Christ is touched by fayth Christ is seene hee is not touched with our body not viewed with our eyes And therefore Chrysostome saith Hee must flie not to the Sacrament but on hie that will come to this body euen to heauen it selfe or rather aboue the heauens for where the body is there also will the Eagles bee Phi. The councell of Nice sayth The Lambe of God is on the sacred table where then did they seeke him or made they prayers vnto him but on the Altar Theo. They lifted vp their heartes to him that sate in heauen and from heauen looke downe vppon them and their prayers before they could please God were directed to the same place and person that their heartes were You must therefore either fasten their hearts and faiths to the Sacrament or suffer their prayers together with their affections to ascend to heauen where Christ sitteth at the right hande of God
and from whence we looke for our Sauiour euen the Lord Iesus Christ. Phi. All the places which are yet alleaged against you you haue shyfted off by referring the speaches to Christ him-selfe sitting in heauen and as you say not in the sacrament But Theodorets woordes are so cleare that no shift will â—erue Hee speaketh of the very mysticall signes and Sacraments which are seene with eyes and touched with handes and of them hee sayth Intelliguntur ea esse quae facta sunt creduntur adorantur vt quae illâ— sint quae creduntuâ— The Sacraments are vnderstood to be the things which they are made are beleeued and ADORED as being the same which they are beleeued Theo. Onely Theodoret of all the fathers that euer mentioned adoration spake of the Sacrament it selfe The rest direct their words to Christ raigning in glory not to the host or Chalice in the Priestes hande Hee in deede speaketh of the mysticall signes which the rest did not Philand Then yet there is one Father for the adoration of the Sacrament you sayde wee had none Theo. Woulde you prooue so high a point of Religion as this is to bee Catholike by one onely Father and such an one as you thinke not worthy to bee called a Saint Phi. These exceptions are but dilatorie and quite besides the matter Doe you graunt that hee sayth the mysticall signes must bee adored Theo. Hee sayth so Philand And such vpstarts as you are woulde bee credited against him when you say the Sacrament is not to bee adored Theoph. Wee reason not about our credite but about your conclusion Philand That is too plaine for your stoare Theo. Why doe you then conceale it so long Phi. You shall soone heare it and haue your belly full of it The mystical tokens bee adored sayth that auncient Father Theodorete Marke nowe howe nimbly we come within you ouerthrow you in plain field If you deny it we haue here antiquitie for it If you grant it then are you worse than miscreants for holding all this while against it Theo. With such weapons I thinke Alexander the great did conquere the worlde Phi. When you come to a non plus then you fall to idle talke But leaue digressing and giue vs a short and direct answere which wee knowe for your heartes you can not Theo. You knowe much but if you knewe your selues and your owne weakenes it were better Phi. Did I not tell you this place would ouerthrowe you Theo. Because hee sayth the substance of bread and wyne must be adored Phi. Hee sayth no such thing but the mysticall tokens must be adored And what are the mysticall tokens but the mysteries themselues which are all one with the Sacrament Theo. Can you take the top and the tayle and leaue out the myddle so cunningly Phi. Wee leaue out nothing Theo. Theodorets wordes are Neque enim sigra mystica post sanctificationem recedunt a sua natura Manent enâ—m in priore substantia figura forma videri taâ—gi possunt sicut prius Intelliguntur antem ea esse quae facta sunt creduâ—tur adorantur vt quae illa sint quae creduntur The mysticall signes after consecration doe not depart from their owne nature For they remaine in their former substaunce and figure and forme and may bee seene and touched as they were before but they are vnderstoode to bee those thinges which they are made and are beleeued AND ADORED as being the things which they are beleeued The mysticall signes not departing from their owne nature but remayning in their former substance are adored By this you may prooue if you bee so disposed that the creatures of bread and wyne must bee adoren which perhaps in your Church is no fault because it is so often But the Church of Christ abhorreth it as a wicked impietie to adore any dead or dumbe creature And therefore you must bee driuen as well as we to seeke for an other and farther meaning in Theodorete otherwise you will shake the foundation of your owne fayth with your owne antiquitie more than you shall doe ours Our answere is easie The mysticall signes hee sayth are adored but not with diuine honour and adoration with the Grecians as also with the Scriptures when it is applied to mortal men or creatures signifieth onely a reuerent regard of their places or vses Your owne Lawe sayth In hoc sensu possumus quamlibet rem sacram adorare id est reuerentiam exhibere In this sense wee may adore any sacred thing whatsoeuer that is giue it due reuerence So that you vtterly ouerthrowe both your adoration and your Transubstantiation when you brought Theodorete to tell vs that the substance of bread is adored that is reuerenced and yet remayneth after Consecration For if it remaine what adore you but the substance of a dead creature And that if you doe howe many steppes are you from open Idolatrie Thus though wee crake not of our conquests as you doe wee returne your authorities for adoring the sacrament as either impertinent or insufficient giue vs cause to consider that your worshipping it with diuine honour is no catholike or ancient veritie but a pernicious and wicked noueltie Phil. Is it wickednes to worship Christ Theop. You defile the name of Christ spoile him of his worship by giuing them both to senseles creatures Phi. How often shall we beate this into your dull heades that we giue this honour to the Sacrament and not to senseles creatures Theo. And howe often shall wee ring this into your deaffe eares that the Sacrament in corporall matter and substance is a senseles and corruptible creature Phi. Did not Christ saie this is my bodie Theo. You must prooue the speach to be literall as well as the wordes to be his Phi. Is not the letter plaine this is my bodie Theo. The letter is so plaine that it killeth the carnall interpreter and hath driuen you whiles you would needs refuse the figuratiue and spirituall constructions of Christs words to these absurdities and enormities which haue euen ouerwhelmed your Church Phi. Can you wish for plainer wordes than these this is my bodie Theo. I could wish that in expounding these wordes you did relie rather on the catholike fathers than on your vncatholike fansies Phi. All the fathers with one voice toyne with vs in this doctrine Theoph. You doe but dreame of a drie Summer Not one of the auncient fathers euer spake of your reall presence or the literall sense of these wordes on which you buyld the rest Phi. Will you haue a thousand places for that purpose or if varietie of writers do rather content you wil you haue three or four hundreth seuerall fathers all auncient and catholike in diuers ages and countries that shall depose for our doctrine in this point Theo. I can enter a course to saue you
by their own words to teach more than idle signes or ONLY figures in the Lords supper because together with the name goe the vertâ—es and effects of Christes flesh bloud vnited in manner of a Sacrament to the visible signes And this their assertion neither troubleth our Doctrine nor strengthneth your error Againe these writers may very well say the Sacraments of the Gospell BE NO FIGVRES but TRVETH IT SELFE in that respect as figures bee taken for samplers of things to come Such were the figures of the law which did premonstrat the coÌ„ming of christ in flesh ceased at his coÌ„ming And so the mysteries of the Lords table were not figures of things expected but euidences of the truth there sitting in persoÌ„ the next day to be nailed to the crosse therby to fulfil abolish al figures our sacrameÌ„ts are now not signes of farther promises but memorials of his mercies alredy performed Do this saith christ not in figure of an other truth to come but in remeÌ„brance of me which am come for memorie you know stretcheth only to things past and doone and in this sense the letter may bee safely pressed and your carnall conueyance nothing relieued I find a third cause that might induce them to force the letter in this sort yet no way confirming your grosse supposall which is this When the Greeke church fell at variance for Images they which held that Christ ought not to be figured after the likenes of our bodies amongest other reasons alleadged this for one that the Lord at his Supper for a true and effectuall Image of his incarnation chose the whole substance of bread not any way like the proportion of a man lest it should occasion Idolatry The defenders of Images whose side Damascene tooke pressed with this obiection durst not flee to your annihilation of the substance of bread and adoration of the Sacrament with diuine honour which no doubt they would haue doone with great triumph had those two points of your Doctrine beene then counted catholike but yeelding and by their silence confessing that the substance of bread remayned in the supper and was not adored for so the contrarie part opposed at length for very pure neede came to this shift that the mysticall bread was not ordained to resemble and figure Christs humane nature nor so called by christ at his maundie who said not this is a figure of my body but my body nor a figure of my bloud but my bloud and when Basil and Eustathius were produced affirming the bread and wine to be figures and resemblances of Christs flesh and bloud the Patrones of Images replied that was spoken alwaies before neuer after consecration Wherefore Damascene first beganne this myncing and straining the wordes of Christ not to build on them any reall or corporall conuersion of the bread into the flesh of christ but in fauour of his artifical pictures and Images he could by no meanes abide that the mysteries should after consecration be called Images and figures of Christs bodie The next that traced this path after Damascene was Epiphanius not that auncient and learned Bishoppe of Cyprus but a pratling Deacon in the bastard Councell of Nice whose furious and fanaticall answer to the Councel of Constantinople that made this obiection declareth more tongue than witte more face than learning Christ did not say take ye eat ye the Image of my bodie Reade whiles thou wilt saith hee thou shalt neuer find that either the Lord or his Apostles or the Fathers called that vnbloudie Sacrifice which the Priest offereth AN IMAGE Thus doth he braie foorth defiance to the whole worlde without trueth without shame For Chrysostome saith If Iesus were not once dead whose image and signe is this Sacrifice This Sacrifice is an image and samplar of that Sacrifice And Gelasius Surely the IMAGE and resemblance of the bodie and bloud of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries We must therefore so thinke of the Lord Christ himselfe as we professe and obserue in his IMAGE And likewise Theodoret. Ortho. The mysticall signes which are offered to god by his Priests whereof doest thou call them signes Eranist Of the body blood of the Lord. Ortho It is very well saide Conferre then the image with the paterne and thou shalt see the likenes Dionysius calleth it both an image and a figuratiue sacrifice Nazianzene excusing himselfe How should I saith he presume to offer vnto God that externall sacrifice the image of the great mysteries Clemens Offer you in your churches the image of the royall body of Christ. Macarius In the Church are offered breade and wine the images of his flesh and blood The 〈◊〉 â—aâ—hers keepe the same word the same sense Ambrose In the law was a shadow in the Gospel is an image in heauen is the trueth Before was offered a lambe or a calf now Christ is offred here in an image there in truth where he intreateth his father as an aduocate for vs. AusteÌ„ Christ gaue an image of his burnt offering to be celebrated in the church for a remembrance of his passion The rest say the like but what neede we farther refutation of so ridiculous and vnshamefast a bragge such causes such councels such poppets such Proctors The very children in the church of God knowe that the diuine mysteries by the generall definition of a Sacrament be visible signes of inuisible graces and as Augustine interpreteth the word Sacramentum id est sacrum signum a Sacrament that is a sacred signe So that vnlesse they be signes they can possibly be no sacraments neither sacraments nor signes can they be without or before coÌ„secration which this stout champion had not yet learned therfore his verdict in matters of religion except his cunning were greater may be wel refused As Damasene and your prating Epiphanius were more than 700. yeares after Christ so Theophilact and Euthymius are farre younger The first of them was Bishoppe of the Bulgarians who were conuerted to the faâ—eth 868. yeares after Christ the second your owne chronologie placeth after Gracian and Lombard 1100. yeares short of Christ. Were then these later Grecians wholy with you what gaine you by them If you woulde oppose them to Tertullian Origen Cyprian Austen Gelasius Thedorete others of purer times and sounder iudgements you could winne nothing by that bargaine the choice were soone made which to take which to leaue but in deede you do them wrong to returne them for transsubstantiators they neuer knew what it ment They say the mysteries of the Lords table be not only figures but haue the truth annexed No figures of grace differed but seales of mercy perfourmed in Christ and inioyed of vs no called figures or images of Christes flesh after consecration but bearing as well the names as the fruits and effects of the things themselues whose
peruert the meaning of Leo and if you did but vnderstand the right course of his reason you would suppresse both his voice and your vaunt for verie shame Phi. He that will trust your sayings shall haue manie false fiers when he should not Theo. And he that will credit your doings shall feele manie quick flames when he would not Phi. You be better at quipping than at answering Theo. You are lothe we should encroch on your common But returne to Leo. Can you tell against whome he wrote Phi. Against such as you are that denied the trueth of Christes bodie and blood in the Sacrament Theo. Were they men without names or names without men Phi. Mock not they were your auncetours Theo. They say it is a wise childe that knoweth his owne father Doe you But in sadnes whome did Leo traduce in that sermon Phil. Mary Eutiches and such like heretikes Theoph. You saie well for Leo nameth him but a litle before in that sermon and against his opinion he reasoneth Philand I am content with that Theoph. What was his error Phi. He denied the trueth of Christes bodie and blood in the Sacrament Theo. Who told you so Phi. I gather it by those that refute him Theo. By them you shall learne his error but this it was not Philan. What was it say you Theo. Eutiches affirmed that Christes humane nature and substance was not onely glorified by his ascension but consumed and turned into the nature immensitie of his Godhead Against him wrate Theodorete Gelasius and others and one of the cheefest argumentes which they bring against him is that which Leo here toucheth in a woorde or two Phi. That argument cleane confoundeth your sacramentarie Sect. Theo. Yours or ours it must needes confound for this it is As the bread and wine after consecration are changed and altered into the bodie and bloud of Christ so is the humane nature of Christ conuerted into his diuine after his resurrection ascension but the bread and wine are not changed neither in substance nor forme nor figure nor naturall proprieties but only in grace and working ergo Christs humane nature is not changed into his diuine EITHER IN SVBSTANCE circumscription or forme but only endewed with glory and immortalitie Phi. This is no Catholike reason but sauoreth altogether of your hereticall poison Theo. They which first framed and vrged this reason against Eutiches in your opinion were they heretikes Phi. No father euer vsed it Theo. If they did must not they be doubbed for heretikes as the first proposers of that reason or at least you for affirming now the quite contrarie For you reiect both their assumption conclusion against Eutiches as starke false and whose ancetour then is Eutiches but yours Phi. They do not vse it as you report it Theo. Looke you offspring of Eutiches whether Gelasius Theodoret and Augustine do not vrge it in those verie pointes and wordes which I repeate Thus Gelasius framed his reason against Eutiches An image or similitude of the bodie and bloud of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries It is therefore apparant and euident enough that we must holde the same opinion of Christ the Lord which we professe celebrate and receiue in his image That as those signes by the working of the holy Ghost passe into the diuine substance and yet remaine in the proprietie of their owne nature Euen so that verie principall mysterie it selfe whose force truth that Image assuredly representeth doth demonstrate one whole and true Christ to continue the two natures of which he consisteth properlie remaining And lest you should not vnderstand what he ment by this The signes still abide in the proprietie of their owne nature he expoundeth himselfe an saith Non desinit esse substantia vel natura panis vini The substance or nature of bread and wine ceaseth not or perisheth not When Theodoret had made an entrance to the very same reason by laying this foundation Oportet archetypum Imaginis esse exemplar the Originall must be answerable to the Image the heretike caught the words out of his mouth and said It hapned in good time that you did mention the diuine mysteries for euen thereby will I prooue the Lordes bodie to be chaunged into an other nature As then the signes of the Lordes bodie and blood are other thinges before the inuocation of the Priest but after they are chaunged and become other than that they were so the Lords bodie after his assumption is chaunged into his diuine substance The maior being good such as Gelasius and Theoderet did both auouch that as the signes were changed after consecration so was Christes humanitie after his assumption if your opinion had then beene taught in the church that the substance of bread and wine were changed by consecration the conclusion had beene infallible for Eutiches error that the substance of Christes humanitie had beene changed by his ascention into his diuinitie and not only both these Fathers had had their mouthes stopped but Eutiches error had beene inâ—olâ—ble as beeing grounded on a Maior that was a confessed and famous trueth and on a Minor that was as you thinke the vndoubted saith of the Church Mary the Minor in deed was apparantly false though you now defend it for Catholike Doctrine and with the plaine deniall of that as a manifest vntrueth Theodoret inferreth the contrarye that because neither the Substance nor naturall proprieties of the bread and wine are chaunged by consecration as the whole Church then beleeued and confessed therefore neither the substance nor shape nor circumscription of Chrisâ—es humane nature were changed by his ascention but his body remaineth in the â—ame substance quantitie and forme that he rose from death and ascended vp withall and with the very same forme and substance of flesh shall come to iudge the worlde These are his wordes Thou art caught saith Theodoret to the heretike with the same nets that thou laiedst for others The mysticall signes after sanctification doe not depart from their own nature For they remanie in their former substance and figure and forme c. Conferre then the Image with the originall and thou shalt see the likenes betweene them For the figure must be like to the trueth That body therefore of christ in heauen hath his former shape and figure circumscription to speake al at once his former substance Lay all your heades together aâ—d graunting the Maior which the whole Church held auoide the conclusion of Eutiches withâ—ut the denying the Minor as Theodoret did which yet is your faith and beleefe at this day and we wil grant you to be Catholiks and our selues heretikes If you cannot see how far you be falleÌ„ from the doctrine of Christs church and that in no lesse point than the greatest and chieâ—esâ— Sacrament on which you haue wickedly founded your adoration oblation halfe communion priuate masse and barbarous prayers without
the thinges themselues whose signes those are Philand It were Theophil Why then since corporall eating serueth only for corporall nourishing and hath a continuall and naturall coherence with it doe you confesse the trueth in the later and not as well in the former part of that action why doe you not expound them both alike Philand To say the immortall fleshe of Christ is conuerted and turned into the quantitie and substaunce of our mortall flesh is an horrible heresie Theophil And so say that his fleshe is eaten with our mouthes and â—awes lâ—â—th in our stomacks is the verie pathway right introduction to that heresie or at least to as brutish and grosse an erour as that is Philand The Fathers affirme that his body is eaten with our mouthes Theophil And so they affirme that his bodie and blood doe increase and augment the substaunce of our mortall and sinnefull bodies Philand But that can not bee Theophil No more can the other Philand Howe shall our bodies rise at the last day if Christes body bee not in them Theophil Our resurrection dependeth not on the act of eating his flesh but of nourishing our fleshe with his as Ireneus telleth vs and the thinges which wee eate are not the causes but as the great Nicene councell admonisheth the pledges of our resurrection Their words be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we must beleeue these to bee the signes or pledges of our resurrection Philand S. Chrysostom earnestly inforceth the eating of Christs flesh And sayth wee doe not onely eate it but euen * fasten our teeth in his fleshe Theo. In deede hee saith so but if you did not auert both your eyes and eares from the trueth you would perceiue by that verie sentence both the maner of his other Fathers speeches of that Sacrament and the right intent of their Doctrine in those cases His wordes are Non se tantum videri permittens desiderantibus sed tangi manducari dentes carni suae infigi desiderio sui omnes impleri Christ suffering himselfe not only to bee seene of those that are desirous but to bee touched and eaten and our teeth to bee fastned in his flesh and all to be satisfied of their longing after him Phi. Lord me thinketh these words be verie plain words He suffereth our teeth to bee fastned in his fleshe Theo. Uerie plaine they bee but very false also vnlesse you either take the flesh of Christ for the signe called by that name or else referre teeth and biting to the soule and faith of the â—â—ward man aâ— wel as you do the eyes hands wherewith we see him touch him Phi. Look what an â—â—â—sion you haue since gotten Theo. Nay looke what a subuersion of all truth and saith you be since fallen to Phi. Doth not this Father say wee fasten our teeth in his flesh Theo. Doeth hee not also say We see him with our eyes touch him with our handes Phi. That is referred to our faith as S. Ambrose teacheth Fide Christus videtur side Christus tangitur By faith Christ is seene by fayth Christ is touched Theoph. And why shall not the next which is more vnlikely to bee true bee referred to faith as well as the former Sainct Ambrose likewise saying Comedat te cor meuÌ„ panis sancte panis viue panis munde veni in cor meum intra in animam meam Let mine heart eate thee O holy bread O liuing bread O pure-bread come into my heart enter into my soule and Cyprian calling it the proper norishment of the spirite besides infinite others that for a thowsande yeares taught that doctrine in the church of God not your gutturall eating of Christ with teeth and iawes Phi. Was your maner of eating Christes fleshe which you defende in the sacrament taught in the church for a thowsande yeares Theop. Euen ours was and when yours came first to be proposed your schoolemen ran euery man his way fighting and scratching one an other â—ho should fal fastest and farthest from the truth Philand Blush you not to auouch two such monsterous lies Theop. A lyar will easily suspect any man as knowing him-selfe to delight in lies but GOD bee thanked that lyes with you bee truethes with vs and with all that haue any knowlegde of GOD or care of his truth The things which I affirmed be manifest truethes and such as you will blush at for verie shame if you be not sworne to your holie Father against Christ as well as you bee against your Prince Origen commenting vppon these wordes of the Supper this is my bodie this is my blood this breade sayeth hee which Christ confesseth to bee his bodie is the worde that nourisheth our soules and this drinke which hee confesseth to bee his blood is the worde that moysteneth and passinglie cheereth the heartes of such as drinke it Thou which art come vnto Christ sticke not in the blood of his fleshe but rather learne the blood of his worde and heare him saying to thee this is my blood which shall bee shedde for the remission of your sinnes Hee that is partaker of the mysteries knoweth the flesh and blood of the worde of God For the bread is the word of righteousnesse which our soules eating are nourished with and the drink is the worde of the knowledge of Christ according to the mysterie of his birth and death The blood of the Testament is poured into our heartes for the remission of our sinnes Athanasius Howe fewe men woulde his bodie haue sufficed that this shoulde bee the foode of the whole worlde Yea therefore doeth bee warne them of his ascension into heauen that he might drawe him from thinking on his bodie and they thereby learne that the flesh which he spake of was celestiall meate from aboue and spirituall nourishment to bee giuen by him The wordes which I spake to you are spirite and life which is as much as if hee had sayde this bodie which is in your sight and delyuered to death for the worlde shall bee giuen you for meate that it may bee spiritually distributed in euery one of you and be an assuraunce and preseruatiue to raise you to eternall life Cyprian writing of the Lordes Supper Eating and drinking saieth hee bee referred to the one and same end with the which as the substance of our bodies is increased and preserued so the life of the spirite is maintained with his proper nourishment What foode is to the fleshe that faith is to the soule what meate is to the body that the worde is to the spirite working euerlastingly with a more excellent vertue that which bodily meates doe for a time and vntill a season Ambrose approaching to the sacred communion which you intitle a prayer preparing to Masse amongest other thinges speaketh thus to Christ himselfe Thou Lord saydst with thine holy and blessed mouth the bread
doubted but the trueth was present with the signe the spirite with the sacrameÌ„t as Cyprian saith We knew there could not follow an operation if there went not a presence before Set a side your carnal imaginations of Christ couered with accidences his flesh chammed betweene your teeth and say what you will either of his inuiâ—â—ble presence by power and grace or of the spiritual and effectuall participation of his flesh and bloud offered and receiued of the faith-full by this Sacrament for the quickening and preseruing of their soules and bodies to eternall life we ioyne with you no wordes shal displease vs that any way declare the trueth or force of this mysterie Your locall compassing of Christ with the shewes and fantasticall appearances of bread wine your reall grinding of his flesh with your iawes these be the points that we deny to be Catholike these doe the fathers refute as erroneous and in these your owne fellowes be not yet resolued what to say or what to hold Phi. Be not we resolued what to hold of Christes reall being in the Sacrament and the corporall eating his flesh with our mouthes Theo. How you be secretly resolued I know not your iudgementes laid downe to the world in writing are cleane contrarie Phi. Ours Theo. Whose said I but yours Phi. Howsouer in other thinges we retaine the libertie of the Schooles to dispute pro con yet in this you shall finde vs all together Theo. Together by the eares as dogges for bones Omit your contentions what the pronowne H O C supposeth what the verbe E S T â—ignifieth when and how the bread is abolished whether by conuersion or annihilation what bodie succeedeth and whether with distinction of parts and extension of quantity or without what subiect the accidents haue to hang on whether the aire or the body of Christ what it is that soureth and putrifieth in the formes of bread and wine whether it be the same bodie that sitteth in heauen and if it be how so many contradictions may be verified of one the same thing Omit I say these with infinite other like contentions the corporall eating of christ with your mouthes are you all agreed about it Philan. We are Theo. Your two Seminaries are perhaps because they hearken rather for sedition in the realme than for Religion in the Schooles But the great Rabbins of your side are they in one opinion concerning this matter Phi. Great and small consent togither against you Theo. Against trueth they doe but in their owne fantasticall error they doe not The cheefest Pillours of your church when they come to that point which is now in handling wander in the desert of their owne deuises as men forsaking and forsaken of trueth Your Gloze is content if a man gape wide that the body of christ shall enter his mouth but he holdeth it for an heresie that the teeth should touch the same and therefore when the iawes beginne to close he dispatcheth away the body of christ in post towards heauen Certum est It is no coniecture but certaine that as soone as the formes of bread be pressed with the teeth tam cito presently the bodie of christ is caught vp into heauen Durandus is more fauourable to the teeth and will haue christ present in the mouth chamme he that list till his â—awes ake but hee is as strait laced against the stomack as the glozer is against the teeth and wil by no meanes haue the bodie of christ to passe thither building himselfe on these wordes of Hugo Christ is corporally present in visu in sapore whiles wee see or tast the sacrament As long as our bodily senses are affected so long his corporall presence is not remooued but when once the senses of our bodie beginne to faile that we neither see nor tast the formes then must wee seeke no longer for a corporall presence but retaine the spirituall because christ passeth from the mouth neither to heauen as the Gloze said nor to the stomack as the rest affirme but to the hart And better it is that he goe straight to the mind than descend to the stomacke Others is whome Bonauenture more inclineth will no way but Christ must take vp his lodging as wel in the stomacke as in the mouth maâ—y thence they suffer him not to wagge neither vpward nor downward whatsoeuer become of the accidentâ—l forms of bread and wine And lest it should be â—hought as Durand and Hugo say that the bodie of Christ goeth to the hart he repâ—ieâ—h that Quantum ad substantiam corporis certum est quod non vadit in meâ—tem sed vtrum sic vadâ—t in ventrâ—m dubium est propter diuersitatem opinionum as touching the substance of his bodie it is cleare that he passeth not to the mind but whether he so come that is in the substance of his bodie from the mouth to the belliâ— this is yet in doubt by reason of the diueâ—sitie of opinions in so great varietie what to hold is haâ—d to iudge Yet he liketh not that Aut mus in ventrem traijceret aut in cloacam descenderet the bodie of Christ shuld goe into the bellie of a mouse or be cast foorth by the draught because the eares of well disposed persons would abhorre that sidiceremus haeretici infideles deriderent nos irriderent and if we should defend that the heretiks and infidels would iest at vs and laugh vs to scorne This notwithstanding Alexander de Hales in spiâ—e of al heretikes and infidels â—entereth on it If a dog or an hogge saith he should eat the whole consecrated host I see no cause but the Lords bodie should goe therewithall into the bellie of that dog or hog Thomas of Aquine sharpely reprouâ—th them which thinke otherwise Some haue saide that as soone as the Sacrament is taken of a mouse or a dog streight way the bodie and bloud of Christ cease to be there but this is a derogation to the trueth of this Sacrament In â—auour of Thomas Petrus de Palude Ioannes de Burgo Nicolaus de Oâ—bellis with the whole sect of Thomists neither few in number nor mean in credite with the church of Rome defend the same yea where the master of the sentences seemed to shrinke from this loathsome position It may wel be said that the bodie of Christ is not receined of brute beasts the facultie of diuines in Paris with full consent gaue him this check here the master is refused And for feare lest the field should be wonne without him in steppeth Antonius Archbishoppe of Florence and recompenseth his late comming with his lewd writing First hee telleth how Petrus de Palude dressed the Glâ—ze for saying that Christ is caught vp to heauen as soone as the formes of the sacrament are pressed with our teeth Quod dicere est haereticum which
forme of a seruaunt Doubtlesse the perfection of mans nature The forme of a seruaunt is out of question the nature of a seruaunt sayeth Chrysostome Therefore Augustine him-selfe addeth this reason why Christ must not bee thought to bee euerie where present ne veritatem corporis auferamus Least wee take from him the trueth of his bodie concluding that Christ is euerie where per id quod Deus est by that nature which is God in coelo autem per id quod homo in heauen by that nature which is man Where these wordes that which is man interprete what he meane by the former speech wheÌ„ hee saide according to this forme Christ is not euerie where present But let the worde bee taken in your sense yet doth it fully confirme our assertion For humane forme and shape is inseparably ioyned to the substaunce of Christes bodie and Christes humane forme by your confession can not bee present in many places at one time ergo neither his humane substance These â—waine shape and substaunce can not bee seuered hee is no man that hath not the shape of man Now choose whether that bodie which as you say your hosts containe shall keepe the forme and shape of man or loose the nature and substaunce of Christ. For the Lord Iesus as man must haue not onely the substaunce but also the shape of a man So shall hee come as you haue seene him go to heauen that is saith Austen in the very same shape and substance of his flesh Our vile bodie saith Paul shall he change to bee fashioned like to his glorious bodie but our bodies shall then haue distinction of partes proportion of shape circumscription of place ergo the glorified body of Christ hath and must haue these very proprieties of our nature So that if his bodily shape can be but in one place his bodily substance can be in no moe Therefore saith Fulgentius Quod siverum est corpus Christi loco potest vtique contineri if Christ haue a true bodie that no doubt may be concluded in a place And Theodoret Illud enim corpus habet priorem formam figuram circumscriptionem vt semel dicam corporis substantiam that bodie which Christ caried to heauen with him hath the same forme figure circumscription at one word the same substance of a bodie which it had before Phi. S. Chrysostome and S. Ambrose affirme the contrary Theo. What affirme they Phi. That one and the some bodie of Christ is euerie where present Their words are Quoniâ—m multis in locis offertur multi Christi sunt â—equaquaÌ„ sed vnus vbique est Christus hic plenus existens illic plenus vnum corpus Because we offer in many places are there many Christs no by no meanes but one Christ is euery where here whole and there whole one body And S. Chrysostom exceedingly wondring at so miraculous a presence crieth out O the strangenes of the thing O the goodnes of our God! He that sitteth aboue with his Father in heauen at the verie moment of time is handled with the fingers of all men Theo. Make you Chrysostom and Ambrose the disciples of Eutyches Phi. Make you no worse reckoning of them than I do and they shall haue their due honor Theo. I thinke them to be farre from Eutyches errour Phi. And so doe I. The. Why then alleadge you their words for that erronious position which was condemned in Eutyches Phi. I alleadge them for the reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament Theo. Your reall presence and vbiquitie if you will haue Christs humane substance dispersed in many places without shape or circumscription are the verie bowels and inwardes of Eutyches heresie Phi. No Sir S. Chrysostom and S. Ambrose were no heretikes Theo. In deede they were not and therefore you doe them the more wrong to wrest their speeches to make for his madnes Philand We produce them to confirme a trueth Theophil The very same trueth that the church of Christ abhorred in Eutyches Phi. What did the church abhorre Theo. Euen this which you would proue by the words of Ambrose Chrysostom â—hat the flesh of Christ after his ascension was not locall nor circumscribed within any certaine place Phi. We grant the manhood of Christ in heauen is locall and circumscribed with place that setteth vs free from Eutyches errour Theo. It doeth if you constantly keepe that point of faith and contradict it not by an other deuise Phi. We verilie beleeue and publikely professe that Christes humane nature in heauen hath quantity shape distinction of parts circumscription and all other conditions of a naturall and true body what would you more Theo. We would no more but if you fall from that are you not within the compasse of Eutyches furie Phi. We fal not from it The. Then how can Christs body in the sacrament waÌ„t all these which christiaÌ„ religion affirmeth to bee permanent perpetual in the maÌ„hood of Christ or why would you collect out of Amb. or Chry. against the very principles of faith that Christes humane fleshe is vncircumscribed and euerie where diffused Philand Wee meane that of Christes fleshe in the Sacrament not of his manhood in heauen Theophil Bee there many Christes Philand Who sayth there are you heard that euen now reproued by S. Chrysostom and S. Ambrose as a wicked absurditie to say that there were many Christes And therefore they concluded there was but one Christ euerie where Theo. That one Christ hath hee many naturall and substantiall bodies Philand Why aske you those questions of vs we bee not infected with any such frensie Theo. You may the sooner answere Hath Christ two reall and naturall bodies the one in heauen the other in the Sacrament Phi. No this is all one with that Theo. That by the rules of your creede is locall and circumscribed if this bee the same howe can this bee without quantitie shape and circumscription Phi. Beleeue you not Christ when hee sayde this is my bodie Theop. Yeas veryly but you so expound his words that you subuert the whole frame of his truth and our common faith with your reall and locall presence Phi. Do we subuert the common faith with our opinion Theo. Our Christian faith is this Wee must beleeue sayeth Augustine the Sonne of God according to the substance of his Deitie to be inuisible incorporall and vncircumscribed but according to his humane nature to be visible corporall and locall You heard Vigilius the martyr say For so much as the word is euery where and the fleshe of Christ not euery where it is cleare that one and the same Christ is of two natures eueriwhere according to the nature of his Diuinity and contained in a place according to the nature of his humanitie and this sayeth hee is the catholike fayth confession which the Apostles deliuered the Martyrs confirmed
the faithfull stand in to this day This faith and confession if you infringe of violate you ioyne handes with Eutyches against the church of God and against the groundes of our common creede and this you must needes impugne if you defend the naturall body of Christ to be euery where present as you would gather out of Ambroses and Chrysostomes wordes Philand Wee say not euerie where but in the Sacrament Theoph. But their wordes are euerie where Vnus vbique est Christus one Christ is euerie where Philand That is in the Sacrament Theophil That is your additament They say generally one Christ is euerie where Phil. To say that his humane nature is euerie where without any restraint were in deede a braunch of Eutyches errour Theophil And since they say so you must either vnderstande it of his diuine nature which is rightly and truely sayde to bee euerie where present without addition or else of the spirituall and effectuall presence of his bodie which entereth the soules and strengthneth the hearts of all the faythfull by the power of his grace and trueth of his promise And either of these wayes their wordes are verie sound your locall presence no part of their speech Phi. S. Chrysostom saith Omnium manibus pertractatur he is eueÌ„ handled with al men fingers Theo. You do that father very much wrong to wrest his eloquent and figuratiue speeces to your carnall and grosse surmises The verie tenor of his wordes wil declare that hee meaneth nothing lesse than your corporal and locall touching With our bodily hands wee neither can nor doe touch Christ. S. Ambrose saith Non Corporali tactu ChristuÌ„ sed fide tangimus We touch not Christ with our fingers but with our faith And so S. Austen Ipsum iam in caelo sedentem manu contrectare non possimus sed fide contingere We cannot handle Christ with our fingers sitting now in heauen but with our faith we may In this sense Chrysostomes wordes are very true but nothing to your corporall vbiquitie of Christs flesh Phi. How shall wee know that this was his meaning finding no words of his to direct vs to that sense Theo. His speech is otherwise so false that none but Iesuits would make any doubt of it And yet the very next wordes before these are a plain admonition to the hearers what to conceiue of this such like places Annon euestigio in caelos transferris annon carnis cogitationem omnem abijâ—iens nudo animo mente pura circumspicis quae in caelo sunt Art thou not presently caried vppe to heauen Doest thou not casting all cogitation of thy fleshe aside with a pure mind and soul seuered from the bodie looke round on the things which are in heauen In this spirituall and yet hyperbolicall vehemencie he goeth on amplifieng euery poinct saying that Christ is handled with al their fingers and that in the open sight of all that stoode about concluding no corporall or locall comprehension of Christ in the Sacrament by any of these mysticall and figuratiue speaches whereof he is ful but only that grace flowing into the Sacrifice should inflame all their hearts and make them cleaner than siluer purged and tried in the fier This is the presence of Christ which Chrysostome auoucheth euen the influence of his heauenly grace that spiritual force and grace as Gregorie saith may very wel be constered to be the trueth of his bodie and bloud in the mysteries So that the same christ is euery where present not by local or corporal diffusion but by mysticall operation and one bodie is proposed to all not to â—ill their mouthes but to clense their hearts and to giue them assurance of eternall life Phi. May not the body of Christ in the sacrament bee such as wee defend though his bodie in heauen be not Theo. If the body of Christ in the sacrament be the very same that is in heauen how can it so much differ from it If it be an other how can it be his since he hath but one naturall bodie and that by no meanes capeable of such contrarieties as you imagine Phi. Is not Christ omnipotent Theo. Almightie hee is in working his will not in changing his nature Phi. Wil you limite his might Theo. The christian faith is not repugnant to his might but agreeable to his trueth which you may not subuert with a pretence of his power at your pleasures Tertullian saith very wel If in our owne presumption we abruptly vse this reasoâ— nothing is hard to God wee may faine what we list of God as though he had doone it because he could do it We must not because he can doe all things therefore beleeue he hath doone that which he hath not But we must search whether he hath doone it or no. For this respect some things may be hard vnto God himselfe to witte that which he hath not doone not because he could not doe it but because he would not Phi. Can not the power of Christ alter the nature of his manhoode Theo. Were it possible that the manhoode of Christ might be changed and altered in his essentiall proprieties which assertion the Church yet alwayes reiected as hereticall why stand you so much on this what Christ can doe when you plainly perceiue by your Creed what Christ will doe Shal his power ouerthwarte his will Or his arme disappoint his mouth We neede not dispute whether it be possible or no this sufficeth vs that the Lorde himselfe saith he will leaue the world and be no more in the worlde Whatsoeuer he can doe this we be sure he will doe his worde is trueth and his will knowen against that if you stand and oppose his power to make him a lyar assure your selues hee hath power enough to be reuenged on your obstinacie for vrging his power which is no part of your care against his wil which he hath commanded you to beleeue and obay Phi. It is you that neither beleeue his wil nor agnise his power we build our selues on both Theo. His wordes by which you gather his will you â—rame and inuert to your owne purposes and when we would reduce you from the misconstruction of his speach by the very tenor of the Christian faith you pleade his power to delude his trueth and ouerflorish a lewd heresie with a shew of his omnipotencie Phi. We do not pretend that power of God for any vntrueth Theo. If the Christian faith bee trueth you vrge his power against his trueth Phi. Go we against the Christian faith Theo. Confesse you the distinction of two natures in Christ after his ascension Phi. We do Theo. And the proprieties of either to remaine without confusion conuersion or alteration Philand What els Theophil This then is the Christian faith that hâ—th natures in Christ now doe and euer shall keepe and continue their seuerall and different proprieties without
failing or changing Phi. That we beleeue Theo. How theÌ„ can the manhood of Christ be in many places at one time Or how can it in any place or time be without shape quantitie circumscription and such like proprieties of mans nature Phi. In heauen it hath them Theo. If they can not be changed or altered the manhoode of Christ must haue them not in heauen only but in earth also in euery place where the substance of his bodie is Philand Saue in the Sacrament Theophi If that be the same bodie which was on the Crosse it must haue the same natural proprieties of a body which that had Phi. It hath as many as it may Theo. It must haue as many as it should Phi. Which be they Theo. Proportion of shape distinction of parts extension of quantitie circumscription of place and the very same substance of fleshe which hee tooke of his mother Marie Phi. You name these things which you see bee not in the Sacrament Theophi I name those which the manhood of Christ must haue wheresoeuer it be Phi. Must haue What necessitie is in that Theo. As much as the denying of your faith contradicting of his trueth For these proprieties the body had that hung on the Crosse and without these hee can be no true man Philan. In heauen we tell you he hath them Theophil And in the Sacrament wee tell you â—ee hath them not Ergo the manhoode of Christ is not in the Sacrament Phi. Cannot Christ be where he list without those consequents Theo. His bodie can not Phi. Doe not you nowe deny him to be omnipotent Theophi Doe not you now alleadge his power to frustrate both his will and your faith Philand You hold christ cannot if he would Theo. We say christ would not though he could And since his will is euident by his worde as our common faith auoucheth you doe wickedly to crosse his will with his power and make his might attendant on your follies Dei velle posse est non posse nolle The power of God which we must stand on is his wil and that which he will not that he cannot You must not therefore imagine what you list and then ground vpon the power and strength of GOD it is error and impietie whatsoeuer is repugnant to his trueth and to father your falsehoodes on his almightie power is irreuerent and insolent blasphemie Phi. You doe not so much as confesse that he can doe it and that causeth vs to suspect you doubt of Gods omnipotencie Theo. Because we suffer you not to vnload your absurdities and impieties on Gods power at your pleasures Philand First graunt hee can doe it and of that wee will commune afterward Theo. What shall I graunt Phi. That Christ according to his corporall presence may be in many places at one time if it please him Theo. What then shal become of S. Austen that said Christ could not concerning his corporall presence be at one time in the sunne in the moone and on the crosse And of S. Cyril affirming that Christ could not be conuersant with his Apostles after he once ascended If hee could not bee in three places at one time how could hee bee in moe If not in earth when he was in heauen how both in heauen and earth as you your selues conceiued and woulde haue vs confesse And yet the thing which we withstand is far more impossible than this For the manhoode of Christ by the tenour of the christian faith hath and must haue after his ascension humane shape partes length breadth both extended circumscribed and otherwise to thinke is the wicked and cursed opinion of Eutyches condemned long since by the church of God for a meere impietie You to auoide the burdeÌ„ of that sentence confes these properties are must be permaneÌ„t in the body which our sauiour tooke of the virgin wherein he now sitteth at the right hand of God his father marie the selfesame bodie you defend to bee in the sacrament without shape partes length or breadth either extended or circumscribed which is wee say simplie impossible For shaped not shaped extended not extended circumscribed not circumscribed be plaine contradictions those of one thing at one time are not possible Phi. Is any thing impossible to God Theo. Doth not the Apostle say Negare seipsum non potest God cannot deny himselfe Impossibile est Deum mentiri it is impossible that God should lie S. Austen well noteth Dicitur omnipotens faciendo quod vult non patiendo quod non vult vnde propterea quaedam non potest quia est omnipotens God is said to be omnipotent in doing that he will not in suffering that hee will not And therefore can he not doe some things because he is omnipotent And S. Ambrose likewise Quid ergo ei impossibile Non quod virtuti arduum sed quod naturae eius contrarium What then is impossible to God not that which passeth his power but that which is contrarie to his nature Impossibile istud non infirmitatis sed virtutis maiestatis quia veritas non recipit mendacium nec Dei virtus leuitatis errorem This impossibilitie proceedeth not of infirmitie but of might and maiestie because the trueth of God admitteth not a lie nor the power of God any note of inconstancie So that all changes against his nature or falshoods against his trueth bee vtterly impossible to GOD and that because hee is almighty Phi. That we know Theo. Then this also you must needs know that contradictions be impossible for of theÌ„ if one part be true the other is euer false and that God should be false it is not possible You must therfore either with Eutyches affirme the manhood of christ to be changed from his former shape partes quantitie and circumscription and consequently from his former substance or els against religion and learning reason and sense defend contradictions that is trueth and falshoode to bee possible both at one time which is nothing but to make God a liar in his workes as you be in your wordes for maintaining that error Phi. At diuers times and in 〈…〉 contradictions may bee true Theo. There can be but one part 〈…〉 other at the same instant is ineuitablie false and as for your 〈…〉 the proprieties of christes bodie which wee speake of bee absâ—lute and inherent necessities no relations nor comparisons you may keepe them for some better â—art in this assertion they will doe you no seruice Phi. What if we say the bodie of christ in the Sacrament hath the same proportion of shape extension of partes and circumscription of place which it hath in heauen how can you refell vs Theo. Neuer take the paiâ—es to incur new contradictions a shorter answer will serue you for all and that is say you beleeue you cannot tell what For otherwise men
depart because he that is the author of the gift is also the witnesse of the trueth For the inuisible priest turned the visible creatures into the substance of his bodie and bloud with his word and secret power saying take eate this is my body and repeating the sanctification he saide take drinke this is my bloud Therefore as at the Lordes becke commaunding the high heauens the deepe waters the wide earth were made on the suddaine of nothing so with like force in the spiritual Sacraments when his power commandeth the effect followeth These words be plaine enough if either truth or authority can content you The. Either shal content me if I may be sure of either Phi. Here you find both Theo. Who wrate this sermon which you cite Phi. Eusebius Emissenus Theo. When liued he Phi. Why doe you aske Theo. Reason we knowe his age before we receiue his testimonie Phi. His age I can tell you is as ancient as his doctrine Theo. I thinke both of one antiquity For neither the maÌ„ nor the matter were knowen in the church of Christ for 900. yeares and vpward Phi. How you be deceiued S. Hierom maketh mention of Eusebius Emissenus that wrate short homilies vpon the Gospels somewhat before his time Theo. And that made your fellowes put his name to certaine latine homilies that were none of his and to beare men in hand he was a frenchman but when he liued they can not tell Phi. Yes S. Hierom saieth hee died vnder Constantius more than twelue hundred yeares ago Theo. Eusebius Emissenus then wrate and then died but who wrate these latine homilies that were extant in his name Phi. Himselfe Theo. What countriman was he Phi. I thinke a Frenchman Theo. So Canisius both your collegue and the compiler of your huge chaos or catechisme sayeth marie when he liued that hee could not tell and therefore of his owne authoritie placeth him 200. yeres after S. Hierom with a perchaunce least if we should aske him for his proofe he might be taken with a lie His wordes are Eusebius Emissenus Gallus cuius habentur homiliae hoc fortè tempore claruit Eusebius Emissenus of Fraunce whose homilies wee haue extant perhaps liued at this time that is 500. yeres after Christ. Phi. And so it may be The. But this is not he that S. Hierom speaketh of For he died vnder CoÌ„stantâ—us whose raign and life ended 343. after Christ. Phi. The elder hee was the better his credit for this question Theo. But the worst is that Eusebius Emissenus was a Bishop in Syria wrate in greeke and therefore to assigne him latine homilies and to suppose him to bee a frenchman was a very grosse corruption and such as children will deride Phi. Might there not be an other of that name Theo. Ye as in that place but in Fraunce there could bee none Phi. Why not Theo. Because Emesenus doth signifie Bishop of Emesa in Syria where this Eusebius liued and as S. Hierom writeth was buried at Antioch the chiefe Metropolis of Syria Phi. But this is Eusebius Emissenus which Gratian alleadgeth Theo. It is not the first word by fiue hundred that Gratian hath altered For Eusebius Emesenus Sainct Hieroms certificate is verie good for Eusebius Emissenus the first record that we finde is in Gratian where by the verie stile periods casures members and agnominations you may perceiue him to be a latinist as Canisius addetâ— a Frenchman Now in what age he liued in what place he preached we require some proofe before we can or will admit these things to be his which you haue forged in his name Emissenus must be a deriuatiue from some place shew any such place in Europe and then you saie somewhat for the likelyhood though not enough for the certainty of this writer Philand What if we can not Theophil Then hee that hath but halfe an eye may soone discerne 〈◊〉 treacherie Your Monks Friers seeking to colour their fained holines late sprong faith with the reuereâ—d titles of aâ—cient fathers prâ—fered the names of Austen Ambrose HieroÌ„ Cyprian Isidore others before diuerse of their own dâ—â— fe◠〈…〉 finding in S. Hierom Eusebius Emesenus to be an old writer gaue him a new liuerie with the rest and ascribed certaine latin homilies such as they had vnto him whom themselues or Gratian that first lighted on this old new writer corruptly called Eusebius Emissenus And because the forgerie did hardly hang together the right Eusebius beeing a Gretian and of great antiquity Canisius the generall Atturnie for your religion hath deuised twoe more of that name one a french-man that perchance he saith florished in the fift Centurie and an other that wrate after Gregory the great and expounded the ghospels but when either of them liued or where they taught neither he nor you can bring vs any proofe besides your bare and vaine supposals Phi. Wil you not trust the inscription of the worke it selfe Theo. That were the way to let euery frier and forgerer create new fathers at his pleasure It is as easie for them that copie out other mens workes to make false as true inscriptions and so haue your Monkes plaied with euery father that was ancient as the most partiall of your owne side doe confesse and in this is too apparent For how many mens names thinke you did this homilie beare which you alleadge not yet two hundreth yeres ago Phi. What can I tel Theo. Then I can Looke in Walden and in one Chapter you shal find this very sermon beare three mens names Phi. Is that possible Theo. The lesse possible the thing the more palpable your forging In the 67 chapter his aduersarie alleaged the woordes which you bring out of Isidore in his sermon beginning with Magnitudo caelestium That Walden doth not much impugne but very often so calleth him and yet at length remembring himselfe he or some man for him yeeldeth to the decrees and calleth that writer Eusebius Emisenus by Gratians authority marie with a single s where now a double is gotten both into the worde and into Gratian and yet in the 68 chapter forgetting what he him selfe or others for him had done he citeth an other part of the same sermon vnder Anselmus name Ratificat eandem coÌ„parationem in sermone sâ—pe dicto qui incipit Magnitudo caelestiuÌ„ Anselmus dicens This comparison Anselmus doth ratifie in his sermon often spoken of which beginneth Magnitudo caelestium though afterward in the same chapter he returne againe to his former staggering and call the writer of your wordes Isidore or rather Eusebius Phi. Let him be Isidore or Eusebius we care not whether Theo. Since the Sermon is not his whose name it beareth we may not suffer you to choppe names as you list neither neede we so much as regard the words before wee know the author lest we reuerence lewd and late