not be in an other vvhich is their only fantastical imagination not S. Peters or any good mans asseâtion And vvhat if I deny that S. Peter ever spake these vvords ot S. Luke ever wrote them but that they are vvords spoâen and writen by M. B. or some fanââical brother of his sect Tâuly in our Testament I find them not nether in the English Latin noâ Greeke In the English Testament autoâized in the English Church vnder king Edwarde S. Peters words are these Iesus Christ which must receive heâven vntil the time that al things be restored In the Testament printed vvith special privilege and appointed to be read in the churches in the beginning of the Queenes M. that now reigneth it is even so Christ Iesus which must receive heaven vntil the tyme that al things be restored If yow reply that Beza translateth it othervvise yow must vnderstand that Beza hath no authoritie to make scripture For this is no translating but a new forging and making And Bezaes rashnes is so much the more reproveable for that Bezaes maister Iohn Calvin distiketh it VVho alâeit as favouring your opinion say that the vvord of S. Peter may beare such a sense as yow after Beza geue yet he confesseth the word to be indifferent to the other sense vvhich those English testaments render The maner of speach here vsed saith Calvin is doubtful For we may vnderstand it that Christ is conteyned in heauen or els that he conteyneth and holdeth the heauen VVherefore he vvilleth his scholers not to make stay sorupulously vpon one word which may be taken in a double signification And therefore yow are the more to blame vvho make so great stay and artest vpon it and say that it proves most evidently Christs body to be in a certaine place and that vvith such restraint as being in that one certaine place it can not be in any other For so your self describe define your certaine place And if yow vvil take the paynes to reade the glose of M. Flacius Illyâicus vvho for advauncing this new gospel hath vvââtren as much as lightly any Protestant of this age vpon this place he vvil tel yow that the vvordes and sense vvhich yow and Beza geve are quit opposite and contrarie to S. Peters meaning For vvhereas S. Peters purpose is to preach to the Iewes the glorie and power the maiestie and omnipotencie of Christ thus to fasten him to one place that he may not be in an other is rather to note in him a vveakenes and imbecillitie So writeth âllyricus To say Christ is conteyned of the heauen in such sort as after Beza M. B. doth is against the sââpe of the Apostle and should âet foââb ãâ¦ã the insirmitie then the power and glorie of Christ For so of Angels yea of devils it may be sââd that they âââ rââeived and conteined in heauen because the word Culum heaven somtime in the scripture signifieth the âyer So that this place of the Acts being in deed not so much taken oââ of the Acts of the Apostles as out of the acts and coâââptions of Theodore Beza an Apostata or some such loââ companion proveth no vvavâs Christs body to be conteyned in one onây place so far of is it from prouing iâ most evidently as M. B. oueâreacheth ¶ The last reason âaith M. B is this Every humane bâly is visible and palpable Therefore Christs is so This proposition I prove by Christs owne words Luc. 24. 39. VVhere to prove the veritie of his body he vseth this argument taken from these two qualities visible and palpable as if he would say If I be visible and palpable ye may be out of doubt that I âââe a true body For as the Poet saith which Tertullian cites to this purpose Tangere enim tângi nisi corpus nulla potestres Of this he concludeth that this doctrine of Christs real presence in the sacrament may no wayes stand with the veritie of Christs body This last argument albeit as the rest so this also be made by Calvin yet is it much vâeaker then the rest Our sauiours reason to prove the veritie of his body and that he vvas not a spirite is good and forcible For that vvhat soever is visible and palpable is questionles a bodie therefore this vvas a very sufficient probation able to put the Apostles out of doubt that he had a true body and a true bodie it vvas vvhich he shewed them But whereas M. B. argueth not as our sauiour did affiâââtively to proue a body but negatively to denie a bodie his argumeÌt is vveake and our saviours vvords do no vvayes iustisie it nor yet Tertullian nor any vvise maâ ether For to exemplifie in the like If I make this argument Such a one A. B. is a Minister and preacheth heresie ergo vvithout al doubt he is an heretike This argument is good taken from 2. qualities of a right heretike to be a Minister and to preach heresie But yet if M. B. vvil turne it to the negative and say such a one is no minister nether preacheth heresie ergo he is no heretike this argument is false and M. B. him self vvil disprove it for that I am sure he vvil confesse many lay men and vvomen are heretikes vvho yet are no Ministers nor have their lawful vocation by the congregation as in the Scottish communion booke to preach heresie ¶ His second mayne principle by vvhich he doth refute Christs presence in the sacrament is for that it repugâes directly against the articles of our beleef How so For in our beleef vve professe that Christ ascended out of this earth into heauen where he fits at the right hand of the father whence he shal come in the last day to iudge the world This in deed is our beloef But how repugâes this directly to the presence of Christ in the sacrament For that here we see that Christ hath ââeeted his dwelling which he had among vs here in the ãâã He is ascended in to the heavens where he ââts at the right hand of god and shal remayne there according to the testimonie of S. Peter which I cited out of the Acts vnto the last day Let this stand for good as we deny it not that Christ is ascended that he sits in glorie that there he shal remayne and thence he shal come to iudge vvhat is the argument taken from any of these parcels vvhich is able so directly to overthrow an other article of Christian faith the true presence of Christ in the sacrament though not specially expressed in the Creed yet in the new Testament expressed more specially then some principal articles of the Creed The argument is this If he sit at the fathers right hand and be to remayne in heaven til the last day as S. Peter sa is that he is coÌteyned in the heavens vnto the last day then is he not corporally in the
to continue men not become vvemen or threaten them that except they stood fast in their new gospel they should never be able to passe from Scotland to Denmark ether on foote or horseback or vvalke in one day from Edinburgh to HierusaleÌ This is to foolish impious yet this is the very forme tenor of the scriptures by M. B. Calvins doctrine And as foolish and impious is Calvins answere to these and the like places that the Apostles Evangelists Christ and al scripture speake vnproperly therefore their speaches are now to be corrected by this vvorshipful squire and Evangelist of Gebenna or rather Gehenna And vvhat can be devised more pregnant and forcible against this then that vvhich the Apostle Paule vvriteth to the Hebrews that some vvho vvere endued vvith faith and that in the most high and excellent degree vvho vvere once illuminated after their illumination had tasted the heavenly gift were made partakers of the holy ghost had moreouer tasted the good word of God and powers of the world to come vvhich is to yeld them al the prerogatiues and tastings of Gods grace vvhich M. B. somtime talketh of and chalengeth to his elect yet these men so amply illuminated after al this fel from the faith yea fel in so desperate sort that as much as in them lay they crucified again the sonne of God made a mocke of him If true faith once had can never be lost vvhat commentarie vvil M. B. make of these vvords I omit to produce fathers of the primitive Church of vvhom no one from the first to the last ever dreamed of this CaluiniaÌ frensie Yet if M. B. have mind to see this in them refelled generally by scripture let him reade S. Austin vvho most of al other vvas by reason of the heresies of his tyme concerning grace exercised in this kind of argumeÌt he shal find inough to satisââe a reasonable man Certainly to geve men in this vvorld securitie assurance assurance I say not of hope but of faith that they shal not nor can perish eternally is to turne vpside downe and cleane invert the nature of humanitie and divinitie of heaven and earth of man and Angels it is to geve the crowne to one vvho yet is fighting and hath not obteyned the victorie to geve him the garland vvho yet is running his race and vncertain how to hold his course to put him in the sure port who yet is rowing on the sea and tossed vvith the vvaues thereof to geve mortal man in this life that reward for vvhich in this life vve labour and is proper to the next and by gods ordinance appointed for the blessed sowles and angels confirmed in grace that is in one vvord to make men beleeve they are already sure of heaven and salvation vvho by this very presumptioÌ are in the broad and most certain vvay to hel and eternal damnation But because if I should proceed in this sort vvith the rest of these two last sermons I perceive I should fal in to that tedious prolivitie vvhich I most covet to avoid I vvil therefore only vvrite downe shortly M. B. his strauÌge assertions concerning faith and vvorks adding for confutation no other authoritie then his owne vvhich I wil likewise put downe so nigh as may be in his owne vvords but alwayes in his owne sense And let this stand for the first The first Faith depends on good life and conscience and so vvith the losse thereof faith and saluation is lost Contra Faith once had can never be lost vvhatsoever a manâ life is For God never reuokes or takes away the gift of faith which once he hath geven Faith shal never vtterly decay perish out of the hart wherein it makes once residence II. Faith is the onlâ moven and instrument whereby we applie Christ vnto our sowles And there is in the scripture no other instrument of applying Christ to vs but this Contra. Love of Christ is an instrument vvhereby vve apprehend and grip Christ better then by faith even as the meate vvhich vve eate tast better nurrisheth our body then that vve only feed our eye vvithal III. VVhere the conversation is not holy let men speake what they wil there the hârâ is defiled there this true and liuely faith hes no place Contra. Be our conuersation never so vvicked howsoeuer âââ bodies be losed to al dissolution faith ever remaineth the fier of true faith is never put out suppose it be covered IIII. The gift of faith where ever it be in what hart soeuer is never idle but perpetually working working wel by love and charitie VVhere ever it be it is not dead but lively that is Al men vvhich have faith are perpetually vvorking vvel by love and charitie Contra. In some of our great men their oppressions of the poore their deadly feids with their owne companions burst out in sick an high measure as shew that they advise not wel with their consciences wherein depends faith And therefore the Lord seing them take so litle tent to their consciences spoiles them of faith Then some men vvhich have faith vvorke not perpetually vvel by love charitie V. Sinne severeth a man from God God can not dwel in a man that alway committeth sinnes Contra. The best men every day and howre commit grosse sinnes Yet the faithful in their greatest dissolutions fal they to murther and adulterie as Dauid did they never leese the spirite of God So then God dwelleth in them notwithstanding their continual sinnes VI. A Christian man living dissolutely in sinne can not have faith and confidence in the mercy of God For how may be have faith in the mercy of God whose conscience witnesseth to him daily that for his manifold sinnes Gods wrath is kindled against him A hurt conscience man ever doubt and the more we doubt the lesse is our persuasion Na question so long as the sense of gods anger and feeling of my offenses bides I can not have a starke persuasion that he wil be merciful to me and so yow can not have a right faith vvhich vvith yow is a starke and strong persuasion of gods mercy Contra. A Christian man living never so dissolutely can never leese faith The spoonks whereof worke in him continual morse and makes him cal to God for mercy every day And ââââ prayer is a certain argument of the right faith and beleefe in God For I can not speake to him nor pray to him in whom I trust not Ergo a brother sinning never so much not only may haue but also actually hath faith cofidece in the mercy of God For els he could not pray vnto him Again In despite of the devil and the corruption which is in vs and M. B. vvho teacheth the contrarie this faith shal never perish and then necessarily such a man hath a stark
iudgement hath at al times among the learned bene much esteemed with whom the Catholike writers D. Allen Cardinal D. Harding D. Sanders D. Stapleton c. vvhom he termeth the yonge Louânian Clergy may not wel compare in the profound knowledge of the Doctors without blushing VVherefore this man so wel esteemed among the learned of so profound knowledge in the Doctors concerning this matter vvriteth thus Protesting his ovvne faith vz that he had rather be drawen in peeces then to become of Berengarius opinion and thinke of the sacrament as the Zuinglians do that he vvold rather susteine al miserie then to defile his conscience vvith so fowle a sinne therein depart out of this life the reasons of this his constant persuasion thus he yeldeth I could neuer be induced to beleeue otherwise then that the true body of Christ was in the sacrament for that the writings of the gospel Apostles expresse so plainly The body which is geuen The blud which is shed for that this thing so wonderful wel agreeth with the infinite loue of God towards mankind that whom he redeemed with the body and blud of his sonne those after an inexplicable maner he should also feed with the body blud of the same his sonne and by this secrete presence of him at is were with a sure pawne or pledge comfort them vntil he shal returne manifest and glorious in the sight of al. Thus for the scriptures the gospels and S. Paule and the cleare euidence of this faith touching the sacrament vttered by them vvhich vvas to him as he vvriteth an vnmoueable foundation to ground vpon Novv for the auncient fathers Councels of the church thus he procedeth Seing then we haue so manifest warrant from Christ and S. Paule whereas besides it is most evidently proued that the auncient writers vnto whom not without cause the church yeldeth so great credit beleeued with one consent that in the Eucharist is the true substance of Christs body blud whereas vnto al this is ioyned the constant authoritie of Councels and so great consent of Christian people let vs also be of the same mynd concerning this heauenly misterie and let vs in a darke sort feed of that bread and cup of our lord vntil we come to eate and drinke it after another sort in the kingdome of God And I wish with al my hart that they who haue folowed Berengarius in his error wold also folow him in his repentance Thus Erasmus a man of profound knowledge in the auncient Doctors vvith vvhom if the yonge Doctors of the Catholike Clergie may not wel compare without blushing much lesse may the yonge scholers preachers of the Scottish and English congregations vvho for sound learning substance of Diuinitie so long as they liue I suppose vvil not be vvorthy to carie the books after those former And therefore being content that on both sides such great peerles authoritie be geuen to Erasmê° as M. Ievvel chalengeth for him thereof I coÌclude that the auncient fathers according to the plaine scriptures alvvaies thought and taught that in the holy Eucharist is the substance of Christs body and blud that a Christian man vvere better to suffer any torment and most cruel kind of death then to be of an other opinion And vvith Erasmus I vvish and our Lord of his mercy graunt that those of our poore Iland both English and Scottish who haue folowed Berengarius in his impudent error for so Erasmus termeth it may also foloâ him in his repentance execration of the same impudent error whereunto Erasmus persuadeth them OF BERENGARIVS HERESIE RENEVVED IN THIS AGE The Argument Luther is to be accompted in some sort the very original ground and cause of the Berengarian heresie renewed in our time But more precisely directly Carolostadius a wicked man and very familiar with the devil and altogether possessed of him To whom succeded Zuinglius and after him Oecolampadi agreing with Carolostadius in substance of denying Christs presence but differing in particular interpretation of Christs words touching the institution of the sacrament Diuers other interpretations of Christs words one against an other al which are iustified by Zuinglius for that they al concurre to remoue from the sacrament the real presence and establish in steed thereof a mere priuatiue absence As the auncient fathers both Greeke and Latine in the primitiue church attribute the real presence of Christ in the sacrament to the vertue force of Christs words vsed in the consecration so the Sacramentaries by a contrarie opinioÌ account such consecration magical and therefore remoue the words of Christ teaching their Sacrament to be made as wel without them as with them Examples of the sacramentarie Communion practised without the words of Christ by the Protestants of England Scotland Zuizzerland and els where which they both by their practise writing iustifie as a very ful and perfite communion The resolution of the church of Geneua that the supper may be ministred in any kind of meate drinke as wel as in bread and wyne VVhereof is inferred that according to the Protestant doctrine that 2. or 3. Euangelical gossips meeting together to refresh them selues eating such vitails as they bring with them haue as true perfite a Communion as the Sacramentaries haue any both touching matter forme also a lawful Minister which ministerie or priesthod euen to preach minister their sacraments the Protestant-gospel alloweth to wemen no lesse then to men CHAP. 2. HAuing novv declared the truth of the Catholike beleef touching the blessed sacrament hovv the faith thereof vvas continued from the first primitiue church of Christ and his Apostles vvith very smale gainsaying in the first thousand yeres somvvhat more in the next 500 vntil the time of our fathers vvherein Luther certaine other vvith him began that vvhich novv is called the Gospel by the Protestants but an vniuersal gulph of heresie and Apostasie by Catholiks it resteth that I plainly sett forth hovv that heresie of Berengarius novv maynteyned in England Scotland began first vvhen Luther broched this nevv Gospel ¶ The original hereof is to be referred to Luther him self noâ only in general for that he brake al order discipline of the church refusing the obedience vvhich by Christs ovvne precise ordinance vvas due vnto it the gouernors thereof so gaue free libertie by his ovvne craÌple by vvriting arguing disputing to interpret the scripture as ech man listed vvithout regard to antiquitie vniuersalitie consent of al Christendom besides of al fathers Bishops auncient Councels vvhich example and behauiour vvas in general the cause and founteyne of al heresie Apostasie and Atheisme vvhich from such contempt self liking arrogancie must needs arise as vve see by experience but also in special the first origin and spring of this Berengarian
a man his vvise a seruant no farmar no Inholder no taverne or vittayling hovvse but the common tables haue ordinarely if they be Christian men vvho eate there as good substantial coÌmunions as any are practised in the most solemne meeting of the bretherne in any congregation through out al Scotland England Zurike yea or Geneua it selfe vvhether ye regard the matter of the Sacrament vvhich is though not vvhite bread and good vvine yet brovvne bread smale drinke which suffiseth or the forme which is nothing certaine but only privatiue that the presence of Christ be assuredly remoued Christ in cogitation at the most thought vpon or the minister for which the good man or if she be better tongued his wife may seââe as wel as any minister in Scotland or Geneua OF CALVIN AND THE CALVINISTS OPINION CONCERNING THE SACRAMENT The Argument Caluins high speaches amplifications of his supper VVherein is shewed by a number of plaine testimonies that he acknowlegeth at the lest as his manifest words import a true and real presence of Christ body and blud in the Sacrament in as plaine and cleare maner as any Lutheran Caluin notwithstanding such high and counterfait speaches which he of purpose affecteth to deceiue his reader yet stil thinketh of the Sacrament as a mere Zuinglian and by 5. diuers crafty special degrees besides a sixt more general against the words and sentences before cited induceth his Sacramentarie heresie The first is that he denieth to the supper Christs body and blud in steed thereof putteth some real vertue deriued from his body and blud by the holy ghost which serueth as a canduit-pipe to that effect wherein he many wayes contradicteth him self The next degree is that he denieth as al old Sacramentaries commonly do euen this deriuation of any such vertue alloweth no other communion of Christs body to the supper then is had out of the supper by only beleeuing In which sort Christs flesh and blud is receiued as wel or better in hearing a sermon then in receiuing the supper Only there is in the supper ioyned to such receiuing an external signe of bread and drinke A third degree is that Caluin and the Caluinists teach not only that Christs body and blud is better receiued cut of the supper then in the supper better by a sermon or reading the scripture then by their Sacramental bread and wine but also acknowlege no maner communication of Christs body ether real or spiritual as proper to the supper VVhereof because it would fâlow that their supper were altogether superfluous they vsed a new point of doctrine that the Sacramental bread and wine serued for seales testimonies or ratifications of Christs body and blud receiued before by the meanes of faith For that the doctrine of seales is daungerous in deed very false Caluin and the rest proceed on and that their supper be not altogether friuolous he saith it is ordeyned for to helpe weake memories And this is the true conclusion of the Sacramentarie doctrine generally to make no more of the Sacrament then a mere rude picture or signe of Christs body and blud absent voyd of al grace and vertue Besides the former points Caluin the Caluinists the more to disgrace the Sacraments of baptisme the supper coÌpare them and make them no better then the Iewish ceremonies VVhich doctrine besides that it is most directly opposite to Caluins first preaching wherein âe so highly magnifieth the supper is also aâ directly opposite to the whole course of the new testament which euery where denyeth al grace to the Sacraments of Moyses law and attributeth al grace to the Sacraments of Christ gospel and the contrarie doctrine vnworthely confoundeth the gospel of Christ with the law of Moyses The Caluinian coÌmunion is particularly conferred with a like ceremonie vsed of old among the Iewes and against Caluin and Beza it is by plaine demonstration out of their owne doctrine and writings proued that their supper is nothing better then a mere graceles Iewish supper or ceremonie Bezaes preferring of their supper before the Iewish is declared to be vaine and Sophistical Answere made to Caluin who with other Protestant writers match the Christian Sacramentâ with the Iewish vpon a falsified sentence of S. Paule The definition of Caluins supper Because the Zuinglians and Caluinists sticke not to graunt the comparison bandled in the last paragraph it is here farther declared that the Sacrament after Caluins doctrine is much inferior to the like Sacrament ether the Paschal supper and especially Manna of the Iewes VVhich thing is shewed by manifest reason and particular conference of those Sacraments together cut of the writing and teaching of the Caluinists which also proue both their Sacraments baptisme and the supper to apperteyne rather to the law of Moyses then to the gospel of Christ CHAP. 3. AGainst the premisses it wil be replyed I suppose that how so euer I ether vpon pretence of Luthers authoritie or of myne owne conceite disgrace and abase the Zuinglian coÌmunion yet it is wel knowen that their writers and Doctors much amplifie advaunce the worthines thereof as in sundry their bookes Apologies and Commentaries is manifest VVhere vnto I answere that true it is some such places in some of their writers are sound but in such sort as litle coÌmendeth their coÌmunions For as rebels when they haue withdrawen them selues from their lawful king appointed them by gods ordinance and framed to them selues one of their owne crue in the beginning or so long as he please them they much extolle magnifie him but vpon the first displeasure and discontentment he is pulled downe againe and brought to his old roome or perhaps serued a worse turne and as tyrannes vpon the sodayne advaunce their minions favorites heaping on them al riches and honors whom afterwards vpon better consideration of their smale deserts or some other light occasion they despoyle abase despise and perhaps hang out of the way in like sort these gospellers hauing reiected the Sacrament which Christ ordeyned and in place of it invented a toy of their owne for some tyme and in some place against their adversaries or for some other occasion much praise and magnifie it But after when the heate is past and they by learning come to examine it or by other force of truth are driuen therevnto or without contention speake of it as it is and as they thinke then are they constrayned to put away al those former borowed fethers and leaue it as pild as Aesopes daw that is they are then driuen to confesle it to be as poore and beggerly a bitte of bread and suppe of drinke as any vsed at common tables And this the reader shal find not only in the old Sacramentaries but also in the new ¶ For albeit it be a common opinion among many that Caluin and the later Sacramentaries haue some what fined the grossnes of their forefathers
by like reason any baptisme vsed in the law were but âgââââue in waâer alone yet the baptisme of Christ brought with it the holy ghost it gaue remission of synneâ and therefore to there that were otherwiâe faithful beleeuing beââââs their faith and beleef baptisme was neâeââaââ for remission of their sânnes eternal life For which cause it is called the holy ghosts lauer or font of regeneration and râââuation By iâ the word of life we aââcle ânâed from synne and siued as ãâ¦ã ââuly as Neâ and his âaâââlâe was sauââ by the Arke and water supporting it in the time of the vniuersal deluge Al which promises and testimonies so plaine and preguant other to ãâ¦ã as Calâââ Zuinghus Musculus and others do with flat denyal that by vertue of baptisme any such matter as grace remission is bestowed on vs or to elude by interpreting al thââ to be spoken only for that baptisme is a signe or marke to âestife the Lords wil vnto vs is to make a âest of al scââpture nothing being so cleare but in this âort and with this audacitie may be shifted of or els to expound al these teâts so that nothing be leaft singular to the new testament aboue the old this is plainly to disgrace and deface Christ with his new testament This is to match Moyses with Christ the servaÌt with his maâster quit to destroy this new testameÌt whose essence coÌâisteth in this differeth from that for that the old law coÌteyned shodowes signes prefigurations the grace veritie whereof was fulfilled in Christ Iesus That was a law of secuitude because it found meÌ sinners left the in then sinne occasionally encreased heaped synne vpon synne by no meanes of the lavy deliuered men from the burden of synne and therefore is called a TestameÌt in the letter which killeth not in the spirite which geueth ââfe the ministerie of death damnation because for the âââson a sore said it was a greater cause of death damââion where as this is the law of freedom lâl ertie especialy for that it setteth men free from their sinnes hath old naââe meanes to abolish sinnes when they are committed and to pouregrace into men whereby they may absteyne from committing sinne and therefore is called a nevv Testament in the spirite which geueth life not in the letter which killeth the ministerie of the Spirite and iustice because it maketh men iust holy by conferring grace in her sacrifice and sacraments vvhereas in those other of the lavv was nothing els but a perpetual commemeratioÌ of synne once committed without forgeuing putting away or abolishing the same Al which difference the Apostle sammatilie compriseth when as comparing these two Testaments together he coÌcludeth that the nevv Testament standeth and is grounded on better promises then the old which out of the prophete Ieremie he noteth to be these In the new testament I wil geue my lawes into theirs mynds and in their hart wil I write them and not in tables of stone as before and I wil be mercyful to their iniquities and their synnes I wil not new remember which in the old testament vvere neuer forgotten but by the very sorme of then seruice remembred perpetually ¶ But to dravv to a conclusion of that vvhich I purpose that is to make plaine and manifest the true nature of the Eucharist after Caluins faith and the faith of such congregations as are erected grounded vpon his Apostolical ministerie and vvithal to demonstrate where to this gospel tendeth that is to a very abnegation of Christianisme establishing in place thereof Iudaisme or some worser thing let vs in this principal mysterie coÌsider wel hovv they forsaking Christ and his Apostles forsaking the Apostolical primitiue church of al fathers martyrs the beleef vse of this SacrameÌt practised amongest them haue taken their Supper from the Ievves from a Iewish ceremonie vsed amongest the Ievves before Christs coming It is recorded by good historiographers that Berengarius was thought to haue bene instructed in this point of his insidelitiâ ây a certain Iew and that al his argument vvhich he made against the truth of Christs presence in the sacrament vvere borowed and taken from Iosephus Albo a Iew a capital enemie of Christian name and religion For that Iew chap. 2â of his 3 oration which he wrote concerning the points of Moyses law vââereâh the self same arguments against the Eucharist which afterwards Berengarius his sectaries cast forth Eadem omnino dicit que BereÌgarius se tatores eâuâ pâstea vomueruÌt Beza out of Emanuel Tremell us the Ievv telleth that among the Iewes it vvas a custome yerely vvhen they did âate their paschal lamb vvithal to ioyne a ceremonial eating of bread and drinking of vvine in this sort The good maÌn of the house in the beginning of supper taketh an vnleauened loaf which he diuiâeth in two parts and blesseth the one with these words Blessed art thow O lord our god king of al things which out of the earth doest bring forth bread The other part of the loaf âe ââuereth with a napkin and reserueth Then âal they to their supper merily which being ended the good man taketh out that part of bread which was couered and sitting downe eateth so much as is the quantitie of an oliue distributeth the like to al that sit with him in memorie of their passe ouer Then sitting stil in like order he drinketh and saith the ordinarie grace c. This Ievvish ceremonie I make choise of to compare vvith the Caluinian Supper principally for that both in matter and forme al circumstances it resembleth the Calâinian deuise most aptly but partly also that vvithal I may shevv to the reader the incredible ârovvardnes and peruersitie of Caluin and Beza vvho vvhen they haue equalled al sacraments and ceremonies of the lavv vvith those of the gospel yet forsooth for honour of their ovvne inuention can not abide to haue their peeuish supper called a Ievvish ceremouie or coÌpared vvith any such vvhereaâ Caluin stoâmeth maruelously Beza in the place before quoted vvheÌ he hath likened the one to the other very diligently in fine as though he bare some special reuerence to his ovvne supper addeth by vvay of correction Longe âamen aliter iudicandum est de hac sancta solemni c. yet must we iudge fââ other wise of this holy and solemne institution of the supper as it is set forth by Ihon Caluin and the church of Geneua whereby we are put in possession of Christ then of thââ external rite humane traditioÌ Thus Beza most foÌdly frovvardly For what more peevish frovvardnes can be imagined then that they vvho against Christ his Apostles and al scripture haue altogether made equal our Testament with the Ievvish our sacraments vvith theirs ouâ Eucharist with
vsed by Caluin Beza Martyr Musculus and lightly euerie other sacramentarie that the Iewish Manna vvater out of the rocke their passing ouer the sea and baptisme in the cloud vvas as good and effectual as our sacraments of baptisme the Eucharist and that the Ievves in those figures receiued the self same foode in the one spiritual benefite in the other as vve do in these sacrameÌts of ours the ansvvere is that they al sovvly corrupt and peruert the Apostles vvords and sense The Apostle saith not that the Ievves had the self same spiritual foode which Christians baââ as though he compared Ievves and Christians together but that the Ievves amonge them selues good bad iust and vniust receiued those benefites there mentioned For the Ievves al alike passed the redde seaâ they vvere al directed alike by the cloud they al alike did eate of Manna vvherein the evil men had as great preeminence as the good they did al alike so did their beasts drinkâ of the water which issued out of the rocke albeit most of them were wicked men in whom god was not pleased This is al that the Apostle saith These vvere temporal benefites bestowed vpon the Iewes which in no place of the Scripture haue annexed vnto them spiritual grace or remission of sinnes as haue the Christian sacraments wherevnto they are impiously opposed And therefore S. Basil with great zeale mueâgheth against them which make such odious comparison as men who vtterly disgrace and extenuate the maiestie of the nevv testament For saith he what remission of sinnes what regeneration or renouation of life was geuen by the sea what spiritual gift was geueÌ by Moyses what mortificatioÌ of sinne was wrought by his ceremonies or sacraments As for the vvord spiritual applied by S. Paule to Manna the vvater he calleth it spiritual partly because it proceeded from a spiritual diuine miraculous cause as in the storie is noted partly because it signified as did almost al things in the old lavv euen the very stones and timber of Salomons temple spiritual things which vvere to be exhibited in the nevv testament in Christ and his church For that of it self it vvas not ordeyned for a spiritual foode but for a corporal the very text proueth which assigneth the vse of it to al indifferently no lesse to euil men then to good yea no lesse to beasts then to men and our Sauiour him self vvho plainlie separateth it from the diuine Manna of the nevv testameÌt directly affirmeth it to haue bene geuen for a corporal foode to differ as much from his diuine body geuen in the sacrament of the nevv testament as doth any vulgar bread or flesh And thus do the auncient fathers agreably to Christs words expound it acknovvleging it for his proper and peculiar vse to haue bene an earthly foode though besides it vvere a signe a figure an image a shadovv and signification of Christ the spiritual Manna and heauenly bread vvhich in deed came from heauen in vvhich first vvord of the definition of our sacraments for every sacrament is a signe that Manna and water of the rocke agree with our sacraments and therefore some times so far forth they are by S. Austin compared together but touching the effect of grace never made equal And now if it shal please the reader to conferre these last 6. rules or obseruatons gathered out of the doctrine of Caluin and the Caluinists with that his first magnifiing of Christs real presence in the Sacrament of the Supper he shal very easely discouer him to be a vvicked hipocrite and also find everie parcel point of that whole paragraph gainsayd and refuted by ech one of these 6. obseruations ensuing vvhich if a man vvould gather in to a table after the example before shevved he should fil a great deale of paper and find at the lest so many contradictions in these later against that first as be sentences perhaps lines in that first He shal vvithal be able to frame to him selfe some certaine and sure knovvledge to sure at lâst as may be gathered out of the vvritings of such vvethercockes vvho according to the Apostles vvords are tossed vp and dovvne vvith everie nevv conceite as a light clovvde is caried here there vvith every puffe of vvind vvhat the Caluinian supper is to vvit after his ovvne description bread and vvine or some like nutriment voyd of Christs body and blud or any vertue thereof or any other grace instituted for this only purpose to put vs in remembrance of Christ in no respect or comparison better then the significatiue bread or sheeps flesh vsed by the Iewes in their Paschal suppers ¶ And thus much touching the equalitie of their sacrament with the Ievves as they graunt vve accept so herevpon a litle farther we proue vvhich perhaps they vvil deny that the Ievvish sacraments vvere better then thens not only for that the Ievvish had their Institution from god and his holy prophets vvhereas this supper proceedeth directly from the deuil his Ministers but also for that comparing the sacraments thus by them described in them selues the Ievvish much excelled VVhereof this only reason in their diuinitie is a most sure demonstration The preper vse institution and end of the sacrament is this and in this confuteth the benefite thereof that it stiriâth vp our âaith moveth ouâ external and internal ãâ¦ã to consideration of the thing signified that is Christ his death VVhereof ââââlâvvâth that where this ãâ¦ã is most âound where a signe is most lâââây ãâ¦ã and ãâã to moue ouâ senses ãâ¦ã iy to quicken ouââaith and excite our mynds to the consideration of Christ his death that âgâe hath in it so much the more singularly and in a more high and excellent degree the nature of a sacrament But this was saâ better and more effââââally wrought by ãâ¦ã ng a lamb by pâwââg out the âlud thereof then by ãâ¦ã bread and drinking beare ãâ¦ã or wine I or both the lamb is a more noble câeatuâe then is bread therefore more apt to âgââââc Christs body the noblest creature that euer was the innocency of a lamb to signifie Christs innocencie that lamb killed that flesh that blud was a more lâââly signe or this lamb of god killed for âs of his body of his blud giuen for âs then breaking of bread drinking of any wine or beare be it neuer so strong Therefore in that wherein consiââeââ the proper nature of a sacrament the âewââh excelled ours Againe an other saâââmental signification and the same very principal ãâ¦ã they in this that as the bread and wine nourisheth our bodies corporally so Christ caâe by faith nourisheth our sâwâes spiritually But that Iewish supper hauing in it yong tender nourishing flesh of a lamb together with bread and vvine nourished corporally and so signified Christ body nourishing
circuâcised afterward received the signe of circumcision a seale of the iustice of faith which he had being yet vncircumcised that he should be the father of them thaâ beleeue c. And vvhat maketh this for the sacrament of the Supper vvhat to our purpose here Certainly as much as circumcision resembleth the supper For first it vvâl not folovv in any reason ether humane or divine that vvhich is spoken of one particular streight vvays to be extended to al. The argument on the contraâie side is good from al to some or any one But from one to al is as vvise as if I should say M. B. is minister eâgo al men are ministers For questionles not al sacraments of the old lavv vvere such signes and seales of iustice For so al that vvere vvashed or purified Iudaically al that eate the Paschal lamb or vnleavened bread yea by the Protestant doctrine al that passed the red sea and eate of Manna or drunke of the vvater issuing out of the rocke vvhich the Protestants make as good sacraments as are the Christian should haue bene iustified vvhich iâ flat against the Apostle and should from god him self haue received the seale and testification that they vvere iust before him Next if a man deny the sacraments of the old and new law to be of one qualitie as al Catholikes do ever did then againe the collection from circumcision to the supper is fond foolish Thirdly it wil not folow from this of Abraham to any sacrameÌt that it is a seale of iustice to the receiuer For albeit it were so in AbrahaÌ of whom the scripture testifieth that before this time he was iustified and afterwards receiving the signe of circumcision that was to him a seale and confirmation of iustice as the plain storie and sequele of the Scripture sheweth and S. Chrysostom expoundeth yet this signe can be no such seale to al others except they haue the like warrant and testimonie of their iustice from god out of his word as Abraham had which to affirme fighteth directly against the Protestants doctrine who teach that many were as then circumcised so now baptized who are not iust before god but remayne stil in their sinnes So nether baptisme now nor circumcision then could be to such men a seale and confirmation of iustice which they then had not nor novv haue Fourthly this vvas to Abraham a seale not of iustice only but also of an other promise as vvitnesseth S. Paule ââ fiereâ pater multarum gentium that he should become the father of many nations both of Ievves Gentilessuch as beleeved For as before his circumcision he vvas iustified by his faith to testifie that the Gentiles might be iustified if they beleeved and did as he did vvithout circumcision so after vvas he circumcised to testifie that in like âort the circumcised Ievv should be iustified as he vvas And as to him his circumcision vvas a seale of his iustice by âaith so vvas it also a seale assurance that he should be the father of many natioÌs vvhich beleeved vvere they circumcised or no. Which both parts the Apostle in one brief sentence for this cause coupleth together And nether this Apostle nor any other nether Evangelist noâ prophet ever calleth circumcision a seale but in this special place and that no doubt for this special reason So that this being a proper privilege and prerogatiue geâeâ in singular sort to Abraham in testimonie of his obedience and faith as Beza also in part confesseth pecâliari ratione hoc convenit Abrahamo cui vni dictum est in âebenediâentur omnes gentes this saith Beza agreeth to Abraham after a verie special and peculiar sort vnto whom only it was said in thee shal al nations be blessed M. B. must learne as the laâv and common reason teacheth him that priuilegia paucorum non faciunt legem communem The priuileges of a few much lesse of one make no common'law for al. And therefore al sacraments can not be called seales although the sacrament of circumcision was so to Abraham Fiftly which is the principal in this place how soeuer that were to Abraham a seale of iustice whether as Origen interpreteth it because it shut vp the iustice of faith vvhich vvas in the time of the gospel to be plainly opened so that this carnal circumcision vvas a secret feale and presignification of the internal circumcision vvhich vvas to be vvrought spiritually after or as S. Chrysostoni interpreteth it vvas a kind of bond and obligation vvhich God tookâ of Abraham to bynd him and his posteritie the more deeply to gods service for as vvhen vve distrust mens vvords vve take some pledge of them so god knovving the inconstancie of mens mynds vvould haue this signe and assurance from them saith S. Chrysostom or as some other vvil a signe and seale to put men in memorie of their dutie to god in vvhich soât also our sacraments of baptisme and the Eucharist are signes and seales of Christs death his paâsioÌ and resurrection to the cogitation and remembrance vvhereof vve are induced by the vse of them or vvhat so euer good sense of this word is geuen by good men no good man ever expounded it to signifie that it is oâ waâ a seale to confirme the promises of god or gods woâd preached which is the point of our question here intreated Finally of this place amongst other let the Christian reader stil nâââ the frowardnes of our adâersaries vvho in al the nevv Testament having this only tâât vvhere a sacrament of the old lavv is called a seale and that peculiarly in one man vpon that one place being so doubtful in deed not applicable to other sacraments wil needs reproue the vsual speech of the church vvhich though not found in scripture as they suppose yet can they not deny but it was vsed in the primitiue church from the beginning For so M. B. confesseth as a thing certain and out of question that the Latin Theologes who were most auncient did interprete the Greeke word ãâã by the word sacrament and applied it to baptisme and the Supper and vvith a litle study and humilitie he might fynd the vvord thus taken in the scripture it self Vpon this so vveake and pitiful a foundation that is vpon this one vvord of seales once vsed by the Apostle in one only place applied to one only man by special privilege never attributed to baptisme never to the supper that is to say vpon his ovvne mere fansie or at lest vpoÌ the fansie of Caluin a vvicked and proud heretike condemned not only by Catholikes but also by most of his felow heretikes of this age M. B. buildeth his entier definition of sacraments VVhich therefore if in this discourse I refute vvith any contemptible words or comparisons let the Reader vvel vnderstand me that In ever intend any such vvord or comparison
were superfluous so vpon this his reason and ground may vve confideÌtly say in this place that howsoever they are helpes for weake Christians vvho mistrust god doubtles to these Apostles and Apostolical men ful of the holy ghost to these Martyrs and Confessors these seales were altogether superfluous and served to no purpose for that othervvise they vvere as strong in faith as they could be by any such poore helpes And yet those most blessed most faithful and constant Saints who by their strong faith were able and did remoue rocks and mountaynes stayed the rage of fluds commaunded the sea frequented this sacrament no men more Ergo there is an other vse and nature of this sacrament then to serue for seales to confirme wavering weake Christians It wil be replied perhaps that the greatest multitude of Christians are not such for them principally serue these signes If so yet then vve see that to the best Christians this sacrament is vnnecessarie And yet the holy scripture calleth the figure of this sacrament principally in respect of this sacrament it self and the perfection thereof panem caeli celestial and heavenly bread and therefore most convenient for divine and heavenly persons such as the best men are It calleth it for like reason bread of Angels or as the Protestants coÌmonly translate it paneÌ fortium or as their translation printed in London anno 1572. with the Q. Priuilege hath panem magnificorum the bread of heroical glorious men strong in faith and radicated therein And without doubt by Christs institution it vvas appointed as wel for the one as for the other But come vve to vveake Christians Hovv doth it confirme and strengthen their feeble faith As for example sake Some vveake brother there is who beleeving al this nevv gospel which consisteth more of infidelitie then faith beleeveth not yet the first article of his Creede that God is omnipotent namely that he is able to make his ovvne body or any body to be at one time in tvvo places And that this supposition be not counted fond or slanderous to omit M. B. who thus preacheth hereafter I produce a man of an indifferent good faith as the Sacramentaries measure faith P. Martyr the lose Monke one of our first Apostles in Oxford who vvriteth in sundry places most expresly Dei potentia fieri non potest vt humanum corpus codem tempore sit in multis locis c. Gods power is not of sufficient abilitie to make that the body of a man be at one time in divers places For this is to take from a body his limites and lineaments nether of which in this mans conceite is god able to do Deus humanum corpus absque suis finibus et terminis facere non potest God saith he is not able to make a mans body to lacke his bounds and limites The like he hath in sundry for their to manifest assistance and support yelded to the Anabaptists in their furious madnes as Zuinglius calleth their gospel VVherevnto he addeth an Appendix vvhich I could vvish M. B. vvel to vveigh and consider of for his ovvne good Quapropter ipse quoque ingenâe fatâor c. VVherefore I my self also confesse frankly saith he that a few yeres sithence I being deceived with this error thought it better to differ the baptisme of yong children vntil they came to perfite age As much as if he had confessed in plaine termes that him self also as great a clarke as meÌ esteemed him so long as he thought the sacrameÌts to be instituted for seales and confirmation of faith so long vvas he in mynd a very Anabaptist so long vvas he an enemy to the baptisme of infants nether had he any other vvay to shake of that Anabaptistical heresie but first of al to leaue and forsake that vvicked opinion vvhich here M. B. so seriously teacheth vvhich so long as he holdeth so long can he not blame men if they suspect him to be an Anabaptist vvhose heresie doth so directly folovv of this his doctrine VVhereas then vve find these seales to confirme the vvord preached or faith of the vvord nether in respect of the vvord it self nor of strong Christians nor of vveake nor of yong infants to vvhom principally these seales of baptisme and the supper apperteyne hovv can they in any sort be applied to confirme the word preached It remayneth only to say that they confirme the vvord to the hearers in respect of the minister that vvhereas othervvise the minister should vvant credit novv forsooth vvhen he exhibiteth these seales of bread vvyne and vvater forthvvith the bretherne may be confirmed in the word preached by the minister and be vvarranted that he hath preached the word rightly and rightly opened al the parts of it But nether can this hold For vvhen vve knovv that the ministers in that they are ministers are by the nature of their ministerie lyers and therefore seldome yea never vvhen they speake out of their chaire that is vvhen they speake as ministers and teach any doctrine of their nevv gospel speake any truth as the holy ghost assureth vs of al heretikes and nevv preachers vvhich lacke lavvful vocation both in the old testament and the nevv we must looke for better seales and they must shevv better and stronger then these before we beleeue the vvord preached by them to the confirmation vvhereof seales of bread and butter are as fit as these their seales of bread vvyne and al the seales of the vvorld can not geue a Christian man sufficient ground and assurance to trust them ¶ And novv finally if vve shal a litle consider these seales in them selues abstracting them from men ether strong in faith or vveake or children or ministers as they are seales to confirme gods promises so as these men describe them we shal yet more perceive the inuention of them to be very fond fantastical and ridiculous and fit for such light ministers for that neuer any Diuine or good Christian of any grauitie conscience would thus talke or dreame not only for that there is no ground in scripture whereon any such doctrine may be framed but also because their writing and speaking in this matter is against al wit reason For seales vvhich are vsed to confirme any thing must by common discourse of reason and light of nature be more euident and manifest then that thing for confirmation vvhereof they are vsed For men confirme not strong things by weake manifest by obscute certain and knovven by vncertaine and doubtful Yet so falleth it out here For the promise vvhich these men vrge He that eateth my flesh shal liue for euer He that beleeueth is baptized shal be saued being taken of Christians for the vvord of god is forthvvith to them sure certaine and manifest vvhereof they neuer doubt But when they see vvater sprinkled on a child oâ
of what matter and in vvhat sort he must preach is that word vvhich is so necessarie and vvhich maketh the sacrament In vvhich discourse first of al the Christian reader may note the good opinion that these Ministers haue of them selues and their owne vvords These signes seales albeit they be ordeyned by Christ to signifie and seale as hath bene often tymes said yet are they dead the bread is commoÌ bread the vvine is common vvine notvvithstanding Christs ordinance institutioÌ Many times the Protestant vvriters vvil beare vs in hand that the auncient fathers vvheÌ they speake of Consecâation meane thereby nothing els but the application of the bread vvine from prophane vse to holy from serving coÌmon tables to ââââ the table of the Lord. The bread water and wine when in baptisme the supper they are applied to holy vses then are they consecrated saith M. Ievvel Bullinger This is their Consecration saith Caluin when they are applied to spiritual vses And so commonly vvrite Peter Martyr Zuinglius âââa and the rest But novv albeit the bread and vvine be brought from the tauerne to the church and there remaine vpon the table al the bretherne and sisters attend ready to receiue it in memorie of the Lords death vvhich is from prophane vse to apply it to maruelous holy yet notvvithstanding stil it remaineth coÌmon bread coÌmon wine a dead elemeÌt vvithout life sowle like a dead carcas If a Catholike priest take such bread and vvine and hauing vvith him a sufficient company to make a communion after their praiers ether priuate or publike purpose farther to consecrate this common bread by rehearsing al the words of Christ ether after S. Maâthevv S. Marke S. Luke or S. Paule al this vvorketh nothing thus to recite Christs vvords is magical inchauntment and it is grosse beastlines doltishnes to suppose that they are of any effect to vvorke any thing say Caluin and Zuingliê° The Papists do perversly superstitiously ascribe force of sanctification to recital of such vvords Nulla est vis in recitatione verberum Domini there is no vertue at al in reciting the words of the Lord ether in baptisme or in the supper saith Bullinger But yet after al this if a minister of Calvins creation vvho hath as much authoritie to make this sacrament as hath his vvise and nether of them more then they haue to create a nevv Sunne or Moone if such a minister come tel a tale of his owne spend perhaps an houâe oâ more in railing at the church discipline at the Pope at Papists or in some such other argument vvhich is the coÌmon subiect of their sermoÌs for fevv ministers folovv M. B. order of preaching prescribed here then forsooth the whole action is quickened then the bread and vvine receiue life and sowle and from common bread become sacramental bread significatiue bread sealing bread vvhereby it is sealed and confirmed to al the bretherne and sisterne that they haue spiritually eaten the flesh of Christ by faith Is not the blindnes of these men vvonderful that can thus iustle our Christ to thrust in them selues can reiect his vvords and so magnifie their ovvne And where find they in any part of the scripture old or nevv that a Sermon is required as a necessarie part of the sacrament VVhat Apostle or Euangelist vvriteth so vvhat Doctor or Councel euer so expounded the scripture or gathered any such rule or conclusion thence VVe find in the Evangelists the vvhole entier forme vsed by Christ when first of al he instituted this sacrament which before we haue in particular declared and that according to the iudgement of a learned and siue Caluinist Nether in the text of the Evangel noâ yet in the exposition of this Euangelist is any such preaching mentioned much lesse is it made a necessarie part of the sacrament vvhereon the life of it dependeth Our sauiour after the deliuerie of it in S. Iohn maketh a long sermon I graunt but nether is that adioyned as a part of the Supper nether toucheth it the sacrameÌt the institution oâ administration or explication or declaration there of to the people which only declaration of the mysterie to the people saith Caluin maketh the dead elemeÌt to become a sacrament In the other sacrament of baptisme this ââoward perversitie sheweth it self much more For to vvhom wil they preach there To vvhose vse frame they their sermon To the infants or to the people present if any be If to the infant this in deed were very magical not preaching but inchauntement to preach to the infant who vnderstandeth never a vvord To the people Hovv so vvhereas the sacrament is not for them the baptisme is not to be applied to them the signe or element must be ioyned to make a sacrament not for the standers by but for the receiuers ¶ Because this vvhereof vve now intreate is the most necessarie and substantial part of the sacrament and also of these sermons we must somvvhat more exactly sift and search the true meaning of this word preached which is of so great authoritie and operation in geving life and spirite to the Scottish and Geneua sacraments otherwise very dead and deadly VVherefore I desire a litle more particularly to be resolued and ansvvered vvhat word preached this is whereof dependeth the life and sovvle of their sacrament Hath euery sermon this grace Doth every idle preaching of a minister geue life and sowle to the sacrament and with common bread make such a wonderful coniunction of Christs body as M. B. telleth vs VVhat if out of the pulpit he tel a tale of Robin hood and litle Ihon VVhat if he do nought els but inveigh against the Pope the Cardinals Purgatorie praying to Saints so forth VVhat if he fal in commendation a common argument among the ministers of love matters and chamber-worke as VVigandus an Archprotestant one of the framers of the Magdeburge Centuries writeth that once him selfe was present vvhen a gospelling minister in his sermoÌ to that effect cited aboue 20. verses out of Ovid dâ arte amandi which also to be a common veine of preaching in Scotland it is wel knovven testified Doth every such pulpit talke geue sowle to your sacrament Yovv wil say no. For albeit both in ScotlaÌd EnglaÌd a number of CoÌmunions are currant passe wel with such Sermons both the CoÌmunions Sermons are compted perfite enough the multitude both of ministers and Protestants like this kind of preaching best yet vvhen they come to M. B. scanning he as vve may here perceiue vvil dislike them find theÌ deficient VVherefore let vs put the case somwhat more indifferent VVhat if the Minister make his sermon of the creation of the vvorld of the fal of Adam of the patriarchs mariages of the deluge of the childreÌ of Israels captivitie of the old law VVhat if he talke of
private then publike of private miserie rather then publike charitie because everie man devoured vp his ovvne supper and gaue no part to his poore neighbour vvho had brought nothing But Dominica caena the supper of our Lord vvho is charitie it self the supper of charitie should be common to al. In an other place he called this supper coÌmune praudiuÌ a coÌmon feast For examining the coherence of the Apostles vvords he obiecteth to him self hovv to vvhat purpose the Apostle bringeth in the storie of Christs Institution of the b. sacrament v. 23. Qualis est haec consequentia what maner of sequele is this saith S. Chrysostom Thow hast hitherto disputed of a common feast or banquet and doest thow new come in with Christs sacraments VVhich question he ansvvereth very vvel as also doth the learned Greeke doctor Theodoretus in his coÌmentaries vpon this same place that he brought in the storie of Christs sacrament for examples sake docens eos facere communes mensas in ecclesiâs ad sacram illam mensam respicientes teaching that it vvel became them to make their church feasts common to the poore by regarde and consideration of Christs holy table that seing he vvithout respect or choise or such distinguishing betwene rich poore indiffereÌtly gaue to al his ovvne most pictious body aud blud it might wel become them vvith like equalitie and indifferency âo coÌmunicate their earthly and fleshly bankets And thus much is after a sort confessed both by Calvin and Beza though they yet cal the sacrament by the name of the Lordes supper For Calvin graunteth that as among the Iewes and also Gentils it was a custome to accompanie their sacrifices made in the honour of god with frindly banquets amoÌg themselues so the first Christians brought the same fashion of banquetting in to the church and called them agapas charities or feastes of charitie vsed them vvith the administration of this sacrament VVhich after grovving to an abuse the Apostle seeketh here to amend And Beza vvriteth that the first Christians were wont to minister the holy supper of the Lord amonge these feastes which were called agapae vvhich in an other place he calleth sacra coÌviâis sacra ecclesiae conviuia and fraterna ecclesiastici caetus cânvivia holy feasts holy church feasts and brotherly banquets of the ecclesiastical congregation among vvhich feastes that the supper of the lord vvas also ministred it may appeare saith Beza by S. Paule 1 Cor. 11. where he goeth al out to correct that custom which was many ways corrupted VVhich being so that S. Paule here goeth about to correct that abuse then must needs those vvords vvhich go before the institution of Christ beginning after versu 23 be vnderstood of such church feasts so abused and then dominicae caena can not apperteyne to the sacrament vvhich after is brought in thereby to correct that custom and abuse of our Lords supper vvhich is expressed before as sovvly corrupted And the vvords of them selues if they be taken as S. Paule vvrote them the old Translation expresseth them and not as they are peruerted in the Geneva translation and examined vvith indifferent iudgement can beare no other sense For these vvords VVhen yow meete together this is not to eate our lords supper for that every one preventeth and falleth to his owne private supper and one is a hungred another is drunke can haue no other proper natural resolution then this vvhen yow meete together that vvhich yovv eate is not that publike ecclesiastical brotherly supper of charitie of god of Christ and his church vvhich should be common to al the societie of Christians but it is a private peculiar supper voyd of al charitie brotherly loue vvhere one devoureth al an other hath nothing one hath to much and is drunke vvith abundance vvhen many other poore Christians stand by get never a morsel of bread or draught of drinke This is the true sense of the place of S. Paule of this vvord vsed in that only place no vvhere els in the scriptures this sense both Beza and Caluin geve after those auncient doctors And therefore M. B. hath litle reason to cal the sacrament the lordes supper by this authoritie And if the compilers of the Scottish Publike prayer booke had no other reason but this they might as vvel haue called their sacrament as our Enghish do by the name of CoÌmunion which cometh somwhat neerer to S. Paules phrase then this of the Lords supper vvhich is not so probable to be S. Paules meaning Albeit nether is that vvord Communion truly to speake geuen to the sacrameÌt ether by Apostle or Evangelist in al the scripture For as the lordes supper so the Communion in the scripture never signifieth as Beza also noteth communion in the sacrament but in civil offices of loue and charitie in imparting our goods and substance as mony cloth meate and drinke to our brethern vvhich need so is it takeÌ Rom. 1â 26. 2. Cor. 9. 13. Hebr. 13. 16. Pro sacris vero mysterijs nusquaâ legi in novo testamento absolute positum hoc nomen CoÌmunionis But ââne ver read in the new testament that the word CoÌmunion put absolutely signified the holy mysteries saith Beza And if it be not found in the nevv testament I suppose it is not found in the old and so nether the English in calling their signe a Communion nor the Scottish in terming theirs the Lords supper folow the word of the Lord but ether their owne vvord or the vvord of some man vvhom they make lesse account of then of them selues ¶ The other name our lordes table is in deed referred to this sacrament But vvhereas M. B. after Caluin argueth from that vvord that because it is a table not an altar therefore vve should sit at it not stand we should take and receiue not offer and propine these arguments are such as become ministers to make For first of al the vvord table in the scripture is indifferent for a table an altar as appeareth continually in the old testament in description of the tabernacle first and Salomous temple after vvhere there vvere tables mensae not for the priests and their vvives to sit at but for the priests alone to stand at to do things apperteyning to sacrifice And the prophete Malachie in one verse both according to the Hebrevv Greeke and Latin calleth it mensam Domini also altare Domini the table of god and the altar of god signifying an altar or place to offer sacrifice on by ether vvord indifferently And the Prophete Esay rebuketh the Iewes for that they forsaking our lord erected a table mensam to fortune and offered sacrifice on it VVhich the English Bibles both of king Edwards time this present time translate ye haue set vp an altar vnto the false goddesse the vvord Mensa according to the most common vse
only such as be of naughtie life but also of evil and heretical faith if they be not plain Apostataes Of the Calvinists special iustifying faith by which last refuge as al Catholikes be excluded from their spiritual communicatioÌ of Christ so yet other most detestable heretikes thereby receiue Christ as wel as the Calvinists And their doctrine of special faith the very roote of dissolute life plainely directly concludeth against M. B. that in their supper the worst Calvinists receiue Christ as wel as the best CHAP. 15. THe next matter not handled before is a couple of arguments vvhich M. B. obiecteth as in the behalf of Catholikes for the real presence The first is this The Apostle saith He that eates of this bread vnworthely is guiltie of the body and blud of Christ There iâ their ground VVhereof they frame this argument No man can be guiltie of that thing which be âââ not received Evil men receiue not the body of Christ Therefore they can not be guiltie of it This is the argument as he maketh it His answere to this as likewise to the next is out of Calvin thus First I say the first proposition is very false For they may be guiltie of that same body and that same blud suppose they never received it But take heed to the text The text saith not that hey eate the body of Christ but that they eate that bread drinke that wine vnworthely And yet because they eate that bread drinke that wine vnworthely they are counted before God guiltie of the body and blud of Christ not because they received him for Christ can not be received of any man bââ worthely but because they refused him For when they did eate that bread and drinke that wine they might if they âad had faith eaten and drunken the flesh and blud of Christ Nââ because thow refusest the body of Christ offered vnto thee thââ contemnes it and so art guiltie of it In this answere whereas M. B. wisheth the reader or hearer to take heede to the text so do I to so shal he find M. B. to be as right a minister that is to say as right a falsifyer of the text as are coÌmonly his felow ministers For where findeth he in the text except it be a false corrupted text that such men eate that bread and drinke that wine vnvvorthely Certainely not in any text of S. Paule For thus stand the words even as I find them translated by Beza and Calvin Therefore who so ever shal eate of this bread and drinke of this cup vnworthely shal be guiltie of the Lords body and blud But let every one proue him selfe and so eate of that bread and drinke of that cup. For who so eateth and drinketh vnworthely eateth drinketh damnation to him self for that he discerneth not the Lords body These are the words of the Apostle and thus are they translated by Calvin Beza And novv take as good heed as yow can to the text VVhere find ye that evil men eate bread drinke wine VVhat godles dealing is this to wil your auditour to take heed to the text then your self to abuse the holy scripture to corrupt the text coosen your auditor or reader most vvhen most yow pretend honestie simplicitie vvil him to take heed to the text And let not the reader suppose that the corruption is smale or of no great moment For it is vile grosse and in this place so heretical that he had bene as good to have made a text of his owne as to have made the Apostle thus to speake For the Apostles vvords are divinely exactly set downe and Apostolically expresse the real presence For in naming this bread in vrging and repeating that bread vvhich in greeke is significantly put and declareth a singular bread he meaneth that bread of God which came from heaven that bread which geueth life that body vvhich in the old testament sometimes and in the Gospels oft times in one chapter of S. Iohn a dosoÌ times at lest is called bread vvhich bread our saviour him self assureth vs to be his flesh which was to be geven for the life and salvation of the world In naming the cup or that cup vvhich is Christs owne vvord and vvhich vvord being common to any thing conteyned in the cup be it the blud of the new testament which was shed for vs be it wine be it water be it ale or beer or any maner drinke to al vvhich the vvord cup may vvel agree our saviour restreyneth to the blud of the new testament shed for remission of sinnes and so restreyneth that it can not be referred to wine or any other thing S. Paule most assuredly meaneth the same and so in the one and other truly describeth the Catholike faith of the church Against vvhich M. B. telling vs that the Apostle saith such evil men eate that bread and drinke that wine most vvickedly by thrusting in his wine redueeth the vvord bread to a vulgar base signification because talking of bread and wine no man can conceive othervvise vvhereas the vvord bread being in scripture common to al foode vvhereby man liveth and the vvord cuppe being in his kind as large and general doth not signifie nether that our vulgar kind of bread nor this wine more then it signifieth flesh and ale or fish and vvater and being o ãâ¦ã self indifferent other places of the scripture necessarily determine it to one certain more high and divine signification as hath bene declared Now vvhereas M. B. maketh a discourse that a man may be guiltie of a thing vvhich he receiveth not which no vvise man doubteth of and so a man may be guilty of Christs body and blud vvhich yet is not eaten oâ drunken ether corporally or spiritually vvhich is a plaine case for Pagans and persecutors are guilty of Christian blud vvhich vniustly they shed though yeâ they drinke it not and Pilate Herode Caiphas and the Ievves vvhich crucified Christ vvere guiltie of his death of âath body vvhich they eate nether vvay nether as Catholiks nor as Protestants al this is labour spent in vaine and talke to no purpose VVe argue not vpon vvords of condemnation or guiltines in general but vpon the vvords as they are put in the Apostle and ioyned vvith other vvords of his so they clearly prove a real presence and M. B. his interpretation is maledicta glâssa a cursed glose and exposition because it is cleane not besides but against the text For saith M. B. the fault of these men vvhom S. Paule reproveth is because they eate not that divine bread nor drinke that diuine cup S. Paule saith their fault is because they do eate it and drinke it M. B. putteth the indignitie and vnworthines in refusing not receiving it S. Paule in receiving it not refusing For they do receiue eate it but
not possibly be ioyned any falsitie as is manifest no more then god can be false in his word or promise But that Luther Calvin Beza M. B. and every Protestant is elect hath remission of his sinnes is iustified this is not only false in the iudgement of every Catholike but also of the most learned Protestants Of every Catholike because he knoweth by gods word that out of the Catholike church ministerie of the same is no remission of sinnes as the forme of our Creed teacheth vs Calvin him self graunteth By the very order of the Apostolical Creed we learne faith Calvin that perpetual rentission of sinnes resteth in the Church because in the Creed so soone as the church is named by and by ensueth remissioÌ of sinnes And this benefit is so proper to the church that we can not otherwise enjoy it except we remaine in vnitie of the church out of whose lap no man may hope for remission of sinnes or salvation as witnesseth Esai 37. 32. Ioel. 2. 32. Exechâel 13. 9. Psalm 106. 4. VVhereas then no kind of Protestaut remaineth in the Catholike Church but is departed thence vnto several particular congregations some after Luther some after Calvin some after Rotman some after other Sect-masters therefore in the iudgement of al Catholikes confirmed also by the testimonie of Calvin and authoritie of scriptures it is very salse and vnpossible that any Protestant remayning in his sect should have remission of his sinnes and be iustified It is false also for a great part in the opinion of M. B. of Calvin and the Calvinists item of Luther and the Lutherans them selves For albeit Luther the first father and inuentor of this faith reckeneth it perhaps as sure as any article of his faith that he and al his scholers the Lutherans have remission of their sinnes yet he beleeveth not so nor can beleeue so of Zuinglius and the Zuinglians nor yet of Calvin and the Calvinists al vvhich heaââounteth for deââstable heretikes as iâ or vvorse then Turkes For so ââ is vvel knowen that he evermore âââl his dying day wrote exclamed against them And the like thought Zuinglius and Calvin vvith their brood of Luther his sectaries as in part hath bene signified before VVherefore this special faith and persuasion being common to every sect of Protestants Trinitarians Arrians Anabaptists Zuinglians especially to the Lutherans who vvere first possessed of it vvhereas yet M. B. if he folow Calvin must needs graunt that these sectaries divided from his CalviniaÌ church notwithstaÌding their special faith have not remissioÌ of their sinnes are not iustified are not elect hereof he may learne most certainly that this false faith conteyning certain and manifest falsitie is not the faith which S. Paule calleth a substance or substancial ground as which hath in deed no substance or ground or firmenes in it but is a mere fansie a mere toy imagination taken vp by every lightbrayned heretike common to al alike by which al alike have remission of their sinnes in particular one as much as an other that is never a vvhit at al. And therefore if the chief principal eating of Christs flesh drinking his blud stand in this special faith â he telleth vs then his chief principal eating of Christs flesh is nothing For in thus eating he eateth nothing but lyes and heresies and feedeth on them vvhich is not very good nurriture for his sowle and âudas vvhen he sold Christ did eate Christs flesh as spiritually as any such beleeving Protestants vvhen they eate Christs flesh by such a false faith ¶ Agreably to this foundation vvhich he layeth thereoÌ to build the rest of this sermoÌ he proceedeth heaping together a nuÌber of most absurd propositioÌs which might rather become a Iew then a ChristiaÌ if some Protestants bearing the name of ChristiaÌs were not as il as Iewes For he so runneth on in extolling his spiritual dealing with Christ by this wicked presumptuous faith so to cal it that he vvholy overthroweth the mysterie of Christâ incarnation living and doing here in the world For see how he goeth on The carnal band whether it be the band of blud running thorough a race or the catrnal tuitchinâ of flesh with flesh that carnal band was never esteemed of Christ in the time be âââ conversant here in earth he made nothing of that band VVhat vvicked speech is this Doth God by the very singer of nature besides his writteâ vvoâd vvherein we are willed to honor our father and mother imprint in the hart of every good child a reverence honor regard and estimation of his parents and had our Sauiour Christ Iesus no reverence of that carnal band vvhich him self specially commended â VVhat scripture reacheth thus VVhere learneth M. B. this doctrine Doubtles no vvhere For albeit in the gospel wheâ some malitiously went about to interrupt Christs preaching by mentioning his mother and bretherne he preferred the doing of his office and service of his father and preaching of his vvord and saving of sowles before carnal kinred then importunely and to evil purpose obiected shewing that we should ever preserâe gods service before humain respect and divine spiritual and heavenly blessings before vvordly and fleshly curtesie or civilities yet to inferre thereof that Christ esteemed not the carnal band that he reverenced not carnal coniunction that âââ maner âe denied that band this is a vvicked illation out of Christs vvord and as wel might he have inferred vvith Marcion and Manicheus out of this same place that Christ was not carnally borne of the virgin his mother but phantastically and as the English Protestants of the familie of Love teach that Christ was borne of the virgin Marie no otherwise then he is borne of their flesh and such illatioÌ or coÌsequence drawen from those words by Marcion Manicheus and these English gospellers is as right as his If M. B. had done as some times the good auncient fathers do that is preferred the spiritual cognation before the carnal because the one is vniversal the other particular the one good and availeable of it self the other not so except it be ioyned vvith the spiritual the one the right vvay to salvation ordeyned by Christ who living and preaching tended to plant in al men such spititual coniunction vvhereas the carnal cognation vvas not ordeyned as a meane to iustifie any though in it and by carnal cognation Christ vvas made man vvhereby iustification redemption salvation is vvrought in al if thus M. B. had compared them and preferred the one his preaching had not bene amisse But simply and rudely to disgrace and disanul the one as though it vvere of no moment or commendation in the scriptures this is vvicked heretical inexcusable Christ as the gospel treacheth lived vvith the virgin his mother Ioseph his supposed father erat subditus
vve conclude so from the sense of a vvord in one only place yet because this special place suggested by such a night-doctor vvas so ioyfully accepted by this patriarch of the Sacramentarie heresie and by this place especially the citie of Zurick vvhich first of al long before Geneva openly received and professed this heresie vvas confirmed therein let vs learne of Martin Luther that reuerend father as M. Fox termeth him Zuinglius his coaâosâle but of greater learning far and for labour and vvriting to âet forth this gospel triple oâ quadââple more famous then Zuinglius how deeply this argument is to be vvaiphed Luther answereth it many vvays 2. ââ 3. of vvhich I vvil briefly note that if one serue not for this so doughly an obâection vvhich M. B. so much accounteth of an other may First I may answere saith Luther that Zuinglius M. B. peââerteth the scripture For Mâses saith not Eate hastely for it signifieth Phase the Lords posseouer but he saith thus Eate hastely for it is the Lords posseouer If Zuinglius M. B. reply that this is the meaning I bid him prove that For it is not plaine that Moyses so meaneth And therefore now he must take a new labour to prove this interpretation of this place in Moyse no lesse then before he was required to prove his like interâretatioÌ of the words of the Supper Children in scholes are taught to answere such Sophistical obiections with Nego cââ equentiam quia est petitio principij His second answere is to the same effect vvich I gave before But because it coÌteyneth also a reâuâation of M. B. his vvhole argument and carieth vvith it more grauitie and authoritie vvhen it cometh from the mouth or pen of that reverend father ââ at man of God that fist Evangelisâ sent from God to illuminate the whole world as our English congregation profesâeth I vvil note it also This it is Let vs learne saith Luther to frame the like argumeÌt I much doubt I am not able it is so ââl of art cunning How be it for once I wil geve the venture And I wil vndertake to prove that Sara or Lia the great mother of many children matâiaâcha remaâned stil a virgin after her child bearing VVhich I prove thus Luke writeth that Marie brought forth her sonne and remayned a virgin Then necessary it is that Sara and Lia did so is Take an other I wil prove that Pilate was an Apostle of Christ and thus I argue for it Matthew tesâifieth that Peter was an Apostle of Christ Then doubtles Pilate was an Apostle to c. If any âil answere me that I must prove by plaine scripture the virginitie of Sara and Apostleship of Pilate as I do the like of Marie and Peter is not Zuinglius as wel bound to prove thââ in the wordes of the Supper est is as much as significat Finally the sense of the place alleged he geveth thus VVhen Moyses saith Eate hastely for it is Phase the lords passeouer Zuinglius nor M. B. can never prove that Moyses in that place meaneth the lamb to be the passeouer For the phrase ââ like to our ordinarie speach when we say Eate flesh for it is sunday drinke water for it is friday Hereof no man can wring out that flesh signifieth sunday or water friday And euen so it is here Eate hastely for it is the Pascha the paschal dry wherein God wrought those benefites for our delivery passing out of Egipt Thus Luther and a great deale more in that place In the end of vvhich discourse after he hath constantly assured vs that the Sacramentaries can never iustifie their tropical exposition of Christs vvords by any âound argument and that they bring nothing for them selves in that point praeter frigida commenta monstrosâ somnia deliranâium but bald devises and monstruous dreames of doting men he vvith indignation breaketh out and exclameth against the devil vvho in the night time vvith so light a toy could seduce Zuinglius and his folowers of Zurick as he doth at this day M. B. and our Scottish and English Sacramentaries Increpet te Deus O Satan Quim acerbe nobis illudis The lord rebuke thee and put thee to silence O Satan How bitterly and scornefully doest thow ride vs vvho vvith such patched and beggerly Sophisines can dravv innumerable sowles to damnation Of contradictions and the Zuinglians impietie in limiting gods omnipotencie The Argument M. B. ignorance in talking of contradictions He denieth that God can alter the order which he hath established in nature or that he can make one body it be without place or in two places whereby he quit destroyeth al scripture old and new and razeth the very principles of Christianitie Other false examples of contradiction Of Christs entring among his disciples the doores being shut VVhich one fact disproueth al the Sacramentaries false Theologie in binding Christs body to the necessitie of a place So doth the fiery fornace of Nabuchodonosor which M. B. ignorantly alleageth for example of a contradiction M. B. shameful and true contradiction to him self about the article of Christs presence That Christ can and can not make his body really present in the Sacrament M. B. again vrgeth that Christs body is to be iudged of and limited according to rules of Phisike VVhich ethnical kind of argument and disputation is fully answered by Luther and VVestphalus Albeit glorification of our bodies maketh them not to lââ in many places yet Christs body is so CHAP. 21. AFTER this to shew a litle subtilitie he falleth in to a dispute vvhich him self vnderstandeth not about contradictioÌs taking the ground from a grosse vntruth of his owne thus Now when they Papists are dung out of this âortresse that Christs vvords are to be taken properly from vvhence M. B. thinketh he hath dung vs by such sweete and mightie argumeÌts as now vve have heard they flie saith he to Gods omnipotencie and say God may make the body of Christ in heaven and in the bread both at one time Ergo it is so This is the first vntruth and ground of his wicked disputation vvhich ensueth consisting altogether of falshod and ignorance Catholikes make no such scald arguments vvhich prove as vvel every rakehel heretike to be as good as the best Catholike every Turke as good as any Christian black vvhite durt gold fish flesh and vvhat not For God can make of an heretike a Catholike of a Turke a Christian of durt gold and so forth The Catholikes sometimes against the heretiks vvhich deny as doth M. B. Gods omnipetencie to extend thus far prove that God can do it VVhich is not to make arguments that because he can do it therefore he doth it but to refute such blasphemous speeches vvhich detract from God and deny the first article of their Creed that God is omnipotent In answering of this argument vvhich he fathereth on vs albeit he
vvho vvant a right faith and confidence in him vvhereon intierly dependeth the health of their sowle their quietnes of conscience and peace with God True it is that the best and faithfullest seruants of god have iust occasion to feare Gods iudgement as vvhom they must attend for not only a mercyful father but also a iust iudge one that iudgeth every man not according to this solifidian persuasion and presumption but according to his worke that so severely that the iust man shal scarce be saved and therefore the prophetes Apostles S. Paule S. Peter and Christ him self ever taught their scholers as to hope wel so to feare in feare trembling to vvorke their owne salvatioÌ But great or rather infinite is the difference betwene feare dread reverence and trembling vvhich the scripture commendeth these terrible doubtings wonderful stammerings and wonderful pits of desteration in to vvhich these men thrust the best seruants of God And yet this preaching vvere more tolerable if he spared our Saviour him self and set not him farther out of Gods fauour as these men measure it according to this their presumptuous confidence then the vvorst servant of God that ever vvas For vvhereas of such servants M. B. saith that the Lord never sussereth them to despaire though they be brought to the very brinke of desperation yet are they not swallowed vp of it Christ our blessed Sauiour he thrusteth farther in to the very bottomles pit of desperation For saith he To what end doth the lord cast his servants so low He answereth To the end they may feâle in their harts and consciences what Christ suffered for them in the yard and on the crosse in sowle and body that we feele in our sowles in some measure the hel which he susteined in ful measure VVhere attributing to Christ the ful measure of that vvhereof he alloweth to his seruants but a portion vvhom yet he draweth to the very brinke of desteration he manifestly teacheth that Christ despayred fully and absolutely according to the doctrine of that monstrous caytive Calvin vvho vvriteth expressely that Christ not only internally in mind despayred but also externally brast out in to a speech of desperation vne voix de desespoir luy est eschappee in his french Harmonic vpon the Gospel and the gehennical church of Geneva in vvhose Catechisme Christ is subiected to the same torment of conscience and paynes of hel as are the damned and reprobate the impenitent sinners whom God doth punish in his terrible wrath saue that Christ susteyned that for a tyme only a day or two in the yard on the crosse saith M. B. vvhich they must endure continually VVhich doctrine invented or published by Calvin and Beza taught in the Geneva Catechisme and here briefly vttered by M. B. besides that it taketh away one article of our faith Christs descent in to hel in effect marreth and destroyeth al articles of our Christian Creed so far as they apperteyne to the redemption vvrought by Christ For if the perfection of Christian iustice be measured by firme persuasion of Gods mercy and favour and as M. B. vvriteth he that hath no measure of this faith hath no measure of peace vvith God Christ of al gods seruants that ever vvere vvas farthest from this measure as being plunged in desperation in ful measure then vvas Christ farthest of all other from being at peace vvith god and therefore was most vnfit to be a peace-maker for others to reconcile man to God pacifying things in heaven and earth vvhereas him self vvas not at peace vvith God nether had that peace of conscience vvhich every Protestant hath A forme of pietie the vertue vvhereof he denieth his vvords cary vvhen as he preacheth that this faith and persuasion vvhich he so magnifieth and baptizeth by the name of their iustifying faith dependes vpon the quiet state of a good conscience This quiet state is troubled by nothing in the world but by sinne Herevpon he falles in to a commoÌ place vvhich conteynes much good moral talke that we must glorifie god by doing good works there maÌ be an agreemeÌt betwene the hart the hand thy conuersatioÌ man of necessitie be changed with thy hart and be holy honest godly as thy hart is VVe must love our neighbour els we can not love God Faith is tried by his fruits and except thow glorifie God by thy deeds and make thy life holy to testifie thy holy faith al is but vayne al is but mere hipocrisie c. If thy conversation be good it is a sure token that thow hast a true faith and art one with God But if thy conuersation be not good let men say what they wil thy hart is defiled true and lively faith is not in thee Al vvhich and much more of like effect in fine he plainly referreth to this conclusioÌ So this ground holds fast A doubting conscience makes a weake faith The more doubting is the coÌscience the weaker is the faith A good conscience makes a strong faith Hurt your coÌscience yow hurt your faith For how can I be persuaded of gods mercy whose anger I feele kindled against me and against whom my conscience shewes me to be gilty of many offences Once again Every of yow take tent to your conscience For keep a good coÌscience and thow shalt keep faith The better thy conscience is the starker thy faith is Loosing it a good coÌscience ye loose faith and loosing faith ye loose saluation The hail exhortation that we gather on this point depends vpon this To omit his false ground that strong persuasion and confidence of Gods mercy can not stand vvith sinful life or evil conscience vvhereas presumptioÌ vvhich is a degree beyond confidence may so be coupled and oft tymes is sure reason certain experience and manifest scripture telleth vs that to to many there are vvho in the depth of their iniquitie say The mercy of the lord is great he wil be merciful to my sinnes be they never so many to omit this and marke only the il coherence of these mens fantastical gospel here faith of necesâitie requireth good conscience good conscience dependeth of holy life So vvhere holy life is abandoned and sinne raigneth good conscience is lost and that being perished faith also perisheth Vpon vvhich gradatioÌ he inveigheth against certain great men whose oppressions of the poore whose deadly feids with their owne companions would not burst out in so high a measure if they had advised wel with their consciences But the Lord seing them take so litle tent to their consciences he spoiles them of faith and of the hope of mercy Out of al vvhich vve may must conclude and so M. B. him self teacheth vs that faith in these men may be easely lost vvhich being altogether fastned and tyed to good conscience and
as the Apostle describes it is no substantial ground no evidence or demonstration and it vvas no offence of the Catholikes to cal it an vncertain opinioÌ fleeting in the brayne vvhich now your self confesse to be the very nature of your Genevian faith saying that ever it hes be it wil be and man be doubting X. Faith is the gift of the holy spirit And this gift is not geueÌ to al men and women Al hes not faith This gift is not geven vnto al but it is only geven to the elect that is to so many as the Lord hes appointed to life everlasting Contra. VVho soever hath a desire to pray to crave mercy for his sinnes suppose the greatest part of thy hart repine and would draw thee froÌ prayer yet assuredly that desire which thow hast in any measure to pray is the true effect of the right faith Prayer is a certain argument of a iustifying faith Ergo al that pray to God have faith Item If thow be content to forgave thy neighbour as freely as God forgave thee assuredly that is the effect of the right spirite Item A third effect of faith is compassion Thow man bow thy hart and extend thy pitie vpon the pure members of Christ For except ye have compassion ye have no faith Examine your selves by these 3. effects prayer forgeving wrongs and compassion and if ye find them in any measure be it never so smal yow have the right faith in your hart yow have the true and lively faith and assuredly god wil be merciful vnto yow Ergo al that pray though neuer so litle or forgeve iniuries and vvrongs done to them freely though never so seldom or be pitifully affected towards a Christian in miserie and geve an almes though never so smale one denier al his life time assuredly al these men have the right faith Fourthly if thy conuersation be good it is a sure token that thow art at one with god No doubt that hart that breakes forth in to good fruites of doing wel and speaking wel is coupled with god And consequently it is sure and there is no doubt but in such a person is faith For no man is coupled with god but by the band of faith Item VVhen thy conuersation thy hart and mouth sais al one thing then no question thow hast the worke of faith wrought by the holy spirit in thy hart Ergo al that live honestly that do vvel and speake vvel doubtles have faith as likewise al that are not dissemblers but speake as they meane and meane as they speake without question have faith vvrought in them by the holy spirit Sixtly ye men also try whether ye be in love charitie with your neighbour Loue is the only marke whereby the children of Christ and members of his body are knowen from the rest of the world And the more we grow in love the more god by his spirit dwels in vs. Alwaies this love flowes from the roote of faith Ergo al men that live quietly in love and peace vvith their neighbours have faith Seventhly and last to talke and coÌsider this faith more properly and specially in it self by her more intrinsecal effect and operation by faith we have peace with god To try whether ye have faith or not ye must try whether ye beleeve in the blud of Christ or not whether ye beleeve to get mercy by his merites sanctification by his blud For if ye have no measure of this faith ye haue no measure of peace with God This is the faith which purgeth the hart and purisieth the sowle Ergo al kind of Christians al I say vvithout exception save only perhaps Calvin some Calvinists vvho deny the merite of Christs passion and can not abide to heare of any merite in Christians or Christ him selfe vvhich beleeve that Christ by his passioÌ merited our redemption sanctification and salvation have faith VVherefore to conclude this vvith his owne vvords The whole weight saith he of our trial stands chiefly vpon this point to see whether we be in faith or nât to examine whether Christ dwels in vs by faith or not For without faith there can be no coupling nor conioyning betwixt vs and Christ without faith our hart can not be sanctified without faith we can not worke by charitie So al depends on this only For vvhich trial and examination he geveth vs so many sure certain doubtles markes markes vvhereby without question vve may know vvhere this faith is found and these maâkes are praier at some time though but coldly forgevenes of iniuries and compassion of the poore though once in ten yeare honest conversation plain dealing love of our neighbour to vvhich by like right and reason he may adde al other civil moral vertues beleef in Christs death and passion VVhere these markes be found he putteth it for sure and certaine vvithout doubt and question that al such men have the right true iustifying faith VVhereof I conclude that according to this his doctrine not only al Christians good bad excepting the Calvinists have faith but also many Turkes and Ethnikes vvho in number of the foresaid vertues far surpasse many kind of Protestants For as S. Austin and S. Prosper vvrite and vve find it true by al learning plain reason and certain experience sine quibusdam operibus bonis difficillime vita cuiuslibet pessimi hominis inuânitur The most wicked man vnder the Sunne be he Iew or Gentile hardly passeth the course of his life without some good workes And therefore ether al these are elect vvhich is vnpossible or al vvhich he putteth downe for such are not sure and certain markes of faith vvhich is true or true it is not that only the elect have faith vvhich to affirme is most false absurd and execrable as vvhich everteth al Christianitie and al sense and meaning of scriptures And these few so palpable contradictions found in so smale a compasse may suffice to declare vvith vvhat substance of diuinitie and constancie of doctrine these men feed their miserable auditors I omit many other as fond and contrarie assertions of vvhich these last two sermoÌs seeme in maner vvholy patched vp as a beggers cloke of divers peeces and colours especially if I should compare them also vvith his former sermons as for example in his third sermon faith is the gift of God and only iewel of the sowle in his fift sermoÌ prayer is a iewel of the sowle as vvel as faith yea better then faith as being the best iewel and gift that ever God gave man in the fourth Sermon love is a iewel of the sowle to and that better then ether faith or prayer as by which vve best of al grip Christ and applie him to our sowles better then by faith c. These and many more must be omitted both for brevities sake and also because in this
and such like it may be answered in his behalf that to require of him or any other of his profession to make their doctrine ech part agreable to other in places so far distant is vnreasonable and against the tenor and qualitie of their gospel vvhich euermore varieth and altereth VVhich libertie also M. B. closely insinuateth and chalengeth to him self in these Sermons vvilling his auditors in the second of them to take this for the present vntil he have more insight in these matters and it appeareth his insight vvas more in the 4. and 5. Seâmons then it vvas in the third I omit also vvhich yet is very markable and diligently to be noted that for al these blind contrarie assertions he stil alleageth scripture as vvel for one part as the other That faith is lost by evil life he proveth by scripture That faith is never lost by any meanes he proveth at large and more abundantly by scripture That faith is a substantial ground an assurance and certaine pârsuasion without al doubting he proveth by S. Paul That faith may stand vvith doubting looke to the Apostle saith M. B. the Apostle saith we always are in doubt but we despaire not For vvhich text refeiring it to faith as he doth that we always are in doubt of our faith or any part thereof vve may looke for it in the Apostle til our eyes be out and never find it That the holy ghost can not abide and remayne in a sinful sowle is proved by scripture That the holy ghost never departeth from the elect commit they sinnes never so fowle and filthy for this also he alleageth scripture and so forth for the rest that faith is ever vvorking wel by charitie sometimes not vvorking wel c. scriptures especially S. Paul is ever at hand to iustifie al. ¶ But the most absurd and grosse contrarietie is that he maketh the very frame body of his discourse plaine repuguant to his beginning ending he setteth as it vvere the head feet of a horse to the body of a man as though he vvould protest him self to be of the number of those of vvhoÌ the Apostle speaketh They covet to be taken for doctors of the law and preachers of the gospel vvhereas they vnderstand nether what things they speake nor whereof they affirme For what is his discourse in these 2. Sermons touching preparation Forsooth that to the vvorthy receiving of the Lords supper is required preparation vvhich conteynes many parts that the communicant have true faith in Christ love God love his neighbour pray be merciful bring forth good fruits glorisie God in vvord and deed be sorie for sinne coÌmitted âheretofore diligently eschew it for the tyme to come hate sinne and also have sorow for it For it is not inough to hate it if thow lament not the committing of it and with a godly sorow deplore it vvherein he speaketh like a Papist or Catholike not like a Gospelling Protestant this being flat against the common vvriting of his maisters Luther Calvin Musculus Melanchton Beza c. yea against his owne Scottish communion booke For it was one of Luthers capital articles condemned by the Romane See and after stubbornely mainteined by him and his sectaries as an article most true Christian and godly plane manifeste Christianissimus that such contrition and lamenting for sinne as here M. B. commendeth maketh one an hipocrite yea a greater and more grevous sinner before God facit hypocritam imo magis peccatorem and the Scottish communion booke speaking of this verie point saith that the Lord requireth no other worthines on our part lut that we vrfaynedly ackowlege our naughtines and imperfection briefly and in summe the person that vvould vvorthely receive the supper must trie his conscience in these 2. points first to know whether it beat peace with God secondly whether it be in love charitie and amitie with his neighbour This preparation vvhich thus in these last Sermons he most prosequuteth may seeme both to incite his auditors to great holynes and to make others suppose that he hath a verie divine and high opinion of their supper to the receiving vvhereof such great preparation is required But vvilt thow see good reader al this overthrowen in one sentence Marke his first proposition in the first page of these last Sermons wherein he avoweth preparation to be always at al times as wel necessarie for hearing the siwple word as for receiving the visible sacrament and like preparatioÌ requisite for the one as for the other For so he foloweth on vvith his discourse The Apostle in the words that we have read 1. Cor. 11. v. 28. gives his commaund that we should not come to the table of the Lord we should not come to the hearing of the word rashly but with reverence we should prepare and sanctifie our selves in some measure VVith the same conclusion he shutteth vp both these sermons thus speaking in the last leaf Thus ye see in what points every of yâw ought to be prepared Ye man be indâed with loue âaith if ye haue these in any smal measure go baldly to the hearing of the word and receiving of the sacrament VVhy Siâis this the vvay to make your auditors to amend them selves their life and maners or to engender iâ them reverence towards the supper to tel them that like preparation is required for hearing the simple vvord as for receiving the sacrament To leâ rest for a vvhile the grosse absurditie and vile consequence vvhich dependeth hereon lââ vs first learne vvhere yow find this kind of Theologie Yow answere The Apostle in the words which yow have read to your auditors 1. Cor. 11. ver 28. interpones his counsel and geves advise and not only that but also geves his admonition and commaund that we should not come to the table of the lord we should not come to the hearing of the word rashly but with reverence c. Let vs consider the text in the Apostle The place by yow quoted is this according to the translation of Calvin and Beza Let every one try him self and so eate of that bread and drinke of that cup. For who so eateth and drinketh vnworthely eateth and drinketh to himself damnation for that he discerneth not the lords body VVhere find yow here that a man must come vvith such reverence as yow tel vs of to heare the word Yea vvhere find yow the vvord mentioned at al ether in that verse or in the vvhole chapter VVhat grosse impietie corruption is this to publish so vvicked vnreasonable pestilent doctrine then to father it on the blessed Apostle and namely in this place vvhere it is most repugnant to the vvhole drift of the Apostles atgumeÌt VVhat one I vvil not say of the Apostles or primitive fathers and auncient Doctors but vvhat man indued vvith any meane learning
ProtestaÌt conference of scripture hovv sure ââââ Chap. 2â VVestphal vbi supra pa. 37. Conclusion of the Zuinglian doctrine touching the Sacrament The Zuinglian opinion of Christs vvords Iustinus in Apologiââ Ambros âââââ qui ãâã ãâã tuâ cap 9. The force of Christs vvord in making the Sacrament Genes â Psal ââ 9. Ambros lib. 4 de sacramenta cap. 4. 5. Quaââ operaâââius sit sââ-âââ Christi Ibi. cap. 5 Cyril lib. 1â in Ioan. cap. ââ Vide ibid. lib. 4. cap. ââ The force â Christs vvord in making the sacrament Euseb Emissenus Sermo dâ corpore Dâââns Zuing. Tom. â Respons ad Conââââoâ âââ ther sol 431 Vt âoâum vertuâe quicquaÌââfiââatur The Zuinglianâ take al sorce from Christs ãâã Zuinglius ibid. lib. ââ baptistract 1. âol 64. A âevv forme of baptisme Cal. Institut lib. 4. cap. 14. num 4. ââââ âââpââs cap. â v. 2â Bullinge deâad â âermâ 6. Nââ ãâã in Christs ãâã Plinie a goodly Doctor Protestant Doctors Plinie Hom. ââ Bezâ annotat in Luc. ca. 22. v. 20. Bullinger in ãâã âirmo part 2. 3. cap. 1â Ioan. Sââut lib. 50. ãâã ârum cap. 13. Calu. 2. desens dâ Sâââmânt pag 35. ãâã minââârâd vââââout Christs vvords In Germanie Calu. Instructio contra Aâabaptist arti 3. pa. 54. Sleidan lib. 10. âol 152. Fox Acts monumet pa. 666. In England Ibi pag. 667. Note tâiâ Pâââââ Clunia âânsis in Tractatu de saâââfiââo Mâââa ââx vbi supra Communion vvith out Christs vvords Obiections against this communion 1 â Cals against the Crosââ art 4. per âoââââbium 3 4 Ievvel Reply against Doct. Harding art â Diuis ââ Christs vvords order âeâââârom the supper The Scottish ãâã Bucâaâââ Histoâ Sââtââ lib. ââ ãâã âââ Scottish communion ãâã âââ Christs vvords The âââzzââ communion Zuingl Tom. â Expositio ââdââ Christiana fol. 563. 564. Bullin in epiââstol ad Hebrâââ cap. ââ Paâââââââuitâârtur in ââââââis Musculus in ââââ cââmunibus cap. de cana Dâmiââ pa. 336. Communion vvithout Christs vvords See the. 5. chapiter num 4. Beza epist. Theolog. â pa. 27. The suppââ ministâââ ãâã âââ In ââââ vvine Baptisme vvââut vvater The ãâã communion A Protestant communion ãâã may ãâã minister the supper Luther Tâm â lib. de Ministrâ ecclesia instituându sol 3â2 Omnes faciânâ tales qualiâ ipsâ suit â consecratores Ibi sol 369. oââursââ sol 372. Ibi lib. ratioâââ iudicij ecclesia c. sol 373. Ibid. lib. âââbrogandââissa priuata VVâmenâ preâching iustified Martyr âââ Cor. cap. ââ â 5. Zâân Tom. â in ââplanâtio artic 17. so 27. In the Harbârough ânnâ 155â H. â Al Ecclesiastical povver deriued from a vvoman Anno 1. Elizab c. 1. 3 VVhitegift coÌtra T. C. Tract â cap. 3. diuis 33. âaâ Actâ monumentâ pa. 52â Parlament Elizab. anno â cap. â VVemens preâching iustifiââ Ievv Reply contra Hard. aââ 1. diuis 30. pa. 69. The Zâângliâ supper Fox Actââ monum pag. 70. Luther in orthodox eccles Tigurina conâââââ tractaâ 3. sol 111. eximâe stultââ Ibâ tractat ââ sol 66. Imâ rustica commpotatio Hovv the Sacramentanes some times magnifie their Sacrament ãâã Ecclesiâ in dââââne Comâtum Manâseldiâ c. an 1559 fol. 121. 121 Nihil aliud quam externuÌ at otiosum signum Caluins inconstancie Caluin Instit. lib. 4. ca. 17. num 11. 10. Christs flesh vvonderfully receiued in the Sacrament Beyond ââ reason Iââ cap. 17. num 32. Magis experior quam intelligo Christs flesh truly receiued vnder the symbole of bread Calâ deâana Domini Christâ ãâ¦ã ãâ¦ã to the Sacrament Calu. Institut lib. 4 cap. 17 num 14. Caâââ for the real presence La chair entââââsgâes à ãâ¦ã âluâquam ââ ãâ¦ã ãâ¦ã Ibid. ãâ¦ã 21. Ibid. num 10. ââ m in Haââââia iâ Mattâ cap. 20. â 20. Caluââ Admâââââltiâa pa. â3 Slââdan lib. â ãâ¦ã 109. anâo 1530. Zuâglâââ ãâ¦ã a ââââ ãâ¦ã Idem lib. â ââ 119. ââ 1531. Non ãâ¦ã âoââ taââââ cuÌââââââllââ ãâ¦ã VVestphalus ãâ¦ã ãâ¦ã ãâ¦ã 7â ââluinââugâââg Vââst ââââ ââ 71. 7â 73. 74. 7â 7â pa. 76. 71. Caluin a mere zuinglian Caluin in Ioan âap 6. v. 5â Caluin Institut lib. 4. âa 17. num 1â Caluins conduit-pipe Calv. Harmoniâ in Matt. cap. 26. â 26. Calv. 1. Câr ca. 11. v. â4 Note thââ meaning Vâ quâdam ãâ¦ã ex Christâ caâââââ not ââffusa Christs body not ân the sacrament but some vertue thereof âââ 6. 19. Luc. â 46. Mââââ â â3 ââ ââ ââaâ 4. â3 Luc. 1. 45. Caluin âââ sup â 24. Institut lib. 4. ca. 17. num 1â Ibid. âââ â2 Caluinâ contraââctions 1 2 quin illâ were pââââgat 3 Institut vbi supra num 10. See the ââââ Diuisiân ââstât lib. 4. ââ 17. num ââ 4 Calu. in Iean âa 6. v. 4â Calu. Institut lib. 4. ca. 17. num 5. VVhat it is to âatâ Christ in Caluins supper Catâchis Caluin Dominica 51. Christ no other vvise receiued in the protestant supper then out of it Calu. in Ioan. ca. 6. v. 53. 54. ãâ¦ã lib. contââ VVâââphalââ paâsim Beza ãâ¦ã ãâ¦ã 65. pa. 2â5 Ievvâââeply contâa Har. â art 5. Diuis â pa. 323. âal Harmâ in Matth. ca 26. v. 26. ãâ¦ã Mât. ca. 26 v 26. Calu Instituâââ lib 4. ca. â7 num 3â Before pa. 7ââ Christ no other vvise receiued in the supper then out of it Calu. in Ioan. ca. 6. v. 54. 56. Calu. Institut lib. 4. ca. 14. num 14. Martyr in desensio Eucharist contra Gardâneâum par 2. regul 5. pa. 61â Calu. Institut lib. 4. ca. 14. num 17. Calu. in Ioan. 6. v. 54. Martyr vhi supra parte 3. pa 644. â47 âââ pâ 6â 1. Before pâ 7 8 Beza âââ corin âa ââ v. 23. Christ receiued better out of the supper then in it Martyr vbâ supra partââ pa. 683. See after cap. 7. num 2. Sââââilus in Apolog. de conââdia Lutheran pa. 105. Before pa. 65. Before pa. 60. The sacrameÌt only a seale Calu. Institut lib. 4. âa 14 num â Calu. vbi supra âum 5. The 2. sacraments ãâ¦ã maner of seales Ibid. num 6. Christ no vvayes communicated in the sacrament See chap 4. ââââ 3. 4 Calv. in Ioan. ââ 6. v. ââ The communi ãâ¦ã counâââfait Wordââsait scale The communion a gâââleâ image 1 ââ v. Inst ââ ãâã 4. ca. 4. num 17. No kind â ãâ¦ã by the â ãâã suppââ Conââsâââ ãâ¦ã Geneuâââ ãâ¦ã Beza lib. de s ãâ¦ã sa ãâã ââ qu sa â 2 The suppâr only a tokân or signe ãâã in â ãâã ap ââ v. â4 Zum Tom. â aâ V ãâ¦ã 2ââ N ãâ¦ã 2. ãâ¦ã c ãâ¦ã sol 2â3 Ibi. Comment d ãâ¦ã 213 Idem Tom. 2. responsio ad ãâã Conâââiâon 477. The supper â ãâ¦ã Zuing. Tom. 2. ãâã baptism âol ââ 60. pa. 70. Caluin a mâre Z ãâ¦ã an Beza epistol Tâââââg 1. pa. 7. The supper a ãâã signe Lâuit 1. 2 v. 1 24. â 6. c. Sacraments of ãâã no better than the Ievvish ââââre pa.