Christe But by his fauour the prophet in calling the newe sacrifice pure doeth not charge the old with imperfection if they had been offered according to their institution but reproueth the priestes that they had polluted the Lords sacrifices with their couetousnes and hypocrisie and in punishment of their pride which thought God could not bee serued except it were by them threateneth that he will reiect them and the people that were partakers of their sinnes and set vp the spirituall pure worship of his name among the Gentils in all partes of the worlde which shoulde better please God as the Prophete saith then a bullock that hath hornes hooffes And as for the purenes that M. Heskins requireth in the new sacrifices wee haue a sufficient warrant of the holy Ghost Heb. 13. that by Iesus Christ wee offer the sacrifice of prayse always to God that is the fruites of the lippes which confesseth his name doeing good and not forgetting to distribute for with such sacrifices God is pleased By which place you may see that the expositions of the godly before rehearsed are grounded vpon the word of God and not the deuise or imagination of man It is meruell that M. Heskins as the rest of the papistes do in this place doth not builde much vppon the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly doth signifie a sacrifice made of flower and so a kinde of bread but then he lacketh wine and the other worde which the prophete vseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth an incense or perfume both excludeth that phantisie and also sheweth that the Prophet according to the common custom of other Prophets speaketh after the capacitie of the people in discribing the spirituall state of Christs Church by the external-figures ceremonies of Moses law And so there is no place in the scripture maketh lesse for the sacrifice of the masse then this text of the prophete Malachie The foure and thirteth Chapter expoundeth the prophesie of Malachie by Martialis and Ireneus M. Heskins desirous to expounde this prophesie by two verie auncient barrons of the high house of parleament beginneth with one Martialis whom to make him seeme more reuerend and auncient he hath adorned with Parleament Robes affirming that he was the disciple of Christ himselfe and after his Maisters death kepte companie almost continually with the Apostle Peter therfore willeth euerie man to giue audience to his speache Now whether euer there were any such disciple of Christ companion of the Apostle as the scripture maketh nomention of him so I will affirme nothing But for as much as the Church neuer heard of any such writer neither by Eusebius or by Hieronyme nor by Gennadius all which gathered the names of all the writers that had ben in the Church of Christe that were knowen in their times and seeing that many hundreth yeares after there is no mention of any such writer and writinges in anye approued authour I will playnely affirme that the authour of such Epistles is more worthie to stand on the pillerie for an impudent counterfeiter then to sit in the Parleament house among the Apostles of Christ and the holy doctors of the Church If there were nothing else to confute him but the title that he giueth himselfe it were sufficient to prooue him a shamelesse forger Martialis Apostolus Christi he tearmeth himselfe in the Diuels name as though the scripture had not defined both of the number and of the calling of the Apostles If any man liste to heare his absurde speach that hee maketh for the sacrifice of the masse let him resorte to M. Heskins swynetrough for I will not vouchsafe to defile my penne and paper to carie awaye such draffe of such pseude-apostles and counterfeit doctors Leauing therefore M. Heskins with his groyne serching in that swill I will chase him away from routing in the holy auntient garden of Irenaeus of whom M. Heskins confesseth that hee is not to be suspected of truth therby insinuating that his Martiall was not so honest but that his credite might come in question But Irenaeus lib. 4. Chapter 32. writeth thus Sed suis discipulis dans consilium c. But also giuing counsell to his disciples to offer the firste fruites vnto God of his owne creatures not as to one hauing neede but that they might be neither vnfruitefull nor vnthankefull he tooke that bread which is of the creature and gaue thankes saying this is my bodie and likewise the cup which is of the same creature that is with vs hee confesseth to bee his bloude and taught the newe oblation of the newe Testament whiche the Church receiuing of the Apostles offereth to GOD in all the world to him which giueth food vnto vs the first fruites of his owne giftes in the new Testament of which Malachias amonge the twelue Prophetes hath foreshewed I haue no pleasure in you saith the LORD Almightie and I will receiue no sacrifice at your handes c. Here M. Heskins I knowe not for what subtiltie had translated verie absurdly primitias munerum suorum the firste fruite of his sacrifices But to the matter What can bee more playne then that Irenaeus speaketh here of the sacrifice of obedience and thankesgiuing celebrated in the sacrament of the Lordes supper For he sheweth the end of the institution to be that they should neither be vnfruitefull nor vnthankfull which oblation the Church obserueth throughout all the world according to the Prophesie of Malachie in the celebration of the Lordes supper although not onely therein M. Heskins cauill of the newnesse of the oblation I haue answered before that it is newe in the manner of the offering which is without such sacrifices ceremonies as the lawe prescribed And whereas the incense and the pure oblation that the Prophet sayeth should be sacrificed to God be both of one nature Irenaeus doth in plaine wordes expound the incenses for spirituall sacrifice namely the sacrifice of prayers Which exposition M. Heskins doth so obstinately contemne lib. 4. Chap. 33. Quoniam ergo nomen filij proprium patris est in Deo omnipotente Iesum Christum offert ecclesia bene ait secundum vtraque in omni loco incensiū offertur nomini meo sacrificium purum Incensa autem Ioannes in Apocalypsi orationes ait esse sanctorum Therefore for as much as the name of the same perteineth to the father and in God almightie the Church offereth Iesus Christ he sayeth well according to bothe and in euery place an incense is offered to my name and a pure sacrifice Nowe S. Iohn in the reuelation sayth that the incense are the prayers of the Saintes The one being a spirituall sacrifice the other is also of the same nature by which it is euident howe the Church offereth Iesus Christ in God almightie namely when shee rendreth moste humble and hartie thankes to God for her redemption by Iesus Christe To which intent much more might be
the sacrament was ministred therefore one Priest did not eat vp all alone in Chrysostomes time To the saying of Ambrose which the Bishop alledgeth in 1 Cor. 11. Inuicem expectaâ—â— c. Ad inuicem expectandum dicit vt multorum oblatio simul celebratur vt omnibus ministretur He sayeth they ought to tarie one for another that the oblation of many might bee celebrated together and that it might be ministred vnto them all M. Heskins aunswereth that this doctour doth onely reproue their want of deuotion which is false for he doth also shewe that all ought to communicate together or else it is not to eat the Lordes supper vppon which wordes of the Apostle he sayeth also Murius enim oblatum tosius populi sit quia in vno paene omnes significantur per id quod enim vnum sumus de vno paene omnes nâ—c sumere oportet For the gift which is offered belongeth to all the people because they are all signified in one bread for in that wee are one we ought to receiue all of one bread If al must then one ought not alone As for that balde shift hee flyeth vnto that all priestes in seuerall places communicate together is too bad for a begger to vse for so might the Corinthians whome the Apostle reproueth for not tarying one for another say they communicated with them whome they left out and with al Christians in the worlde But now M. Heskins with full sayle in rayling seas inueigheth against the proclaimer for falsifying wrong translating of Leo when hee doth not translate him at all but onely doth gather the summe of his saying in fewe wordes and that truely though hee name neither Masse nor sacrifice which are in the saying of Leo which how little it maketh either for the popish Masse or for the sacrifice propitiatorie or finally for the priuate Masse I desire the reader to returne to the 32. Chapter of this booke where he shall finde the place at large set downe and vrged which therefore I thought it in vaine to repeat in this Chapter After this hee defendeth that by the Masse booke they are not bounde to haue a communion but one priest may receiue alone And whereas the Bishop rehearseth diuerse exhortations to prayer vsed in the Masse as Oremus let vs praye Orate pro me fratres sorores pray for me brethren and sisters c. And after the Agnus Dei haec sacro sancta c. This holie commixtion and consecration of the bodie and bloud of our Lorde Iesus Christ be vnto mee to all that receiue it health of mind bodie All which sayings import a number present the last a number receiuing whereas in the priuate Masse there is neuer a brother or sister present many times but one sorie boy that helpeth the priest to Masse though they be present yet vnderstaÌ„d they not that they are bidden to pray for the priest when he turneth about Maister Hesk. trifleth vpon the former prayers separating them from the last and affirming that they may pray together though they do not receiue together For he saith there be two communions in the Masse beside the receiuing and therfore-belike that is not needefull the one of prayer the other of sacrifice and as for the last prayer for them that receiue is not ment onely of them that receiue in the church at that time but for all receiuers of all places and times when and wheresoeuer But what reason hath he to persuade vs that those brethren sisterne whome the priest firste exhorteth to pray for him that their sacrifice might be acceptable to God are not the same which ought to receiue with him neuerthelesse in the ende supposing the priestes prayeth with limitation of time and place he sayth it is no reason that if the people will not receiue the priest should not ye as verily because Christe instituted a communion of many participantes in one time and place and not one priests breakefast in a corner by him selfe Againe the wordes of the Masse Omnibus sumentibus to all which do receiue and quae sumpsimus which wee haue receiued doe proue a number of receiuers and which haue receiued at thaâ— time and in that place or else the Priest should saye to mee which receiue it and which I haue receiued And whereas Maister Heskins chargeth the proclaimer for adding the worde Consecration which is not in their Masse booke I confesse I knowe not whether it be in all coppies omitted but I am persuaded the bishop had some ground of his saying or else it might be the faulte of the Printer But whereas the proclaimer alledgeth the Canons of the Apostles and decrees of the bishops of Rome Maister Heskins sayth as odious as the Popes be to him faine he is to praye ayde of them But he is altogether deceiued God be thanked the holy scriptures are sufficient for vs both to proue al trueth and to disproue all errours But if either counsels or Popes decrees be alledged it is to beat downe the Papistes with their owne weapons and to cast their owne doung in their owne faces as the Prophet sayeth But let vs heare the Canon of the Apostles Can. 9. Fideles c. The faithfull which come to the Church and heare the Scriptures and receiue not the holye communion let them be excommunicated as men that disquiet the church Here he doth most impudently charge the proclaimer with falsification which he himself committeth alledging it not out of the booke of Canons but out of the Popes dirtie decrees Omnes fideles c. All Christian men that in the solemne seruice come together to the church let them heare the scriptures of the Apostles the Gospell And such as continue not in prayer vntill masse be all done nor do receiue the holie communion it is meete they be excommunicated as such as moue disquietnesse to the church but that the learned reader may see how syncerely the bishop hath dealt how falsly Hesk. belyeth him I wil set down the Canon in Greek as it was firste written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All the faithfull or Christians which enter into the church and heare the Scriptures but tarrie not out the prayer the holie coÌ„munion or participation ought to be separated as causers of disorder in the Church Here you see no mention of Masse at all And if any ignorant papist dare not trust my translation out of Greeke let him vnderstand that in the book of councels he shal find two translations of this the rest of those Canons called the Canons of the Apostles of which the bishop hath followed the one but Hesk. neither of both for as I said before there is no mention of the Masse in any of them Therfore what is the falsification committed in the Popes lawe out of which he citeth it how honestly in so doing reprouing the bishop for following the trueth let the readers iudge But
easie of all men to be vnderstanded and neede none interpreter for that we be all taught of God and of his spirite c. Of which minde he imagineth his aduersarie to be In that he would the scriptures to be common to all men How false slanderous this his report is of Luther may sufficiently appeare by that one worde Theodidacti taught of God by which it is most manifest that Luther affirmeth the scriptures to be easie to be vnderstood not of all men in generall but onely of all them that are taught of God and of his spirite by which they were indighted But nowe our Burgesse will make plaine by discussion that the scriptures be obscure darke and hard to be vnderstanded and for that cause not of all men indifferently to be read and that by seuen arguments Although it followeth not that the scriptures are not to be read bicause they are hard but the contrarie yet let vs weigh these seuen arguments The first There be many controuersies of the blessed sacrament therefore there be difficulties in the scriptures If controuersies raysed by froward maintainers of falshoode be a proofe of difficultie there shall nothing be plaine not only in the scriptures of God neither in any other writings or sayings of men no not in such matters as are subiect to our senses but we shall be brought into an Academicall doubtfulnesse of all things But what say you M. Heskins are not the scriptures plaine for the reall presence of Christes body in the Sacrament which you maintaine Is Hoc est corpus meum nowe a matter of difficâ—ltie Let all Papistes that haue witte beware of your proceding you haue euen now by your first argumeÌ„t cut asunder the synnes strength of al your cause The second The very disciples of Christ besides the Iewes vnderstoode not Christes owne words before they were written Ioh. 6. Much lesse we the same written To passe ouer the vngodly difference you make betweene Christes wordes proceeding out of his owne mouth and the same writteÌ„ by inspiration of his owne holy spirit call you them the very disciples of Christ which offended with that speach departed from him or them that abid the interpretation of them and tarried still with him Such disciples as the former were be you and your sect which when the scripture serueth not your purpose accuse it of difficultie and vncertaintie as the olde Heretiques the Valentinians did as witnesseth Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 2. But Chrysostome I suppose helpeth you much where hee saith Quid ergo est durus difficilis intellectu quem capere non posset eorum imbecillitas plenus formidinis What then is this word hard difficult to be vnderstoode and such as their weaknesse could not receiue full of fearefulnes Here is the name of the words of Chrysostome but to what purpose when no doctor more often or more earnestly exhorteth all Lay men that are Christians to read the scriptures of God affirming theÌ„ also to be easie to be vnderstood for the most part and not onely without daunger but also verie profitable euen where they be hard to be vnderstoode I wil rehearse one or two places of a great number In Luc. cap. 16. Idque hortor hortari non desinam c. And this I exhort you and will not cease to exhort you that you would not only in this place meaning in the Church giue heede to those things that are said but also when you shall be at home you would euery day giue your selues to the reading of the holy scriptures And there followeth a reason Neque nunc fieri potest Neither can it nowe be I say it can not be that any man should obtaine saluation except hee bee continually conuersant in spirituall reading And not long after Etiamsi non intelligas illic recondita c. yea although thou vnderstand not the misteries that are therein hidden yet of the very reading of them great holinesse groweth Finally In genesim Hom. 9. In diuinis autem scripturis c. but in the holy scriptures in those spirituall and precious stories neither is it lawfull to suspect any danger neither is there any great labour but vnspeakable gaine onely let vs bring with chearefulnesse that which lyeth in vs. The third If the scriptures be plaine and easie for euery maÌ„ to vnderstand it was no great benefit that Christ did open his Apostles witts that they might vnderstand the scriptures nor that he did interpret Moses and the Prophetes to the disciples that went to Emaus wherefore we conclude with S. Peter that as he witnessing the Epistles of S. Paule be hard so be the rest of the scriptures hard O blundering Burgesse Who did euer affirme that the scriptures were easie to be vnderstaÌ„d without the spirit of Christ Or what asse of Acarnania wold brave out suche a reason The Apostles could not vnderstand the scriptures sufficieÌ„tly to teach all the world without a singular gift of interpretation therefore no Christian man may learne by reading the scriptures howe to knowe God to his eternall saluation without the same extraordinarie gift But by your leaue maister speaker for the office you take vpon you I know not howe you came vnto it you misreport S Peter being a Lord of the higher house as you count him for he saith not that the Epistles of S. Paule be hard but that among those things which he wrote of the second comming of Christ some things are hard to be vnderstoode Wherefore neither his authoritie nor your reason will be sufficient to conclude your cause The fourth The Chamberlen could not vnderstand the prophet Esay without an interpreter therefore the scriptures are not plaine and easie of all men to be vnderstanded A proper conclusion There is some difficultie in some scriptures therefore they are all hard and can not be vnderstoode We neither affirme that all things in the scriptures are easie to be vnderstanded nor that they are easie to be vnderstood of all men But that the children of God by his spirite are instructed to vnderstand so much in them as is profitable for their saluation and that nothing necessarie for vs to knowe is so obscurely set foorth in one scripture but it is as plainly set down in an other Neither do we reiect interpreters bicause we read the scriptures but as Chrysostom teacheth by reading the scripturs we are made more apt to vnderstaÌ„d the interpreters In Euan. Ioan. Hom. 10. The exaÌ„ple of Philip sent vnto the Chamberlen doth also declare howe God wil blesse the reading of the scriptures wheÌ„ he is sought in them The fift The Apostles them selues vnderstoode not Christe speaking of his passion and resurrection Iohn 16. After a while c. therfore if the liuely voyce of Christ was dark much more is the same now written in dead letters dark hard to be vnderstanded The Apostles by speciall dispensation not yet so wel lightned that they vnderstood their master not
only at this time but at many other times also bewrayed their naturall ignorance that the grace of God in their illuminatioÌ„ in due time afterward might appeare more glorious But doth it therefore followe that the sayings of Christe were hard or their vnderstanding darke A blinde man can not see the Sunne is it therefore a good conclusion that the Sunne is darke and not easie to be seene Howbeit it is well to be marked that once againe hee putteth difference betweene the liuely voyce of Christ and his word written in dead letters making opposition betweene The liuely voyce in the eare and the deade letter in the eye As though the vnderstanding of the scripture consisted either in the eare or in the eye when neither the eye hath seene nor the eare hath heard neither haue they ascended into the heart of man such things as God hath prepared for them that loue him 1. Cor. 2. Es. 64. But God hath reuealed them vnto vs by his spirit which spirit searcheth out al things euen the depthes or greatest secretes of god Neuerthelesse here is brought in Hieronyme ad Paulinum Habet nescio quid latentis energiae viua vox c. The liuely voyce hath I knowe not what hidden vertue and being vttered froÌ„ the mouth of the author into the eare of the disciple soundeth more strongly Wherfore Aeschynes when he was banished at Rhodes and that Oration of Demosthenes was read which he made against him when all men did woonder at it and praise it sighing he said What if ye had heard the beast himself sounding out his owne words This writeth Hieronyme to persuade Paulinê° not only to satisfie him self with his writings but also to trauel that he might so him heare him whom he had known before only by his writing that by the example not only of heathen Philosophers but also of holy men of the Church as the next wordes following immediatly do plainely testifie Haec non dico quod sit in me aliquid tale c. I say not these things for that there is in me any such matter whiche either thou mayest or art desierous to learne but bicause thy feruent heate and desire of learning ought to be commended euen without vs Thy wit is pregnant and commendable without a teacher 3. So farre is it off that Hieronyme meant to compare the word of Christ spoken with that which is writen whose force is as great by his spirite in the scriptures which this dogge calleth the deade letters as it was in his voyce when it was vttered But howe impudently the name of Hieronyme is abused against his plain iudgment wherby he not only alloweth lay men to read the scripturs but also confesseth that they receiue great fruit therby may appeare by this one place amoÌ„g many written in Esaiam libro 4. cap. 11. Frequenter euenit vt homines soeculi It commeth to passe verie often that lay men being ignorant of the mysticall sense are yet fedde with the plaine and simple reading of the scriptures 33. And in his epistle vpoÌ„ the same CoÌ„mentarie he affirmeth that Ignoratio scripturarum ignoratio Christi est Ignorance of scriptures is the ignorance of christ Shortnes will not suffer me to point the places only to the confusioÌ„ of the aduersary if any dout or would see more let them reade the places at the full The sixt All men haue not the gift of knowledge of prophesie nor of interpretation of tongues therefore euerie man hath not the vnderstaÌ„ding of the scripturs neither be they easie to be vnderstanded of euerie man. First I pray you note that he maketh interpretatioÌ„ of the scriptures and the interpretatioÌ„ of tongs al one secondly what force is in this reason all men haue not extraordinarie gifts of tongs of healing of knowledge of prophesie of interpretation of tongues c. Therefore the scriptures are so harde as they cannot be vnderstood by the ordinarie gifte of prophesie which is promised to all the seruaunts of God young olde men and women vpon whom his holy spirit is powred 10.2 Act. 2. I am ashamed to troble the readers with any more words in answer vnto such a grosse consequence The seuenth God hath ordeined first Apostles â–ª secondly Prophetes thirdly teachers c. Now if the scriptures be easie for euerie mans vnderstanding then either these states be superfluous or else euerie man is a teacher and prophete but this were a great absurditie therfore the scriptures are hard full of difficulties If a yong Sophister had D. Heskins in the scholes at Cambridge where somtime he hath been a Sophister he would with one common warde which is Nego consequentiam auoyde the pikes of all these seuen arguments Alas poore man is there no vnderstaÌ„ding of the scriptures but such as may make a man a teacher an extraordinarie prophete are there no degrees of knowledge but either the highest perfection or the depest ignorance Will this reason follow Men may profite in knowledge by reading therefore teaching is superfluous or this teaching is necessarie therfore reading is vnprofitable What shall I say to these reasons but that they are giuen ouer into a reprobate minde which are so furiously bent to withstand the trueth that they set not foorth so much as any shadowe of reason The second Chapter to proue that the scriptures be not easie reciteth certaine harde and obscure places of the olde Testamente The purpose of this Chapter as of the next also is al together foolishe and vnreasonable for who is so mad to denie but that ther are diuerse places both in the old and newe Testament which bee obscure and hard to be vnderstode not onely of the ignorant but euen of the best learned yet doeth it not therefore followe because something is harde therefore all is so or because some places in the scripture are harde therefore there is no profite in reading of all the rest But let vs see these places recited First he nameth all the prophetes the books of Iob the book of Psalmes the Preacher the song of Salomon Al which books in his iudgement are so hard as they cannot be vnderstoode without an interpreter Wel let vs graunt great difficultie to be in these books as in diuers other is all time lost therfore that is spent in reading of them The harder they be the more diligently they are to be red that they may be vnderstood The difficultie to good scholers will not dull but wheâ— â—heiâ— desire to learne â–ª to 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 to conferre to seâ—â—e 〈…〉 to find CoÌ„cerâ—ing Genesis he alledgeth out of Hieronyme the tradition of the vnbelâ—uing Iewes that they might not read it before they were 30 yeres olde But Hieronyme him self wold haue yong childrens tender tongs seasoned with sweet Psalmes â–ª and exercised in studie of the scriptures and Prophets which you M. Heskins professe to be so difficult For he instructing Laeta 〈◊〉 she should bring â—p her
which the holy Ghost in expresse words denyeth Heb. 7.11 But the first that figureth both the priesthood and sacrifice of the new law is Melchisedech So that this priesthood is peculiar only to our sauiour Christe as both Dauid Psal. no. and the Apostle to the Hebrues the 7. do proue it there is no doubt but Melchisedech was a figure of Christ But what sacrifice hee offered the scripture maketh no mention neither is M. Heskins able to shewe For first he hath rehearsed the historie of him which is written in Gen. 14. And Melchisedech king of Salem brought foorth breade wine and he was a priest of the most high God Therfore he blessed him saying blessed is Abraham of God most high possesser of heauen and earth and blessed be the most high God which hath deliuered thine enimies into thine hande And Abraham gaue him tithe of all In which words there is no mentioÌ„ of any sacrifice Afterward he compareth him in all those points in which the Apostle to the Hebrues doth Heb. 7. Which are these that he was king of rightuousnesse and king of peace without father without mother without kinred on earth Hauing neither beginning of dayes nor end of life but is likened to the sonne of God and continueth a Priest for euer that he blessed Abraham and that Abraham payde tythes vnto him In all which applications there is not one worde of any sacrifice Neither in the apostle nor in M. Heskins therefore as I sayde in the beginning M. Heskins hath not satisfied the title of his Chapter And verily the Apostle in these two pointes onely considereth the Priesthoode of Melchisedech that he blessed Abraham which had the promises and receiued tythes of him in whose loynes Leuie the father of Aarons Priesthoode was tythed who vndoubtedly would not haue omitted the sacrifice of breade and wine if there had bene any when he applyed the interpretation of his name which was a great deale lesser matter And surely it seemeth that Maister Heskins could not handsomely frame an application thereof else would he not haue admitted so plausible a matter and so commonly prated of among the Papistes He sawe first in the text was no mention of oblation secondly if there had bene oblation of bread and wine it would not well haue figured that sacrifice wherein they say is neither bread nor wine The fourteenth Chapter declareth after the minde of Chrysostome that Iob was a figure of Christ for the desire his seruants had to eate his flesh Maister Heskins doth well to adde after the minde of Chrysostome for it is plaine by the text that the words of eating his flesh are meant of hatred and not of loue Either that Iobs seruaunts shewed their desire to be reuenged of their maisters enimies of whoÌ„ he speaketh in the two verses before or else as Saint Hieronyme thinketh that he had procured his seruants hatred for his intertainment of straungers and other vertues mentioned in the next verse following Pro hospitalitatibus eius virtute quae caeterâ— sancti Deo placuerunt odium seruorum contraxerat So that this matter standeth not vpon any certaine figure of the scripture but onely vpon Chrysostomes minde vnto which you heare the contrarie minde of Hieronyme But â—owe let vs consider what the authoritie of Chrysostome maketh for him his wordes are as he cyteth them out of Hom. 45. in 6. Ioan. Vt autem non solùm per dilectionem c. But that we should be conuerted into that flesh not onely by loue but also in deede it is brought to passe by that meate which he hath giuen vs For when he would shewe his loue toward vs he hath mixed himself with vs by his body and made himself one with vs that the body might be vnited to the hed These last words For this is the maner of them that loue especially in M. Heskins traÌ„slation are left out I know not for what causes peraduenture of negligence This did Iob signifie by his seruants of whome he was loued especially which declaring their loue did say Who would giue vs that we might be filled with his flesh Which thing Christe did that he might binde vs to him with gâ—â—â—ter loue and that he might shewe his desire that he had to vs suffering him selfe not onely to be seene of them that desire but also to be touched and eaten and their teeth to be fastened in his flesh and all to be filled with the desire of him Wherefore let vs rise from that table as Lyons breathing fire terrible to the diuell and let vs knowe our heade and what loue he hath shewed vnto vs Parents haue oftentimes giuen their children to be nourished of other but I doe feede with mine owne flesh I giue my selfe vnto them I fauour all I giue an exceeding good hope to all of things to come He that giueth him self so vnto vs in this life much more in the life to come I would be your brother and I tooke flesh and bloud with you for your sakes and by what thinges I am ioyned to you the same I haue giuen to you againe In this long speach of Chrysostome what is there that maketh for Maister Heskins bill that hee hath promoted into the Parleament house and not rather altogether against it For first it can not bee necessarily concluded out of this place that Chrysostome speaketh of the Lordes supper but rather of that table meate giuing and eating of Christes flesh which is spoken of in the sixt of Saint Iohn where no worde is of the sacrament or supper which at that time was not instituted Secondly if we should neuer so much vnderstand this speach of the sacrament yet must we graunt it to be figuratiue or else there wil folow infinite absurdities beside such as M. Heskins affirmeth Wherfore I will reason thus Christ by this saying of Chrysostome is none otherwise eaten then he is seene but he is not seene corporally but spiritually by faith therefore he is not eaten corporally but spiritually by faith And likewise thus as Christ is touched and teeth fastned in his flesh so is he giuen or eaten but he is not touched corporally or naturally nor teeth fastned in his flesh corporally but spiritually therefore hee is not giuen nor eaten in the sacrament corporally but spiritually The maiors of these argumeÌ„ts are Chrysostoms words the minors are the confessions of the Papistes which affirme Christes body to be in the sacrament inuisibly and doe correct the recantation of Berengarius where he affirmed that the body of Christ is torne with the teeth the conclusions I trust be rightly inferred But nowe let vs see what handsome stuffe M. Heskins gathereth out of this text of Chrysostome First that we are ioyned to Christe two wayes by loue and by the thing it selfe Which in other termes is called spiritually and really Marke this wise diuision of spiritually and really as though such things as are ioyned spiritually
Iesus entered in the doores being shut when he shewed his handes to bee felt and his side to be considered and shewed both flesh and bones least the trueth of his body should be thought to be a fantasie And I will aunswere howe Saint Marie is both mother and a Virgine a Virgine before birth a mother before she was knowne of man. Vpon these places Maister Heskins doth inferre that if the doores did open as the going in of Christ which hee saith is a shaddowing of the miracle and a falsifying of the scriptures as though it were not miraculous ynough except it tooke away the trueth of Christes body and ouerthrewe the immutable decree of GOD then his entering In could not proue that the clausures of the virginitie I vse his owne wordes of the mother of Christ notwithstanding his birth remained alwayes closed which the Doctours intended to proue I would not for shamefastnesse enter into discourse of the secrets of virginitie last of all the high mysteries of the incarnation and natiuitie of our sauiour Christe of the immaculate Virgine Marie in any such Physicall questions but that I am driuen vnto it by this shamelesse aduersarie And yet will I onely alledge the authoritie of the scripture referring the collection to the reuerent shamefast consideration of the honest reader Saint Luke writeth of his presentation at Hierusalem As it is written in the lawe of the Lorde euery manchilde that first openeth the matrice shall bee called holy to the Lorde Luke 2. According to this text the miracle of his natiuitie preseruing her virginitie and of his entering in the doores beeing shut are verie like in deede and agreeable to the Doctours meaning But hee proceedeth with Chrysostomes authoritie Hom. 86. in Ioan. Dignum autem dubitatione est c. It is woorthie of doubt howe the incorruptible body did receiue the fourme of the nayles and could be touched with mortall hande But let not this trouble thee For this was of permission For that body being so subtile and light that it might enter in the doores being shut was voyde of all grossenesse or thicknesse but that his resurrection might be beleeued he shewed him selfe such a one And that thou mightest vnderstand that it was euen he that was crucified that none other did rise for him therefore he roase againe with the tokens of the crosse Except wee vnderstand Chrysostome fauourably in this place where hee denyeth the glorified body of Christe to haue any thicknesse but that it might pearce through all thinges as a spirite wee shall make him author of a great heresie both concerning the body of Christe and concerning our bodyes which after the resurrection must bee made conformable to his glorious body Philip. 3. But in an other place as wee shall heare afterwarde hee doeth eyther expound or correct him selfe in this matter And yet this that hee saith here helpeth not Maister Heskins one whit and that for two causes one for that hee speaketh heere of the glorified bodye of Christe who instituted his sacrament before his bodye was glorified An other cause for that hee doeth not heere make two bodyes in one place or one bodye in an other but to auoyde that absurditie doeth transfourme the bodye of Christe into the subtiltie and thinnesse of a spirite But in an other sentence De resurrect Hom. 9. he is of an other minde concerning the bodye of Christe Non est meum ludificare phantasmate vanam imaginem visus si timet veritatem corporis manus digitus exploret Potest fortassis aliqua oculos caligo decipere palpatio corporalis verum corpus agnoscat Spiritus inquit carnem ossa non habet sicut me videtis habere Quod Ostia clausa a penetrani sola est virtus Diuini spiritus non sola carnis substantia It is not my propertie to delude my disciples with a fantasie if your sight feare a vaine image let your hand and fingers trie out the trueth of my body Some myste peraduenture may deceiue the eyes let bodily handling acknowledge a true body A spirite saith he hath neither flesh nor bones as you see mee to haue That I pearced through the doores beeing shut it is the onely power of the diuine spirite not the onely substaunce of the flesh In these wordes hee ascribeth it to the onely power of his diuine spirite that he passed through when the doores were shut and not to the subtiltie of his glorified body as in the former sentence Likewise in Ioan. Hom. 90. Qui intrauit per ostia clausa non erat phantasma non erat spiritus verè corpus erat Hee that entered in by the doores beeing shut was no fantasie hee was no spirite hee was a body truely and in deede But wee must passe ouer vnto Saint Ambrose in Luc. lib. 10. cap. 4. Habuit admirandi causam Thomas c. Thomas had a cause to maruell when hee sawe all thinges being shut vp and closed the body of Christe by clausures without all wayes for body to enter the ioyntes beeing vnbroken to bee entered in amongest them And therefore it was a woonder howe the corporall nature passed through the impenetrable body with an inuisible comming but with inuisible beholding easie to be touched hard to bee iudged In these woordes of Saint Ambrose nothing can bee certainely gathered bycause hee doth not him selfe determine after what manner the body of Christe came in but onely sheweth what cause Thomas had to doubt and maruell sauing that in an other place I finde him write suspitiously of the trueth of the body of Christe and of the true properties thereof For in his booke De mysterijs initiandis Cap. 9. hee hath these woordes speaking of the body of Christ Corpus enim Dei corpus est spirituale Corpus Christi corpus est diuini spiritus The body of GOD is a spirituall body The body of Christe is the body of a diuine spirite These sayinges for reuerence of the Authours may haue a gentle construction but otherwise they are not directly consonant to the Catholique confession of the trueth of Christes body and the properties thereof remayning euen after his Assention as hath bene discussed by the scriptures especially after the Church was troubled with the heresies of the Eutychians and Monotholites Nowe followeth Saint Augustine De agone Christiano Cap. 24. Nec eos audiamus c. Neither let vs giue eare to them that denye that the body of Christe is risen againe of such qualitie as it was put into the graue Neither let is moue vs that it is written that hee appeared soudenly to his disciples after the doores were shut that therefore we should denye it to bee an humane body bicause wee see that contrarie to the nature of this body it entered by the doores that were shut for all thinges are possible to god For if hee could before his passion make it as cleare as the brightnesse of the Sunne wherefore could he not after his
could not remaine The drinke sanctified in the bloud of our Lord brake out of her polluted bowels c. Out of this Historie Maister Heskins gathereth two thinges First that the sacrament in that time was ministred to infantes which was in deede a great abuse contrarie to the worde of god Secondly that this childe receiued onely the cup which is false for though she was not so troubled at the receipt of the bread yet it followeth not that she receiued no bread but contrariwise Cyprian saith the Eucharistie by whiche wordes the fathers alwayes vnderstand the whole sacrament could not remaine in her bodie And whereas he reasoneth foolishly that if she had receiued the bread she should like wise haue beene troubled he must vnderstand that when God worketh a miracle he taketh times and occasions at his pleasure And it is like he would not discouer her pollution that come by bread and wine before she had receiued both bread and wine as the sacrament If I should vrge vpon this place as the scoole men doe whether this that was vomited was the bloud of Christ and what should be done with it or what was done with it in this storie I should trouble him more then he could easily answere Another tale he telleth out of Sozomenus Eccl. hist. lib. 8. Cap. 5. Ioanne Constantinopolitanum c. When Iohn Chrysostome did very well gouerne the Church of Constantinople a certeine man of the Macedonian heresie had a wife of the same opinion When this man had heard Iohn teaching what was to bee thought of God he praysed his doctrine and exhorted his wife to be of the same minde with him But when she did more obey the words of noble women then his conuersation and after many admonitions her husband had profited nothing Except quod he thou be a cōpaniō with me in Diuine matters thou shalt not be hereafter a partaker of liuing with me When the woman heard this promised her consent dissemblingly she cōmunicated the matter with a certeyne maide seruant which shee iudged to be trustie vnto her and vseth her seruice to deceiue her husband And about the time of the mysteries they that be receiued to them know what I say she keping that she had receiued fell downe as though she would pray Her maide standing by giueth her priuily that which she brought in her hand with her which thing when it was put to her teeth it congeled into a stone The woman beeing astonnied fearing least any euil should happen to her for that thing whiche came to passe from God made hast to the Bishop and bewraying her selfe sheweth the stone hauing yet vpon it the markes of her bit and shewing an vnknowen matter and a wonderful colour and also desiring pardon with teares promised that she would agree with her husband And if this matter seeme to any man to be incredible this stone is a witnesse which is kept to this day among the Iewels of the Churche of Constantinople If this storie be true as it is no article of our beleefe yet proueth it not that the communion was ministred in bread only to all the rest that would receiue the cuppe although I wote not what was turned into a stone before the time came she should receiue the cuppe If M. Heskins will vrge she could not haue any thing to conuey into her mouth in steede of the wine I answere she might easily counterfet the drinking by kissing the cuppe and so letting it passe from her without tasting thereof Wherefore this is but a blind and vnreasonable coniecture of Maister Heskins that the sacrament was ministred in one kinde because she that had dissembled in the receipt of one kinde was punished with depriuation from both kindes The last reason he vseth Is that it is testified by learned men that the manner of receiuing vnder one kinde which is vsed in all the Latine Church vpon good Friday on which day the priest receiueth the hoste consecrated vpon maundie Thursday hath been so vsed from the primitiue Church But what learned men they be except such as him selfe and what proofes they haue of this vsage he sayeth not so much as halfe a word The whole matter standeth vpon his owne credite But if he and all the learned of that side should fast from good Friday vntill they haue shewed proofe of such an vse in the primitiue church not as they vse to fast in Lent but from all manner of nourishment there would not one learned Papist be left aliue on gang Monday to shew what proofes they haue found Thou hast seene Reader what his reasons and authorities are iudge of the answers according to thy discretion ¶ The end of the second Booke THE THIRD BOOKE OF MAISTER HESKINS PARLEAment repealed by W. Fulke The first Chapter entereth by Preface into the first text of S. Paule that toucheth the sacrament and expoundeth it according to the letter TThe Preface is out of Didymus that diuine matters are to be handled with reuerence and considering the difficultie of the scriptures by Hierome that in matters of doubt recourse must be had by Irenęus his aduise vnto the most auncient Churches in which the Apostles were conuersant In so much that Irenaeus saith Libro 3. Cap. 4. Quid autem c. And what if the Apostles had left vs no writinges ought we not to haue followed the order of tradition which they deliuered to them to whome they had committed the Churches Wherevpon Maister Heskins gathereth that not onely for matters conteined in scripture but also for traditions vnwritten in the holie scriptures the fathers are to be credited But he goeth farre from Irenaeus minde who confuted the heretiques both by the scriptures and by the authoritie of the moste auncient Churches whose traditions must haue beene all our institution if there had ben no scriptures But seeing that scriptures inspired of God by his gratious prouidence are left vnto vs al traditions are to be examined by them that is twise proued after Irenaeus minde whiche is proued both by the scriptures and by the authoritie of the Churches Otherwise the scriptures are sufficient of them selues 2. Tim. 3. And no tradition or authoritie is to be receiued which is repugnant or contrarie vnto them The text of Saint Paule that he speaketh is written 1. Cor. 10. Brethren I would not haue you ignorant that all our fathers were vnder the cloude and all passed through the sea and were all baptised by Moses in the cloude and in the sea and did all eate the same spirituall meate and did all drinke the same spirituall drinke for they dranke of the same spirituall rocke which followed them and the rocke was Christe Where it is to be noted that Maister Heskins in steede of the same spirituall meate and the same spirituall drinke translateth one spiritual meate and one spirituall drinke as though the sense were that the Fathers did all eate drinke of one spiritual kind
nothing of the institution of the sacrament bicause hee spake of it most plentifully in this Chapter by Augustines iudgement Ioannes c. Iohn saide nothing in this place of the body and bloud of our Lord but plainely in an other place he testifieth that our Lord spake of them most plentifully Here he will haue vs note that Augustine calleth it not a signe or figure but plainly the body and bloud of Christ therefore it is not a figure or signe By the same reason he may say Augustine calleth it not a sacrament therefore it is no sacrament But Christ him selfe saith Not as your fathers did eate Manna in the wildernesse and are dead He that eateth this bread shall liue for euer In which wordes M. Heskins noteth two thinges The first that Manna is a figure of Christe in the sacrament for proofe of which he sendeth vs backe to the 4.5.6.7.8.9 10. Chapters of this booke The second is the excellencie of the body of Christ in the sacrament aboue Manna the eaters whereof are dead but the eaters of the body of Christe in the sacrament shall liue for euer M. Heskins saith he wot not what for if you aske him whether all they that eat the body of Christ in the sacrament shall liue eternally he will say no. For wicked men as he saith eate it which shall not liue eternally Againe if you aske him whether al they that did eat Manna are dead he will say no. For though they be dead in body yet bicause many did eate Christ spiritually by faith they shall liue for euer You see what pith is in his reason and substance in his doctrine But in very deede Christe compareth his flesh with Manna as it was a corporall foode only and so all that did eate it are dead but all they that eat the flesh of Christe which is eternall life shall liue eternally for though they dye corporally yet will be raise them vp in the last day And whereas Maister Heskins voucheth S. Augustine to warrant De vtilita poenit Manna de coelo c. I must send the reader to the eight Chapter of this booke where that authoritie is cited and answered to be flat contrarie to M. Heskins Likewise the sentence of Cyprian de Coen Dom. Coena disposita c. is handled in the first booke Chapter 17. and the other beginning Significata in Lib. 1. Cap. 39. The saying of Ambrose Lib. 4. de sacra Cap. 5. is also against Maister Heskins as we shall plainely see Ipse Dominus c. The Lorde Iesus him selfe testifieth vnto vs that wee receiue his body and bloud ought we to doubt of his fidelitie and testification Nowe returne with me to my proposition It was truely a great and a venerable thing that he rayned Manna to the Iewes from heauen But vnderstand which is the greater Manna from heauen or the body of Christe The body of Christe truely who is the maker of heauen Further he that hath eaten Manna hath dyed but he that shall eate this body it shall be made to him remission of sinnes and he shall not dye for euer By the effectes of the sacrament which are remissioÌ„ of sinnes eternal life M. Hes. saith the excellencie thereof is proued aboue Manna I answere Ambrose folowing our sauiour Christ doth not compare Manna the sacrament with our sacrament but Manna the corporall foode with the body of Christ the heauenly substance of our sacrament so it is more excellent without comparison But Maister Heskins skippeth ouer with a drye foote that Ambrose saith Whosoeuer shall eate of this body it shall be made to him remission of sinnes and he shall not not die for euer by which words it is euident that no wicked man eateth this body but they only which eat it spiritually by faith An other place of Ambrose hee citeth De myster initiand Cap. 9. Considera nunc c. Consider nowe whether is better the bread of Angels or the flesh of Christ which truly is the body of life That Manna was from heauen this aboue heauen that of heauen this of the Lorde of heauens that subiect to corruption if it were kept vntill the next day this farre from all corruption which who so euer shall taste religiously he can feele no corruption The water did satisfie them for an houre the bloud doth wash thee for euer The Iewe drank and thirsteth when thou hast drâ—nke thou canst not thirst And that was in a shaddowe this in the trueth And after a fewe wordes he saith Thou hast knowne better thinges for light is better then a shaddowe the trueth then a figure the body of the Authour then Manna from heauen This place of Ambrose vtterly denieth the body of Christ to be receiued of the wicked which perish and so consequently denyeth it to be corporally present But least we should obiect that Ambrose speaketh not of the sacrament he addeth a long discourse following immediatly Forte dicaâ— c. which bicause it is contained in the 51. Chapter of the second booke I will send the reader thither where he shall see it aunswered by Ambrose him selfe and in the same place and in the tenth Chapter of the second booke where some part of it is touched For it were in vaine to trouble the reader with one thing so often as M. Heskins listeth to repeat it The fifteenth Chapter prouing all our sacraments generally to be more excellent then the sacraments of Moses First baptisme in respect of The noble presence of God the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost must bring with it some more noble gift then a bare signe or token See howe this impudent beast would make Popish fooles beleeue that we teach baptisme to be nothing else but a bare signe or token We thinke and speake of it as honourably as the scripture teacheth vs Let the forme of baptisme vsed in the Church of England testifie whether we make it nothing but a bare signe or token Let our catechismies of al sorts beare witnesse of the same But nothing will stop a slanderous mouth Yet to aunswere the title of that Chapter S. Augustine is cited contra Faust. lib. 19. cap. 13. Prima sacrameÌ„ta c. The first sacraments which were obserued celebrated by the lawe were the foreshewing of Christ that was to come which when he had fulfilled by his coÌ„ming they were taken away therfore they were taken away bicause they were fulfilled For he came not to breake the law but to fulfill it And other are instituted greater in power better in profite easier to be done fewer in number Maister Heskins asketh wherein bee they greater in power but in this that the sacramenets of the olde lawe had no power but to signifie onely oures not onely to signifie but also to giue that they signifie And I will aske him seeing he maketh the sacraments instruments of Gods grace by what instrument did they receiue the grace of
for al that he foysteth in the name of his Masse yet can he not exclude the necessitie of receiuing the cōmunion of all the lay people which is the matter in question And therefore it is a verie shame to report what an absurde interpretation of the Canon he would make namely that it was not decreede against good Catholike people which ioyned in prayer and receiued when deuotion serued them but against licentious yet dissembling heretikes and schismatikes which being present in the churche would not communicate either in prayer or in receipt of the sacrament For confutatiō of which blind meaning first I woulde aske whether omnes fideles all the faithful as the Canon sayeth doth signifie all licentious and dissembling heretikes and scismatikes Secondly when the Canon is made expressely against them that after thei haue heard the scriptures depart when the prayer celebration of the communiō beginneth whether those that be present ioyne not in prayer participation can be vnderstood Thirdly if he knew what kind of Censure this was that is spoken of whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or separation were a sufficient punishment for men knowne to be licentious dissembling heretikes scismatikes But hee wil father his feyned vnderstanding vpon the councel of Antioch which saith he expoundeth it so almost word for word Omnes qui ingrediuntur c. All that come into the Church of God heare the holie scriptures communicate not in prayer with the people but of a certein wantonnesse turne them selues away from the receiuing of the holie communion let them be remoued from the church vntill by confession they shewe fruites of repentance and by prayers obteine pardon But with excommunicate persons it is not lawfull to communicate neither may we pray with such as go from house to house auoyding the prayers of the church But who will graunt to M. Heskins that this should be an interpretation of the former Canon contrarie to the wordes thereof Secondly when this Canon consisteth of two partes and in deede comprehendeth two of those Canons of the Apostles the former parte concerning all men that come into the churche the later onel◠excomunicate persons and scismatikes who is so deuoyde of reason to graunt that this Canon was made onely against heretikes scismatikes But in the ende as it were forsaking his holde he claspeth another rotten post that the Canon was made against the slacknesse of the people and not against the deuotion of the priest so that if none of the people would communicate the priest might receiue alone Surely that priuate Masse is such a monster as it is not credible that it once entred into any of their heads that decreede those Canons But seeing they would not suffer any smal number of Christians to withdrawe them selues from the communion is it like they would suffer all not to receiue And seeing the worde of God was the ground of their decree Tarrie one for another 1. Cor. 11. c. who doubteth but that if the peoples deuotion serued them not the priest was as well bound to tarrie for the people as one lay man for another So that all the congregation ought to communicate together and none to be left out but such as either be vnworthie or haue some necessarie impediment Finally if the Papistes were grieued at the seeldome receiuing communicating with the priest as they pretende why do they not execute the censures of these Canons against all that be present at their Masses and do not receiue with them But M. Heskins proceeding in confutation of the proclaimers arguments first chargeth him to father a decree vpon Calixtus which was decreede by Anacletus as though one thing might not be decreed by two bishops and as though in the Canon lawe and other like-recordes one lawe is not fathered vppon diuerse bishops And Gratian ascribeth it to both and namely to Calixtus dist 2. Cap. Peracta The words are these Peracta consecratione c. When the consecration is done let euery man receiue the communion vnlesse he wil be put from the vnitie of the church For this thing the Apostles haue ordeined and the holy churche of Rome continueth the same Two great faultes M. Hesk. findeth in this allegation First he doth detort abuse and wrest the place secondly he doth mutilate it and cutt it off by the knees Here be vehement accusations but in the tryall you shall see the bishop clearely discharged all the slaunder verified vpon the accusers owne dealing For first to reproue the bishops allegation which was brought out of a decree of Calixtus hee bringeth in an Epistle of Anacletus Secondly he will not alledge the wordes of the Epistle but the report of Bartholomewe Garanza a common falsifier of Canons decrees and thus he citeth it Sacerdotes quando c. The priestes when they do offer sacrifice vnto our Lorde they ought not to do it alone but let them take witnesses with them that they may be proued to sacrifice perfectly vnto the Lord in places dedicated to God according to that of Deutron 12. Take heede thou offer not sacrifice in all places that thou seest but in the place that thy Lord God hath chosen Let a bishop sacrificing to God haue witnesses with him more then another priest with whome when the consecration is done let all the ministers communicate which will not bee forbidden the entrie of the church Maister Heskins in his translation hath falsifyed the wordes for where the Latine is Non soli hoc agere debent The Priestes ought not to do it alone he hath turned it they shall not do it alone where the Latine is sed testes secum adhibeant he turneth it but they shall haue witnesses with them wheras hee should saye let them take witnesses with them His pollicie is easie to espye Hee would haue it seeme to the Englishe reader that witnesses are appoynted which if they faile to bee present the Priest might notwithstanding saye his priuate Masse alone whereas by the wordes of the decree the Priestes are commaunded to get witnesses and it is tolde them they ought not to do it alone But M. Hesk. to iustifie the falsification of his spanish Garanza which saith omnes ministri communicent let all the ministers communicate as though the commaundement were to them not to the people bringeth forth a patch or two out of the Epistle of Anacletus But that the trueth of the proclaimer the falshood of this exclaimer may be more manifest I will set downe all the discourse of this matter out of that Epistle set forth vnder the name of Anacletus by Peter Crabbe as errant a Papist as Bartholomew Garanza for his heart nothing therein by diuersitie of letter that which M. Hesk. hath rent out from the rest Ipsi autem quando Domino sacrificant non soli hoc agere debent sed testes secum adhibeāt vt Domino perfectè in sacratis Deo
more certeintie and better credite then the Papists can bring any shewed by God since the restitution of the Gospell yet because our doctrine is the same that was confirmed by all the miracles of Christ and his Apostles we seeke no confirmation thereof by later miracles but onely by the scriptures And herein we followe the example of S. Augustine who vrgeth the Donatistes to proue themselues to be the Church of God only by Canonicall scriptures not by miracles whereof they boasted more then the Catholikes Lib de vnitate Ecclesiae Cap. 16. Et sic ostendat vt non dicat verum est quia ego hoc dico aut quia hoc dixit ille collega meut 〈◊〉 illi collegae mei aut illi Episcopi vel clerici vel laici nostâ—i aut ideo verum est quia illa illa mirabilia fecit Donatus vel Pontius vel quilibet alius aut quia homines ad memorias mortuorum nostrorum orant exaudiuntur aut quia illa illa ibi contingunt aut quiae ille fraeter noster aut illa soror nostra tale visum vigilans vidit vel tale visum dormiens somnianis Remoueantur ista vel figmenta mendacium hominum vel portenta fallacium spirituun ut eniâ—â— non sunt vera quÄ™ dicuntur aut sihÄ™reticoruÌ„ aliqua mira facta sunt magis canere debemus And so let him shewe the Churche that he do not say this is true because I say it or because such a one my fellowe saide it or those my fellowes or those our bishops or clearkes or laymen or it is therfore true because Donatus or Pontius or any other hath done those and those miracles or because men pray at the memories of our dead men and are heard or because those thinges those things happen there or because this our brother or that our sister sawe such a vision waking or dreamed such a vision sleeping Let these thinges be set aside which are either the counterfetting of lying men or els the wonders of deceiuing spirits for either those things are not true that are told or else if any miracles are done of heretiques we ought the more to beware of them And after a litle he saith in the same Chapter Sed verum ipsi Ecclesiam teneant non nisi diuinarum scripturarum canonicis libria ostendant quia nec nos propterea dicimus nobis credere oportere quòd in Ecclesia sumus quia ipsam quam tenemus commendauit Mileuitanus Optatus vel Mediolanensis Ambrosius vel alij innumerabiles nostre coÌ„munionis episcopi aut quia nostrorum CollegaruÌ„ concilijs ipsa praedicata est aut quia per totum orbem in locis sanctis quae frequentat communio nostra tanta mirabilia vel exauditionuÌ„ vel sanitatum fiant ita vt latentia per tot annos corpora Martyrum quod possunt a muâ—tis interrogaÌ„tes audire Ambrosio fuerint reuelata ad ipsa corpora caecus multorum annorum ciuitati Mediolanensi notissimus oculos luménque reciperet aut quia ille somnium vidit ille spiritu assumptus audiuit siue ne iniret in partem Donati siue vt recederet à parte Donati QuÄ™cunque talia in Catholica fiunt ideo sunt approbanda quia in Catholica fiunt non ìdeo ipsa manifestatur Catholica quia haec in ea fiunt But whether they holde the Churche or no let them shew none otherwise but by the Canonicall Bookes of the holie scriptures for neither do we say that men ought therfore to beleeue vs that we are in the Church because Optatus of Mileuitum or Ambrose of Millain or innumerable other Bishops of our fellowship haue commended this Church whiche we holde or because it is set foorth and praysed in the councels of our fellowships or because that in holy places thorough the world which our fellowship doth frequent so great miracles are done either of hearing mens prayers or of restoring to health so that the bodies of Martyrs which haue been hidden so many yeres which thing if they wil ask they may heare of many were reuealed to Ambrose at the same bodies one that had ben blind many yeres very well knowen to the citie of Millain receiued his eyes and sight or because this man saw a dreame or that man was taken vp in spirit and heard either that he shold not go into the faction of Donatus or that he should depart from it Whatsoeuer such things are done in the Catholike Church they are therefore to be allowed because they are done in the Catholike Church but the Church it selfe is not therby proued Catholike because these things are done in it And thus much concerning miracles The issue that M. Hesk. ioyneth is tried by all Catholike ancient Doctors that the Masse is idolatrie because it is a worshipping of creatures in steed of the creator although none of the olde writers call the Masse Idolatrie whiche had neither name nor being in their dayes The three and fortieth Chapter maketh recapitulation of the conference of the Masses of the Apostles and Fathers of the primitiue Church and of the Catholike Church that now is with a breefâ— confutation of the conference made by the proclamer betweene thâ— Masse of Saint Iames and that is now vsed The recapitulation conteining nothing but that which is confuted in the discourse at large I will omitte it and come to the conference that the Bishop made betweene the liturgie falsely ascribed to S. Iames and the Popishe Masse beeing content for the time to call it Saint Iames Masse as Maister Heskins doth although neither it is a Masse nor such as it is was it writteÌ„ by S. Iames the Apostle but by some of much later time as appeareth by the prayer therein conteined for such as liue in Monasteries and other thinges fauouring of the errours of that time in which it was written The first point of the conference is that S. Iames saide Masse in the common tong vnderstoode of the people the Papistes say Masse in a straunge tonge M. Heskins answereth that this point toucheth not the substance for the Masse may be good though it be not vnderstood but he himselfe maketh the doctrine of the Masse to be of the substance of it wherefore seeing there lacketh doctrine in the Masse there lacketh one of the foure substantiall partes But he would make the reading of the epistle and Gospel in Latine Doctrine and good doctrine What doctrine that is by which the people are not taught let reasonable men iudge for although all the Masse were nothing but scripture yet it were not good to be read in the Church in a straunge tong 1. Cor. 14. because it were not profitable for edifying His childish sophismes of Plato his substance and his accidents I disdaine to rehearse the trueth is manifest The second comparison S. Iames spake out of the words of consecration They in their Masse suppresse them and keepe them
in reformation no doubt but there were mutuall messages betweene them The vnion and communion of our Church with other particular Churches of God throughout the world is spirituall made by the working of the holy Ghost and not by embassages or orders taken by men But the same is declared and shewed by the confession of our faith fully agreeing in all necessarie Articles with them 91 The publique protestations and confessions of our faith doe shewe our reconciliation and coniunction with the Catholique Church of Christ without that it is needfull for vs to exhibite any billes of submission to any singular persons as hath bene vsed in cases of particular discipline as in reconciliation of Vrsarius and Valens to Iulius of Rome Maximus Vrbanus other to Cyprian of Carthage 92 The realme did neuer submit it selfe to Luther Zuinglius or Caluine but to Christe and his Church As for offring of billes of submission to forreigne Bishops it is no part of Christian discipline But if it were a matter of any substance al the Cleargie of England gaue their subscription to the Archbishop of Canturburie and other Bishops for the departure out of the Popish Church into the Church of England That we receiued not the errour of Luther concerning the reall presence it sheweth wee depend not vpon any man further then his doctrine is true and agreeable to the word of God. 93 Caluine and Zuinglius although they receiued some light of vnderstanding by the ministerie of Luther yet came they not from him but were stirred vp of God as he was 94 The realme in King Edwards time neuer purposed to submit them selues to Caluine who although he misliked the title of supreme head in that sense whiche Steuen Gardiner maintained it at Ratisbone as though it gaue vnto the King an absolute authoritie to do what he would in the Church yet in that sence that it was receiued of King Edward and vnderstoode of all godly men that is to bee the highest Magistrate in the Church as well for the ordering of Ecclesiasticall as ciuill matters he neuer did condemne it 95 King Edward retaining that title in the godly sense aboue rehearsed the Church of England notwithstanding was vnited to the Catholique Church of Christ throughout the world 96 When Queene Marie came to the Crowne shee found the realme a member of the Catholique Church of Christe which she forsooke and sought to bring it in bondage againe to the Antichristian See of Rome which by meanes of a Legacie from the Pope brought by Cardinall Poole long before attainted for treason against his Prince and countrie was by an acte of Parleament yeelded vnto Although GOD reserued more then seuen thousand that neuer bowed their knee to Baal of Rome whereof many were cruelly put to death and suffered martyrdome the rest were persecuted and by the protection of God escaped out of that bloudie and fierie persecution 97 The seat of Peter could not be planted at Rome in the dayes of Claudius the Emperour bycause that in the tenth or eleuenth yeare of his Empire Peter was at Antioch reproued by Paule Gala. 2. The last yeare or the first of Nero S. Paule writte his Epistle to the Romanes from Corinth where he taried almost two yeres in which Epistle he sending salutation to sixe and twentie singular persons beside diuers families would not haue omitted to salute Peter if he had bene there But admit that Peter had a seat at Rome yet the Papacie hath not continued from that time but since the dayes of Boniface the third which was more then â—00 yeares after Christe Neither hath the faith of the See of Rome continued without chaunge as M. Sanders saith these 1500. yeares but is altogether in a manner chaunged from the faith of Peter and of the Apostolike Church therefore Queene Marie bringing the realme to that Church did not reconcile it to the true Church of Christ but restored it to the slauerie of the Antichristian tyrannie 98 Seeing the realme is nowe againe returned to the embracing of the doctrine of the Gospell set foorth in the holy scriptures taught in the Primitiue Church many hundreth yeares after Christe continued in all times though vnder persecution of Antichrist and nowe openly and publiquely professed of many nations it is a member of the true Catholike Church of Christe whereof Christe onely is the head and communicateth with the Church of Christ of all nations in all pointes of true religion necessarie to saluation and therefore is no seismaticall Church but a Catholique and Apostolique Church 99 The Catholique Church of Christe whereof the Church of England is a part is an inuisible Church and therefore an Article of our faith which is of things inuisible Heb. 10. and no Church vnder a bushell But Hierusalem that is in heauen is the mother of vs all Gala. 4. Contrariwise the Popish Church which is visible is the Church of Infidels and Rome which is vpon earth is the mother of all Antichristians 100 The preaching of Gods worde is the ground of faith â–ª the celebrating of the sacramentes is the confirmation of the same these exercises haue alwayes beene in the true Churche of God when they be not hindred by persecution 101 The Gospell of Christ hath beene preached vnto all nations And the Church hath had Pastours and teachers froÌ„ Christes time vnto Luthers age Maister Sander asketh where they were through all nations As though it were necessarie they should be in euerie nation at all times Poperie when it was at the largest had not teachers in all nations For many coÌ„tinue in barbarous Gentilisme beside Mahometisme which hath filled the greatest part of the worlde The Church of Christe is scattered in many nations and hath had and now also hath many Kinges that walke in the light thereof And at this time more then the Popish Church hath 102 The true Church in England is honoured nourished by the Kinges whome she honoureth as supreme gouernours heades or rulers thereof And although Ecclesiasticall persons pay subsidies vnto their princes yet are not their Princes and their Courtiers nourished by the goodes of the Church as Maister Sander moste slaunderously reporteth otherwise then it is meete that subiects should contribute to the maintenance of the state of the Prince and their owne defence 103 The worde of God written is in deede honorable and true and conteineth all that doctrine by whiche the Church of God was gouerned two thousand yeres before any word of the Bible was written when by reason of that long life of the Patriarches the tradition might be certeine The Gospell also was preached by the Apostles before any of the foure Gospels was penned but yet agreable to the scriptures of the olde Testament and is the same that is written and none other which written word of God is able to make the man of God perfect and is deliuered vnto the Church of Christe as a moste certeine rule to followe that
San. himself afterward confesseth that it is an heathenish custome to honour men with setting vp their images And if it was superstitious in the heathen therefore it was superstitious in these Christians which folowed the heathenish custome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without any change Secondly he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is spightfully Englished their sauiours And why so I pray you â–ª What other thing doth the worde signifie but a Sauiour of whole or part of body or soule Except you will say that among the Heathen Castor Pollux were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the plural number but it was for that they were supposed to be sauiours or preseruers of Mariners which declareth in what sense Eusebius saith these men worshipped them without chaunge by an heathenish custome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen as they worshippe sauiours for example such and so as they called Castor and Pollux I will not therefore sticke with you but that those men of whome Eusebius speaketh in this last sentence were such as professed some lâ—ue of Christe and Christianitie but yet after an heathenish maner Alexander the Emperour worshipped the image of Christe in his Chappell among his other idols Carpocrates the heretique made the images of Iesus and Paul Homer and Pythagoras did cense them with incense and worship them Epiph. lib. 1. Tom. 2. in prefat The Gnostike heretiques had euen such images of Christe painted in colours as Eusebius speaketh of euen as they had the images of Pythagoras Plato Aristotle Epher 27. which heretiques answere directly to the wordes of Eusebius that they made and worshipped the images of Christe and his Apostles without chaunge euen as they made the images of Heathen men whome they had in estimation Againe S. August De moribus Ecclesiae Catholicae cap. 34. speaketh of such worshippers of reliques and pictures euen in his time which yet the Catholique Church did not allowe Nolite mihi colligere professores nominis Christiani neque professionis suae vim aut scientes aut exhibentes Nolite consectari turbas imperitorum qui vel in ipsa vera religione superstitiosi sunt vel ita libidinibus dediti vt obliti sint quid promisserint Deo. Noui multos esse sepulchrorum picturarum adoratores noui multos esse qui luxuriosissimè super mortuos bibant epulas 〈◊〉 laueribus exhibentes super sepultos seipsos sepeliant voracitates ebrietatesque suas deputent religioni Gather not me together such professours of the Christian name as either know not or shewe not the vertue of their profession Seeke not vp the multitude of vnskilfull men which euen in true religion it selfe are superstitious or else so giuen to filthie lustes that they haue forgotten what they haue promised to god I knowe there be many worshippers of tombs and pictures I know there be many which most riotously drinke ouer the dead making banquets for the dead bodies burie them selues vpon the buried bodies and account their gluttonies and dronkennesse to be religion Such Christians they might be of whome Eusebius speaketh But M. San. confessing this maner of honouring by images to be an heathenish custom doth also affirme that it was a laudable custome saying that it was but pusillanimitie scrupulositie in the Iewes that they durst make no images So that to obey the commandement of God is counted of him for a vice and it is a great vertue of magnanimitie to be bolde to do that which God hath forbidden But what reason hath he Forsooth all things that the heathens vsed were not euill Sacrifice was not euill though the heathen did offer sacrifice to diuels Virginitie of Nuns for so it pleaseth him to translate Sanctiomonialium in Augustine although there were no Popish names in his time is not euill bicause the heathen had their vestall Virgines So that by his Logike there is one reason of things good and lawfull if they be well vsed as sacrifice and virginitie and things simply forbidden as making and worshipping of images in religion But nowe we are come to S. Iames Chapter which not heathen men but the brethren at Hierusalem and as Ruffinus translateth it the Bishops in succession did preserue and had in estimation his words folowing imediately after the sentence last intreated of are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the brethren there by succession hauing in estimation the Chaire of Iames the Apostle that is kept vnto this time which Iames was the first that receiued the charge of the Church of Hierusalem of our Sauiour him self and of the Apostles whome also the holy scriptures do shewe to haue bene called the brother of Christ doe euidently shewe vnto all men in what manner both those that were in the old time and those that be euen till our days haue maintained yet do maintaine a worthie reuerence and worshippe of holy men for their godlinesse sake Here M. Sander scoffeth rayleth braggeth and all about the Moone shine in the water Knowe you not Maister Iewel saith he that this worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For giueth a reason of that which went before What was that That olde men tarrying in superstition did set vp images whereof the reason followeth bicause the brethren at Hierusalem do honour the chaire of S. Iames. Then he cryeth out O cursed lying spirit c. At length he concludeth that it is manifest that Eusebius alloweth and stoutly defendeth the honour that is giuen to Saints by their images and reliques See what a stout champion Maister Sander wil make Eusebius to be for images and reliques But to returne to your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Maister Sander is there no remendie but either images must be allowed or this connexion be foolish May 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for giue a reason of nothing but as you wil haue it Why may it not rather giue a reason why hee counteth that an heathenish custome of honoring Christ his Apostles by making their images bicause the faithfull brethren at Hierusalem euen from the time of Saint Iames not making an image of him but keeping his chaire that he vsed to sit in as a monument declare euidently what maner of reuerence hath bene giuen by true Christians from the beginning to this day vnto holy meÌ„ that is to haue them in remembrance without superstition and idolatrie but not by making of their images For except this Antithesis be vnderstood it were in deed a folish connexion as euil an argument to proue that they which made images of Christ his apostles after the heathnish custome did wel because the Christians at Ierusalem kept the chaire of S. Iames and had it in estimation So that the matter beeing well considered the coniunction is wiser then Maister S. can vnderstande for all his outcries and amplifications To that which the Bishop saith this image beeing in the streete proueth not the setting vppe of Images in the Churche he aunswereth there were other
praescriptionibus aduersus haereticos which is such as hee saieth that euen religion muste agree to it if with anye reason it will bee credited But in deed it is suche as while Tertulian followed too muche hee fell from the Catholike Church to be an heretike The summe of that saying which M. Rast. hath shamefully gesded falsely translated so that it seemeth he hath not red it in Tertulians booke but in some mans notes that hath ioyned together as it were cantles or patches of Tertulians saying the effecte I saie is this That because some heretikes of his time receiued not all the scriptures and those which they did receiue they receiued not whole but by additions and detractions corruptions and wrong expositions they peruerted them to their purpose his iudgement was that against such heretikes the triall was not to bee made by scriptures by which the victorie should either be none or vncertaine or not sure and therefore in as much as they were not agreed what was scripture and how great was the authoritie thereof he thought that the order of disputinge required that these questions shoulde first be decided Vnto whom the Christian faith pertaineth whose are the scriptures of whom and by whom and when and to whom the learning is deliuered by which men are made Christians For where it shall appeare that the trueth of the Christian learning and faith is there shal be the trueth of the scriptures and of the expositions and of all Christian traditions This is the iudgement of Tertulian But seeinge we receiue all the scriptures Canonicall without addition or detraction yea and for the principal articles of our religion wherein we differ from the papistes we receiue the exposition of the most auncient writers both of the Greeke and Latine Churche not bringinge in any newe doctrine but requiring that the olde doctrine may be restored this rule of Tertulian doth not concerne vs Yet are we able to aunswere to all his demaundes without any taryinge and so as it shall satisfie Tertulian or anye man that vnderstandeth him We say that Christian faith pertaineth to true Christians and that the scriptures are theirs also We say also that the learning by which men are made Christians was deliuered of Christ by his Apostles and Euangelistes in the time of the raigne of Tiberius the Emperour first vnto the Iewes and after vnto the Gentiles making one vniuersall Chruch dispersed ouer the whole worlde And the trueth of this Christian learning and faith thus and then deliuered we do hold and mainteine therefore by Tertullians rule the truth of the scriptures and expositions all Christian traditions are with vs the rather because it cannot be proued that we hold any one article of beliefe but the same is conteined in the manifest wordes of the scriptures by which onely it may be tryed what learning Christ deliuered to his Apostles and they to the churches For seeing the memory of man cānot ascende vnto so many hundreth yeares the certeine remembrance must be had out of Records of writings for so much as no writings are either so auncient or so credible as the holy scriptures the trial must be onely by the scriptures notwithstanding Tertullians opinion as Augustine teacheth in many places of his writings against the Donatistes After this discourse vpon Tertullian he addeth sixe articles more falsely pretending that they are the demaundes of Tertullian but altering them into the manner of a challenge where as I haue both set forth and answered Tertullians demaundes according to his owne words and meaning The first is if we can proue by any sufficient and likely argument that we haue any true Christian faith at all among vs for faith saith hee cleaueth vnto authoritie which they can neuer shewe for themselues c In deede suche faith as cleaueth vnto mennes authoritie wee haue none but suche as cleaueth vnto the worde of God as saint Paule saith faith commeth by hearing of the worde of God which is onely true Christian faith wee haue the whole faith of Christians as we do dayly proue not onely by the auctoritie of scriptures but also by the testimony of aunciēt writers agreeable to the same And because he is so impudent to deny that we haue any true Christian faith at all I demaunde of him why hee doth not then rebaptise those that are baptised of vs seing he is persuaded that neither the minister nor the godfathers whose faith according to their doctrin maketh much fo◠baptisme haue any true Christian faith at all The seconde that the scriptures are deliuered vnto vs that we be the right keepers of them is proued by this argument that we be the church of God vnto whome the scriptures and the custodie of them perteineth That wee are the church of God we proue by this argumēt that we beleeue and teach all that and nothing else but that which God by his holy scriptures hath appointed to be beleeued and taught for Christian faith The thirde we knowe from whome wee haue receiued the gospel not from the Papists Namely frō the doctrine of god and his holy spirite from such ministers as were stirred vp of God and lightened with his spirite according to the scriptures and from the books of the Greekes and Hebrues and not of the papists The fourth we knowe by what successours the gospell came vnto vs from God the authour of it euen from the prophets and Apostles Euangelistes pastours and teachers of the church of all ages florishing in sight of the worlde vntill the comming and tyrany of Antichrist had ouerwhelmed all the worlde with darkenesse by whom they were persecuted and driuen into corners according to the prophecie of Christe in the Apocalipse cap. 12. but yet so as they alwayes continued and testified the trueth oftentimes openly protesting against Antichrist vntill nowe at the length the time being come in which Antichrist must be consumed they are againe brought into the sight of the worlde and the kingdome of Antichrist is made obscure ignominious contemptible The fift we knowe at what time the Gospell was first delyuered vnto the Church of the gentiles namely in the reigne of Tiberius in whose time Christ suffered since which time it hath alwayes continued and shall do to the end of the worlde To the sixt wherein he requireth vs to shew the foundatiō of some Church house communion table or booke c. by which it may bee gathered that a true apostolike religion was within the 600. yeares as void of ornamēts ceremonies reuerence distinction of places and dignities sacraments and solemnities perteining to sacraments as ours is I answere our religion hath all sacraments ornaments ceremonies distinction solemnities reuerence necessarie vnto eternall life and therfore to shewe a monument of a religion voide of these it perteineth not to vs Beside that it is a foolishe and vnreasonable demaund for vs to shewe any such monument remaining aboue 900. yeares when by so often
iustice that Dauid doeth promise to execute against al the wicked of the land Psalm 101. to incourage men to cruelty and contention but all in vaine like as his purpose for which he alledgeth them was wicked namely to ouerthrowe the true and naturall sense of the scripture But yet the same Origen is directly against maister Heskins in that cause for which he is alledged as appeareth plainely in Leuitici cap. 16. Hom. 9. An tu putas qui vix diebus fectis ad Ecclesiam venis c. Thinkest thou whiche scarcely commest to the Church vpon the holy dayes giuest no heede to heare the wordes of God nor takest any paines to fulfill his commandements that the Lordes lot can come vppon thee Yet we wish that after you haue heard these things you would take paines not only in the Church to heare the wordes of God but also at home in your houses to be exercised and to meditate in the Lawe of the Lorde day and night Go your wayes now and boaste of Origens authoritie that the scriptures are not to be read of all men when in a publique Sermon he exhorteth all the people to the diligent reading of them and sharply reproueth them for their negligence in this behalfe The third Chapter to declare the newe Testament not to be easie to be vnderstanded â–ª bringeth diuers obscure places of the same As I said before there was neuer man yet so foolish to affirme the scriptures to be so easie that there was no obscure place in them but that nothing needful to saluation is so obscure in them but that it may be easily vnderstoode by conference of other places where the fame is most plainely set foorth But let vs see his wise reasons to proue the new Testament to be hard bicause some places therein be hard to be vnderstanded The Euangelistes Matthewe and Luke seeme to varrie in the Genealogie of Christ therefore all is not easie What then They both doe manifestly agree in that which is materiall for our faith â—hat Christe was the seede of Abraham and the sonne of Dauid In the rest what straunge matter is it if one pedegree be brought from one principall ancester by seuerall discents lineall and collaterall natural and legall by the male and by the female â–ª For the second obscure place Chrysostome is alledged who Numbereth it among the hid thinges howe Elizabeth being of the tribe of Leuie may be called the cousen of Marie A perillous doubt in solution whereof though a number be ignoraunt yet I doubt not but they may be saued And yet by conference of the stories of scripture it is easie to finde that men of the tribe of Iuda might marrie of the Priestes daughters and the Priestes did marrie euen of the Kings daughters of Iuda By which mariages cousenage might easily be vnderstoode to growe betweene the two tribes â–ª notwithstanding the lawe of Num 36. Which did forbid only those marriages by which the inheritances might be confounded The third doubtfull place is in Marke 13. Where it is said that Of that day and houre knoweth no man no not the Angels in heauen nor the sonne him selfe but the father And Chrysostome is againe alledged to shewe that this is a doubtful place and yet a simple Christian that knoweth the two diuers natures in Christ humane and diuine can easily solute it and say that although Christe by his godhead knoweth all things yet as he was man he knewe not all things The fourth proofe is taken out of the example of Algasia and Hedibia two godly women and studious of the scriptures whereof the one found twelue the other eleuen doubtes in the newe Testament and sent to S. Hieronyme for resolution of them I maruell M. Heskins hath so small discretion to alledge these examples which do quight ouerthrowe his purpose If not onely men but women also may read the scriptures and profite so well in the studie of them that they can finde but eleuen or twelue doubts in the whole newe Testament for resolution whereof they did as became good schollers send so farre for the iudgement of their learned maister But M. Heskins not content to shewe that they douted will also set downe some of their douts namely this one moued by Algasia Why Iohn the Baptist should send his disciples to Christ to aske this question Art thou he that shalt come or do we looke for an other seeing he both knewe openly pointed at Christ with his finger before Although this good woman doubted of this matter yet it is easie to answer that theÌ„ he sought the instructioÌ„ of his disciples rather then the confirmation of his owne knowledge An other was moued by Hedibia Howe Christ in Iohn 20. forbad Marie to touch him when Matthew 28. affirmeth that the women held his feete It seemeth to M. Heskins that one of these must be vntrue I dare say it seemed not so to Hedibia although she could not perfectly reconcile these places But seeing that both these reports are true it is plaine ynough that he suffered Marie Magdalene to holde his feete so much as was sufficient to confirme the certeintie of his resurrection forbad her not vntil she shewed her self too much addicted to his bodily preseÌ„ce Another doubt is howe Marke saith the women came to the sepulchre when the Sunne was rysen and then saith Marie Magdalene came early in the morning when it was yet darke A woman sitting at her distaffe woulde easily solue this doubt and say that it was darke when they set foorth of their dores but the Sunne was risen by that time they came to the Sepulchre Yet another doubt of Hedibia whether Christ breathing on his Apostles gaue them the holie Ghost when he promised to send him after his ascension There is no doubt but he did then in some small measure but afterwardes sent him with most plentifull vertue and power To conclude what needed Austen to haue written a great volume De consensu Euangelistarum what needed the comentaries of Hieronyme Ambrose vpon the Euangelistes or the Homilies of Chrysostome Augustine and the expositions of so manie learned men c. if the Scriptures be so plaine easie O foolish conclusion as though the Scriptures may not planely set foorth vnto vs all things necessarie for vs to learne and yet the same things with all other things conteined in them be set forth more plainly largely to the instruction increase of our faith hope comfort obedience c. by Comentaries Homelies expositions yea admonitions and exhortations The fourth Chapter conteineth certeine hard places of the Epistles M. Heskins taketh great paines in those Chapters to proue that which no man doubteth of that there be some hard and darke places in the Scriptures and yet it followeth not but that the Scriptures are a light vnto our steppes a lanterne vnto our feete the worde of the Lord giueth wisedome vnto
exercise of patience confirmation of faith Then the Epistle to the Hebrues hath two sore sentences Heb. 6. 10. For it is not possible that they which were once lightened and haue tasted of the heauenly gift and were made partakers of the holie Ghoste and haue tasted of the good worde of God and of the power of the world to come if they fall away should be renewed againe by repentance seeing they crucifie againe to them selues the Sonne of God and make a mocke of him And againe For if we sinne wilfully after we haue receiued the knowledge of the trueth there remaineth no more sacrifice for sinnes but a fearefull looking for of iudgement and violent fire which shall deuour the aduersaries The difficultie of these places resteth in one point and in a manner in one worde in eche of the sentences For the Apostle excludeth not from repentance euery one that falleth and sinneth but him onely which sinneth so wilfully that he falleth cleane away from christ For then there is no repentance nor remission because he sinneth against the holie Ghost as did Iudas Alexander the coppersmith Iulian the Apostata such like The contention of Hieronyme Augustine about Peters dissimulation is the last example of difficultie which did not arise of any obscuritie of the place but of Hieronymes immoderate and ouer great zeale to defend Peter where the holie Ghost saith plainly he was worthie to be reprehended But for as much as these two great doctors could not agree about the exposition of this place it doth not so much declare the hardnesse of the Scriptures as it doth discourage vs to finde the certeine exposition of them at all times in the iudgement of the doctours which both in this place and many other are not onely diuers but oftentimes contrarie one to another The conclusion of the Chapter is not all amisse wherein he dissuadeth not men from reading the scriptures but from rashnesse of iudgement and exhorteth the readers of them to humilitie and modestie that so the spirite of GOD may rest vppon them which will leade them into all trueth The first Chapter declareth the mindes and iudgements of the Fathers and Doctours vpon the difficultie of the scriptures It is not ynough for this bold Burgesse to trouble the house in prouing that which no man doth gainesay but he wil also charge men with impudencie and arrogancie which giue him no occasion of this his long and vaine speache But herein he sheweth his witt more then his honestie For bicause he can not disproue that which they say he laboureth to proue that which they do not denie And nowe of the doctours substantially no doubt Origen must beginne who saith That these wordes of Paule Brethren you are called into libertie Gal 5. is an hard place and that the holy Ghost must be found in the scriptures with much labour and sweat c. We say likewise with Dauid that the godly mans studie must be in the lawe of the Lorde day and night But that Origen would not for the difficultie of the scriptures dissuade any Lay man from reading of them is manifest by this place in Gen. Capit. 26. Hom. 12. Tenta ergo tu ô auditor habere proprium puteum proprium fontem vt tu cum apprehenderis librum scripturarum incipias etiam ex proprio sensu proferre aliquem intellectum secundum ea quae in Ecclesia didicisti tenta tu bibere de fonte ingenij tui Assay therefore thou ô hearer to haue a pit of thine own a spring of thine owne that euen thou also when thou takest in hand the booke of the scriptures maiest beginne to bring foorth some vnderstanding of thine owne wit and according to those thinges which thou hast learned in the Churche assay thou also to drinke of the spring of thine owne witte Here Origen will not only haue men to reade the scripture but also incourageth them to seeke out the interpretation by their owne studie But Hieronyme next to Origen in his Epistle to Paulinus both noteth diuerse obscure places in the scripture and also counselleth Paulinus to vse the helpe of interpreters And who is it that mislyketh his councel especially if it be to exhort one that meant to be a teacher in the Church as Paulinus was Yet neuerthelesse we shewed before that Hieronyme would haue euen infantes brought vppe in the knowledge of the scriptures and exhorteth not onely men but women also to the studie of them and commendeth husband men and labourers for their knowledge of the scriptures And although he confesse the questions of Algasia to be full of difficulties yet he both commendeth her studie in the scriptures and desire to be resolued in her doubtes Yet Basill teacheth that all the scriptures are not to be published and made common For there are poyntes of learning or of doctrine that are to be kept close and the obscuritie which the scripture vseth is a kinde of silence so framing those points of learning that a man may hardly vnderstand them The wordes of Basil are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is according to Erasmus translation exercising a minde vnapte for the contemplation of this doctrine and that for the profite of them that exercise them selues in the scriptures Which last wordes M. Heskins hath fraudulently left out and so he is cleane contrarie to M. Heskins purpose Although Basill speaketh not expressely of reading the Scriptures by the faithfull but of publishing the mysteries of Christian religion that were receiued by tradition without Scripture For in his short definitions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to this question whether it be expedient that they which are new come to the faith should be instructed in the holie Scriptures he aunswereth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. This question may be dissolued by those things that were sayde before For it is both conuenient necessarie that euery man for his neede should learne out of the diuine Scriptures both for the certeine persuasion of godlinesse also that he be not accustomed vnto mans traditions But S. Ambrose also in fewe words saith much to this matter calling the Scripture of God the great sea hauing in it a deepenesse without bottome of deepe senses vnderstandings into the which many floods do enter But this letteth not S. Ambrose vpon 118. Psal. Serm. 1. to exhort the laye people to read the Scriptures Et tu lege prophetam vt videat lege vt apperiat os tutum And thou also read the Prophet that thou mayst see read that he may open thine eyes And againe Quod sisugias lectionem propheticam si domi non legas in ecclesia audire nolis c. But if thou flye from the reading of the Prophetes if thou read not at home thou wilt not heare in the Church but while thou feinest to heare those things that are read c. And if in your iudgement
he said much for you when he coÌ„pareth the scripture to the sea I thinke he saith more against you where he compareth the Church to the sea Hexam lib. 3. cap. 3. Vnde bene mari plerumque comparatur ecclesia quae primo ingredientis populi agmine totis vestibulis vndas vomit deinde in oratione totius plebis tanquam vndis refluentibus stridet tum responsorijs Psalmorum cantus virorum mulierum virginum paruuloruÌ„ consonus vndarum fragor resultat WhervpoÌ„ the Church is oft times verie wel compared vnto the sea which first by the coÌ„ming in of the multitude floweth out waues froÌ„ euery porch or entrie and then maketh a noyse with the prayer of the whole people as it were with the ebbing or flowing backe of the waues last of all with answerings of Psalmes singing of men women virgines and little children a well tunable sound of the waues reboundeth By this place it appeareth that all sorts of people were admitted to the reading of the scriptures and that no tong was vsed in the Church but such as was coÌ„mon to all the people Chrysostome succeedeth Ambrose who saith The scriptures are darke that they are found out with labour but not shut that they can not be found out at all and that the priestes ought to be the keykeepers of the scriptures not to shut them vp but to open them c. I would oppose some testimonie of Chrysostome to explane his meaning not to be to discourage men froÌ„ reading the scriptures but that M. Heskins doth soone after confesse the same of his owne accord in these wordes I am not ignorant gentle reader that Chrysostome doth so that is that Chrysostome in a number of places most earnestly exhorteth men to the reading of the scriptures and doth not feare them with the obscuritie and difficultie thereof I aske no more against M. Heskins but his own confession of Chrysostomes iudgement to be against him whervnto we must returne anon after a little consideration of Gregories iudgement Gregorie sheweth that the obscuritie of the scriptures is for great profite for exercising the vnderstanding for auoyding of wearines idlenes contempt and for great delight when it is found out with labour Augustine hath the like sentence but this maketh much for our cause that the obscuritie of the scripture where it is darke is very profitable for the diligent reader To conclude if all the scripture were neuer so darke yet seeing it is necessarie to be knowne of al men it ought to be read and studied of all the more the oftener where it is more hard to vnderstand that long diligent search may find out that which sildome slight reading would passe ouer As for the last testimonie of Hieronyme ad Paulinum concerning the Canonicall Epistles That they are both short and long so that there be not many which are not blind in them Bicause we had the like before I will referre it to the former answeres The rest of the rayling stuffe charging vs with cause of heresies arrogance and ignorance in suffering and allowing the people to reade the scriptures affirming them to be easie when they be hard c. is more meete for M. Heskins to write then vs to answere But to return to the obiection that he maketh of the iudgement of Chrysostome and Erasmus whom he confesseth to be against him let vs see his wittie answeres To Chrysostome he answereth That there were two causes why he would haue the scriptures read one that they might the better vnderstand his expositions in the Churche the other that they might reade them to followe them to these purposes he graunteth it were tollerable they should be read but not to frame newe doctrines out of them nor to contâ—mne the learned teachers c. And who I pray you would haue them read to other purpose Not Luther not Iewell nor any man whom you most spyte at But see the force of truth and the malice of an enimie therof Heskins hauing reasoned in fiue Chapters against the reading of scriptures nowe graunteth to it but yet that which is most conuenient of al most necessarie he vouchsafeth to cal it but tollerable To Erasmus he replyeth first that seeing he confesseth in diuers places the scriptures to be hard to vnderstand he maruelleth that he would exhort ignorant men to the reading of them But Erasmus would easily turne backe M. Heskins reason vpon his owne head Seeing they are hard they are the more often and diligently to be read studied Secondly he thinketh Alphonsus good ynough to oppose against Erasmus who affirmeth That although it were meete the people should read the scriptures in Chrysostomes time yet it is not meete nowe bicause lawes are changed as the times and manners of men are And it is no more meete that the people should nowe read the scriptures then that the Vigils should be kept as they were in Hieronymes time or that Infantes should receiue the Communion as they did in Augustines tâ—me or men shuld abstaine from bloud and strangled as in the Apostles time or discipline and publique penance should be vsed as in the old dayes If the maners of men be worse nowe they haue more neede of the knowledge of God whereby they might be reformed wherefore the similitudes are nothing like And besides this note also the errour of the Church in S. Augustines time confessed and the want of discipline in the Popish Church acknowledged The sixt Chapter declaring howe the people shall come to the vnderstanding of the scriptures The vnderstanding then of the scriptures is necessarie seing God as you coÌ„fesse which ordeineth nothing in vain hath appointed a meane wherby the people should come to the vnderstanding of the scriptures So by the way we haue gained thus much that ignorance is not the mother of Christian deuotion as was most impudently affirmed by all the Bel weathers of Papistrie in the conference of Westminster to the perpetuall shame ignominie both of them selues and al the Popish Church But nowe to the meane appointed by God which you say Is that the lawe should be in the mouth of the Priest and the people should learne it at his mouth A very godly order in deede but yet such as neither promiseth that the lawe shal be alwayes in the Priestes heart nor bindeth the people to learne it only at his mouth And therefore nothing in the world letteth but that the godly man should meditate in the lawe of God day night Psal. 1. and haue it so familiar vnto him that he shuld teach his childreÌ„ therin talke of it at home abroad vprising and downlying and write on the postes of his doores and vpon his gates that he may learne to do it Deut. 4. 11. Wherefore all the places that M. Heskins alledgeth to shewe that the Priestes should be learned and the people instructed by them serue to proue nothing that is in controuersie
but is confessed of al men except it be to condemne the Clergie of Papistrie which for the most part are ignoraunt not onely of Gods lawe but of all honest knowledge and vpon very necessitie open a gate vnto the people to seeke instruction them selues where the ordinarie passage is stopped through the ignorance of the Ministers The first place by him alledged is Deu. 17. That if there rise a matter too hard for the people in iudgement betweene bloud and bloud c. they shall come to the Priestes and stand to their iudgement on paine of death c. Although I might answere that this ordinaunce appertaineth to iudiciall causes of which God gaue his lawe also yet if it be taken generally so long as the Prieste determineth according to the lawe it is well ynough But this proueth not that the people must haue no vnderstanding beside the priests mouth For the decree is onely of matters that are difficult and such as cannot be decided at home No more do the wordes of Malachie That the lips of the Priest shall keepe the law and men shall require it at his mouth And much lesse the commaundement in Aggee Enquire the lawe of the Priestes And least of all that Christ commaundeth the Scribes and Pharisees to be heard sitting in the chaire of Moses These places proue that it is the Priestes duetie to be learned in the lawe of God but repel not the general lawe wherby euery man is cōmanded also to studie in the law of God yea though the Priestes neither would nor could teach him For if the blinde followe the blinde they both fall into the ditch which our sauiour Christ willeth all men to take heede of Hieronyme in the place by you alledged M. Heskins gathereth rightly of these places that it is the Priestes office to know and expound the scriptures but I muse how the greatest number of your Priestes can brooke those words of his If he be ignorant of the law he proueth him selfe to be no Priest of God. Much more against your cleargie your cause is that large sentence you set down out of Hieronyme thē to hurt your aduersaries where he concludeth out of 1. Tim. 3. Tit. 1. that both by the new Testament and the old it is the priests office to know and teach the lawe of god As is also that which you adde out of 1. Cor. 12. that God hath appointed some Apostles some Prophets some pastors teachers as though these orders might not stand with the peoples reading of the scriptures whē euen in the Apostles time the Thessalonians or Berrhoeans wer cōmended for that thei did not only heare the Apostles but also cōferred their doctrin with the scriptures Actes 17. Hauing rehearsed your texts you fal to collecting of three things out of thē 1. That it is the dutie of a Priest to be learned in the law of God and godly life also which euerie man confesseth 2. That there be doubts and hard matters in the law And that also shal be confessed But withall out of the same place it is proued that there are many plaine and easie pointes in the lawe because the decree was not for all the lawe but onely for harde cases of the lawe Thirdly that the people must bee taught them and learne of the priestes and this also shall be granted to the vttermost so that you will allow the people to learn such things as are easie not only of the priests but also of their own reading study conference with thē that are no priestes And this is no inuerting of Gods order M. Heskins how much soeuer you enuie the peoples instruction For it is gods commaundement as I shewed before that his people shoulde not onely reade the lawe themselues but teach the same to others yea parentes are commaunded to teach the lawe of God to their children and yet I weene you will not say that all parents be priestes But the marke you shoote at is easie to see the ignorance of the people is more for your worshippe and gaine then their knowledge The examples you bring of the people teaching Aaron of Chore Dathan Abiram rebelling against Moses and Aaron and of the Israelites in deposing Samuel and desiring a king are of no force to dissuade men from reading of the Scriptures no thoughe they haue learned and true teachers much lesse when they are vnder dumbe dogges and heretikes as all popishe priestes are nor to abridge the authoritie of lawfull magistrates in banishing and suppressing all vsurped power and false teachers nor to shake off the yoke of Antichrist to submit thēselues vnto a king There is too great oddes betweene the Pope and Samuel betweene Moses and Aaron the popish cleargie that they which withstande the Pope and his Prelates should be in the case of Dathan and his complices or of the people that refused the regiment of Samuel The saying of Augustine Ep. 118. Although it come in here out of season yet it maketh nothing against vs He saith It is most insolent madnesse to dispute whether that is to be done which the Church throughout all the worlde doth obserue Excepte M. Heskins can shewe what is obserued of the Church throughout the worlde which we doe not obserue or deny to be obserued For S. Augustine in that place speaketh of Ceremonies The seuenth Chapter declaring the same by examples of the Fathers and authorities of the Doctours of the Church The title of this Chapter pretendeth to declare howe the people shall come to the vnderstanding of the scriptures but the examples are most of the preachers and teachers how they shall atteine to knowledge sufficient to discharge their office But the first argument whervpō almost all the rest of the Chapter doth runne is a maruellous conclusion God commaundeth the children of Israell 32. Aske thy father and he will shewe thee thy Elders and they will tell thee Ergo God did not sende all the people only to the fiue books of Moses to learne but willed them to learne of their Elders So now all men may not be sent to the scriptures to learne but they must learne of their Fathers what be the goodly workes of God conteined in the Scriptures Why M. Heskins you forget not only lodgike but common reason We would not haue men to learne onely by reading the scriptures but muche more by hearing their teachers first their Pastors and then all other whom God hath indued with any gift of knowledge And wil you conclude with shame that because men were not sent only to the fiue Bookes of Moses men may not now be sent at all to the scriptures And are you so blinde that you cannot see this text to ouerthrowe the purpose of both your sixth and seuenth Chapters after this manner by necessary conclusion Men must learne of their fathers therefore not only of the Priestes The rest that followeth for certeine pages is so tedious a
proofe of that which is not at all in controuersie that it yrketh me to abridge it but for orders sake The Apostles learned of Christ in three yeares study prayer is required to the vnderstanding of the scripture by Origens iudgement The Fathers of the Church learned of their Elders as Clemens Marke Linus Cletus of Peter Titus Timotheus Luke Dionise of Paule and so one of an other Basil and Gregorie Nazianzen studied thirteene yeres in a monasterie Hieronyme learned of the Hebrues trusted not his own iudgement wherefore all rashe readers and arrogant teachers may be abashed which take vpon them to teach before they be learned whereas no man may be his owne teacher in the scriptures All this and much more shall be graunted to M. Heskins without any strife at all But that which he also granteth though it be not very liberally yet it must not be refused That in S. Hieronymies time many did study the scriptures which if the people coulde nowe reuerently and meekely vse might be tollerated Well then the allowance of antiquitie is of our side and the conditional tolleration of M. Heskins for I may not say of the Popish Church knowing what horrible persecution they practise against thē which haue but a book of the scriptures in their mother tonge found in their hand or house although it cannot be proued that they read it Wherefore it is most absurd that hee chargeth the proclamer with slaundering their Churche to bring hir in hatred with the lay people as though she had nowe forbidden them to read the Scriptures in their owne tongue whereas he knoweth no suche prohibition giuen to the lay people vniuersally But the reason is most monsterous For if there had bene any such prohibition there should not haue bene so many lay men which haue both read and written of the scriptures in their natiue tongues c. As thoughe learned lay men coulde not haue readd the scriptures but in their mother tongue But the church fearing the abuses of the scriptures by the vnlearned lay men forbad them But such lay men as vnderstād the scriptures in Hebrue Greeke the Church wil allow them to read thē in english O wise prouident Church Nay meruell not at this For the learned if they be rashe fall into heresies much more the vnlearned And the learned also yea and phisitians themselues sometimes take surfeites therefore it were a sure way for the people neuer to eate meate Noble men and wisemen somtime haue their houses burned therefore it is much more dangerous for poore and simple men to haue fire in their houses The knowledge of Mysteries muste not bee made common to all men for the Iewes would not suffer Genesis and Cantica to be redde of young men before 30. yeares of age The heathen men also as the Romanes Philosophers kept close their secrets the one Sibyllaes bookes the other Morall philosophie especially Metaphysike If I had time I might make sporte with this Metaphysical argument that Christian men must folow the practise of Infidels But I must passe ouer to the rest Chrysostom in the Greeke Church as wel as Hieronyme in the Latine wold haue the people to learne by hearing their teachers and not onely by reading them selues because the scriptures are darke and are a storehouse not common for all men but out of which the stewardes must deliuer to euerie man his portion Remember all this notwithstanding that M. Heskins confessed before that Chrysostome doth often earnestly exhort the lay and vnlearned people to the diligent reading of the scriptures Then followe similitudes of young children and vnthriftes the one if they feede thēselues the meate runneth about their mouth bosome and clothes the other spende their fathers goods in suites and quarels and contention with their brethren So men without witte grace abuse the scriptures to the hurt of others no profite of themselues Except all laye men want witt and grace these similitudes proue nothing For many priestes also want wit grace whō you admit to read the scriptures After similitudes come examples Valdo an vnlearned man caused Bookes of scripture to be translated and so beganne the sect of Valdenses or Pauperes de Lugduno Out of the same founteine of ignorance sprang the heretikes called Begradi Turrelupini Valdo was a godly man seeing the ignorance and vngodlines of the Priests did very wel to procure the translatiō of the scripture and vppon good groundes departed from the Church of Rome vnto the Church of Christ what the other were as stories are vncertein so I leaue them in doubt But Luther and Zwinglius are charged to affirme The scriptures to be easie and make it free for all men to read and expound them and teach that not onely men but also women may openly preache the worde of God and that as well a childe and a woman absolueth as a Bishop If these were not meere slaunders he would haue set downe their owne wordes the circumstance of which no doubt would discharge them of such absurdities as he collecteth For they would neuer affirme euery place of the scripture to be easie nor women but in case where al men or the most faile of knowledge to teach as the prophetesses of the olde lawe did nor women and children to absolue as well as a godly bishop by the doctrine of the Gospell but perhaps better then an ignorant Popish Prelate Likewise where he chargeth Luther To boast that he was ignorant in no part of the scripture and yet bringeth in his owne wordes wherein he confesseth that he knew not whether he had the right vnderstanding of the Psalmes and saith also that it was most impudent rashnesse for any man to professe that he vnderstoode any one booke of scripture in all partes I say the conference of these places doeth declare that no man except he were blinde madde or dronke with malice would beleeue the slaunder of boasting to be true in manner and forme as Maister Heskins setteth it downe Hauing vomited his malice against Luther Zwinglius he inueyeth with mayn sayle of open rayling against the people of our time for the rashnesse and disorder of some As though there were no talke but rash babbling of predestination free wil iustification yea God to be the author of sinne of the number of the sacraments especially the sacrament of the altar and no where but in Tauernes Innes Alehouses and Barbarshops in streetes highwayes and fieldes and in the mouthes of women boyes and girles God be thanked this slaunder is false Although there be great rashnesse in some and vnreligiousnesse in more yet the true members of Christ profite much by reading of his word We confesse with Gregorie Nazianzene that it is not for euery man rashly to dispute of God nor yet of diuine matters but with humilitie and sobrietie which they shal learne no where so well as in the holy scriptures of god The
many God be blessed follow their example at this day and yet too fewe for it were to be wished that such modestie were in all men The saying of Clemens registred also in the cannon lawe although you alledge it out of a counterfet and barbarous epistle yet is it very godly and worthie of the Apostles scholler That the scripture must not be drawen into straunge and forreigne senses according vnto euerie mans phantasie but the true sense must be taken out of the very Scriptures themselues agreeable to the iudgement of them that haue receiued is from the elders That is the Apostles For there were none other in the time of Clemens whiche went before but euen they The rest of the Chapter conteineth a repetition of that he hath handled in these eight Chapters with a promise that after this prety preamble he will goe immediately to his purposed matter to bee debated in this highe Court of prattlement And yet I weene as you haue had a preamble so you shall haue a preface of other matter for three or foure Chapters more or euer you come to the principall matter In deede great solemnitie becommeth a parleament The ninth Chapter declaring that our redemption was prenunciâ—â—ed by promises figures and prophesies and what the promises be and to whom they were made In this Chapter so long as he followeth the scriptures he hath well and truely satisfied the title shewing that Christ was promised principally to Adam Abraham and Dauid denying that Salomon was promised to Dauid but christ Where I hope he meaneth that Salomon was not promised as Messias but as a figure of him Finally I agree with him in all things for which he bringeth authoritie of the worde of God onely I cannot admitte the exposition that Iacobus de Valentia maketh of the Dominion of Christ from sea to sea that is from the mid lande sea to both the Oceans the South and the North whiche inclose Affrike and Europe from the floudes Nilus and Tanais vnto the endes of the world that be towarde the East which comprehendeth all Asia For since the time of Iacobus de Valentia we haue knowledge of the fourth part of the worlde toward the West called America greater then any of the three other which his circumscriptioÌ„ doeth exclude out of the kingdome of Christ although I doubt not but thither also the founde of the Gospell hath beene carried and is nowe restored in some places although brutish barbarousnesse hath of long time ouerwhelmed it The tenth Chapter toucheth the figures of Christes incarnation passion resurrection and ascention In this Chapter as in the former following the authoritie of the holy scriptures he sheweth that the conception of Sampson was a figure of the incarnation of Christ Ioseph of his betraying Isaac of his suffering the priesthood of Aaron and the sacrifices of his priesthoode sacrifice Ionas of his resurrection Elias of his ascention Wherein I see nothing worthie of reprehension except peraduenture in some collation there be more subtil curiositie then sound stedfastnesse The eleuenth Chapter declareth by the Prophets of what line the Messias should come with his coÌ„ception birth passion death In this Chapter also he doeth well discharge his promise for the historie of the coÌ„ception passion of Christ. If al the rest were like these Chapters we should soone agree The twelfth briefely toucheth a prophesie or two of the resurrection and ascention of Christ. In this Chapter as he promiseth is touched a saying of Dauid Psalm 16. alledged by Peter Act. 2 to proue the resurrection and an other Psalm 67. for the ascention alledged by Paule Eph. 4. in these foure Chapters there is nothing in a manner but that which is confessed of both sides The thirteenth Chapter how that Melchisedech was a figure of Christ both in Priesthood and sacrifice This Chapter promiseth more then it performeth for it sheweth in deed and as the trueth is that Melchisedech was a figure of christ but it scarse toucheth his priesthod and speaketh not one worde of his sacrifice as by a briefe collection of the whole Chapter and euerie parte thereof shall appeare First he there declareth that as the mysterie of our redemption was promised figured prophesied in the olde Testament and accomplished in the New so was the memorial of that redemption which Newe Testament being euerlasting hath an euerlasting Priest an euerlasting sacrifice The euerlasting priest he coÌ„fesseth to be our sauiour Christ. But the euerlasting sacrifice he saith is the very body blod of the same our sauiour Christ. Which as he according to the order of his priesthood did sacrifice in his last supper vnder the formes of bread wine so did he giue authoritie coÌ„mandemeÌ„t to the Apostles ministers of his Churche to do the same saying Hoc facite in meaÌ„ coÌ„memorationem This do ye in the remeÌ„brance of me Beside that these thinges of the euerlasting sacrifice be vttered without all proofe or shadowe thereof marke one horrible blasphemie and an other detestable absurditie For in as much as he affirmeth the euerlasting sacrifice to be Christes body and bloud offered in the supper and it is manifest by the scripture that Christe neuer offered but one sacrifice and that but once Heb. 9.25.10.14 it is euident that he vtterly excludeth the sacrifice of his body vpon the Crosse as not being done according to the order of his euerlasting priesthoode For a prodigious absurditie note this that he graunteth the euerlasting priesthood to Christ Which as the Apostle witnesseth is without succession Heb. 7.24 because it is euerlasting in him and yet he maketh the Apostles and ministers of the Church partakers of that Priesthod to offer that sacrifice which none could offer but he himselfe which is an euerlasting priest after the order of Melchisedech that is both a King and Priest. He proceedeth and affirmeth that Of this new Priesthood and sacrifice there were figures and prophesies which must aswell be performed as the other were of the instituter of them The other figures and prophesies ended in Christ touching the fact but not touching the efficacie and vertue which is eternall The newe Testament with the new priesthood and the new sacrifice are begon and confirmed in the bloud of Christ but must continue alwayes whereof there be figures in the lawe of nature and in the lawe of Moses In the lawe of nature albeit that Seth Noe and other did offer sacrifices vnto God yet were they not figures of this sacrifice now vsed in Christes Church but rather of Christes sacrifice offered vpon the crosse after the manner of Aaron Here marke first that he maketh Christ to haue two sacrifices this sacrifice whiche is now offered I can not tell after what manner and that which he offered on the Crosse after the manner of Aaron Secondly that he maketh Christ a Priest after the maner of Aaron
hee and the Counsell forgot his first rule For they doing as much as they had either example or commaundement of Christes institution by his owne rule were in this respect blamelesse But he addeth that they in the Counsell alledged the Masse of Saint Iames and Basil which is vtterly false for they alledged but the manner of celebration of the mysticall sacrifice set foorth by them and no Popish Masse Whether Saint Iames did set foorth any such forme of celebration I will not here dispute but I am sure there were many thinges intituled to the Apostles euen while they liued that were but counterfet and so I thinke was this for else it had bene Canonicall scripture and the Churche would not or should not haue chaÌ„ged S. Iames his Masse for Gregories Masse nor Basil nor Chrysostome should haue needed to haue made any newe liturgye if they had bene certaine that the olde had had the Apostles for their authours and inditers But M. Heskins triumpheth vpon the old vsage of the Primitiue Churche for mixing water with their wine which we in our celebration obserue not neither is it any matter that we striue for but against the necessitie of water in the wine TheÌ„ he cauelleth against M. Iewel For punishing a Minister of his Dyocesse that ministred the Communion with Ale whereas he him selfe doth worse like the high Priestes that made no conscience to condemne Christ but a great matter iâ— was with them to put the price of his betraying in the tresurie c. Where note that ministring with wine onely which was Christes institution is called of him our tradition The thirde manner of doing he diuideth into two kindes When the substaunce being kept some circumstance is altered or some ceremonie added for decencie But reseruatioÌ„ is no meare circumstance of time place or persons nor yet an indifferent ceremonie but contrarie to the substance of the institution and the coÌ„mandement of christ For the sacrament was ordeined only to be eaten and dronken wherevnto reseruation is contrarie so was it commaunded to be receiued therefore ought not to bee reserued hanged vp worshipped c. And as M. Heskins will ioyne issue so wil I demurre in law with him and all his fellowes that Popish reseruation is contrarie to the end of the institution and commaundement of Christe and nothing like those matters of circumstance wherewith he compareth it of morning euening fasting after supper number of persons or difference of sexe or any of those kindes Therefore he him selfe saith The Protestants argument of negatiue is eluded but neuer a whâ—t answered or auoyded The seuen and twentith Chapter answering other arguments obiections of the proclamer In the beginning of this Chapter whereas the Bishops challenge was of hanging vp the sacramente vnder a canopie meaning reseruation and setting it vp for idolatrous worshipping for which M. Heskins hath no color in antiquitie he woulde inforce him to vnderstande his challeng of simple reseruation or for other vses theÌ„ adoration as to be caried to the sicke or such as coulde not be present c. And first he pleadeth possession of nine hundreth yeares out of which hee shoulde not bee put without reason but as good a lawyer as hee is he muste know that nowe a writ of right being brought against him prescription of possession will not serue him But hee wil giue colour to the plaintife and apply the reason vsed agaynste priuate masse by the proclamer to see if it will serue against reseruation That it is the commaundement of Christ Doe this that is to say practise this that I haue here done and that in such forme and sorte as you haue sâ—ene mee doe it This exposition hee refuseth as false concerning the manner and forme Affirming that the commaundement extendeth no further but to the receiuing of his bodie and bloud as the substance wherevppon the memoriall shoulde be grounded without any charge giuen of the manner and the forme And for proofe of this exposition hee citeth S. Hieronyme Chrysostome Euthymius Thomas Aquinas and Hugo Cardinalis all whiche in deede affirme that wee are commaunded to celebrate the remembrance of his passion but none of them exclude the manner and forme of celebration from the commaundement Howe â—oudenly hath M. Heskins forgotten the strong clubbe of his Logike whereby hee did euen now beate downe the proclaymers negatiue argumentes but now againe they are the best he canne occupie him selfe Hieronyme Chrysostome and the rest speake not of the manner and forme of celebration therefore there is no necessarie forme to bee obserued as commaunded by Christ. But as the proclamer hath no authoritie for his expsition so M. Heskins will bring good reasoÌ„ against it to proue it false First he will graunt that the primitiue Church for fiue or sixe hâ—ndreth yeares after Christ did minister the sacramentes purely and without the breach of Christes commaundement Hee will grant for the substance but not that they continued so long without abuse The assumption of this proposition is that the Masses vsed in the primitiue Church varied from Christes institution As for example the Masses of S. Iames Basil Chrysostome Ambrose differed ech from other and all from Christes institution in forme and manner It pleaseth him to call the olde liturgies or formes of ministration vsed in diuerse Churches masses the diuersitie hee meaneth is in formes of prayers and circumstances concerning which Christe gaue no commandement and therfore they are contrarie to his institution The seconde reason is of the proclamers owne practise who in celebration of this sacrameÌ„t vseth other time other kinde of breade other garmentes other number of communicantes then Christe did But none of these are the forme or matter of the sacrament and so they touch not the substance But eating and drinking is of the substantiall forme of the sacrament and the end of the consecration of the creatures of breade and wine to the vse of that holy mysterie against which not eating is contradiction and so reseruation is a plaine contradiction of the commaundemente of Christ. An other reason hee hath of admitting an vnworthie person as Christ did Iudas which is for all that a matter of question and yet nothing to the purpose if hee were admitted For Christe knewe him by his diuine nature before he chose him to bee an Apostle but in as much as Iudas was an hypocrite before he was reueled to the iudgement of man hee was not to be refused To be short the substance of the sacrament is not only the heauenly matter thereof as M. Heskins dreameth but also the earthly matter and the fourme also As for circumstances and accidentes that touch neither the forme nor matter they are to bee applyed to edification order decencie Cyprian and the fathers in his time and long time after what reason did they vse to confute them that ministred with water mylke clusters of grapes dipping of bread and linnen cloathes in
twentieth Chapter beginneth to speake of the Prophesies and first of the prophesie of the priesthood of Christe after the order of Melchizedech The one halfe of this Chapter is consumed in citing of textes to proue that Christe is a Priest after the order of Melchizedech and at length hee deuideth the Priestes office into two partes teaching and sacrificing Then he affirmeth that Christ was not a Priest after the order of Aaron but after the order of Melchizedech Yet in the ende of the Chapter like a blasphemous dogge hee sayeth that Christ executed his priesthood after the order of Aaron vppon the Crosse. Where beside his blasphemie note how hee agreeth with him selfe But Christ he sayeth it called a Priest after the order of Melchizedech for the manner of his sacrifice which maketh the difference betweene the order of Aaron and the order of Melchizedech For Aaron offered in bloud the other in bread and wine The Apostle to the Hebrues obseruing many differences could not finde this But M. Heskins aunswereth that the cause why the Apostle did leaue out this manner of sacrifice was for that his principall purpose was to shewe the excellencie of Christ and his priesthood aboue Aaron and his priesthood which could not bee by shewing that he sacrificed breade and wine for the Iewes sacrifices were more glorious then bread and wine By this wise reason he giueth vs to deeme that the Apostle of subtiltie suppressed this comparison because they were weake as though they knewe not what the sacramentes of the Church were But if Christe sacrificed his bodie and bloud twise he could not better haue shewed his excellencie aboue Aaron then in declaring that Christe did not onely offer him self in bloud on the Crosse but also in bread wine after the example of Melchizedech For if offering of sacrifice were one of the chiefe partes of a Priestes office and breade and wine had beene the sacrifice of Melchizedech the Apostle neither would nor coulde haue dissembled the comparison of his sacrifice with the sacrifice of Christe which would infinitely haue aduaunced his priesthood aboue Aaron For else the Hebrues whom M. Heskins imagineth would haue obiected their sacrifices to be more glorious then bread and wine might more probably haue replyed that the Apostles compared Melchizedech with Christe in small matters and omitted the chiefest parte of his office which was this sacrifice so that if he were inferiour in the chiefe it was little to excell in the small matters But M. Heskins taketh vppon him to aunswere our obiection that we make against this sacrifice of breade and wine which is this as the Apostle to the Hebrues speaketh nothing of it no more doeth Moses in Genesis For it is sayed there that Melchizedech brought foorth breade and wine but neuer a worde that he did sacrifice breade and wine This obiection he wil aunswer both by scripture and by the eldest learned men of Christes parleament Concerning the parleament men as it is true that many of them did thinke Melchizedech to be a figure of Christ in bringing foorth bread and wine so when we come to consider their voyces it shall appeare that they make little for transubstantiation or the carnall presence But now let vs heare the scripture The scripture to proue that Melchisedech did sacrifice this bread and wine saith that he was a Priest of the most high God to whome is belongeth not to bring foorth but to offer bread and wine so that the verie connexion of the Scripture and dependants of the same enforceth vs to take this sense and none other can be admitted This is a verie peremptorie sentence plumped downe of you M. Heskins not as from your doctours chaire but euen as from Apolloes three footed stoole But if it may please you to heare is it not also scripture that he was King of Salem and wil not the verie connexion and dependance of the Scripture leade vs to thinke that as an example of his royall liberalitie he brought foorth bread wine to refresh the hungrie and wearie souldiers of Abraham which being such a multitude could not easily be prouided for by a priuate man And where Moses sayeth he was a priest of the highest God hee addeth also an example of his priestly holynesse that he blessed Abraham praysed God and that Abraham gaue him tythes of al. And lest you should exclame as your manner is that this is a newe exposition Iosephus in the firste booke tenth Chapter of his Iewishe antiquities doth so expounde it Hic Melchisedechus milites Abrahami hospitaliter habuit nihil eis ad victum deesse passus c. This Melchisedech gaue verie liberall intertainment to the souldiours of Abraham suffered them to want nothing vnto their liuing But if M. Heskins wil obiect that Iosephus was a Iewe then let him heare the author of Scholastica historia a Christian and a Catholike as M. Heskins will confesse allowing of the same exposition Chap. 46. in these wordes At verò Melchizedech rex Salem obtulit ei panem vinum quod quasi exponen◠Iosephus ait ministrauit exercitui Xenia multam abundantiam rerum opportunarum simul exhibuit et super epulas benedixit deum qui Abrahae subdiderat inimicos Erat enim sacerdos Dei altissimi But Melchizedech King of Salem offered vnto him bread and wine which Iosephus as it were expounding of it sayeth he ministred to his armie the dueties of hospitalitie and gaue him great plentie of things necessary beside the feast or at the feast he blessed God which had subdued vnto Abraham his enimies For he was a priest of the high◠so god Thus farre he 〈◊〉 M. Heskins for his connexion perchaunce will vrge the Coniunction enim erat enim saterdos c. in the vulgar Latine text to make it to be referred to the former clause but neither the Hebrue nor the Greeke text hath that Coniunction To be short if the bringing foorth of bread and wine perteined to his priestly office there is nothing in the text to expresse his Kingly office but Moses as he calleth him both a King and a priest so doth he distinctly shewe what he did as a King and what he did as a priest Yet Maister Heskins goeth on and will proue That if Christ were a Priest after the order of Melchizedech he offred a sacrifice after that order but he neuer made any mo oblations then two the one on the crosse after the order of Aaron the other in his last Supper after the order of Melchisedech except we will say that Christe altogether neglected the priesthoode appointed to him of God. Marke here Christian Reader how many horrible blasphemies this impudent dogge barketh out against our Sauiour Christ directly contrarie to his expresse worde First he affirmeth that Christ made two offerings of himselfe whereas the holy Ghost saith Heb. 9. not that he should oftentimes offer himselfe as the high priest c. For
cōmon meate being consecrated is profitable for the whole man as a medicine to heale infirmities and a sacrifice to purge sinnes but neither our faith in Christ crucified nor the merites of his passion are the sacrifice but his very body therefore this meate is his very body The Maior of this argument is ambiguous and therefore it must be distinguished for this worde sacrifice is either taken properly or vnproperly and figuratiuely if it be taken figuratiuely for a sacrament or a memoriall of a sacrifice as Cyprian meaneth the proposition is true but if it be taken for a sacrifice in the proper sense it is false For Christe offered but one sacrifice and that but once neuer to be repeated which was on the crosse Nowe to proue that Cyprian vsed the word sacrifice vnproperly for this time I will shewe no more but his owne word Holocaustum which signifieth a whole burned sacrifice for M. Heskins will graunt that the sacrifice of Christ is vnproperly called a burned offering The second note that he gathereth is of the Propertie of this word Aliud in the Neuter gender it signifieth an other substance forsooth as we may say Alius pater alius filius but not aliud pater aliud filius And then the rule is extended to vnum for Christ saith ego pater vnum sumus hij tres vnum sunt This he would beare men in hand to be the determination of learned men and so the bread before consecration was aliud that is one substance but after consecration it is aliud that is an other substance and so the body of Christe This is an high point in a lowe house but the young pettites in the Grammer schoole can teach him that aliud in the Neuter gender put absolutely must bee resolued into alia res an other thing and so doth Maister Heskins him selfe translate it And Cyprian sheweth what other thing it is after consecration when he saith here is declared the difference betweene the spirituall meate and the corporall meate namely that it was one thing when it was first set before them that is corporall meate and an other thing which was giuen by their maister namely spirituall meate The same substance remaining it is spirituall meate that before was corporall meate as in baptisme the same substaunce of water remayning it is a spirituall lauer that before was a corporall lauer This is the greate diuinitie of aliud and aliud But I maruell that Maister Heskins which seeth such high mysteries in aliud can not see that Cyprian saith they did eate of the same breade before after the visible forme which they did afterward eate being conuerted into spirituall meate so that it was the same breade before and after although it had nowe a newe vertue giuen it by the wordes of Christ to nourish the whole man which before nourished only the body The next place which he alledgeth out of Saint Cyprian is Lib. 2. Ep. 3. ad Caecitium Where he leaueth out the beginning of the matter bicause it expoundeth all the rest of the place against him but I will be so bold as to add it for the better vnderstanding of S. Cyprian and the discharging him of M. Heskins blasphemies Item in sacerdote Melchisedech sacrificij dominici sacramentum praefiguratum videmus secundùm quod scriptura diuina testatur dicit Melchisedech c. Also in the Priest Melchisedech we see that the sacrament of our Lordes sacrifice was prefigured according to that the scripture testifieth and saith And Melchisedech king of Salem brought foorth bread and wine and he was a Priest of the highest God and blessed Abraham And that Melchisedech did beare the figure of Christ the holy Ghost declareth in the Psalmes saying in the person of the father vnto the sonne Before the day starre I haue begotten thee The Lorde hath sworne and it shall not repent him thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech which order verily is this comming of that sacrifice and from thence descending that Melchisedech was a priest of the most high God that he offered bread and wine that he blessed Abraham For who is more the priest of the highest God then our Lord Iesus Christ which offered vp a sacrifice to God his father ▪ And offered the selfe some thing that Melchisedech offered that is bread and wine euen his body and bloud And concerning Abraham that blessing going before perteined to our people For if Abraham beleued God and it was imputed to him for rightuousnesse so likewise who so euer beleueth God liueth also by faith is found righteous and long agoe shewed to be blessed and iustified in faithfull Abraham a◠S. Paule the Apostle proueth saying Abraham beleeued God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse Ye knowe therefore that they which are of faith euen they are the sonnes of Abraham Wherefore the scripture foreseeing that God iustifieth the Gentiles by faith foreshewed to Abraham that all nations should be blessed in him Therefore they that are of faith shall be blessed with faithfull Abraham Wherevpon in the Gospell we find that many are raised vp of stones that is that the sonnes of Abraham are gathered of the Gentiles And when the Lord praised Zacheus he answered and saide This day is saluation happened to this house bicause this man is also made the sonne of Abraham Therefore that in Genesis the blessing about Abraham might duely be celebrated by Melchisedech the priest the image of the sacrifice goeth before ordeined in bread and wine Which thing our Lord perfecting and fulfilling offered bread and the cup mixed with wine and he that was the fulnesse fulfilled the truth of the image that was prefigured Thus much Cyprian In cyting this place note what falshood M. Heskins vseth first of all he leaueth out the beginning where Cyprian calleth the supper the sacrament of the Lordes sacrifice by which it is plaine what he meaneth when he calleth it afterward an oblation or sacrifice Secondly he falsifieth his wordes where Cyprian saith Fuit autem sacerdos that is and he was a Priest Maister Heskins chaungeth it into Fuit enim sacerdos for hee was a priest Thirdly where Cyprian compareth Christ to Melchisedech in three thinges distinctly in that he was the Priest of the highest GOD in that he offered breade and wine and in that hee blessed Abraham shewing that Christe was the Prieste of the highest GOD when hee offered his sacrifice to his father meaning in his passion ▪ that hee offered breade and wine as he did meaning in his supper and last of all that he blessed his people as Melchisedech did Abraham Maister Heskins confoundeth the first with the second by putting out the interrogatiue point that is after obtulit and ioyning the next sentence to it and the last he omitteth by cutting off the dicourse that Cyprian maketh thereof As though Cyprian had spoken of no resemblance of Melchisedech vnto Christe but in
were of weight or the corruption of the time in which he liued vnknowen there is nothing in this saying which might not easily and without any wresting be referred to the spirituall sacrifices to the spirituall manner of sacrificing the body and bloud of Christ which we haue learned out of the elder fathers The seuen and thirtieth Chapter maketh a brieefe recapitulation of thinges before written with the application of them to the proclamation of the aduersarie and so concludeth the first booke It were but vaine labour especially for me that professe such breuitie to repeate the answers and declarations made before that not one of these Lordes of the higher house whom he nameth fauoureth his bill of the carnall presence or the sacrifice of the masse in such sense as he and his fellowes take it But whereas he is so loftie once againe to ioyne issue with the proclaymer that as he hath done alwayes hitherto vpon the negatiue I will not refuse him And yet by the way I must admonish the Reader how vnreasonably he dealeth that ioyneth all his issues vpon the negatiue whiche sometime is harde sometime is vnpossible to be proued whereas the Bishop whom he calleth the proclaimer ioyneth issue with them vpon the affirmatiue which if euer it was holden is more probable to finde proofe in antiquitie Whereas if I might haue libertie to ioyne vpon the negatiue I would bring in fiue hundreth propositions that are false and yet neuer a one expressely denied of the olde writers because there neuer happened any controuersie aboute suche matters in their times But to his issue If he can bring any one sufficient authoritie that shall directly say that the Church may not offer the body of Christ in such sorte as it doeth I will giue him the victorie First here he reiecteth the authoritie of the Apostle to the Hebrues saying it is but wrested which is as direct as nothing in the worlde can be more direct that Christ offered himselfe and that but once and by that one oblation hath made perfect for euer them that are sanctified But he shal heare Chrysostome vpon the same scripture Hebr. 10. Aufer◠primum vt sequens statuat c. He taketh away the former that he might establish that whiche followeth Beholde againe the aboundance This sacrifice sayeth he is but one but those sacrifices are many for therefore they were not strong because they were many But tell me what need is there of many when one is sufficient Therefore whereas they were many and alwayes offered he sheweth that they were neuer purged For as a medicine when it is strong and effectuall to giue health and able to driue away all sicknesse being but once laide to worketh the whole at once If therfore being but once laide to it hath wrought the whole it sheweth the vertue thereof in that it is not laid to any more this is the effect of it that it is laid on no more but once But if it be always laid to it is a manifest token that it preuailed nothing For this is the vertue of that medicine that it is but once laid on and not oftentimes euen so in this case By what meanes were they always healed by the same sacrifices For if they had ben deliuered from al their sins there should not haue bene offered sacrifice throughout euery day For they were appointed that they should be always offred for al the people both at euening in the day Therfore that was an accusation of sinns not a discharge for ther was made an accusatiō of weaknes not a shewing of strength For bicause the first sacrifice was of no force the second was likewise offered bicause that also profited nothing an other was offered also wherefore this is but a conuiction of sinnes For in that they were offered there is a conuiction of sinnes but in that they were always offred there is a conuiction of infirmitie But contrariwise in Christ the sacrifice was but once offered For what neede was there of medicines when there is no more wounds remaining For this cause you wil say he cōmanded that it should always be offered bicause of infirmitie that there might be also a remēbrance of sinnes What then do we◠Doe we not offer euery day we offer truely but for a remembraunce which we make of his death and this is but one sacrifice not many Howe is it one and not many Bicause it was offered but once and it was offered in the holy of holies but this sacrifice is an exemplar of that we offer the same alwayes For we do not nowe offer one lamb to morrowe an other but the same thing alwayes Therfore this sacrifice is but one For else by this reason bicause it is offred in many places are ther many Christs No but one Christ is euery where both here being perfect and there being perfect euen one body For as he which is euery where is one bodie and not many bodies so also it is one sacrifice And hee is our highe Priest which offered the sacrifice which purged vs the same do we also offer nowe which then truely being offered can not be consumed Howbeit that which we doe nowe is done truely in the remembraunce of that which was done then For this do ye saith he in remembraunce of me We make not an other sacrifice as the high Priest but alwayes the same but rather we worke the remembrance of the same This place of Chrysostome sheweth both that the Church neither doth nor may offer the body of Christ in such sort as the Papistes say that is really and carnally and for the sinnes of the quicke and the dead and also howe the Church is saide to offer the sacrifice of Christes body namely when she celebrateth the remembrance thereof After this holy issue ioyned M. Heskins rayleth vpon Cranmer which in his first booke hath not one Doctour or Counsel to alledge but only a litle false descant vpon a scripture or two as the proclamer in his Sermon What reading Cranmer and Iewell were able to shewe in the Doctours and Counsels is so well testified by their owne learned workes vnto the world that it can not by such an obscure doctour as M. Hesk. is be blemished or darkned But M. Heskins hath such store of testimonies for the sacrifice of the Masse to proue that Christ is offred therin that beside those which he hath alredy cited he wil ad three or foure to this recapitulation First he nameth Iustinus Martyr in his dialogue against the Iewes Where he alledgeth his wordes truncatly leauing out the beginning ▪ which declareth that Iustine maketh all Christians Priestes and offerers of the sacrifice of thankesgiuing in the celebration of the Lordes supper His wordes are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euen so we which by the name of Iesusas al shal be one man in God the maker of al things hauing put off our
filthy garments that is our sinnes by the name of his first begotten sonne and being set on fire by the word of his calling are a right kinde of high priests of God as God himself doth witnes That in al places among the Gentiles acceptable pure sacrifices are offred to him But God receiueth no sacrifice of any but of his Priestes Wherefore God before hand doth testifie that he doth accept all them that offer by this name the sacrifices which Iesus Christe hath deliuered to be made that is in the Eucharistie or thankesgiuing of the bread and the cuppe which are done in euery place of the Christians By these words it appeareth not that Christ was offered but thankesgiuing in the sacrament not of the priest alone but by all Christians And yet more plainely in the wordes of his that are in the same Dialogue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And as concerning those sacrifices which are offered to him of vs Gentiles in euery place that is of the breade of thankesgiuing and the cup likewise of thankesgiuing hee foresheweth saying that we do glorifie his name and that you do prophane it In which saying what can we see but the sacrifice of thankesgiuing in the bread and cup And to proue that the Church hath none other sacrifice but of prayers and thankesgiuing he saith within few lines after the place cited by M. Heskins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For I my selfe do affirme that prayers and thankesgiuing made by worthie persons are the only perfect and acceptable sacrifices to god For these are the only sacrifices that Christians haue receiued to make to be put in minde by their drie and moyst nourishment of the passion which God the son of God is recorded to haue suffered for them This place doth not onely shewe what the only sacrifice of Christians was in his time but also teacheth that in the sacrament is drie and moyst nourishment that is bread and drinke not bare accidents as the transubstantiators affirme How little Iustinus maketh for the sacrifice of the Masse these places doe sufficiently declare The second place hee citeth is out of Hierom in his booke of Hebrue questions Quod autem â—it c. whereas he saâ—th thou art a Priest for â—uer after the order of Melchisedech in the word order our mysterie is signified not in offering vnreasonable sacrifices by Aaron but in offering bread and wine that is the body and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ. We haue shewed sufficiently before howe the olde writers vsed the worde of sacrifice licentiously when there was no such heresie as fined is sprung vp of the sacrifice of the Masse for the memoriall of the sacrifice of Christes body and bloud in which was offered the spirituall sacrifice of prayers and thanksgiuing which reasonable men might wel ynough vnderstand though heretiques do nowe drawe it to their meaning As when Hierom calleth this offering of bread and wine a mysterie euery indifferent reader may vnderstand that he speaketh not properly in calling it the body and bloud of Christe and a sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe But as to a sicke man of the ague all drinkes seeme bitter so to a popish heretique all sayings of the Doctours seeme popish and hereticall The third place he alledgeth it is out of Ambrose his preparatiue prayer to Masse I will not vouchsafe to rehearse it bicause it is a meere bastard and counterfet writing out of which it is cyted hauing as much of S. Ambrose in it as M. Heskins hath witt and honestie in alledging it If any man will obiect that then I must bring arguments to disproue it or else I may likewise denye any authenticall writer I answere it were too long to do in this shortnesse that I must vse and not necessarie when they are notorious and well knowne already to euery man of meane reading in the Doctors and Erasmus in his censure doth plainly reiect it The fourth is Isydorus li. 1. ca 18. de off which althogh he be somwhat without the coÌ„passe of 600. yeares after Christ yet because he is an auncient writer nere that time I will consider his speach which is cited by M. Heskins in these wordes The sacrifice that is offered to God by the Christians our Lorde and maister Christ did first institute when hee commended to his Apostles his bodie and bloude before hee was betraied as it is redd in the Gospell Iesus tooke the bread and the cup and blessing them gaue the same vnto them Here beside the vsuall phrase of sacrifice which we haue often declared what it did signifie and whence it came is nothing to quarrell at For Isydore ment no doubt the spirituall sacrifice of thankesgiuing which is offered in the celebration of the Lords supper not the propitiatorie sacrifice of the popish masse of which scarce the foundations were begonne to be laide in his time of certaine odde stones of vnproper speach and licentious phrases of sacrifices and oblations As for Haymo and Cabasila I will neuer trouble my self to examine their speaches they are but late writers therefore of small credite in these causes And whereas M. Heskins glorieth that he hath aunswered foure members of the proclamation in this booke the scriptures in the vulgar tongue the reseruation of the sacrament the offering of Christe to his father and the presence of his bodie and bloude in the sacrament let the iudgement reste with the indifferent readers whether although hee hath some of the lower house to fauour his billes more might haue if hee woulde aske their voyces yet I haue proued by this short aunswere that of the higher house he hath not one that hath giuen a voyce with theÌ„ but many that haue spoken directly against them God be praysed THE SECOND BOOKE OF HESKINS PARLEAMENT repealed by W. Fulke The first Chapter declareth the offices of the olde lawe and the benefites of the newe lawe with an exhortation to submit our vnderstanding to the knowledge of faith and therewith to the beleefe of the sacrament HOW vnsauerly he discourseth vpon the two offices of the lawe it were too long to examine in euerie pointe Onely this let the reader obserue that when he hath made the first office of the lawe to giue them knowledge of sinne and to restrayne them from it The other office hee saith was by lineamentes of figures and shadowes to leade the people to Christe as S. Paule sayth the lawe was our scholemaister to Christ c. As though the lawe was not a Schoolemaister to bring vs to Christe by shewing vs our sinnes and condemnation but onely by shadowes and figures After this hee maketh him selfe a ioly hunter That with great trauell and some pleasure hath passed through the bushes and thickets of the lawe and nowe being come into the faire land of the Gospell forgetting his former trauels with freshe delight will followe on his game So that hee is nowe belike
passion also in a moment of time bring it into as much subtiltie as hee would that hee might enter in by the doores that were shut Here first of all Maister Heskins according to his accustomed manner of falsification translateth tale corpus the same body as though there were no difference betweene substaunce and qualitie Secondly it is manifest that Augustine in this place iudgeth as in other places most plainely that the body of Christe nowe glorified retayneth not onely the substaunce but also the properties and qualities of a true body which hee had before he suffered Although for that moment he supposeth the body of Christe might be subtiliated by his Diuine power to passe through the doores being shut and yet affirmeth nothing directly that it was so but rather that it might bee so Whereas more probably hee might haue thought that eyther the doore opened or the nature of the boordes gaue place then that the body of Christe for the time was altered The like place hee hath in him Epistle to Volusianus which I maruell Maister Heskins hath not noted Ep. 3. Ipsa virtus per inuiolatae matris virginea viscera membra infantis dutie quae posted per clausa ostia membra iâ—uenis introduxis The same power brought foorth his body being an infant by the Virginall bowels of his vndefiled mother which afterward brought in his body being a yong-man by the doores that were shut Of his natiuitie whereunto this Doctour doth compare his comming in after the doores were shut I haue shewed before howe it was out of the scripture But let vs heare what Cyrillus saith of the same matter In Ioan. lib. 12. cap â–ª 53. clausu foribus c. After the gates were shut the Lord by his almightie power the nature of things being ouercome soudenly entered vnto his disciples let no man therfore enquire how the body of our Lord entred in after the gates were shut when he may vnderstand that these things are described by the Euangelist not of a bare man aâ— we be nowe buâ— of the almightie sonne of god For seeing he is true God he is not subiect to the lawe of nature which thing did appeare in other his miracles also Here Maister Heskinâ— after his wonted syncâ—â—itie translateth 〈…〉 through the gates beeing shut otherwise the place of Cyrill is of our side that hee chaungeth not the nature of his body but ouercame the nature of other thinges and so made a passage for him selfe although the gates were shut as in his other 〈◊〉 hee chaunged not the nature of his body â–ª when hee walked on the waters 〈◊〉 the nature of the waters Hee altered not the trueth of his bodye when hee arose out of the sepulchre but remoued the stone from the doore thereof For it stoode Cyrillus vppon by reason of the Eutychian â—eresie to preserue in all thinge the true properties of the body of Christ which in all places he doth â—onstantly affirme But the elder fathers before they 〈…〉 by that hereâ—ie to search out the trueth did 〈◊〉 sometimes 〈◊〉 sometimes inconsideratly was beside â—hem affirmes that he◠〈◊〉 already 〈◊〉 Hilariuâ— doâ—h not onely passed through the Lands walleâ— with his body in Psalme 55. but alâ—â— that his body felt 〈◊〉 paine in the time of his passion In. Psalm 4◠〈…〉 and in other pâ—aces whiche iâ— a groâ—â—e and wicked errour wherevnto hee was carried whyle he studied too much to aduaunce his Diuinitie in the humane nature Howe be it the trueth of his naturall bodie by other Doctours was in all times affirmed especially after Eutyches had broched his wicked heresie First Origen as it is cited by Pamphilus in his apollogie out of his booke Periaâ—chie translated by Ruffinus thus writeth Corpus assumpfit nostro corpori simile eo solo differens quod natum ex virgine espiritu sancto est He toke vpon him a body like vnto our body in this point onely differing that it was borne of a virgine by the holy Ghoste This place would the rather bee noted because it conteineth the consent of three auncient Doctours of seueral ages Origenes Pamphilus and Ruffinus Afterward in the counsel of Chalcedon the sixt of Constantinople they were condemned heretiques whiche denied either the trueth of the humane nature of Christ or the true properties thereof At in this latter counsell was allowed the Epistle of Leo Ad Flauianum written in time of the former wherein he writeth Simul suit altitudâ— Deitatis humilitas carnis seruante vtraque natura etâ—am post aditatationem fine defectu proprietatem suam Together be both the height of the Godhead and the humilitie of the fleshe both the natures euen after the adiuâ—â—rion keeping the propertie without defect And againe Nusquâ—m 〈◊〉 differentia naturarum propter vnitatem sed potius salua proprietate 〈…〉 â—â—turae in vnum personam vnam subsistentium concurrente In no place taking away the difference of the natures because of the vnitie but rather hauing the proprietie of both the natures concurring in one person one subsistence Those testimonies 〈◊〉 shewe the iudgement of the Church concerning this matter when iust occasion was giuen narrowly to search out the trueth in the conclusion of this Chapter Maister Heskins yeelding a reason of his trauell in this matter alledgeth two causes the one that the miracle might not be shadowed the other that he might shew the workes of Christe to be aboue nature And both these might stand without his labour For it was a miracle aboue nature that the doores of their owne accorde opened to our sauiour Christ at his entrie as when Peter also came foorth of the prison Actes 12. But whereas he bringeth in an example of the eternitie of the worlde which is held by some naturall philosophers to proue that Gods workes are aboue nature he sheweth a grosse capacitie that can not put a difference betweene the errours of naturall Philosophers and the true lawe and order of nature made by God himselfe which is vndoubtedly knowen to all wise men as in these propositions nowe in question For it is not the opinion of philosophers we stande vpon but vpon the trueth of thinges naturall which either sense or first intellections doth manifestly approue vnto vs For as Tertullian saith speaking of the trueth of Christes body Non licâ—t nobis in dubà m sensus istos reuocare nâ— in Christâ— dâ— side illoruâ— deliberemus It is not lawful for vs to call in doubt these senses least in Christe also we should stand in deliberation of the credit of them The like is to be iudged of such trueth in naturall causes â–ª as Christ the true light hath kindled in the mindes of naturall men to see the works of God in his creatures lest beside horrible confusion of all thinges we be driuen also into blasphemouâ— errourâ— The twelfth Chapter aunswereth certaine obiections tha◠〈◊〉 to impâ—â—ge the Catholique doctrine of this matter In the
non aspernanter sed sapienter audiamur Euen as we knowe though against these mens will two in one fleshe Christe and his Church without any filthinesse euen as with faithfull heart and mouth wee receiue the Mediatour of God and man Iesus Christe giuing vs his fleshe to bee eaten and his bloud to be drunken although it seemeth a more horrible thing to eate the fleshe of man then to kill him and to drinke the bloud of man then to shed it And in all the holie scriptures if any thing figuratiuely spoken or done be expounded according to the rule of sounde faith of any things or wordes which are conteyned in the holie scriptures let not the exposition be taken contemptuously but let vs heare wisely Where is nowe that should pinche the proclaimer by the conscience of receiuing the bodie of Christ with the mouth Where is that lewd insultation against Maister Horne whome he sayeth he heard in Cambridge abuse the figuratiue speach and place it there where it should not be placed c. When S. Augustine maketh this whole text a figuratiue speache And if Maister Horne as he sayeth did not place the figuratiue speach as Augustine doeth why did not such a doubtie doctour as Maister Heskins is either in another sermon openly confute him or in priuate conference admonishe him of it But such hedgecreapers as he is that dare not ioyne with a much weaker aduersarie then that reuerend father is in any conference or open disputation can shoote out their slaunderous boltes against them when they are a farre of and prate of placing and displacing of Augustine when he himselfe as I haue shewed most impudently peruerted and displaced the wordes and sense of Augustine euen in this verie sentence whereuppon he thus taketh occasion to iangle Out of Cyrill are alledged two places neither of both any thing to his purpose but directly against him the former In 1â— Ioan. Non poterat c. This corruptible nature of the bodie could not otherwise be brought to vncorruptiblenesse and life except the bodie of naturall life were ioyned to it Doest thou not beleeue mee saying these thinges I pray thee beleeue Christ saying Verily verily I saye vnto you except you shall eaâ—e the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall haue no life in you Thou hearest him openly saying that wee shall not haue life except wee drinke his bloude and eate his fleshe He sayeth in your selues that is in your bodie The same fleshe of life by right may be vnderstanded life What is there here for the sacrament or that euery Christian man of our side will not graunt But belike the second place maketh all playne Non negamus c. Wee do not denye that with right faith and syncere loue wee are spiritually ioyned to Christe but that wee haue no manner of coniunction with him after the fleshe that truely wee do vtterly denye and that wee saye to be altogether contrarie to the holye Scriptures For who hath doubted that Christe is euen so the vine and wee the braunches that wee receiue life from thence into vs Heare Saynt Paule saying that we all are one bodye in Christ For although wee be many yet we are one in him for wee all take parte of one breade Or peraduenture doth hee thinke that the power of the mysticall blessing is vnknowen to vs which when it is done in vs doeth it not make Christe to dwell in vs corporally by the participation of the fleshe of Christe For why are the members of the faithfull the members of Christ Knowe ye not sayeth he that the members of the faithfull are the members of Christe Shall I then make the members of Christ the members of an harlott In this place Cyrill sayeth that Christe doth dwell corporally in vs but howe by participation of the fleshe of Christe which as he tooke of our nature so hath he againe giuen the same vnto vs to bee in deede our nourishment vnto eternall life which thing is testified vnto vs by the sacrament euen as the vnitie wee haue one with another and all of vs with Christe is testified in that we all take part of one breade Otherwise I see nothing in this place that may help Maister Heskins For such as our vnitie is such is our participation of his flesh and as we are members of his body so doe we eate his body This M. Heskins must graunt if he will allowe Cyrills authoritie but our vnitie participation and coniunction of members though it be in his body of his flesh and vnto him as our head yet is not after a carnall manner no more is the eating of his flesh nor the corporall dwelling of him in vs after a carnall or corporall manner but after a diuine and spirituall manner The place of Chrysostome hee cyteth hath bene once or twice considered already The fifteenth Chapter continueth the exposition of the same text by Leo and Euthymius The place of Leo is cyted out of Serm. 6. de Ieiu sep mens Hanc confessionem c. This confession most welbeloued vttering foorth with all your heart forsake ye the vngodly deuises of heretiques that your fastings and almes may be defiled with the infection of no errour For then the offering of sacrifice is cleane and the giuing of almes is holy when they which performe these things vnderstand what they worke For as our Lord saith except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall haue no life in you you ought so to be partakers of the holy table that you doubt nothing of the trueth of the body of Christe and of his bloud For that is taken with the mouth which is beleeued by faith and in vaine doe they answere Amen which dispute against that which is receiued Leo in these words as Maister Heskins is enforced to confesse speaketh against the Eutychian heresie which denyed the trueth of Christes body after the adunation therof to the Diuinitie as the papistes do indeed though not in words by their vbiquitie traÌ„substaÌ„tiatioÌ„ saith thei cannot be partakers rightly of the sacrameÌ„t of his body bloud which do not acknowlege that he had a very body bloud Therfore it is intollerable impudencie in M. Hes. to note a place for M. Iewel wheÌ„ he him selfe after confesseth that he spake not of the trueth of his body in the sacrament And whereas he saith the mouth receiueth that which is by faith beleeued it helpeth him nothing for he meaneth nothing else but that those men cannot receiue with their mouth the sacrament of his flesh and bloud which deny him to haue true flesh bloud for the sacrament is a seale and confirmation of faith Nowe how far Leo was from transubstantiation or vbiquitie we haue shewed before in the 11. Chapter of this booke where his saying may be read The testimonie of Euthymius is cyted In 6. Ioan. Nisi comederitis
from our sight but also place it in heauen and in steede therof he leaueth the sacrament of his bodie and bloude which no man doubteth but it ought to be honoured as so high a mysterie deserueth but not as God or Christe The other saying of Eusebius which hee addeth doeth shewe howe it is to be honoured When thou commest to the reuerende altare to be satisfied with heauenly meates beholde with faith the holy bodie and bloud of thy God honour it wonder at is touch it with thy minde take it with the hande of thy heart and cheefely receiue it with the inwarde draught What can be layed more plainely for the spirituall receiuing and the like reuerence to be giuen to so holie a sacrament But because M. Heskins thinketh this saying to make more against him then for him therefore he sayeth to auoyde cauilling Eusebius proceedeth sone after in these words Sicut autem c. As any man comming to the faith of Christe before the wordes of baptisme is yet in the bands of the olde deis but when the words are spoken is foorthwith deliuered from all dregâ— of sinne So when the creatures are set vppon the holie altares to be blessed with heauenly words before they be consecrated by inuocation of the most highest name there is the substance of bread wine but after the wordes of Christ the bodie bloud of Christ. This is a plaine place for M. Iuell what else But if it be rightly vnderstood it is a plaine place against M. Hesk. for he sheweth the change or transubstantiation that is in the Lordes supper to be the same that it is in baptisme which is spirituall and not carnall and so doth verie fitly compare them together or else his similitude were to no purpose if it were not to shewe by that which is don in baptisme what is likewise done in the other sacrament M. Heskins still blattereth of a bare figure which is of vs always denyed Consequently he citeth Bernarde whose authoritie I leaue vnto him being a burgesse of the lower house in which he hath many voices as he hath neuer a one in the vpper house though he wrest their speaches most iniuriously To confirme some phrase of Bernard he rehearseth certein phrases of the old writers like to them in words but not in sense which haue bene aunswered alreadie as Hierom. ad Hed. qu. 2. Our Lord Iesus is the feaster the feast he that eateth and which is eaten Ambrose in praepara ad miss which is none of his but falsly intituled to him Thou art the Priest and the sacrifice wonderfully and vnspeakably appointed And Augustine in Psal. 33. He was borne in his owne hands But he leaueth out a worde which expoundeth both Augustine and all the rest that speake so quodam modo after a certeine manner Christ was borne in his owne hands is the feast that which is eaten the sacrifice I say quodam modo therefore not simpliciter Last of all he wil ioyne issue to subscribe on this point that the proclaimer can bring but one auncient doctor that saith the sacrament is not to be adored To whome I answer that forasmuch as in the primitiue church the opinion of transubstantiation was not knowen there neuer grew any question of the adoration of the sacrament as that Papistes nowe do vse it and commaund it The eyght and fortieth Chapter confuteth the rest of the proclaymers wordes before rehearsed against the honouring of Christ in the sacrament The words which he taketh vpon him to confute are these It is a newe deuise to worship the sacrament About three hundreth yere past Pope Honorius commaunded it to be lifted vp and the people reuerently to bowe vnto it How doth he confute these words First he saith it is no newe deuise but the contrarie that is the denying of the adoration is not past fourtie yeres old and yet he confesseth before that some infected with the heresie of Berengarius Wickliffe might whisper it in corners yet Berengarius and Wickliffe preached openly beâ—ore them Bertrame wrote a booke to Charles the great wherein he confuteth the reall presence which began in that time to be receiued of some as it seemeth vpward euen to Christ al the auncient fathers are against that carnall presence consequently against adoration But to proceede Admitting that Honorius was the first that commaunded it to be worshipped which was 300 yeres agoe yet is he elder then Oecolampadius not defamed of heresie as Oecolampadius was yes M. Hesk he is defamed of more then heresie and proued to bee an antichrist As for the continuance of 300. yeres in an errour can make no prescription against the trueth But he saith it is a fond argument of the proclaimer Because Honorius commaunded the adoration of the sacrament therefore it was neuer in vse before But if it were generally beleeued vsed in all ages before as M Hesk. would beare vs in hande what neede had Pope Honorius to commaund it He saith in like manner the fleshly sort of them dispute to mainteine their shamelesse abode with their women it is a newe deuise that priests should not marrie inuented by Vrban and Gregorie Whether M. Heskins were marryed or else had a shamelesse abode with a woman I leaue to be tryed by God the countrie in the countie of Cambridge But to the purpose I haue not heard any affirme these late Popes to be the first forbidders of marriage and therefore it is to no purpose that he citeth Syluester before them and Calixtus before him and the counterfet Canons of the Apostles before them all And yet by the prohibition of the latest Popes it is certeine that Priestes were married vntill their time And for as much as the scripture alloweth their marriage and condemneth the forbidders thereof and the eldest fathers in the primiâ—iue church confesse no lesse it is not to bee regarded although a whole hundreth Popes in a rowe did euery one forbid it The like example he bringeth of fasting in Lent decreede in the eight Toletane counsell neere 700. yeres after Christe but yet affirmed of Hierome to be a tradition of the Apostles For so they vsed to father such ceremonies and vsages as they knewe not the beginning of them vpon tradition of the Apostles neuerthelesse he cannot shewe any Pope or any councell before Honorius that did commaund adoration of the sacrament wherefore the wordes are vnconfuted vntill the contrarie can be shewed After this the Proclaimer sayth he falleth to mocking the Scholasticall doctours as S. Thomas Duns Durand Holcos and such like to make it seeme a dangerous thing to honour the sacrament for that the people cannot discerne the accidents from the bodie of Christ and so may committ idolatrie in honouring the outwarde formes in steede of Christ or if the priest do â—mitt consecration This M. Heskins calleth a mocking but he is not able to auoide it in good earnest
of meate and drinke but not of the same that we doe Which is directly contrarie to the meaning of the Apostle as it appeareth by many reasons whereof some I will set downe because this one text of scripture if it be rightly vnderstoode is sufficient to determine all the controuersies that are betweene vs and the Papistes concerning the sacramentes First therefore the argument of Saint Paule is of no force to conuince the Corinthians except he shewe that the fathers of the olde Testament had the same sacraments in substance that we haue and yet pleased not God by meanes of their wicked life no more shall we hauing the same sacramentes if we followe their wicked conuersation Secondly except he had meant to make the fathers equal vnto vs in the outwarde signes or sacramentes of Gods fauour he would rather haue taken his example of circumcision and the pascal lambe which all men knowe to haue beene their principal sacraments then of their baptisme and spiritual foode which in them was so obscure that except the spirite of God had by him reuealed it vnto vs it had beene very harde for vs to haue gathered Thirdly when he saith the fathers were all baptised there is no doubt but that he meaneth that they all receiued the sacrament of the bodie and bloud of Christ for there were no reason why they should receiue the one sacrament rather then the other Fourthly seeing the Apostle saith expressely they did eate the same spirituall meate and drinke the same spirituall drinke and after doth precisely affirme that they dranke of the same rocke which was Christe it is moste euident that their spiritual meate was our spiritual meate namely the bodie of Christ and their spiritual drinke was our spirirituall drinke namely the bloud of Christ. And this place ouerthroweth transubstantiation the carnal presence the cōmunion vnder one kinde the grace of the worke wrought the fiue false sacramentes the Popish consecration the Popish reseruation for adoration and in a manner what so euer the Papistes teache of the sacraments contrarie to the truth For if we haue no prerogatiue aboue the fathers concerning the substance outward signes of the sacramentes then we receiue the bodie and bloud of Christ in the sacramentes none otherwise then they did before his bodie was conceiued of the virgine Marie and that is spiritually by faith not carnally with our mouth The rest of this Chapter is consumed in rehearsing out of Chrysostome the general purpose of the Apostle in these wordes which we haue shewed before it is most plaine by the text as it followeth Finally in declaring what temporall benefites the Israelites receyued by the cloude the sea manna and the water of the rocke But that which is principall and for which cause the Apostle alledgeth their example namely for the spirituall grace that was testified by these outwarde signes Maister Heskins speaketh neuer a worde The second Chapter sheweth what these foure thinges done in the olde Law did figure in the newe Lawe In this Chapter he laboureth to shewe that these sacraments of theirs were not in deed the very same in substance that ours are but onely figures of them And for this purpose he citeth diuers authorities of the fathers especially Chrysostome and Augustine which cal them figures of our sacraments whereof we will not striue with him But he doth not consider that in so calling them they compare not the substance or thinges signified by these auncient sacramentes with the substance or thinges signified by our sacraments but the outward signes of theirs with the substance and things signified by ours As it appeareth in sundrie places of S. Augustine whose authorities in this Chapter he citeth which affirmeth that the fathers also receiued not only the signes of our sacraments as bare figures but also the grace and substance of them whereof they were no counterfet seales Neither doeth Chrysostome or Origen say any thing to the contrarie for Chrysostme saith that as all sortes of men riche and poore were vnder the cloude passed through the sea and were fedde with the same spirituall foode so in our sacramentes of baptisme and the supper there is no respect of persons but all members of the Church are partakers of them alike And Origen saying that Baptisme was then in a darke manner in the clowde and in the sea but nowe in cleare manner regeneration is in water and the holie Ghoste Doeth both affirme the same sacrament to haue beene then which is nowe namely baptisme and also sheweth the onely difference betweene this and that when he sayeth that was after a darke manner and this after a cleare manner But Augustine is moste playne in many places namely Tract in Ioan. 26. speaking of the bread of life in the sixt of Ihon he sayeth Hunc panem significauit manna hunc panem significauit altare Dei. Sacramenta illa fuerunt in signis diuersa sunt sed in re quae significatur paria sunt Apostolum audi Nolo enim inquit vos ignorare fratres quia patres nostri omnes sub nube fuerunt omnes mare transierunt omnes per Mosen Baptizati sunt in nube in mari omnes eandem escam spiritualem manducauerunt spiritualem vtique eandem nam corporalem alteram quia illi manna nos aliud spiritualem verò quam nos This bread did manna signifie this bread did the altar of God signifie Those were sacramentes in signes they are diuerse but in the thing which is signified they are equall Heare what the Apostle saith For I would not haue you ignorant brethren sayeth he that our fathers were all vnder the cloude and all passed the sea and were all baptised by Moses in the cloude and in the sea and they did all eate the same spirituall meate I say the same spirituall meate for they did eate another corporall meate for they did eate manna and we another thing but they did eate the same spirituall meate that we doe Likewise in his exposition of the 77 Psalme vpon this very text in hand he saith thus Idem itaque in mysterio cibus potus illorum qui noster Sed significatione idem non specie quia idem ipse Christus illis in Petra figuratus nobis in carne manifestatus The same meate and drinke in mysterie was theirs which is ours but the same by signification not in cleare manner because the selfe same Christe was figured to them in the rocke whiche is manifested in the flesh vnto vs. The same S. Augustine also in his booke De vtililate poenitentiae Cap. 1. writeth thus vpon the same text Eundem inquit cibum spiritualem manducauerunt Quid est eundem Nisi quia cundem quene nos They did eate saith he the same spirituall meate what is the same but the same that we eate and a little after Eundem inquit cibum spiritualem manducauerunt Suffeceras vt diceret cibum spiritualem
broken downe thine altares While hee sayth thine he sheweth that the thing is Gods where any thing is offered of any man to God. Vppon pretence of this place Maister Hesk. chargeth vs with great sacriledge for pulling downe their popish altares on which they committed idolatrie and moste horrible sacriledge And therefore wee are commaunded to ouerthrowe such altares to breake downe their pillers burne their images with fire Deut. 7. And whereas he compareth vs to one Iulianus an heathen man that pissed against the altare and therfore was horribly punished hee sheweth his wisedome For there an idolater did vilanously contemne the Christians religion therfore was iustly plaged of God but we as Christians haue obeyed the lawe of God in ouerthrowing their antichristian idolatrous altars And yet I thinke the fact of Iulianus was not worse then the filthinesse of Pope Iohn that lay with his whores vppon your altares In the conclusion of this chapter he affirmeth that the altar sacrifice are correlatiues therefore there coulde be none altars but there was also sacrifice I haue shewed sufficiently howe the old writers called the communion table an altare and the sacrament a sacrifice namely a sacrifice of thanksgiuing and not of propitiation and yet more must I saye vpon M. Heskins discourses that followe The two and thirtieth Chapter vpon occasion that it is proued that the primitiue Church vsed the altare and reputed the bodie and bloud of Christ to be a sacrifice beginneth to treate of the same sacrifice which we commonly call the Masse Because the names of altar sacrifice haue beene vnproperly vsed by auncient writers for wee haue shewed that their altar was a table and their sacrifice a thankesgiuing therefore M. Hesk. will treat of the sacrifice of the Masse And first of the name of Masse which he saith we abhorre and iustly because it hath been vsed of many yeres to signifie a most blasphemous and idolatrous seruice The name he will deriue in all the haste out of the Hebrue tongue from a word that is called Mas from whence the Latines haue deriued their worde Missa being the same that the Greekes called Liturgia and the Latines officium which is in English a seruice To this I aunswere first that if Missa or Masse be nothing but a seruice then Euen song may be called Masse because it is a seruice Secondly it carryeth no shewe of trueth that the Latines would borrowe their name of the Hebrues rather then of the Greekes Thirdly that there is no such Hebrue worde as Maister Heskins affirmeth to bee Mas signifying a seruice as I report mee to all that haue but meane knowledge in the tongue Fourthly that although the name of Missa bee of some antiquitie in the Romane church yet is it neither so auncient as he maketh it and that which is chiefely to be regarded it is neuer founde in the holie scripture But nowe let vs consider his authoritie First Leo bishop of Rome Epist. 79. sayeth thus Necesse est vt quaedam pars populi sua deuotione priuetur si vniut tantùm Missae more seruato sacrificium offerre non possunt nisi qui prima diei parte conuenerint It must needes be that some parte of the people bee depriued of their deuotion if the manner or custome of our onely masse being obserued they cannot offer sacrifice except such as came together the first part of the day Vppon coulour of this place Maister Heskins will not onely prooue that the name of Missa is auncient but also that it is lawfull to saye more then one Masse in one church in one day if two then three if three then tenne if tenne then fifteene and so twentie which the proclaimer sayed could not be proued But you shall see howe lewdly hee abuseth his reader The proclaimers challenge was of tenne or twentie priuate Masses sayed in one church and commonly at one time Maister Heskins bringeth in authoritie of Leo which proueth that when one communion coulde no serue any more then so manie as the church woulde holde at one time it was meete it should be celebrated twise or as often as the same was filled with people vntill all had receiued which as wee confesse to be true so maketh it nothing in the worlde for the priuate Masse but altogether against it as is plaine by the whole treatie going before which Maister Heskins according to his accustomed synceritie hath cleane left out Vt autem in omnibus obseruantia nostra Concordet illud quoque volumus custodiri vt quum solennior festiuitas conuentum populi numerosioris indixerit ad eam tanta multitudo conuenerit quam recipere Basilica simul vna non possit sacrificij oblatio indubitanter iteretur ne his tantùm admissis ad hanc deuotionem qui primi aduenerint videantur hi qui posimodum confluxerint non recepti cum plenum pietatis atque rationis fit vt quoties Basilicā pręsentia nonae plebis impleuerit toties sacrificiū subsequēs offeratur And that our obseruation may agree in al things this also we will haue to be kept that when a more solemne festiuitie shall call together a greater assembly of people and so great a multitude is gathered vnto it that one great Church can not receiue them altogether the oblation of the sacrifice without doubt may be done againe least those only being admitted which came first they which came together afterward might seeme not to be receiued whereas it is a matter full of godlinesse and reason that how often so euer the presence of a newe people shall fill the Church so often the sacrifice following should be offered But M. Heskins vrgeth in the place by him cited that the word missa is vsed which is not denyed but this was almost 500. yeres after Christ about the yere 480. Secondly that the Masse is a sacrifice But he will not see that it is such a sacrifice as all the people offer which can not be a sacrifice propitiatorie but of thankesgiuing Howbeit he saith The Masse is a sacrifice that is or ought by ioyne affection and deuotion of the people to the Priest to be offered of them all What affection or deuotion he would haue to the Priest I do not well vnderstand but let him shadowe him selfe in what fond phrase of word he will yet can he not auoyde but that the people by the wordes of Leo did offer sacrifice in as ample manner as the Priestes and then they were all Priestes Besides this in the words of Leo he obserueth not that it was a custome of the Church before his time to haue but one Masse or Communion in a day so straightly kept that vpon necessitie they would not relent therein vntill he tooke this order with them But Maister Heskins asketh what scripture the proclamer hath to the contrarie for twentie Masses in one Church in one day I aunswere Saint Paule willeth the Corinthians to
no man of learning will acknowledge them to be his And seeing the Greeke Liturgies are very vnlike the Latine Masse hee doth but mocke the ignorant readers to say they be all one Finally hee doth most absurdly conclude that his Masse should be within the compasse of Saint Augustines rule ad Ian. Ep. 118. That those thinges which the vniuersall Church obserueth throughout the worlde we may vnderstand that they are retayned as ordained either of the Apostles them selues or of the generall Counsels whose authoritie in the Church is most profitable Illa que per orbem vniuersa obseruat Ecclesia datur intelligi vel ab ipsis Apostolis vel a plenarijs concilijs quorum est in Ecclesia saluberrim a authoritas statuta retineri Thus hath M. Hes. cited Augustine to haue a starting hole vnder the name of the church but Saint Augustines wordes are somewhat otherwise Illae autem quae non scripta sed tradita custodimus quÄ™ quidem toto terrarum orbe obseruantur datur intelligi vel ab ipsis Apostolis vel plenarijs concilijs quorum est in Ecclesia saluberrima authoritas commendata atque statuta retineri sicuti quod Domini passio resurrectio ascensio in Coelum aduentus de Coelo Spiritus sancti anniuersaria solennitate celebrantur si quid eliud â—ale occurrerit quod seruatur ab vniuersis quacunque se diffundat Ecclesia Those things which we obserue being not written but deliuered which truely are obserued throughout all the world it is giuen to be vnderstoode that they are retained as commended and decreed either by the Apostles or by generall Counsels whose authoritie in the Church is most wholsome as that the Passion resurrectioÌ„ of our Lord and his Ascention into heauen and the comming of the holy Ghost from heauen are celebrated with yerely soleÌ„nitie or if there be any such like matter which is obserued of all men wheresoeuer the Church spreadeth her self But seing the Popish Masse was vnknowne to the world in Augustines time neuer vsed throughout the worlde of all men for the orientall Churches neuer receiued it to this day if it haue no better holde then it getteth by this place of Augustine it must needes fall to the ground And thus much concerning the name fourme of the Masse In the next Chapter we shall heare of the matter or substance of the Masse it selfe The three and thirtieth Chapter treateth of the Masse it selfe Maister Heskins first with rayling tearmes taketh exception to the proclaymers diuision of the Masse into foure partes Prayers consecration receiuing doctrine except he adde oblation as the fifte or comprehend it vnder the name of consecration Moreouer he saith this is but a description of Masse in the large signification But the Masse it selfe properly is the holie consecration of the bodie and bloud of Christ the holy oblation and offring of the same in the memoriall and remembrance of his passion and death with humble and lowly thankes lawdes and prayses for the same and holy receiuing of that body and bloud so consecrated Here is the Lions skinne couering the asse but yet not so closely but the long eares may be seene hanging out For as the forme of these wordes for the most parte may be applyed to the holy communion so almost by euerie word he vnderstandeth another thing then either the scriptures or the auncient fathers do teache as we shall best see in the examination of the partes which followe First where he sayeth the proclaymer cannot abide consecration he sayeth falsely for both he graunteth consecration and the presence of Christes bodie and bloud but not the Popish charming nor their carnall manner of presence whiche how they be proued by M. Heskins let the readers iudge Oblation the second part he sayeth is proued in the first book and declaration of the prophesies of Melchisedech Damascen Malachie and in the 37. Chapter In the same places let the reader consider the answere In receiuing which is the thirde part two things saith Maister Heskins offend the proclaymer that is receiuing vnder one kinde and receiuing of the Priest alone The former is defended by him Lib. 2. from the 64. Chap. to the end of 67. Chap. there it is in this booke confuted The priuate receiuing he saith shall be defended afterward In doctrine the 4. part he knoweth not what faulte the proclaymer can finde wherein is greatest fault of all but M. Heskins will haue nothing to be the doctrine of the Masse but the Gospell and Pistle and other scriptures that are read in it In prayer the fift and last parte he findeth two faultes namely prayer to Saintes and for the dead for triall of these he will haue recourse to the primitiue Church It is well he can haue no recourse to the holie scriptures nor to the most ancient Church which is properly called the primitiue Church although these two errors be of great antiquitie But before M. Heskins vndertake these trials he girdeth at the communion ministred in copes and the proclaymer wearing Aarons garment for a bishoprick If the Popish priestes had no more pleasure to say masse in their vestments then the proclaymer to minister in copes I thinke the common sort of Papistes would haue lesse deuotion to the Masses then Gods people haue to the communion when it is ministred without any ceremoniall attyre But Maister Heskins will proue that neuer yet was heard off that Christ himselfe saide Masse For he instituted the Masse in his last supper and that he will proue by Cyprian but why doth he not rather proue it by the Euangelistes Forsooth because the scriptures haue no such vnproper speech to make any shewe of the Masse as Cyprian and the rest of the fathers haue Well let vs heare how Cyprian affirmeth that Christ saide Masse Maister Heskins saith First for the consecration Lib. 2. Ep. 3. He writeth thus Vt in Genesi c. That the blessing in Genesis by Melchisedech the priest might be duely celebrated about Abraham the image of the sacrifice appointed in bread and wine goeth before which thing our Lord perfecting and fulfilling offered bread the cup mixed with wine and he that is that fulnesse hath fulfilled the veritiâ— of the prefigured image In these wordes M. Heskins forgetting that Christ offred bread wine gloseth vpon the veritie of the image fulfilled by Christ and expressed by Cyprian in other wordes Obtulit c. He offred the same thing which Melchisedech had offered that is bread and wine euen his bodie and bloud Here againe is bread and wine offered by Christe which is his bodie and bloud after a spiritual manner as it was offered by Melchisedech Hitherto no worde of consecration nor of the carnall manner of presence but directly against it Nowe let vs heare howe he proueth oblation Quaerendum est c. It must be asked whom they haue folowed For if in the sacrifice which is
or of any mans meanly learned and therfore I will not vouchsafe such a grosse counterfet of any answere The rest of the Chapter beeing spent in rayling I will answere with silence concluding that as here is little for sole receiuing conteined in this Chapter so for priuate Masse here is nothing at all The two and fortieth Chapter proueth the trueth of those matters of the sacrament by that it hath pleased God to confirme the same with miracles First M. Hesk. compareth himselfe with Helias which challenged the Priests of Baal to shewe a miracle so he challengeth the Lutherans and sacramentaries to bring forth first some miracle But he could neuer heare of any sauing one and that was of Luther which he reporteth of himselfe as he saith in his Booke of the priuate Masse and as Prateolus sayeth in his Booke De Missa Angulari but where it is written I could neuer yet finde though I haue made some searche for it Luther reporteth that the Diuell awaked him out of his sleepe at midnight and disputed with him that the priuate Masse is horrible idolatrie c. For any thing that I can perceiue by the wordes cited by Maister Heskins there is no miracle at al spoken of by Luther but only he confesseth what inward temptations of Sathan he susteined for saying priuate Masse by the space of 15. yeares together Which the Papistes after their accustomed synceritie doe interprete as though he boasted of a miracle as though he were persuaded by the diuell to forsake the priuate Masse as a thing abominable But Luther in deede in this booke written against the priuate Masse vtterly reiecteth all miracles that are alledged to mainteine false doctrine contrarie to the worde of God and namely those miracles that are reported to haue beene done to confirme the credite of the priuate Masse which either were feigned as a great number were or else wrought by the sleight of Sathan to establish idolatrie as in all Heathen nations the diuell hath thus wrought miracles to confirme the people in their errours Thus therefore we are to iudge of miracles that they are euen as the doctrine for which they are alledged so that if Maister Heskins can not proue his priuate Masse and other heresies by scripture they will be made neuerthelesse by miracles But let vs heare in order what worshipful miracles he alledgeth First a feigned fable out of a counterfet writer called Amphilochius that a Iewe sawe in Saint Basils hand a childe diuided Then a tale out of Vituspatium of as good authoritie as Legenda Aurea that the sacramente was turned into bloudie fleshe to a doubting olde man Next out of Optatus Libro 2. Contra Donat. That dogges after they had eaten the sacrament caste vnto them by the Donatistes ranne madde and werried their Maisters Which last might be a true iust punishment of God against the Donatistes for their heresie yet proueth it not that the dogges did eate the body of Christe which God forbid that any Christian man should thinke Another miracle is reported by S. Augustine Lib. 22. De ciuitate Dei Cap. 8. That one of his priestes saying Masse in a house that was molested with the power of the diuell deliuered the house from such disquietnesse This belike is alledged for the priuate Masse But that proueth nothing For Augustine in that place nameth no Masse he saith he offered there the sacrifice of the bodie of Christe praying that the house might be deliuered from that molestatioÌ„ and so it came to passe Now it is nothing credible that he offerâ—d that sacrifice alone but that the owner of the house and all his familie did there communicate with him and therefore here is nothing to helpe the priuate Masse in this miracle Next vnto this interlacing certeine sentences of Bernarde of the vertue of the sacrament he returneth to miracles and then telleth a tale out of Paule the Deacon of a noble woman of Rome for whom S. Gregorie by prayer turned the sacramental bread into the fourme of A very bloudie fleshly litle finger A faire miracle I promise you but if it had beene true Gregorie that was so light of credite to beleeue and report so many miracles would haue written it him selfe But Gregorie though otherwise full of superstition was not yet come to the carnall manner of presence Two miracles are rehearsed of his reporte one of a prisoner that was deliuered out of his chaynes when Masse was saide for him by his wiues procurement supposing he had ben dead Gregorie in deede speaketh of sacrifices whiche perhaps were prayers and not the Masse But if he speake of that prophanation of the sacrament that in his time tooke some strength to offer it for the dead yet he speaketh of another maner of offring then the Papistes vse For thereof he saith in the same place as Maister Heskins confesseth Hinc ergo c. Of this decree brethren gather you certeinely how great a band of conscience in vs the holie sacrifice offered by our owne selues is able to loose if beeing offered for another it could in another loose the bandes of the body These wordes declare the sacrifice was such as euerie one might offer for himselfe which coulde not be the sacrifice of the Masse which only the priest offereth The last miracle is of Agapetus that by giuing the sacrament to a dumb man restored him to his speech Admitting this to be true it maketh nothing for the carnal manner of presence which the Church of Rome at that time had not receiued And although such miracles might now be wrought by Papistes we would giue no more credite vnto them then they could winne by Gods worde for so we are taught by God him sefe Irenaeus a moste auncient writer of great credite testifieth Lib. Cap. 9. that Marcus the heretike by his sorcerie caused the wine in the cup at his ministration to appeare purple and redde like bloud that the people might thinke that Christ dropped his bloud into his cup through his prayer likewise he wrought so cunningly that he multiplied the wine so that out of a litle cruse he filled a great pot so ful that it ranne ouer But the Church of God was not moued by these lying miracles to giue credite to his false doctrine or to think that he had the bloud of Christ in his challice for all that counterfet shewe of bloud which he made no more wil we beleue the Papistes pretending miracles coÌ„trarie to the word of god And as for diuers of these miracles which he alledgeth to confirme the dignitie of the Masse they were done or at least said to be done before the Masse was throughly shapen and therfore if they be true yet they confirme not the doctrin of the Masse which was afterward inuented Finally wheras he vrgeth the proclaymer to bring one miracle for the confirmation of his religioÌ„ although it were an easie matter to bring foorth many signes of
all Councels is and ought to be by the authoritie of the holy scriptures The Apostles thēselues in the Councel of Hierusalem decided the controuersie of circumcision by the scriptures Act. 15. A worthy paterne for al godly Councels to folow Constantine also in the Councel of Nice charged the Bishops there assembled by his commandement to determine the matter by the authoritie of the holy scriptures Euangelici enim Apostolici libri necnon antiquorum Prophetarum oracula planè instruunt nos inqui sensu numinis Proinde hostici posua discordia sumamus ex dictis diuini spiritus explicatione◠The bookes of the Gospels and the Apostles and also the Oracles of the auncient Prophetes do plainly instruct vs saith he in the vnderstanding of god Therefore laying away hatefull discord let vs take explications out of the sayings of the holy Ghoste Therdor lib. cap. 7. By this charge it is manifest how truely M. Rastel faith that the decree of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or equalitie of the Sonne in substance with the Father was made only by tradition and not by the authoritie of the scriptures For the Councel examining by scriptures the tradition and receiued opinion of the Fathers and finding it agreeable to them did confirme the same And whereas the Arrians quarrelled that this worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was not found in the scriptures and therefore would refuse it it helpeth nothing M. Rastels vnwritten verities for the trueth of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is proued by an hundreth textes of scriptures as the truth of the Trinitie is although neither of both words are found in the scriptures We quarell not as those heretiques did and M. Rastel a Popish heritique doth of letters syllables words and sounds but we stand vpon the sense meaning vnderstanding doctrine which we affirme to be perfectly contained in scripture what so euer is necessarie to saluation as S. Paul saith Al scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach to improue to correct and to instruct in righteousnes that the man of God may be absolute being made perfect to al good workes 2. Tim. 3. And therefore olde customes being referred vnto the custome of the Church of God in the time of the Patriarches Prophetes Apostles and Doctours that followed the same vnitie of Gods wordes is the thing wee desire might preuaile in all our controuersies of religion and so the sentence is wel inough placed if Momus could let any thing alone SECTIO 2. Frō the second face of the 12. leafe to the first face of the 19. leafe When any order giuen by God is broken or abused saith the Bishop the best redresse thereof is to restore it againe into the state that it was first in the beginning M. Rastel saith the Bishop can not tell where of he speaketh For whereas he affirmed that S. Paule had appointed an order touching the ministration of the sacramentes vnto the Corinthians M. Rastell will not simplie graunt that this order was appointed by God although S. Paule himself say he receiued it of christ which he deliuered to thē For this difference hee maketh That an order giuen by God must be obserued without exception and yet he addeth an exception of reuelation and especial licence from god But what so euer order S. Paule did giue he saith is subiect vnto the Church to remoue or pull vp as it shall please her Thus the blasphemous dog barketh against the spirit of god But I trust al sober Christian minds will rather beleue S. Paul then Rastel who saith of such orders as were giuen by him 1. Cor. 14. If any man seem to be a prophet or spirituall let him know the things that I write to you that they be the cōmandements of god But now M. Ra. will take vpon him to teach vs the order giuē that Paul speaketh of namely That the Christians had certein charitable suppers called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after which as August saith before which as Chrysost. saith they did vse to receiue the sacramēt Note here that M. Rast. which wil haue old customes tried by the fathers bringeth in here two Doctors one contrarie to the other To the purpose This order was taken away by cōtention disdaine of the rich against the poore therfore Paule purposed to bring them againe to that order of sitting eating their supper altogether that rich with the pore by saying That which I receiued of the Lord I deliuered to you And not to reforme any abuse of the sacramēt by reducing it to the first institution This iudgement of M. Rastell is partly by him proued by the authoritie of Theophylact but chiefly it standeth vpon his owne authoritie without further reason Howbeit it is manifest by the scripture that Paule reproued that mingling of prophane suppers with the Lordes supper appointing their priuate houses for their bodily refreshings of eating and drinking Haue you not houses saith he to eate and drinke in By which saying it is manifest he would haue no eating and drinking in the Church as M. Rastell dreameth but onely the eating and drinking of the Lordes supper And therefore that abuse of mingling their bodily suppers with the spirituall supper of the Lorde whereof came so many abuses and especiall the seuering and sundering of the congregation into diuers partes which ought to haue receiued altogether he laboureth to reforme by bringing it to the first institution of the Lord him selfe But M. Rast. following his owne dreame asketh what there was in the institution for sitting together or a sunder for eating at Church or at home Yes forsooth Christe did institute his supper to be a foode of the soule and not of the body and therefore to be celebrated in the congregation and in common as the saluation is common and not to bee mingled with prophane banquets of bellie cheare for which priuat houses and companies are meet and not the Church of god And wheras M. Rastel chargeth M. Iewel with not vnderstanding this place which he alledgeth namely therefore when you come together to eate tarie one for an other which he saith pertaineth no more to the institution of the sacrament then a pot full of plumbs doth to the highway to London he sheweth all his wit honestie at once For he denyeth that any thing that Saint Paule there rehearseth namely these wordes take eate this is my body c. is the institution of the sacrament or the originall paterne of reforming the Corinthians disorder bicause time place vesture number of communicants and such other accidentall and variable circumstà nces be not therein expressed So that by his diuinitie either the institution of the sacrament is not at all contained in the scriptures or else there is an other first paterne to reforme abuses by then this that is set downe in the scriptures I would maruel at these monstrous assertions but that I see the obstinate Papists cannot otherwise defend their Popish Masse
this we obserue the same essentiall order that the Apostles practised by Christs institution which S. Paule in that place reduced otherwise the bishop neither said nor ment therfore the foule lyes come onely out of M. Rastelles foule mouth and slaunderous penne From whence come fiue other lyes that folowe namely the the order of the coÌ„munion restored hath bin coÌ„tinued by the holy doctors fathers as in the beginning of this Section wherto he addeth to make the fift lie that the bishop saith some refuse the coÌ„munioÌ„ where there be many refusers in deed a few is too many but if there were a thousand times so many they are truely said some so long as they be not all Communion agreeth not with the primitiue Churche olde fathers First he bringeth in Iustine Athanasius Basill and Agustine to shewe that they vsed to praye to the East as though that were anye parte of the Communion And he will know of vs wherefore we appoint the priest to stand on the Northside Verely eueÌ„ for the same reason that the primitiue Churche did chuse to praye towarde the East Namely to auoide the superstition of the Iewes that prayed towarde the West as we doe to auoid the superstition of the papistes that vse to pray toward the East otherwise all quarters of heauen of their own nature are indifferent for vs to turne our selues vnto in our praiers either publike or priuate The seconde exception is of mingling of water with the wine which is also a pointe nothinge materiall as their owne schoole doctours doe confesse the vsage of this he prooueth by a counterfett decree of Alexander bishoppe 〈◊〉 â—ome by Cyprian and the third councell of Carthage sauing that he belyeth Cyprian who in deede reprooueth them that ministred with water alone but not such as ministred with wine alone although hee thinke it conuenient that water shoulde be mixed with the wine But all his reasoninge is for wine and not for water against water alone and not against wine alone Wherefore the vse of water being not of Christes institution as many other thinges practised of the fathers at the first as indifferent or profitable ceremonies being ouergrowne after with superstition and opinion of necessitie our Churche hath done verie well to curse them of and leaue nothinge but the pure institution of Christ. The third exception is of the signe of the crosse which he saith ought to be vsed in the coÌ„munion that he proueth by the counterfet liturgies ascribed to S. Iames S. Basill he citeth also Tertulian to prooue that men vsed to make that signe on their foreheads customably at euery action which they did to shewe themselues to be Christianâ— against the Heathens Likewise he citeth the sayings of Chrisostome and Augustine to proue that they vsed the signe of the crosse at the celebration of the communion which is not denyed yet cannot he proue that the vse of that signe is necessarie to the ministration and the first that we reade of that had it in estimatioÌ„ were the Valentinian heretikes Ireneus lib. 1. Cap. 1. By fond emulation of whome the Catholikes also began to vsurpe the same signe Therefore our communion which lacketh that signe lacketh nothing that is either necessary or profitable or considering the abuse of it meete to be reteined The fourth exception is of Altars which we haue not neither in deed had the primitiue church but tables made of bords which although they called altars as they did also cal them tables yet were they neither in forme nor matter like those which the Papists haue as I haue shewed at large in the aunswere to M. Hesk. lib. 3. Cap. 31. whither I remit the reader As for maister Rastels proofe out of that saying of the Apostle to the Hebrues we haue an Aultar of which they may not eate which communicate with Idols declareth what a wel exercised man in the scriptures he is for neither be the words of the apostle Heb. 12. as he doth falsifie them neither doth he speake of any materiall altar but of our spirituall Altar Christ. The words be these we haue an Aultar of which it is not lawful for theÌ„ to eat which serue in the tabernacle His next proofe is for hallowing of aultars and oyle of the priests blessing out of the prouinciall councel of Agatha which he citeth Cap. 14. in steede of 10. which was a new decree made by 35. Bishoppes in Fraunce almost fiue hundreth yeares after Christe and therefore not Catholike either for time or place The saying of Opratus which he citeth last you shal finde at large in the aunswere vnto Hesknis before named The fifth exception is of incense which hee proueth by a prayer of the counterfet masse of S. Iames which yet may be otherwise taken figuratiuely Also by a saying of Dennys who was not knoweÌ„ in the church fiue hundreth yeres after Christ for a writer neither of Eusebius IeroÌ„e nor Gennadius Last of al by a saying of Ambrose lib. 1. in cap. 1. Luc. I would to god that while we inceÌ„se the aultars bring sacrifice thither the Angels should stand by vs. By which wordâ— he meaneth nothing else but prayers which are figuratiuely both in the psalmes in the reuelation called incense or sacrifice Wherefore popish sensing is not of such antiquitie as he pretendeth The sixt exception is of lightes and tapers vsed in the primitiue Church which is false except it were in the night season to giue them light For profes he citeth a counterfet sermon of Augustine de tempore which for all that speaketh but of oyle wax for the vse of the night Neither is the verse of Paulinus otherwise to bee vnderstanded Of the Aultars bright that were rounde ydight with lampes thicke set and light Finally where he citeth Hierom against Vigilantius excusing the superstitioÌ„ of some women that lighted candles at day time partly by their deuotion partely by the example of the East Churches which onely at the reading of the gospell vsed to light their candels in signe of ioye you shall see by his owne wordes in the same place that neither it was the custome of the latine church to â—ett light candels on the aultars neither did he allowe them that vsed so to doe Caereas autem non clara luce accendimus sicut fustra calumniaris sed noctis tenebras hoc solatio temperemus vigilemus ad lumen no tecum caeci dormiamus in tenebris Quod si aliqui propter imperitiam vel simplicitatem saecularium hominum vel certe religiosarum faeminarum de quibus verè dicere possumus confiteor zelum Dei habens sed non secuÌ„dum scientiam hoc pro honore martyrum faciunt quid inde perdis We do not light wax caÌ„dels in the brod day light as thou dost slander vs in vaine but that we may temper the darknesse of the night with this comforte may watch by a light least we
should sleepe with thee in the darke like blinde men And if any lay men or perhaps deuout we men through ignorance or simplicitye doe so for the honour of the Martyrs of whome we may truly say I confesse they haue a zeale but not according to knowledge what leesest thou thereby By these words you may see howe this custome came vp namelye of superstition and ignorance by Hieromes owne confession although hee was more readie to excuse it then to reforme it as his duetie had beene After some rayling against our grosse vnreasonable and vnnaturall heresies as he calleth them hee returneth to two other exceptions the one of prayers made to saintes vsed at the communion the other of prayer for the deade For proofe of the first hee citeth the liturgies falsely intituled to Basill and Chrisostom which the worlde knoweth are of a much later stampe the one being vnknowen to Gregorie Nazianzen that wrote Basils life and commended his actes the other praying for Pope Nicholas and the Emperour Alexius whiche were sixe hundreth yeares after Chrisostome was deade After these he citeth the authorities of Chrisostome Augustine that mention was made of the saintes and martires at the celebration of the communion in their time which wee confesse and so there is in our ministration but no prayer was in their time offered vnto them more then is nowe as euen that place of Augustine which hee citeth sufficiently doth proue De ciuit dei lib. 22. Cap. 10. although he cite it falsely and by patches Suo loco ordine nominantur non tamen à sacerdote qui sacrificat inuocantur they are named in their order and place yet are they not called vppon by the priest that sacrificeth what can be more plaine against inuocation of saintes then this testimonie of Augustine But hee citeth another place of Augustine Contra Faust. Manich. lib. 20. cap. 2 where hee saith the Christians did solemnelye frequent the memories of the martyrs both to stirre vp themselues to a following of them and also to be made companions of their merites and to be helped by their prayers This was Augustines iudgement in deede but yet in the same place he denyeth that any Aultars were set vp vnto them or that any prayers were euer offered vnto them Quis enim Antistitum c. for what bishoppe standing at the aultar in the places of the holy Martyrs euer saide We offer vnto thee O Peter or Paule or Cyprian As for prayer for the deade wee confesse it was vsed at the communion in the time of Chrisostome and Augustine but not as any part of the communion or as the institution of Christ or the practise of the Church for two hundreth yeares after Christ but onely as a superstitious errour crept into the Church and not espied while the fathers were busily occupied in fighting against monstruous heresies of greater importance Wherefore these exceptions notwithstanding our celebration of the Communion hath the whole institution of Christe the practise of the Apostles and the obseruation of the primitiue Church for fiue or sixe hundreth yeares so farre as it agreeth with the saide institution and practise which was in all substantiall and essentiall partes although the later age had added diuers superfluous and supersticious vsages and otherwise we boast not of the conformitie of our ministration with the auncient obseruaton as maister Rastel like a malicious cauiller doth charge the Bishop I cannot say whether more lewdely then folishly SECTIO 5. From the first face of the 38. leafe to the 2 face of the 41. leafe The Bishoppe said there is no ordinance or misterie so good â–ª but through foly or frowardnes of men it may be abused after reherseth many abuses of the sacrameÌ„t M. Rastel saith if he can take him tardie but in one he must be guiltie of all A wise man I promise you I haue taken him tardye alreadie in falsifying the scripture and Saint Augustine yet will I not denye but that some thing he saith is true But let vs see howe he taketh him tardâ—e The abuse of baptizing dead men was condemned in the third Councell of Carthage and the sixt Canon But saith Maister Rastell in the seuenteene Canon of that Councel strange women are forbidden to dwel with the Cleargie whereas nowe saith he they doe not onely receiue them to their seruantes but also to their bedfellowes And I pray you syr haue not some Popish Priestes such seruants and bedfellowes also Of seruants he will not deny but bedfellowes if they haue hee will say they haue them not as wiues but as Concubines So that belike it is better to haue Concubines then wiues Neuerthelesse the Canon which forbiddeth straunge women forbiddeth not their wiues as it is most manifest nor yet their sonnes wiues to dwell with any of the Cleargie wherby you see he is taken tardie in his owne trip It seemeth he neuer read the Councel or else he is a most impudent reporter of that he readeth As for the 27. Canon that he citeth in steed of that 24. of water to be mixed with wine I say he falsifieth the Councel saying that it commaundeth water and wine both to be vsed in the sacrifice the words be these Vt in sacramentis corporis sanguinis domini nihil amplius offeratur quà m ipse Dominus tradidit hóc est panis vinum aqua mixtum Nec amplius in sacrificijs offeratur quà m de vuis frumentis That in the sacramentes of the body and bloud of our Lorde nothing more be offered then our Lord himselfe deliuered that is bread and wine mixed with water And let nothing more be offered in the sacrifices but that which commeth of grapes and of corne This last clause then excludeth water as any necessarie part But yet he will presse vs with the 36. Can which forbiddeth a Priest to consecrate the Chrisme and licenseth him to coÌ„secrate virgins And we as he saith haue taken away oyle consecration and virgines In deed in such matters of ceremonies and externall discipline we do not deny but that we varie from theÌ„ vpon good grounds otherwise we are not bound to the determination of any Councels but as they agree with Gods word But seeing the Papistes glorie that al their doctrine ceremonies and discipline are of Catholike or vniuersall antiquitie and consent wee may iustly presse them with euery Canon of any auncient Councell which they affirme can not erre Namely with the 26. Can. of this present Councel which forbiddeth that the Bishop of Rome or any other Bishop of any principal See should be called Princes of the Priestes or the highest Priest or by any like title but only the Bishop of the principall See. I might alledge many other Canons wherein order is taken for the modest behauiour of the sonnes and daughters of Bishops which proueth their mariages lawful but for shortnes I passe them ouer Another abuse the Bishop noteth that in
c. is proued by the Canons of the Apostles that Excommunicate all Christians that be present and doe not communicate Can. 9. Also the first Epistle of Anacletus which is good authoritie against a Papist forbiddeth the priest or Bishop to sacrifice alone and commandeth all the ministers that are present to receiue with him in paine of excommunication And appointeth what number shall be present of deacons namely on solemne dayes seuen on other dayes fiue or three beside Subdeacons other ministers These decrees do proue that there should be no celebration of the Lordes supper but when there be a good number to communicate Concerning the 5. of distinction of Bishops or Priestâ— in apparell froÌ„ the laitie which yet we hold to be a thing of his owne nature indifferent Celestinus Bish. of Rome saith in an Epistle to the Bishops of France Epi. 2. Discernâ—ndi a plebe vel cÄ™teris sumus doctrina non veste conuersatione non habitu mentis puritate non cultu We must be discerned from the common people or other men by doctrine not by garment by conuersation not by apparell by purenes of minde not by attyre To the 7. that the communion table was remoueable and carried too an fro it is proued by Augustine who In quest vet Non test ques 101. saith it was the office of the Deacons of Rome as well as of all other Churches to carrie the altar and the vessels thereof and although he call it an altar in this place and many other yet doeth he in as many places call it a table and in his Epistle to Bonifacius Ep. 50. it appeareth that it was made of boordes and not of stones To the 8. for saying communion on good Friday although perhaps it might be proued by those fathers of the primitiue Church that kept their feast of Easter after the manner of the Iewes whiche was the 14. day of the moneth whiche some tymes did fall vpon that Friday whiche is called good Friday yet beeing no matteâ— of religion there is no cause why we should be bound to proue it The like I say to the 9. of singing of Gloria in excelsis after the communion and to the 11. of saying the Creede of Athanasius vpon principall holie dayes Concerning the 10. that the sacrament was ministred in the loafe bread vsually to be eaten at the table it is proued by S. Cyprian In sermone de Caena Dom. whiche saith of that bread wherewith they did minister Panis iste communis in carnem sanguinem mutatus procurat vitam incraementum corporâ—bus c. This common bread being chaunged into our flesh and bloud procureth life and increase to our bodies Also by S. Ambrose Li. 4. Cap. 2. de sacram Who rehearseth the obiection of the ignorant saying Tu forte dicis meus panis est vsitatus c. Thou perhaps wilt say my bread is coÌ„mon vsual bread Also by Gregorie which in his dialogues reporteth that two Coronae loaues of bread were giuen to one that was thought to be a poore man in rewarde of his seruice in a bathe but he being a guest willed that the same shoulde bee offered in sacrifice for him To the 12. for the ministers wearing of a Cope or surplesse which hold it to be no part of religion and that the communion hath bene ministred in common apparell we will go no further then our Sauiour Christ himselfe Ioh. 13. and there is no question but his Apostles and the primitiue Churche many hundreth yeares followed his example To the 13 that the words of S. Paul 1. Cor. 11. should be red at the ministration rather theÌ„ of S. Mathewe Marke or Luke it is a matter of meere indifferency yet better ordered then your popishe canon whiche rehearseth the wordes after none of all foure To the 14. that they vsed a common cup at the Communion is prooued also by scripture that our sauiour Christ ministred in the same cup which he and his company had vsed at supper To the 15. that the curses of Gods law should be redd vpon Ashwednesday we hold it not as a thing necessarie but an order of indifferencie vntill a better discipline be restored To the 16. concerning procession about the fields we vse none but a perambulation which is a matter of meere ciuill pollicie To the 19. whether Saint Peter were euer at Rome or no it is no article of our beliefe but we are able to proue by scripture that he neither was there as bishoppe nor so long as the common opinion is To the 20. that the minister in time of necessitie hath giuen the communion to one alone is proued by the example of Seraphion vsed of the Papistâ— but vnfitly to defende your priuate masse to whom being at the point of death the communion was sent by the prieste who at the same time also was so sicke that hee coulde not come himselfe Eusebius libros 6. capitulo 44. and yet that communicatinge which we alowe is but graunted to the infirmitie of suche as cannot bee perswaded to forbeare the sacramente not as a thing simplie allowed If anye one man aliue coulde prooue anye one of these articles by Scriptures doctours or councelles hee promiseth to subscribe what I haue prooued let the Reader iudge After this followe twentie nine articles more The 22. that the bishoppe of Rome was not called Antichriste the cause was that vntill after sixe hundreth yeare the bishoppe of Rome was not Antichriste But that Antichriste shoulde bee a Romaine it is prooued by Irenaeus Libro 5. and that Rome shoulde be the Sea of Antichriste Sainte Augustine testifieth De ciuitate Dei libro 16. capitulo 17. callinge Rome Westerne Babylon and libro 18. capitulo 2. callinge Rome seconde Babylon c. Also Hierome ad Marcellam iudgeth Rome to bee Babylon spoken of in the Apocalypse and in praefati in Didymum hee calleth Rome Babylon and the purple whore and Algasiae Quest. 11. and manye places else Gregorie also affirmeth that who so woulde bee called vniuersall bishoppe was the forerunner of Antichriste whiche was Iohn of Constantinople also he prophesieth that Antichristes reuelation was at hande and that an armye of priestes shoulde wayte vppon him whiche was fulfilled in his nexte successour saue one namely Bonifacius the thirde whiche was the first Pope of Rome that was called vniuersall bishoppe and was Antichriste him selfe as Iohn of Constantinople was his forerunner about the yeare of our Lorde â—10 To the 23. that no consecration was required to the sacramente but the vertue of the peoples fayth is not holden of vs and therefore wee are not to prooue it To the 24. that the residue of the sacramentall bread which was not receyued by any olde custome of the Church of Constantinople was giuen to young children that went to schoole is prooued by Euagrius libr. 4. cap. 36. whether to spredde their butter as hee requireth is to shewe or to eate it with cheese
105. After all these iollie questions he confesseth he should do vs wrong to require the probation of these articles bicause many of them containe indifferent ceremonies in many he sticketh vpoÌ„ such termes as he thinketh are not found in the auncient Fathers in some he presseth vs with particular wordes leauing the generall principle and in some with priuate mens opinions he might haue added in some with his own impudent lyes and forgeries which none of vs do holde and such he would make the Bishopâ— challenge to be but the world hath sufficiently seene the contrarie proued that most of the matters contained in that challenge be of the greatest mysteries of Poperie whereas these of M.Ra. witlesse and shamelesse deuising for the most part are not maintained at all in manner and forme as he propoundeth them and such as be materiall are sufficiently proued But nowe that he hath played the foole as he confesseth all this while he promiseth to play the wise man in propounding matters of weight substance in which you shall see that euen as before he chargeth vs to proue many things which we do not hold and therefore he playeth not the wise man but the craftie marchant to make the ignorant beleeue that wee maintaine that we are not able to iustifie He diuideth his challenge into foure partes the first hath three Articles To the first that it is vnlawful to make a vowe to God of chastitie obedience or pouertie I answere it is vnlawfull to make a vowe of that which is not in a mans power to performe as is the vowe of Virginitie which is a gift not giuen to all as our sauiour Christ testifieth Matt. 19. Also ConciliuÌ„ ArasicanuÌ„ 2. decreed ca. 11. De obligatione votoruÌ„ Nemo quicquam Domino rectè vouerit nisi ab ipso acceperit sicut legitur Quae de manu tua accepimus damus tibi Of the bonde of vowes No man shall rightly vowe any thing to the Lord except he haue receiued it of him as it is read Such things as we haue receiued of thy hand we giue to thee That breakers of such vowes were esteemed aboue others as singular witnesses of the libertie of the Gospell is no part of our assertion But that their meaning is honest is proued by Leo B. of Rome Ep. 90. speaking of a Monke Vnde qui relicta singularitatis professione ad militiam vel ad nuptial dâ—uolutus est publicae paenitentiae satisfactione purgandus est quia etsi innocens militia honestum potest esse coniâ—gium electionem tamen meliorem deseruisse transgressio est Wherefore he which hath forsaken the profession of sole life and fallen to warfare or marriage must be purged by satisfaction of open repentance bicause that although his warfare may be harmelesse and his marriage honest yet it is a transgression to haue forsaken his better choyse To the second that it was abhominable to make any sacrifice to God beside the sacrifice of thankesgiuing in words the figures for his benefites with remembrance of his passion c. I proue by the authoritie of Iustinus which affirmeth that these were the only sacrifices deliuered vnto the Christians therefore it was abhominable to vse any other His wordes are in his Dialogue with Tryphon against the Iewes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For I my selfe doe affirme that prayers and thankesgiuings made by worthie persons are the only perfect and acceptable sacrifices to god For these are the only sacrifices that Christians haue receiued to make to be put in mind by their drie and moyst nourishment of the passion which God the sonne of God is recorded to haue suffered for them Here note that he calleth the sacrament drie and moyst nourishment To the third that there was no Priesthood according to the order of Melchisedech but onely the Priesthoode of our Sauiour Christ it is manifest by the 110. Psalme that the Priesthood pertaineth to him that sitteth at the right hand of God euen to the Lord Iesus Christe also by the Apostle to the Hebrues 5. 7. Chapter in which it is saide that he hath that Priesthoode 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is so peculiar to him as it passeth not by succession Neither was there euer any greater blasphemie then that euery Popish Priest should bee a Priest after the order of Melchisedech to offer Christe to his Father And that Priestes haue not a singular sacrifice to offer for the sinnes of the people is proued by S. Augustine â— Contra aduersar leg prophe who calleth the death of Christ Vâ—um singulare solum verum sacrificium that one singular and onely true sacrifice in which the bloud of Christe was shed for vs But the Papistes call their blasphemous sacrifice an vnbloudie sacrifice therefore they haue not any singular sacrifice for the sinnes of the people The second part containeth 12. Articles in which he falsly chargeth Caluine in his institutions with diuers Articles which neither he nor any of vs doe holde The first that the sacrament of baptisme instituted by Christ is no better then the circumcision of the old lawe is proued by Saint Augustine which saith in Ioan. Tr. 26. speaking of the sacraments of the old law that they were in fignis diuersa in re quae significatur paria diuers in signes equall in the thing signified The second that baptisme is a signe onely of our profession and that our sinnes are not truly forgiuen in it is no doctrine of ours but of the Anabaptistes mightily confuted by Caluine whome he slaundereth to hold it The 3. that confirmation ought to be a sacrament is an inuention of man plaine for that it is not taught in the scriptures to be an institution of christ IrenÄ™us testifieth that the annointing with sweete oyle came first of the Valentinian heretiques Lib. 1. cap. 18. Also in S. Hieromes time the Priestes made the oyle of Chrisme and laide on their handes and not the Bishop only In Sophon cap. 3 â–ª For a Bishop did nothing more then a Priest but only in ordeining of ministers Hier. Euagrio Wherevpon it followeth that the Popish confirmation was not then a sacrament which they hold can be ministred of none but of a Bishop The fourth that Christ deliuered in his last supper a figure only of his body to be eaten of his Apostles is none of our assertions for we affirme that he deliuered breade and wine not as a figure onely but as his very body and bloud spiritually to be eaten and dronken The 5. that the power of forgiuing and reteyning sinnes which Christ gaue to his Apostles is nothing else but a comforting or fearing of mens consciences by the promises or menaces of the scripture c. is not affirmed of vs but that Christ hath giuen power to his ministers to assure the penitent of forgiuenesse in his name to pronounce his iudgment to the vnrepentant so that man followeth the sentence of God and not God of man.
daughter saith â–ª Adhuc tenera lingua Psalmis dulcibus imbuatur let her tong when it iâ— yet but tender be seasoned with sweete Psalmes when she groweth to yeares of discretion Quaerant eam c. let them seeke her in the iourney of the worlde among the flockes and companies of her kinsfolkes but let them finde her no where else but in the closet of the scriptures asking counsell of the Prophets and Apostles of her spirituall marriage But more agreeing with the title of this Chap. you alledge the 49. Chap. of Gene. one speciall place of that Chapter namely the blessing of Iuda What if this Chapter be harde and this place especially in the Chapter is it therefore hard which Moses writeth in the beginning of this booke In the beginning God created Heauen and Earth And shal all the profitable and necessarie doctrine of this booke be vnread for the difficultie of one Chapter In Exodus and Leuiticus although many things require a ripe iudgement yet are many thinges also very easie and plaine and the same scripture also teacheth vs that all figures were referred to the patterne shewed in the mount which is christ Exod. 25. Acts 7. Heb. 8. But these sayings offendeth M. Heskins and seemeth to him to haue almost no reason in them where God forbiddeth them to suffer their cattel to gender with a contrarie kinde or sowe their fielde with mingled seede or to weare a garment of linsiwoolsie Which positiue lawes me thinkes do plainly teach that God loueth purenesse and abhorreth all vnholy mixtures As likewise those wordes Deut. 23 of sowing the vineyard with diuers seeds and plowing with an oxe an asse The law Deut. 22. of leauing the old bird when a man taketh her yong out of the nest was a good rudiment to teach them to abhor either couetousnes or crueltie or both Which law when the heathen men had by the light of nature as appeareth in Phocylides I maruell why it seemeth so straunge to M. Heskins which would be taken both for a Christian and a Diuine As for the moosling of the oxe that treadeth the corne is yet more plaine when the Apostle doth gather a strong argument out of that place from the lesse to the more that God which would haue men to consider bruite beastes with humanitie would not haue the Ministers of his word neglected at their handes But ô noble Diuine Doth the high prouidence of God occupie it selfe in making ordinances for birds nestes Yea M. Doctour and in teaching birdes to make their nestes and in feeding their young birds that cal on him although these ordinances coÌ„cerning birdes nestes were not made for birds but for men Or doth the wisedome of God ioyne such rewardes of prosperitie and long life to such trifles O M. Doctour obedience before God is better then sacrifice though it be in neuer so small matters But Salomon in his Ecclesiastes pleaseth not M. Heskins where he saith that Where much wisedome is there is also much trauell and disquietnesse c herevpon the vnlearned he saith might take occasion to contemne wisedome and much more by that which followeth cap. 2. If it happen to the foole as to the wiseman what needeth me to labour any more for wisedome And herevpon he sweareth that he heard a man of worship grauitie wisedome godly life competent learning able to vnderstand and exercised in the scriptures earnestly say to him that it was a naughtie booke When Salomon doth so exceedingly not onely in his other bookes but also in that same booke and place set foorth the commendation of wisedome it was a very spiderlike iuyce that your wise Gentleman M. Doctour gathered out of that booke and such as no Bee would sucke out of so-sweete and wholesome flowers As for The title Inciâ—ament vnto vertue that you suppose to appeare in the ballattes of Salomon yea rather how vngodly and wanton they seeme to be rather in the outward face teaching and prouoking wantonnesse then godlinesse of life Declareth how reuerently you iudge of the holie scripture And that offence you dreame off belike not most chastly affected is most easily auoyded for what vnlearned man indued with common sense reading in so many other places of the scriptures all wantonnesse of life expressely forbidden will not immediately conceiue that this is some spirituall and mysticall loue which is set forth in these ballats rather then lewd or wanton songes prouoking to wickednesse But then followeth the sonne of Syrach With his vnseemely wordes describing the wickednesse of an harlot Cap. 62. Which an honest man would be ashamed to speake and you ashamed to write if they were not scripture Like as one that goeth by the way and is thirstie so shall she open her mouth and drinke of euery next water that she may get By euery hedge shal she fit her downe open her quiner to euery arrowe Then what trifling resting and pastime you haue seene and heard vpon the reading and rehersall of this text and what vnchast wordes haue fallen out vpon the same It appeareth you haue beene in good company where you haue often heard such wholsome talke But once againe you sweare that This text being spoken in the presence of a good vertuous gentlewomaÌ„ the book turned the place read she exclamed said that if the scripture had such bawdie wordes she would no more beleeue the scripture for it was naught with mo such like wordes To passe ouer the blasphemous nicenes of this your Gentlewoman and your iudgement of their goodnes and vertue with their honestie that troubled her with this place I pray you maister Heskins was it the darkenes of the place that did so much offend her or else because she thought it to be too plaine a description of suche a matter You see therefore or if you do not all the worlde beside doeth that while you seeke to bring the reading of scriptures into contempt and hatred you forget your selfe so much that you bring examples of one contrarie for another Although if I may speake of mine experience as well as you I do very well remember that I hearde a sober and chaste matron of her owne accorde not prouoked thereto by any meanes but the only hearing the same place read affirme that it was a modest description of so vile manners as an harlot vseth To conclude this Chapter you bring in a long testimonie of Origen 10. lib. Strom. Who to defend his wicked allegorizing vpon the scriptures goeth about to proue by some examples and sentences that the litteral sense is not profitable but rather hurtfull As the incest of Iuda the polygamie of the Patriarks the dronkennesse of Noe and such like which are not commended in histories but reproued The sacrifices of Leuiticus he imagineth should prouoke men to idolatrie but without all colour of reason He addeth the iudgement of God against Babylon and her children in the Psalme 136. and the
the simple But let vs follow him whether he leadeth vs In the Epistle to the Romanes be mo obscure then plaine places yea the matter of iustification how hard it is the controuersies thereupon risen may suffise to declare Such is M. Heskins diuinitie that he counteth al scripture obscure that caÌ„ not easily be wrested to maintein poperie Otherwise ther is nothing more clere then the doctrin of iustification though the Owles Battes of our time either can not or will not see it But it is no easie matter to reconcile the saying of S. Paul Rom. 3. We conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe that which Iames saith Iac. 2. what auayleth it my brethren if a man say he haue faith if he haue no workes can faith saue him And after he concludeth euen so faith if it haue no workes it is dead in it selfe It is an easie matter to reconcile these places to him that can put a differeÌ„ce between him that hath faith in deede him that onely saith he hath it betweene a true liuely faith a false dead faith finally between the cause of iustification that goeth before the effectes therof that followe after In the same Epistle Cap. 10. concerning the reiection of the Iewes calling of the Gentiles there are many places that trouble M. Heskins as that out of Esay for calling of the Gentiles I am found of them that sought me not c. But against Israel c. yet afterward he asketh if God haue forsaken his people aunswereth God forbid such like The matter is not so hard as it seemeth to him but who so doth read the text attentiuely may see the difference betweene a perticuler reiectioÌ„ of many an vniuersal reiection of all a temporal reiection of most the finall reiection of al. The former is true the latter is false The matter of predestination no man denyeth but it is a great secreat yet so much as the spirite of God hath reuealed of it for our comfort is not so hard but it may be easily vnderstood And as for that contrarietie which he seemeth to finde betweene these two texts Rom. 9. It is neither in him that willeth nor in him that ruâ—neth but in God that hath mercie that other Rom. 7. To will is present with me but I finde no meanes to performe that which is good is so absurd that I thinke it would not enter into the head of any vnlearned man to make a doubt whether the will which is in a regenerate man by the grace of Gods election was the cause of his election before the world was made A like difficultie he findeth betweene these places God will haue all men to be saued and 〈◊〉 to the knowledge of the trueth â–ª 1. Tim. 2. and that Rom. 9. Who can resist his will. And againe Many are called fewe are chosen If master Heskins would vnderstande like a man and noâ— like a childe the verie wordes following would teache him that in the first sentence by all men are meant all forces of men as well Kings and Princes as inferior subiectes After this he repeateth another doubt of Algasia What Paule meaned to wish him selfe accursed from Christ for the Iewes which doubt is increased by an obiection of Hieronyme that he had sayed before I am sure that neither death nor life c. nor any other creature can separate vs from the loue of god In which saying he seemeth to affirme that he so feruently loued Christ that nothing could separate him from his loue in the other he seemeth for the loue he bare to the Iewes to wish that he were sepaerated from Christ as though he loued the Iewes better then Christ. A short aunswere is best Although his desire was exceeding vehement yet it was more for zeale of Gods honour then for loue of the Iewes And although he loued Christ feruently â–ª yet the boast he maketh of assurance was not of that loue wherewith he loued Christ but of that loue wherwith Christ loued him And yet there is another doubt moued by Algasia vpon the wordes of Paule Rom. 5. For scarse will any man dye for a righteâ—us man But yet for a good man it may be that one dare dye The obscuritie of which place hath moued two contrarie heretikes to take their heresies thereof Marcion who made two Gods a iust GOD of the Lawe for whome fewe dyed and a good God of the Gospell Christ for whome innumerable Martyre haue suffered Arâ—ius contrarywise calleth Christ the iust God vppon the Psalme 71. Lord giue thy iudgements to the King and thy righteousnesse to the Kings sonne The good God he called father of heauen of whome Christ saide none is good but God. These doubtes Master Heskins moueth but he aunswereth none The place is not so darke that eyther such doubt should be made of it or such farre fetched expositions sought as the heretikes made For a man may be righteous in some case for which he is condemned to dye which is not simply a good man and for such a one will hardly any man giue his life although peraduenture for a very good man some woulde venture to dye But Christ dyed for vs being his enemies iustly condemned altogether naught or wicked which no man would euer do but he The douts of Algasia are matched with the foure questions of Amandus of which one was of that place 1. Cor. 15. He must reigne till he haue put all things vnder his feete The last enimie that shal be subdued is death For he hath put all things vnder his feete But when he sayeth all things are put vnder him it is manifest that he is excepted which did put all things vnder him When all things are subdued vnder him then shall the sonne himselfe also be subiect vnto him that put all things vnder him that God may be all in all â–ª The question is howe the sonne shal be subiect to the father when he is equall with him And this doubt is answered by Hillarius lib. 11. de Trin. M. Heskins doth often declare that he had rather men should be taught by him to doubt then to be resolued in doubtes for he vouchsafeth not so much as to recyte the aunswere of Hillarius but onely to cyte the place But the aunswere is easie by the distinction of the two natures in Christ for he shall neuer be subiect in his diuinitie but in his humanitie wherein he is nowe exalted reigneth vntill all his enimies be put vnder his feete Yet another doubt vpon Coll. 1. Where Paul writeth Nowe ioye I in my suffrings for you and fulfill the rest of the afflictions of Christ in my fleshe for his bodie which is his Church Here he seemeth to make the passion of Christ insufficient Not a-whit for as Christ suffered once in his owne person for their redemption so he suffereth daily in his members for their