of the new TestameÌ„t to be without external Sacrifice and Priesthod propre to that state he should seme to haue deliuered vnto his people not the Testament of grace but a state of ire and wrath yea of more wrath then was the state of the Iewish people But whereas he saith him selfe Esai 61. that he came praedicare annuÌ„ Domini acceptuÌ„ to preache the acceptable yeare of our Lorde Luc. 4. that is to say the time of grace mercie and saluation and sith that S. Paul saith 2. Cor. 6. Behold now is the acceptable time beholde now is the day of saluation verely assured we are forasmuch as to euery lawe ordeined by God Sacrifice and Priesthod belongeth propre and conuenient to the same that God would not suffer his most deare people of the newe TestameÌ„t his best beloued spouse the Church to be without external Sacrifice and Priesthod the lacke whereof was sometimes threatened to the Iewes for a greuous plague Neither to say the trouth could it in any wise seme conuenieÌ„t that that ReligioÌ„ which of al that euer haue ben is most absolute should lâ—cke that Seruice and wourship wherby the external and propitiatorie sacrifice is offred which Seruice hath alwaies ben most highly estemed in euery ReligioÌ„ not only in that which is true and instituted of God but also in that which is false and deuised by the enuie and suggestion of the Deuil wherein he endeuoureth al that he can that the Image of the true Religion as muche as may be be expressed and liuely set forth Forasmuche then as in the olde Testament The Sacrifice of the Churche as S. Paule witnesseth there wanted perfection by reason of the weakenes and vnhablenes of the Leuitical Priesthoode for the lawe brought nothing to perfection it behoued Heb. 7. God the Father of mercie so disposing that an other Priest after the order of Melchisedek should rise who might make perfite al that were to be sanctified This Priest was Iesus Christe our Lorde and God Who whereas he came not to loose the Lawe in asmuch as it was Natural Mat. 5. or Moral but rather to fulfil the Law when he brought his new Lawe into the worlde so much promised before in Ieremie Ierem. 31. and th' other Prophetes least he should haue least it maimed and vnperfit in this behalfe coÌ„trarywise then the manner of the former lawes of nature and of Moyses was either of which had outward sacrifice furnished it with a peculiar Sacrifice and Priesthod For it could not otherwise be but that when a new Lawe tooke place Sacrifice propre to that Lawe should go with it and Priestes likewise as Ministers of the same Sacrifice For according to the Doctrine of S. Paule Lawe Sacrifice and Priesthode go euer together Therefore though he would once offer him selfe Heb. 7. vnto God the Father vppon the Aulter of the Crosse with Death that he might there pay the price of the raunsom of the worlde and worke euerlasting Redemption yet bicause his Priesthod was not to be extinguished and ended by Death and euery Priesthod requireth a proper Sacrifice at his last Supper in the night that he was betrayed that he might leaue vnto his Deare Spouse the Churche a visible Sacrifice as the nature of men required whereby that blouddy Sacrifice once to be made vpon the Crosse might be represented and the Memorie of it kepte and the healthful Vertue of it appyled vnto vs and God duely recognized at the same Supper declaring him selfe to be constituted a Priest after the order of Melchisedek according to the dutie of Priesthoode he offered vp vnto God the Father his body and bloude vnder the formes of bread and wine and deliuered the same vnto the Apostles whom then he made Priestes of the newe Testament that they should receiue them and by these wordes Hoe facite in meam coÌ„memorationem Luc. 12. Doo ye this in my remembrance 1. Cor. 11. vnder whiche request that his whole action is comprehended he gaue commaundement to them and to their Successours in Priesthoode to offer vp the same Thus the Churche hath alwaies vnderstanded thus it hath taught thus it hath beleued In witnesse hereof S. Ireneus speaking of that which Christe did at his Supper Iren. lib. 4. cap. 32. saith Noui Testamenti nouam docuit oblationem He taught the new oblation of the newe testament And this is the doctrine of the Catholike Churche touching the Sacrifice of the newe Testament simply declared which Sacrifice is now according to our Lordes Institution and commaundement offered daily by Priestes in this office the Apostles successours Neither saith S. Irenaeus of this Oblation onely that it is the newe Oblation of the newe Testament Ibidem and that Christe taught it but also that the Churche receiuing it of the Apostles doth offer this Sacrifice to God in vniuerso mundo in the whole worlde Wherefore it is mere madnesse yea if we would speake as S. Augustine speaketh in euery the like case it is most insolent madnesse August Epist. 118. ad Ianuar. to dispute whether in the Masse there be a Sacrifice and oblation or no and whether the same ought to be continued seing that the whole Churche through the worlde doth celebrate and frequent it For good proufe of it we haue the Scriptures Auctorities for the sacrifice of the Aulter the Doctours of al ages the auncient Councels the sense practise and vse of the vniuersal Churche As for the Scriptures I thinke it ynough here only to note certaine places Scripturâ— for the Sacrifice that be alleged for it They are these the Institution of Christe described in the Ghospel the prophecie of Malachie the Fignre of Melchisedek Vnto whiche may be added the manifest place of the first Epistle to the Corinthians Luc. 22. where S. Paule saith Malach. 1. they could not be made partakers of the Table of our Lorde Gen. 14. who had defiled them selues with taking parte of the Table of Deuils 1. Cor. 10. where by Table he vnderstandeth in bothe places the Aulter whereon the prophane meates were offered to Deuils among the Gentiles and the Euchariste is consecrated and offered vp vnto God among the true beleeuers whereof Sacrifice is concluded For by those woordes it is manifest that S. Paule doth compare our Euchariste in respecte of Sacrifice to the Sacrifices of the olde lawe and to the Sacrifices of the Deuils Whiche thing he would not haue done onlesse he had ben assured and onlesse it had ben wel knowen to the ChristiaÌ„ people that the Euchariste is so a true Sacrifice as those that were offered to God in the olde Testament and as those that of thâ— Gentiles were offred to Deuils Doctours for prouf of the Sacrifice As for the Doctours their witnesses for proufe hereof be in manner infinite In al their writinges whereof speake they so often as of this Sacrifice Many
special kings bearing rule not only ouer them selues yea though perhaps not ouer them selues sometimes which may be said for some parte of them but at the least ouer their Subiectes notwithstandinge that al the faithful people through Christ whose members thei are be made by Baptisme kinges ouer their own soules and bodies So there be special Priestes in the newe Testament called and appointed to that function albeit al Christians be spiritual Priestes as being the membres of the highest Priest Iesus Christe Here I thinke good to fore warne the Reader that bicause I am constrained by the Replie to make a distinction betwen these two termes Sacerdos and Presbyter Presbyter Sacerdos Priest Sacrificer by which the persons of the highest order in the Church be called and in our English tongue there want two distinct termes correspondent to them the name of Priest seruing to both as the common vse hath receiued I wil for a fewe leaues that my talke may be more distincte and better perceiued vse the terme Sacrificer for the Latine worde Sacerdos and the terme Priest for the worde Presbyter When therfore I shal name a Sacrificer that is to be vnderstanded which this worde Sacerdos signifieth and likewise Priest shal be that which is signified by the worde Presbyter Thus I require the vse of an vnwoont terme to be taken in good part for so good and profitable a cause After a fewe leaues I wil returne to the vse of the accustomed terme Priest whether the Latine where vnto it shal answer be Sacerdos or Presbyter And now to come againe froÌ„ wheÌ„ce I haue thus digressed If for the force of the former coÌ„parison M. Iewel wil coÌ„fesse that there be certaine special persons chosen and sent to beare in the congregatioÌ„ certaine offices which euery man vpon the coÌ„mission of their general Priesthod may not adueÌ„ture vpon without a special coÌ„mission and appointement and those persons be of the Fathers by an abuse of the worde called Sacerdotes Sacrificers wheras in deede and properly they are to be called Presbyteri Priestes Elders or Ministers to this I reply graunting and coÌ„fessing that such persons called to these special functions were at the beginning and may now also be called Priests aÌ„d Ministers That there be novve in the Churche vvho ought properly to be called Sacerdotes that is Sacrificers But I deny vtterly that the same may not ne ought not properly to be called Sacrificers Yea doubtlesse the name of a Sacrificer doth more aptly and properly agree vnto theÌ„ theÌ„ doth the terme Priest or Minister For of these termes the one rather declareth the age or auncient grauitie which is most seemely in these persons then expresseth their office The other through the largenes of the significatioÌ„ is such as may be applied as wel vnto Maiors of Cities and temporal Iudges ministring Iustice as vnto those persons that minister and dispeÌ„se the mysteries of God But the terme Sacrificer doth properly extend only to those who haue auctoritie to coÌ„secrat the Body and Bloud of Christ aÌ„d be by special vocatioÌ„ ministers and dispensers of most holy things which ministratioÌ„ aÌ„d dispeÌ„satioÌ„ is to be fouÌ„d in the Church only To him that perhaps wil reply VVhy S. Paule calleth them Priestes rather then Saâ—crificers and demaunde why then did S. Paule as it were of purpose shuÌ„ning the terme Sacrificer alwaies cal them Priestes or Ministers I answer S. Paule had iust cause so to doe The which cause learned men shewe to be for that in his time the olde Law and Priesthod of the same was yet amoÌ„g the Iewes fresh in estimatioÌ„ and stickte so in their coÌ„science as they could not vpon the soudaine be remoued from the obseruation of their accustomed ReligioÌ„ deliuered vnto them of God by Moyses his special prophete S. Paule therfore with other the first setters forth of Christes Law the Gospel preaching coÌ„tinually of the end of the old Law aÌ„d of the ceassing aÌ„d abrogatioÌ„ of the Sacrifices thought it coÌ„uenient for a time to forbeare the name of Sacrificer and to cal the spiritual officers by the name of Priests aÌ„d Ministers least the Iewes hearing the termes of their owne ReligioÌ„ might falsly suppose no differeÌ„ce or preemineÌ„ce to be betwen the office aÌ„d officers of the new and their ReligioÌ„ that is to say of the new and old TestameÌ„t And this warenesse of speaking coÌ„tinued vntil IerusaleÌ„ After the destruction of IerusaleÌ„ the olde terme Sacrificer vvas resumed and vsedâ— and the TeÌ„ple it self wher only their Sacrifices were to be made were destroyed at what time the kingdom Priesthode and rite of Sacrificing of the Iewes was quite ended and takeÌ„ away FroÌ„ theÌ„ce forth to this time the learned Fathers haue coÌ„moÌ„ly without feare or doubte resumed the termes of Priesthod and Sacrificers and applied theÌ„ to the spiritual ministerie administers of the Church This cause being knowen and wel weighed bewrayeth M. Iewels ignoraÌ„ce or folieâ— affirmiÌ„g the Fathers to haue vsed the termes Sacrifice Sacrificer aÌ„d Aulter for that the Iewes aÌ„d the GeÌ„tils eares were wel acquainted with these termes Where as contrary wise the first Preachers of Christian Religion absteined from those woordes bicause the same were vnto them vsual and familiar least by the vse of theÌ„ some errour or inconuenience might chaunce to growe Ansvvere to M. Ievvels authorities Now to answer the authorities first whereas Pachymeres is haled in whether he wil or no to be a witnesse in this wrong cause let it be considered how iniurious M. Iewel is in that he bindeth other men to Doctours and Councels of the first six hundred yeres after Christe only and here vseth him selfe the auctoritie of so late a writer as Pachymeres is And therefore sith that he hath first broken his owne Lawe and the bonde of the couenances we thinke it right he beare with vs if sometime we allege Doctours and Councels though some deale beneath the first sixe hundred yeres yet auncienter and of farre better auctoritie then Pachymeres a writer of Notes vpon S. Dionyse hath euer ben accompted of Next how proueth Pachymeres the purpose for which he is brought in Be it graunted that S. Dionyse writing to Sopater being a Priest calleth him a Sacrificer and that custome hath now obteined a Priest or Elder to be named a Sacrificer as Pachymeres saith what can be concluded of al this Wil it folow hereof that Sopater was no true Sacrificer but onely a figuratiue Sacrificer And that the name of a Priest doth more aptlye expresse the office of the stewardes of Gods Mysteries in the Churche then doth the terme Sacrificer Nothing lesse This is it only that wil folow that the dispensatours of those spiritual treasures were called by both the names of a Priest and of a Sacrificer euen from the beginning of the Churche a shorte time only excepted vntil the Iewish Synagogue was buried and almost forgotteÌ„ After which time the
may suffice in their behalfe that Sacrifices and other godly workes offered and done for them may helpe them Wherefore as S. Athanasius S. Chrysostom Damascen and the more parte of the auncient Fathers doo witnesse it descended by Tradition from the Apostles that this vnbloudy Sacrifice be continually offered for them Now then Christian Reader thou hast here declared vnto thee those pointes that I promised in the beginning what is Sacrifice being considered either as it is taken for the Action of offering or for the giftâ— offered for what consideration it is due vnto God that it is most conuenient for our nature that it be visible that the rite of sacrificing hath ben by God bothe engraffed in the mindes of men before the Lawe and commaunded in the Lawe That for loue of his Churche our Lorde Instituted the singular Sacrifice of his body and bloude at his last Supper How those foure thinges be in this singular Sacrifice whiche S. Augustine teacheth to be required in euery Sacrifice lastly for whom this Sacrifice is offered by what waies it is auaileable for man what effectes it bringeth forth Some here perhaps do wish that I said somewhat in defence of the Prayers that be commonly said in the Masse about the Oblation of this vnblouddy Sacrifice The Praiers of the Masse godly and without superstition and of the Ceremonies whiche the Churche vseth in the celebration of the same for our Aduersaries by diuers waies labour to bring them in contempte As touching the Canon of the Masse what parte of it M. Iewel reproueth as blasphemous in this Reiondre I doo sufficiently defend Pag. 123. b. item pag. 254. b. c. Ambro. de SacrameÌ„t lib. 4. c. 4. as godly and holy and such as may worthily seme meeâ—e to be said at the celebratioÌ„ of these Mysteries As for al the rest that is said for so much as therein as S. Ambrose saith Praise is deferred to God prayer is made for the people for Kings and for al men and for al our necessities briefly â—ith nothing is done but that which S. Paule exhorteth to be done in his epistle to Timothe 1. Tim. 2. whereof we spake before what is there that M. Iewel or any of that side or Sathan him selfe the great enemie of this Sacrifice can finde fault withal Concerning the Ceremonies vsed in the Masse Ceremonies vsed in the celebration of the Masse which consiste in the behauiour Gesture Mouinges and Signes of the Priest whereat also these men beare great spite they be void of superstition and free from al iuste reproche bicause they be onely such as put vs in minde of some special thing touching the Incarnation Birth Life Preaching Death and Resurrection of Christe which perteineth to the stirring vp of Deuotion and to the commaundement of Christe the more conueniently to be obserued For whereas he commaunded vs Luc. 22. that what he did we should doo the same it may reasonably seeme to be our duetie that as he did and after what manner he did we also doo likewise Verily the Ceremonies which we vse be of more antiquitie represent thinges of more excelleÌ„cie and through the practise of the whole Churche of Christe be of more auctoritie then that by the doctrine of any new Gospel it may now towarde the time of Antichriste seeme either necessarie or conuenient that they be changed And to thintent these ouerthrowers of al auncient Religion and setters vp of their owne Nouelties haue ceremonies in lesse contempte let vs consider whether Christe him selfe who first of al celebrated Masse at his last Supper 1. Tim. 2. and did those things which S. Paule requiteth in his epistle to Timothee obserued not certaine Ceremonies Ceremonies vsed by our Sauiour him selfe muche like to ours He layd downe his garment he girded him selfe he kneeled or stooped downe he washed his Disciples feete he gaue thankes to his Father he consecrated and offered vp vnto him his Body and Bloude Iohan. 17. he spake vnto his Disciples he admonished he taught he comforted them he lifted vp his eyes vnto heauen he prayed vnto the Father for them and for vs. 1. Cor. 11. S. Paule straitly forbiddeth a man to pray or prophecie in the Churche with coouered head If the Catholikes without expresse Scripture though moued with the like reason that moued S. Paule had so ordeined these men would haue cried out that it had bene superstitious Touching this mater here to speake of al it were very long and a thing meete for a special booke to be written thereof rather then for the breuitie of a Preface Therefore I let passe much that might wel be recited out of S. Dionyse the Areopagite S. Iustine the Martyr Tertullian Innocentius the firste and others that of these thinges haue written Hovv ceremonies may be vsed with out superstitioÌ„ Certaine it is that the Ceremonies we vse be not superstitious For that we iudge to be superstitious whiche being vsed in place of Gods seruice perteineth not to the wourship of God nor to the loue of our neighbour And whereas the worship of God is double for so muche as we haue from him both thâ— inward and the outward good thinges then is it duely and lawfully and without al superstition done when the outwarde thinges by some publique auctoritie as from God for al power is of God or by a certaine leading of nature be ordeined vnto an inward reuerence and a duetiful kindnes towardes God to be stirred vp nourrished and continued For the mouing it selfe of the soule as saith S. Augustine so long as it is yet lapped within earthly thinges August ad Ianuar. epist. 119. is but slowly inflamed but if it be carried vnto bodily likenesses and thence be carried vnto the spiritual thinges that by those likenesses be figured with the passing it selfe as it were from the one to the other it is quickened and being stirred as fyre in a fyrebrande it is enkindled and with a more ardent loue it is pulled vnto her rest and quiet Therefore the vse of comely Ceremonies moueth the minde more then if the thinges by them signified were vttered naked and without similitudes of Sacramentes as there also he saith And this is the meaning of al the outwarde Rites The meaning of the Ceremonies vsed in the celebration of the Masse that be obserued in the Masse As for example the Priestes Vestimentes doo signifie either the garmentes of Christe with which he was mockt either the new condition of the new man or the Incarnation of the new King His comming vnto the Aulter betokneth Christes appearing whiche was receiued with great ioye and singing of Angels Math. 27 the going from the one side of the Aulter to the other Luc. 2. sheweth the translation of the Gospel vnto the GeÌ„tiles and the returning of it vnto the Iewes by the washing of handes the Priestes cleannesse of life by his bowing downe humilitie by
And so were they by the Fathers inuited either to returne againe to their olde Iewishnes and Paganisme or at least to conceiue of their manner of speache they knewe not what those termes signifying nothing properly that is extant or put in practise This being supposed whiche M. Iewel supposeth that there is no real Priesthoode no real Sacrifice no real Aulter proper to the newe Testamente againe this being graunted as it is an vndoubted truth that the Priesthoode Sacrifice and Aulters of the olde Lawe be abrogated and those of the Heathens detested what thing doth remaine for these termes properly in the newe Testamente to signifie I say properly For if any will replye saying that euery Christian man and woman is a Priest and that contrition of harte thankes geuing praises and such other the like be sacrifices and our hartes be Aulters to offer these sacrifices vpoÌ„ it may be answered that these termes applied to such thinges be not taken in their first and proper signification but in a second and improper or rather metaphorical meaning And the thinges be so called more for a similitude then for any proprietie That the terme Sacerdoâ— Priest is vsed of the Fathers in proper signification for a Priest of the nevv TestameÌ„t August de ciuit Dei lib. 20. ca. 10. If M. Iewel say that when so euer the old learned Fathers speake of these thinges in expresse termes they are to be vnderstanded metaphorically onely he is sone coÌ„futed For auoiding tedious prolixitie it may suffice here to proue the contrary in the terme Sacerdos Priest only Which being proued the like may be iudged of the rest for the mutual respecte and relation which either of the two other termes hath to the other For this the authoritie of that excellent learned Father S. Augustine may stande vs in stede of many Thus he saith Quod autem cùm dixisset In istis secunda mors non habet potestatem adiunxit atque ait Sed erunt Sacerdotes Dei Christi regnabunt cum eo mille annis non vtique de solis Episcopis Presbyteris dictum est qui propriè iam vocantur in Ecclesia Sacerdotes Apoc. 20. sed sicut omnes Christianos dicimus propter mysticum Chrisma sic omnes Sacerdotes quoniam membra sunt vnius sacerdotis De quibus Apostolus Petrus 1. Pet. 2. Plebs inquit sancta Regale Sacerdotium As touching that when the Apostle had saied In these the second death hath not power he added and saied But they shal be the Priestes of God and Christe and shal reigne with him a thousand yeres that is not spoken of the Bisshops and Priests who properly are nowe called in the Churche Sacerdotes Priestes But as we doo cal al men Christians for the mystical ointement likewise al men Priestes because they be members of one Priest Of whome the Apostle S. Peter saith Real Priesthod is in the Churche novv ergo real Sacrifice a holy people a kingly Priesthood Beholde Reader S. Augâ—stine by expresse terme auoucheth that Bishops and Priests are they who be properly now in the Church of God called Sacerdotes Priestes or as M. Iewel commonly for spite translateth Sacrificers Whereby it foloweth clearely that the terme Priest being applied to al men and wemen who be not by a solemne sacrament ordered not specially called and chosen to the office of a Bishop or Priest is taken in an improper or mystical signification In that S. Augustin acknowlegeth the order of those to remaine nowe in the Churche which be called Sacerdotes Priestes properly he excludeth al metophorical metonymical and mystical signification of the woorde So then folowing the doctrine of S. Augustine a very sufficient witnesse of the saith of Christes Church of and before his tyme we may boldly say that in the Churche we haue Priestes and Priesthood speaking properly that is to say a real Priesthoode and therefore a real Sacrifice which M. Iewel denieth This then being proued that in the state of the newe Testamente there be Priestes in the proper signification of the terme beside that mystical signification whereby al Christians be termed Priestes this also is clearely prooued withal that the other two termes Sacrifice and Aulter properlye taken muste remaine in the Churche of Christe and not be construed where so euer the Fathers make mention of them by a metaphorical or mystical vnderstanding as though there were neither real Sacrifice nor material Aulter For a Priest properly taken requireth a Sacrifice properly taken whiche he may offer and an Aulter properly taken wherevppon he maye make his Sacrifice Like as a Prieste metaphorically taken requireth onely Sacrifice and Aulter of like signification Christian meÌ„ in general be Priests after a metaphorical meaning not in proper speache as likevvise thei be Kings That this mater be made more manifest if it shal like thee Reader to returne againe to the place of S. Peter forementioned by S. Augustine wherein al faithful beleuers haue the name and title of Priestes ascribed vnto them in the same sentence shalt thou finde them called Kinges no lesse then Priestes But how are they called Kinges By a proper kinde of speache Not so but by a similitude or Metaphore And by the same kinde of speache euery Christian persons owne body and soule may be called his kingdom appointed him of God king of kinges to gouerne The iurisdiction and dominion of infinite such kinges we conceiue to be bordered and inclosed within the narrow limites of eche one person and the subiectes to be fewer then may make a perfite number Shal we hereof inferre that there is nothing els in the worlde that these termes kinge and kingdom may and do properly signifie Shal we hereupon dissolue Monarchies and plainely tell such whom the worlde calleth kinges that they haue but the Metaphoricall name of kinges and be no kinges in deede bereuing them of all auctoritie to rule their Subiectes and bidding them to be content as other meaner persons are with their Metaphorical kingdom In dede this were the rediest way to bring al to confusion and beastly enormitie in whiche state this new Gospel might sone be set vp or any other religion besides that the holy Ghost hath plaÌ„ted in the Church hitherto And this is that state that Luthers holy sprite would haue brought Germany vnto and had preuailed had not the Nobilitie resisted with al their force the rash and wiked stourdinesse of the vulgare people We might say and easy it were to proue that the like confusion must ensue in the Church if this opinion be once planted and rooted in the hartes of the Laitie that ech of theÌ„ is as truly and as properly a Priest as is his Curate his vicar his Person or his Bishop But bicause this perteineth not chiefly to the present purpose I wil not stand about it This which is now made euident by that is already saied may boldly be auouched That as there be
Nettes neither forsake the great House that is to say the Churche for their sakes who be Vessels made to dishonour Now in case ye also by like rule wil say that they at whose handes the Catholique Churche suffereth suche thinges be not of your side then trie your owne mynde amend your errour imbrace vnitie of sprite in the band of peace Iewel Certainely the holy Fathers and Martyrs of God vvil say unto you VVee knovve not your Priuate Masses vvee knovve not your Halfe Communion vvee knovv not your Strange Vnknovven Praiers vvee knovve not your Adoration of Gorruptible Creatures vve knovve not this Sacrificing of the Sonne of God vvee knovve not your Nevve Religion vvee knovve not you God open the eyes of your Hartes that ye may see the miserable state ye stande in and recouer the place that ye haue loste and finde your Names vvritten in the Booke of Life Harding In the ende of this Diuision by a Rhetorical fiction you make the holy Fathers The holy lerned Fathers tale to M. Ievv and hi◠Cōpanion◠and Martyrs of God to say vnto vs as your blasphmous harte doth phontasie But as we feare not that any suche thing by them shal be tolde vs so were they now lyuing doubtelesse thus would they saye vnto you and them of your sectes as neuerthelesse in their bookes and learned workes they also doo now in effecte say vnto you daily We knowe not your strange state that is without external Sacrifice and Priesthod and consequently without a Lawe We knowe not your eating of common bread and drinking of common wine at your newe founde Suppers in steede of receiuing the true body and bloude of Christe We knowe not your Iustification by your special Faith onely We knowe not your perilous doctrine of Predestination We knowe not your new manner of baptizing without holy oile and other auncient rites and Ceremonies We knowe not your chaungeable new deuised Cōmunions We knouwe not your monstrous Supremacie of Princes in Ecclesiastical maters that is to say the keyes of the kingdom of heauen the supreme Cōmission to feede Christes lambes and shepe and the whole auctoritie that Christe gaue to S. Peter and his Successours so to be vnited by a forced Parlament to the Crowne of a laye Prince that it be made a mater of inheritaunce so that the Prince for the time being be head of the Churche and supreme gouernour in al thinges and causes as wel spiritual as temporal be it man or woman or childe sucking at the Nourses breste We condemne your negatiue Diuinitie which denieth mannes freewil merites of good workes done in grace Prayers made to our blessed lady the Apostles Martyrs and other Saintes to be intercessours for vs to God Prayers for the dead We deteste your wicked and incestuous mariages of Priestes Monkes Friers and Nonnes and of al such as haue made solemne vowe to liue without the vse of wedlocke We deteste your impietie in that ye refuse to adore and doo godly honour to the body and bloude of your Creator in the Sacrament of the Aulter We detest your pulling downe of Aulters your robbing of Churches your schismes and heresies and rebellion against your lawful Princes we detest your prophane contempte of al good religion and godlynes we detest your wickednes we detest you As for you M. Iewel I pray God to touche your harte so as you may be induced rather with some shame of the worlde to recant your heresies and repent to saue your soule then with desperat continuing in that you haue taken vppon you by your foolish and arrogant Chalenge to keepe the vaine estimation of deceiued men and finally to lose your foule for euer The .12 Diuision The Ansvver LEauing no smal number of places that might be recited out of diuerse other Doctours I wil bring two of two woorthy Bishops one of Chrysostom the other of S. Ambrose confirming this Trueth S. Chrysostomes woordes be these Chrysosto in epist. ad Heb. homi 17. Pontifex noster ille est qui hostiam mundantem nos obtulit ipsam offerimus nunc quae tunc oblata quidem consumi non potest Hoc autem quod nos facimus in commemorationem fit eius quod factum est Hoc enim facite inquit in mei commemorationem He is our Bishop that hath offered vp the Hoste whiche cleanseth vs. The same doo we offer also nowe whiche though it were then offered yet can not be consumed But this that we doo is done in Remembraunce of that whiche is done For doo ye this saith he in my Remembraunce S. Ambrose saith thus Ambros. In Psal. 38. Vidimus Principem Sacerdotum ad nos venientem vidimus audiuimus offerentem pro nobis sanguinem suum sequamur vt possumus sacerdotes vt offeramus pro populo sacrificium etsi infirmi merito tamen honorabiles Sacrificio Quia etsi Christus non videtur offerre tamen ipse offertur in terris quando Christi Corpus offertur We haue seene the Prince of Priestes come to vs we haue seene and hearde him offer for vs his Bloude Let vs that be Priestes folow him as we may that we may offer Sacrifice for the people being though weake in merite yet honourable for the Sacrifice Because al be it Christe be not seene to offer yet he is offered in earth when the Body of Christe is offered Of these our Lordes woordes which is geuen for you and which is shedde for you and for many here S. Ambrose exhorteth the Priestes to offer the Body and Bloud of Christe for the people and willeth them to be more regarded then cōmonly they be now a daies for this Sacrifice sake though otherwise they be of lesse desert Iewel This allegation argueth no greate abundance of stoare For Chrysostome in these vvoordes bothe openeth him selfe and shevveth in vvhat sense other Ancient Fathers vsed this vvorde Sacrifice and also vtterly ouerthrovveth M. Hardinges vvhole purpose touching the same For as he saithe wee offer vp the same Sacrifice that Christe offered so in most plaine vvise and by sundrie vvordes he remooueth al doubte and declareth in vvhat sorte and meaning vvee offer it He saithe not as M. Hardinge saithe wee offer vp the Sōne of God vnto his Father and that verily and in deede but contrary vvise thus he saithe Chrysost. in Epist. ad Hebr. Hom. 17. Offerimus quidem sed ad Recordationem facientes Mortis eius Hoc Sacrificium Exemplarillius est Hoc quod nos facimus in commemorationem fit eius quod factum est Id ipsum semper offerimus Magis autem Recordationem Sacrificij operamur VVe offer in deede but in remembrance of his Death This Sacrifice is an Examlpe of that Sacrifice This that we doo is donne in remembrannce of that that was done VVee offer vp the same that Christe offered Or rather wee worcke the Remembrance of that Sacrifice Thus vvee offer vp Christe That is to say an