that he protesteth to stand and keepe himselfe close to the doctrine of the Pope and Church of Rome to wit that the bread and the wine which are upon the Altar are not onely the Sacrament but also the very body and blood of Christ Words that must be taken in a quite contrary sense For the Church of Rome beleeveth not that the bread is the true body of Christ Item they make him say that Christs body is sensiblie handled by the Priest and is broken and crushed with the teeth of the faithfull But the Doctors Glosse noteth in the margent these wordes Except thou understandst aright Berengarius his words thou shalt fall into a greater herisie than Berengarius did It is the property of untruth to intangle it selfe with figures and not to understand it selfe CHAP. XIII Of the Ascension of the Lord and of his absence and of that our Adversaries say that in the Sacrament he is Sacrmentally present ABove all things the Glosses and figures of our Adversaries are intolerable when as they wrest the places of Scripture wherein mention is made of Christs Ascension and of his departure out of this world The Lord in the 12 Chapter of Saint John 8 Verse saith The poore ye have alwayes but me ye have not alwayes And in the 14 Chapter 3 Verse If I goe I will come againe speaking of his returne at the day of judgement And in the chapter 17.10 speaking of his Ascension neare at hand as if it were past he saith Now I am no more in the World Saint Peter in the third Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles saith Heaven must containe him untill the times of the restitution of all things which is the day of judgement All these words are as many lies if we beleeve the Transubstantiation For in these places Christ saith that he hath left the world and is no more in the world and that we shall not have him alwayes But if we beleeve the Transubstantiation we must say Christ hath not left the world but is much more present than he was before his ascension For then he was but in one place at once upon earth but now they will have him to be present upon a million of Altars in boxes and in bellies And for to conclude that place of Saint Peter which saith that Heaven must containe him untill the day of restitution the Latin version of the Roman Church hath put Heaven must receive him as if when S. Peter said these words Christ was not yet ascended And it is false that heaven doth receive Christ continually untill the day of Judgement The Lovain Doctors which have traÌ„slated the Bible into French have acknowledged the same wherefore they have turned faithfully WhoÌ„ heaven must contain And Emanud Sâ— the Jesuite in his Notes upon this place Recipere id est receptum continere To receive that is to say to containe him after he be received Christ then must be contained in heaven not be still upon earth They rid themselves as ill out of the other places They say that when Christ saith He leaveth the world and is no more in the world it must be understood concerning his visible presence So they make without word of God 2 sorts of Christs presence the one visible the other invisible And make Christ say I goe away but I will remaine invisibly I leave you but my body shall be alwayes with you Now in conscience could a man that had Christs body and soule in his mouth say that Christ is not present under colour that he sees him not By the same reason one may say that a man hath no soule because it is invisible and that a man hath left the towne when he lyeth hid in it What more Christ himselfe in the 13. of Saint Marke 21. verse warnes us that there will come a time in which they shall say unto us Loe here is Christ or loe he is there and forbids us to beleeve it And in the 24. chapter of Saint Matthew he addeth If any man shall say unto you he is in the closets or in the cup-boards for the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth that beleeve it not Truly he speaketh evidently of the places wherein they shall say that Christ is hidden And speaketh in the plurall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in closets as of a Christ which shall be thought to be in severall places at once But Christ refuteth plainly all these shifts and evasions of our Adversaries when as to comfort his Disciples sorrowfull for his departure he promiseth them to send them the Comforter Iohn 14.16.26 chap. 15.26 which is the Holy Ghost According to the doctrine of the Church of Rome hee should have said I goe away but that shall not hinder mee from being present in your mouths and in your stomacks and I shall 〈◊〉 more present unto you than I am now Hâ— saith not a word of all that unto them but comforting them for his departure he promiseth them his holy Spirit Saint Paul in the second to the Corinthians chap. 5.8 saith We are willing rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord. And to the Philippians chap. 1.23 My desire is to depart and to be with Christ Had this Apostle lost his wiâ—s For according to the Popish doctrine he should have said I am already with Christ I do carry him in my hands I have him in my stomacke S. Austin upon that is very expresse in his 50. Treatise upon S. John where he saith According to the Maj stie of thâ— Lord according to his unspeak â—â—â—e and inâ—isiâ—â—e grace is accomplish'd that which he said I will be with you at all times till the consummation of the world But according to his flesh which the world bath taken and is he is horn of the Virgin c. he said Ye shall not have mee alwaies And in the first Treatise upon the first of John * Ipsum jam 〈…〉 sed side contingâ—re Wee can no more handle him with our hands now that he sitteth in heaven but well may we touch him by faith He speaketh to the Priests of these times who bragge to have Christ in their hands And in the 78. Treatise upon S. John * A quibus homo abscedebat Deus non recedebat Christ was going away as being a man and withdrew not himself as he is God And in the 30 Treatise †Corpus Dominiâ—n quo resurrexit in uno loco esse oportet veritas ejus ubâ—que disâ— fusa est The Lords body in which he is risen must be in one place onely but his truth is spread every where There is in the Latin in uno loco esse oportet and not in uno loco esse potest according to the new editions falsified * Gratiaâ—nus Dist 2. de Conseâ—â— Câ—nâ—prim Iuo 2. partâ— Decreti c 18. Lombard lib. 4. Sentent Gratian Ivo Carmitensis Lombard Thomas
Cup his blood These things Bethren are called Sacraments because in them one thing is seene and another is understood What is seene hath a corporall forme What is meant hath a spirituall fruite If then thou wilt understand what the body of Christ is heare the Apostle saying to the Faithfull Ye are Christs body and his members If ye bee therefore Christs body and members your mysterie is set on the table of the Lord c. He giveth the same exposition in the 26 Treatise upon Saint John By this mâ—ate and by this drinke the Lord will have to bee understood the society and fellowship of his body and of his members to wit the holy Church of the Predestinate And in the Roman Canon in the a Distinction of the Consecration at the Canon Hoc est a Coelestis anis qui â—hristi caro 〈◊〉 suo modo â—ocatur â—rpus â—hristi cum 〈◊〉 vera sit â—cramentii â—rporis â—hristi illiâ—s videliâ—t quod â—alpabile â—ortale in â—uce posiâ—m est tâ—b Glos â—oeleste Saâ—amentum â—uod vere â—praesenâ—t Christi â—rnemdiciâ—r corpus â—hristi sed â—aproprie crum diciâ—r suo moâ—â—sed non â—iveritate sed significante mysterio Vt sit sensus vocatur Chriâ—â— corpus id est significatur The heavenly bread which is the flesh of Christ is after its manner called the body of Christ although to speake truely it be the sacred signe of Christs body to wit of that which being visible palpable mortall was put upon the Crosse And thereupon the Glosse of the Doctors hath these words which truely are excellent The heavenly Sacrament that representeth truely the flesh of Christ is called the body of Christ but improperly for it is thus called after its manner but not according to the truth of the thing but by a significant mystery So that the sense is that it is called the body of Christ that is to say that it is signified S. Cyprian in his 63 Epistle will have in the sacred Cup water to be mingled with the wine His reason is because that as the wine is the blood of Christ so the water is the People and that the People ought not to bee divided from Christ b §. 9. Quando in Calice vino aqua â—iscetur Christo populus adunatur c. Sivinum tantum quis â—crat sanguis Christi inc pit esse sine nobis si veroaqua sit sola â—ebs incipit esse sinc Christo If saith he any one offereth nothing but wine Christs blood beginneth to bee without us but if the water be alone the people begins to be without Christ Whereby it followeth that as Cyprian did not beleeve that the water was transubstantiated into the people so did he not beleeve that the wine was transubstantiated into the body of Christ And in the same Epistle c Vinum fuit quod sanguiuem suii dixit That which Christ called his blood was wine And in the 76 Epistle d Dominus corpus suii paneÌ„ vocat de multorii granorum adunationâ— congestum The Lord called his body the bread compounded with the gathering together of many graines We have a Treatise of the two natures of Christ against Nestorius and Eutyches made by Pope Gelasius who wrote about the yeare of our Lord 495. There is this sentence to be found which vexeth and grieves mightily our Adversaries e Certe Sacramenta quae sumimus corporis sanguinis Christi divina res est propter quod per eadeÌ„ divinae effiscimur consortes naturae tameÌ„ esse non desinit substaÌ„tia panis vini Et certe image similitudo corporis et sanguinis Christi in actione mysteriorum celebraÌ„tur Certainely the Sacraments that we take of the body blood of Christ are a divine thing for which cause also by them we are made partakers of the divine nature and yet the substance or nature of the bread and wine ceaseth not to be And verily the Image and similitude of the body and blood of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries Note that hee disputed against the Eutychians who held that the substance of the body of Christ was passed and changed into the substance of the divine nature The controversy was not about the conversion of the accidents but of the Substance which Gelasius maintaineth to remaine in the body of the Lord as the substance of the bread remaineth in the Sacrament Now no man can doubt but that this Book be of Gelasius Bishop of Rome Hoc etiam eatae meâ—orie Papa Gelasius c. in co â—bro quem â—emoratus â—â—ntistes â—onscripsit â—dversus eâ—â— qui in 〈◊〉 omino Ieâ— duarum at urarum â—olunt indiâ—â—aÌ„ credere â—ritatem Quomodo â—cend t in â—â—lum nisi â—â—ia localis verus est â—mo aut â—omodo aâ—st fidelâ—â—s suiâ—â—nisi â—â—a idem â—mensus 〈◊〉 â—rus dâ—us seeing that Fulgentius who lived in Gelasius time alleadgeth it * in his Book to Feâ—randus the Deacon in the 2 proposition and attributeth it to the Pope Gelasius Fulgentius Disciple to S. Austin in his second Book to Trasimondus chap. 17. a How is Christ ascended into Heaven but because he is in a place and a man indeed Or how is he present to his Faithfull ones but because he is infinit and a God indeed Again in his Book of the Faith to Peter the Deacon chap. 19. b Cuâ— nunc id est tempore nov Testamenti cum Paâ—e et Sp Sancto cum quibs illi est una diviniâ—as sacrificium â—ais et â—â—niâ—n side et charitâ—te sancta Ecclesia Catholica per uversum orâ—â—â—â—eâ—rae offerre non cessat etc. The holy Catholick Church which is over all the world now that is to say under the New Testament ceaseth not to offer unto Christ Jesus with the Father and the holy Ghost with whom he is one and the same Godhead a Sacrifice of bread and wine in Faith and Charity For in those caâ—n ill oblations of the Old Tetestament there was a figure of Christs flesh which he was to offer for our sins being without sin But in the sacrifice of the Eucharist is made an action of thankesgiving and a remembrance of the flesh of Christ which he offered for us and of the blood that himselfe who is God hath shed for us Besides this that he calleth the Holy Supper a remembrance and a Sacrifice of bread and wine it is very remarkable that he saith that this Sacrifice of bread and wine is offered unto Christ Jesus Whereby it appeareth that this Sacrifice is not Christ himselfe for Christ is not Sacrificed unto Christ Facundus an Affrican Bishop who wrote about the yeare of our Lord 550 in the defence of three heads or points of the Councell of Chalcedon * Potest Sacramentum adoptionis adoptio nuÌ„cupari sanguâ—neÌ„ dicimus noÌ„ quod proprie corpuâ— ejus sit panis poculum sanguis sed quod in se mysterium
in us hee must be eaten by the mouth of the bodie Christ by the same reason must eate us that we may dwell in him 11. Christ for to divert and turne away our mindes from carnall thoughts addeth in the 63 Verse The fâ—est profiteth nothing It is the Spirit that quickneth Since that by the spirit hee meaneth his Spirit whereby he regenerateth us by the flesh also he understandeth his human body Whereof he saith that it profiteth nothing to wit being taken after that manner as the Capernaites did imagine themselves What would it profit a man to have in his stomach the head and feet of Christ Jesus whether hee doe swallow him by peeces and parcels or doe swallow him whole For the absurditie is a like 12. Christ addeth The words that I have spoken unto you are spirit and life that is to say are spirituall and quickening They are not quickning but to them that understand them spiritually and that imagine not a carnall and corporall manducation So teacheth Saint Austin in his 27 Treatise upon Saint John Hee demandeth * Quid est spiritus vita sunt Responder Spirit aliter intelligenda sunt Intellexisti spiritaliter spiritus vâ—â—a sunt Int ellexisti carnalâ—ter â—tiam siâ— spiritus vâ—â—a sunt sed tibi non sunt What meaneth these words are spirit and life His answer is That they must be under stood spiritually Hast thou understood them spiritually They are spirit and life unto thee Hast thou understood them carnally In this manner they bee also spirit and life but not unto thee 13. And upon that the Capernaites and some of the Lords Disciples were scandelized and said that these words were an hard saying he saith unto them * Illi putabant cum erogaturum corpus suum ille autem dixit se ascensurum in coelum utique integrum Cum videritis Fil um hominis ascendentem ubicral prius certe vel tune videbitis quia non co modo quo putatis crogat corpus suum Certe vel tunâ— intelligetis quta gratia ejus non consumitur morsibus What and if ye shall see then the Sonne of man ascend where he was before Which words Saint Austin in the same Treatise explaineth thus What meaneth that Thereby he resolveth that which had moved them They thought he would give them his body but he saith unto them that he would ascend up to heaven to wit whole and entire When ye have seene the sonne of man ascending where he was before certainely then at leâ—st shall ye see that he giveth not his body as ye thinke Then at the least shall ye understand that his grace is not consumed with biting CHAP. III. That the Romane Church by this doctrine depriveth the People of Salvation THat which grieves our Adversaries most in all this discourse of the â—ord is this clause of the 53 Verse Veâ—ily I say unto you Except ye eate the flesh â—f the sonne of man and drinke his blood â—e have no life in you For if by these words Christ doe speake of the partiâ—ipation of the Sacrament it followes that the People of the Roman Church whom they have deprived of the cup â—hall have no life and are lost eternally â—or they drinke not Christs blood To say as Bellarmin doth that the People â—akes the blood in the Hoste is to say â—ust nothing For Christ commandeth â—ot onely to take his blood but also commandeth to drinke it If he speaketh of the Sacrament hee commandeth men not onely to be partakers of his blood but also declareth the kind and manner how he will have them to participate thereof for to drinke is thâ— kinde and manner of participating thereof Briefly he commandeth to drinke But to eate a dry Hoste or wafer is noâ— to drinke That if to eate is to drinke the Priest drinketh twice in the Masse once in taking the Hoste and anotheâ— time in taking the Cup. Vnto which thâ— common sense contradicteth and Popâ—â— Innocent the third too in his fourt Booke of the Mysteries of the Masse Chapter 21. Neither is the blood drunâ— saith he under the species of the bread nor the body eaten under the species of tâ—â— wine Here then our Adversaries do forge an absurd figure whereby to drinâ— signifieth to eate Everywhere else the doe distinguish eating from drinking but here they confound them as if thâ— were all one Indeede to eate and 〈◊〉 drinke taken in a spirituall sense signifieth one and the same thing Bâ—â— when the question is of the Sacramâ—â— of the Eucharist and of eating thâ— bread and drinking the Chalice tâ— eate and to drinke are different thing That if to eate the Hoste be to drink so to drinke the Cup shall be to eaâ—â— the Cup. And if drinking bee take figuratively why not also the word eating Here the truth is so strong that Vasquez the Jesuite sticks not to dispute with might and maine against Bellarmin who saith that the Lord commandeth only the perception of his blood but not the manner of participating therunto * Vasquez in III. partem Tomo 3. Disp 206 num 50. Hoc respoÌ„ sum mihi non proba tur quia verba Domini non tantum reseruntur ad rem sumpt am sed ad modum sumeÌ„ dâ—eam Nam manducare bibere si verba proprie usurpentur â—â—â—tois species cor venire non possunt neque enim sanguis sub specie panis bibâ— dicitur sicut neque corpus sub specie vini manducari ut optime notat Innocent III lib. 4. de Mysteriis Missae qu mvis sumâ— dicatur Christus autem praecipit ut bibamus I do not approve saith he of this answer because the words of the Lord have not only reference unto the thing that is taken but to the manner of taking it For to eate and to drink if the words be taken properly cannot agree with any species whatsoever For the blood is not said to be drunk under the species of the bread no more than the body is eaten under the species of the wino as Innocent the third observeth very well in his 4 Book chap. 21. And he addeth a thing very considerable to wit that from this answer of Bellarmin who will have this word drinking to bee taken improperly it will follow that in the whole chapter there shall not be a word spoken of the Cup. Salmeron another Iesuite is of the same opinion saying * Salmer Tom. 9. Tract 24. Quinon bibit non bibit sanguinam â—eet carneÌ„ et sanguine siâ—mat that he that drinketh not drinketh not the blood though he do take the flesh and blood But the same Jesuites that contest against their own fellows bring no better things themselves They say that when Christ said Except ye drink my blood yee have no life in you he bindeth the people to drink the Cup and that they drink it indeed in as much as the Priest drinketh for the people and representeth the
OF it The Apostle commands us to eate OF this bread that is to say to take every one his part and portion of it and Christ saying Drinke ye all of it bids the Communicants to take their share of the cup. This manner of speaking is become absurd in the Roman Church who by this bread understand Christ himselfe For they would esteeme that man to be mad or a mocker that should say that we eate every one his portion of Christ body 17. Christ presenting the cup to his Disciples said in the present tense that it was his blood which is shed for many Where manifestly he speaketh of a Sacramentall and not of a reall effusion For our adversaries confesse that in the Masse the blood of Christ is not shed out of the body and goeth not out of the Veines He therefore speaketh of a Sacramentall effusion which is respective to the real effusion made upon the crosse We aske then whether the Priest in the Masse drinketh that blood of Christ which came out of his side and wounds upon the crosse If they answer that the Priest drinks not that blood of the Lord which issued forth of his body upon the crosse but that blood which remained in the body and is there still thereby they confesse that the Priest drinks not the same blood which Christ will have us to drink For he commands us expressly to drinke the blood shed for us But if they answer that the Priest drinketh the same blood which the Lord shed upon the crosse then they presuppose rashly and without word of God that that blood which came out of the Lords body is gotten in againe All this abuse comes for lack of considering that in the holy Supper Christs body is represented unto us and presented to our faith as suffering and broken and dying and dead for us and his blood as shed and issued out of his body Whereas on the contrary the Romane Church hath a conceit that she receive the spirituall glorious body of Christ and his blood enclosed within the body and within the veines 18. The Apostle Saint Paul 1. Cor. 1◠And Saint Luke chap. 22. record th◠Christ said This cup is the New Testame◠in my blood If by this word of cup th◠blood must be understood the sence 〈◊〉 these words shall be This blood is th◠New Testament in my blood By that meanes loe here two kinds of blood of Christ whereof the one shall be within the other 19. Christ in celebrating the holy Supper said Doe this in remembrance of me And Saint Paul hath told us here above that in earing this bread we doe shew his death On the contrary the Priest in the Masse saith that he celebrateth In the first place the remembrance of the Virgin Mary saying Communicantes memoriam venerantes in primis gloriosae semperque Virginis Mariae Communicating and solemnizing in the first place the remembrance of the glorious Virgin Mary leaving Christ behind As Gabriel Biell saith in the 32 Lesson of the Canon of the Masse First and principally the remembrance is made of the most blessed Virgin Mary because saith he she is the most safe sanctuary of our calamities and hath beene the administratrix and dispensatrix of this sacrifice and all the reason of our hope 20. In the whole institution of the Eucharist there is no mention made of the Saints neither is there any command to pray unto Saints No word of the intercession of Angels On the contrary the Priest in the Confiteor of the Masse prayes Michael the Archangel and John the Baptist and all the Saints to pray for him There are some Masses in which the Letany is rehearsed which is but a long chaine of prayers unto Saints In the Masse they blesse the Encense through the intercession of Michael the Archangell The Priest askes of God that he would be pleased to command his Angell to take the consecrated hoste and to carry it up to heaven And for an excesse of abuses at the offertory of the Masse the Priest saith he makes that oblation in honour of the Virgin Mary and of the Saints As if the holy Supper were instituted in honour of the creatures That truely is to put the creatures above Christ As when a man gives almes in Gods honour he presupposeth that God is more excellent than the Alme 21. S. John in the 13 chapter and 2 verse witnesseth that in the action o◠the holy Supper the Divel entred int◠Judas But our adversaries with mos◠of the Fathers hold that Judas was pertaker of the Eucharist with the rest o◠the Disciples They will therefore tha◠both Christ and the Divel have entre◠together into Judas So they give unto Christ a very unsutable companion and truely the Sonne of God and the Divel had been very ill lodged together 22. We agree in this point with ou◠adversaries that Christ ate and dranke with his Disciples and was partaker of the holy Sacrament He sheweth it himselfe sufficiently when after he had delivered the cup he said I will drinke no more of this fruit of the Vine Whereby it followeth that after the doctrine of the Romane Church Christ did eate himself and swallowed his owne body and soule and had his whole body in his mouth and in his stomacke By this meanes Christs passible body devoured the impassible body Whereupon it were good to know what Christs body did within the body of Christ and how Christs soule could enter into Christs body seeing that it was in already And since that that which containeth and that which is contained are severall things and that nothing containeth it selfe by this doctrine it is evident that they make Christ to have two bodies the one of which was contained within the other And since that to eat ones selfe is a more admirable thing than the Creation of the World it is not credible that Christ did eat himself without some great profit should come thereby for our salvation Yet our adversaries produce none at al. For to prop so extravagant a doctrin and which exposeth the Christian Religion to laughter our adversaries alledge a place out of S. Austin upon the 33 Psal where he saith that in this Sacrament Christ did cary himself in his own hands But Austin saith not only that he did cary himself in his own hands But he saith Ipse se portabat quodam mode cum diceret Hoc est corpus meum he did carry himself in a manner when he said This is my body So a man that carries his owne picture in his hands carries himself in a maner Even as it would be a sencelesse speech to say that the Moon is the Moon in a manner so i◠that which Christ carried in his hands was his true body it would be a foolish thing to say that it was his body in some kinde For concerning the sense of these words This is my body S. Austin expounds them plainely enough in
the power of Priests who make him and pin him up and walke him and may if they will cast him into the fire As Gabriel Biel a famous Doctor saith in the first Lesson upon the Canon of the Masse †Biel Lect. 1. in Canonem Missae Super utrumque corpus Christi Sacerdos insignes habet potesiates The Priest hath great power over the one and the other body of Christ that is to say over the Church and over the consecrated hoste Whereupon he addeth * Quis hujus rei â—ndâ—t similia Qui creavit me si fas est dicere dedit mihi creare se Eâ— qui creavit me creatur mediante me Who ever saw things like unto this He that hath created me if I may say so hath given me to create him And he that hath created mee without me is created by my meanes Thus Priests doe create Christ in the Masse and make Christ who is made already As if one should beget a man already born CHAP. VII That the very words of the Masse are contrary to Transubstantiation IN the midst of this alteration of the Lords Institution God hath permitted that in the Masse some clauses should remaine which manifestly condemne the Transubstantiation For a great part of the Canon of the Masse are prayers which have beene added when they did not yet beleeve the Transubstantiation As when the Priest having before him the consecrated hoste saith * Osserimus praeclarae â—uae Majestati de tuis domis datis hostiam puram Wee offer to thine excellent Majesty of thy gifts and presents a pure hoste By these gifts they understand at this day Christ himselfe Surely never a man in his right sense called Christ gifts and presents in the plurall But that agrees very well with the bread and wine The Priest goes on saying †Supra quae propitio aâ— sereno vuliu respicere digneris accepta habere sicut accepta habere d gnatus es munera pueri tui justi Abel Vpon which things vouchsafe to looke with a cheerefull eye Is it not a jeast to call Christ these things and for a full measure of abuse to aske of God that he may looke upon Christ with a gracious eye as if Christ had need of our recommendation Moreover the Priest demandeth of God afterward that he would be pleased to have these gifts and presents as acceptable as he had acceptable the presents of Abel That is to say that Christ may be as acceptable unto God as the beasts sacrificed by Abel This prayer is good being said upon the bread and the wine but being said upon Christ it is altogether blasphemous Chiefly this is evident in that the Priest looking upon the consecrated hoste and the chalice saith that * Per Christum Dominum nostrum per quem haec omnia Domine semper bona creas sanctificas vivificas henedicis by Christ our Lord God creates alwayes for us these good things sanctifies them and vivifies them Can Christ be called these good things Doth God create and vivifie Christ alwayes And since God creates these things through Jesus Christ as the Masse saith it is certaine these things are not Christ But all that agrees very well with the bread and wine We must not omit that Christ giveing the bread to his Disciples said simply Take Eate But in the Canon of the Masse there is Accipite manducate ex hoc omnes Take and eate all of it Whosoever added these words E X HOC lie did not beleeve that in the Eucharist the Lords body was really eaten by the mouth of the body For to eate of that is to eate a part thereof and not all Which cannot be said of Christs naturall body CHAP. VIII Recrimination of our Adversaries THe Prophet Elisha accused the Israelites of Idolatry and of forsaking Gods Covenant They out of revenge called him bald-pate which was a reproach nothing belonging to the doctrine We stand upon the like termes with our Adversaries We accuse the Roman Church to have brough in Idolatry in the Masse worshipping of the Sacrament and a Sacrifice of Christs body which Christ hath not instituted To have taken away from the people the halfe of the Sacrament To have changed the nature of the Sacrament yea of Christ himselfe which are thing of importance and altogether essentiall to the Eucharist and to Christian Religion But they out of recrimination tell us that we have likewise changed many things in the Lords Institutution For say they ye solemnizâ— the Supper in the morning but Chriâ—â— instituted it after Supper Ye celebrate it in a Temple but Christ did celebrate it in an upper Chamber Yee receive women to the Communion But when Christ instituted the Eucharist there were none but men Things whereof the two first are indifferent and all three not onely are not of the essence of that Sacrament but even make no part of that action To this objection Christ affords us an answer For hee said Doe this in remembrance of mee Hee said not Doe this in such a place nor at such an houre nor with such a Sexe or such persons But hee said Doe this commanding us to doe as hee hath done and to imitate his action Christ did not exclude women If any had beene there present worthy to be partakers of the holy Supper he would not have rejected them CHAP. IX Causes why the Pope admitteth not of any alteration in the Masse and will not conforme himselfe to the Lords Institution THough the abuse be so apparent yet the Church of Rome and the Pope will not let goe their hold and suffer any change or alteration to be made in the Masse The cause of that is easie to be knowne For if the Church of Rome should yeeld to the least alteration it would overthrow the three Maximes that are the basis whereon all Popery is grounded whereof the first is that the Church of Rome cannot erre the second that the Pope and Church of Rome are not subject to the holy Scripture and have greater authority than the holy Scripture the third that the Pope and Church of Rome have power to change Gods Commandemens and make new Articles of Faith All which things are seene not one by practice in that all the doctrine 〈◊〉 the Roman Church is contrary to thâ— holy Scripture but also by example of Popish Councels and open profeâ—sion of the principall Doctors of thaâ— Church whereof I will alleadge soâ—â— places in the next chapter CHAP. X. Places wherin the Doctors and Councels of the Roman Church maintain that the Pope and the Church of Rome are not subject to thâ— Scripture and have greater authority than the Scripture anâ— may make voide and abolish thâ— Commandements of God THe Romish Decree and its Glosseâ— are all stuffed with this brave maxime * Can. Lect. Dist 34. in Gloss Papa dispensat contra Apostolum Innec III. Dâ—cretaâ—â—le Concessione Praeâ—end Tu. 8. c p. Proposâ—â—t
bodie of Christ and of the residues of the body of Christ that remaine after the Communion Which cannot agree with Christs naturall body crucified for us that cannot be broken in peeces and whereof there can be no residue Pope Gelasius in the Canon Comperimus second Distinction of the Consecration d Comperimus quod quidam sumpta taÌ„tum modo corporis sacri portione à calice sacrati cruoris abstineant We have learned that some having taken one part of the body of Christ abstaine from the cup which thing he calleth a sacriledge And Evagrius the Historian in his fourth Booke Chapter 36. e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The ancient custome of the royall City requireth that when many Peeces of the immaculate body of Christ remaine children not yet in age to be corrupted going to Schoole be called for to eate them How could one give peeces of the naturall bodie of Christ who sitteth at the right hand of God What likelihood is there to give to a troope of little children the residues of the body of Christ Would not that bee esteemed at this day in the Romane Church an horrible profanation Wherefore it is a thing very frequent in the Fathers to say that Panis est Corpus Christi The bread is Christs body And we have heard Saint Austin here above speake so Words which if they were taken or understood of the naturall body of Christ would be false For the bread is not the body that was crucified for us It is therefore unjustly done by our Adversaries to expose unto the View with great noyse and rumour some placeâ— out of the Bookes of Sacraments attributed to Saint Ambrose and out of the Booke of the Lords Supper attributed to Cyprian wherein is sayde that the bread after the words of Consecration becometh and is made Christs bodieâ— since we doe shew by so many proofâ—â— that they speake of another body that of that which was borne of the Virgin Marie and that was crucified aâ— we will shew yet more clearely hereafter For that the Author of these Bookâ— attributed to Saint Ambrose hath beleeved that after the Consecration the bread is bread still he shewes it plainly when he saith c Lib. 4. de SacrameÌ„t cap. 4. Let us therefore establisâ— this to wit how that which is bread may be Christs body And a little after a Si tanta vis in Sermone Domini Iesu ut inciperent esse quae noÌ„ erant quaÌ„to magis operatorius est ut sint quae erant et in aliud commutentur If there be such power and vertue in the word of the Lord Jesus as to make that things which were not begin to bee how much more shall he make that the things which were be and be changed into other things This excellent place which saith that the things which were are still that is to say that that which was bread is bread still is found thus alleadged by Lombard in his fourth Booke of Sentences Distinction 10. And by Thomas in the third part of his Summe question 78. Art 4. And by Gratian in the second Distinction of the Consecration at the Canon Panis est And by b Gabr. lect 40. in Can. Missae Alger de Sacram corp lib. 2. cap. 7 Ivo Car. 2. Parte cap 7. Et Iodocus Coccius Tom. 2. lib. 6. pag. 621. Gabriel Biel and Alger and Ivo Carnutensis and Jodocus Coccius and not according to the new editions of Ambrose in which these words Sint quae erant are left out Such falsifications are frequent in the new editions Some places may bee found indeed wheâ—ein some Fathers say that the bread of the Eucharist is the body of the Lord crucified for us But that must be understood after the sâ—me manner as Christ said of the bread that it was his body and that the Cup is the New Testament because it is the Sacrament or remembrance of it They doe object a place of Saint Hilarie out of his eighth Booke of the Trinitie where he saith a De veritate carnis saguinis noÌ„ relictus est ambigendi locus Nunc enim â—psius DoÌ„mi professione side nostra vere caro est vere sanguis Et hac accepta atque hausta essiciunt ut nos in Christo Christus in nobis sit Of the truth of the flesh and blood there is no doubt For at this day both by the profession of the Lord and by our Faith it is flesh indeed and blood indeed and these things taken and swallowed downe cause us to be in Christ and Christ in us First of all it is a great abuse to urge Saint Hilary who in this point of the nature of Christs body had an errour that destroyes the whole Christian Religion For b Hilar. lib. 10. de Trinitate In quem quanvis aut idlus incideret aut vulnus descenderet c. afferrent quideÌ„ haec impetuÌ„ passionis non tamen doloreÌ„ passionis inferrent ut teluÌ„ aliquod aut aquam perforans aut ignem compungens aut aëra vulnerans Et paulo post Virtus corpoâ—is sine sensu poenae vim poenae in se desaevientis excepit he teacheth that Christ in his Passion suffered no manner of paine at all and that the stripes they gave him were as if they had pierced the aire or the fire with a dart Secondly it appeareth that Hilary speaketh of the Spirituall manducation For by it alone are we in Christ and Christ in us Thirdly when Hilarie saith there remaineth no place to doubt of the truth of the flesh and blood of the Lord he doth not meane it must not be doubted but that in the Eucharist we cate truely the naturall flesh of Christ by the mouth of the body But he saith that we must not doubt but Christ had a true flesh and a true blood For he disputeth against certaine Hereticks that destroyed the truth of his human nature For as touching the Mystagogicall Catecheses attributed to Cyril of Jerusalem which are objected against us where it is sayd that we must not beleeve our senses telling us that it is bread it is certaine that those Catecheses are supposed and falsly attributed to Cyril For the Stile of them is very different from those 18 Catecheses of Cyril that precedes them which are cited by Theodoret and by Gelasius and by Damascen but these last are never alleadged by any one In the first Catechese there is an evident marke of falsity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For hee disswadeth his hearers from frequenting the Amphitheater where the Gladiators chases and combates were made against wild beasts and the Hippod omus or Circus that is to say the Parke or Place where horses races and combates were exercised For then were no such buildings nor spectacles in Jerusalem nor never were any since Jerusalem was Christian And concerning Chrysostomes hyperbolical amplifications saying that the Altar streames with
the pronouncing of the words of Consecration For by these words This is my body the Priest offâ—reth nothing to God But every Sacrifice is an offering made unto God Furthermore in every Sacrifice he that sacrificeth addresseth himselfe to God but these words are addressed to the broad Which is more we have seene hereabove the Confession of our Adversaries acknowledging that in all this action Christ offered nothing to God Therefore he made no Sacrifice 11. It is to be noted that in the Roman Church the Order of Priesthood is a Sacrament whose it stitution they wil have to be found in the Institution of the Eucharist when the Lord said Doe this as if Christ by one and the same words had instituted two Sacraments With as much absurditie as if one would needs finde the Institution of Marriage or of Extreame Vnction in the institution of Baptisme That if these words Doe this in remembrance of mee bee the formall and expresse words whereby Christ conferred the Order of Priesthood how comes it to passe that the Bishops when they dâ—e conserre that Order in the Ember weeks make no mention of these words at all 12. Our Adversaries put two sorts of Sacrifice The one bloody the other unbloody which they call the Sacrifice of Melchisedek and which they say to be farre more excellent that the blooddy sacrifice and will have the Masse to be the Sacrifice after the Order of Melchisedek Whence followeth that the Masse is more excellent than Christs death which is a bloody Sacrifice It is great wonder then that the Apostle to the Hebrewes speaking so at large of the Priesthood of Melchisedek maketh not any mention at all of Masse nor of Eucharist 13. But how is it thay by these words Doe this in remembrance of mee Christ should command men to sacrifice him in the Masse since it is impossible to sacrifice Christ in remembrance of Christ seeing also that Saint Paul immediately after these words addeth the explication of them saying For as often as yee cate this bread and drink this cup ye doe shew the Lords death 1. Cor. 11. He teacheth us that to Doe this is to eate bread and drink the cup in remembrance of the Lords death Here therefore every man that seareâ— God and loves the Lord Jesus shal consider what a crime it is for moratal men and sinners to intrude and take upon themselves to Sacrifice the Eternall Sonne of God to his Father and to bee Priests after the Order of Melchisedek without charge and without commission CHAP. XXXIIII In what sence the holy Supper may be called a Sacrifice Of Melchisedeks Sacrifice And of the Oblation whereof Malachy speaketh THe holy Scripture calleth our Almes our Prayers our Praises and Thankesgivings and generally what worship soever wee render unto God Sacrifices In this sence the holy Supper may be called a Sacrifice For the question betweene us and our Adversaries is not whether the Eucharist may be calâ—ed a Sacrifiee But whether it be truly and properly a Sacrifice of redemption and whether the Priests in the Masse sacrifice the body of Christ really and truely for the sins of the quick and of the dead Touching that our Adversaries bring no manner of proofe out of the new Testament wherein neverthelesse the institution of this Sacrifice should appeare Only they all eadge out of the Old Testament the example of Melchisedek who as they say sacrificed bread and wine Gen. 14.18 Which they produce falsly for that place saith no such thing Melchisedek brought out bread and wine to Abraham for to refresh his wearieâ— troopes but offered not bread and wine to Abraham in Sacrifice The very Biblâ— of the Roman Church hath proferens and not offerens Neverthelesse we wil suppose that place to be faithfully alleadged For if the Masse be the Sacrifice oâ— Melchisedek it will follow that the Masse is a Sacrifice of bread and wine and not of slesh and bones and blood From thence it followeth also that the Masse is not a Sacrifice of redemption For bread and wine offered up in Sacrified cannot bee the price of our redemption It were an abuse to think that Melchisedek hath sacrificed bread for the redemption of any one The propitiatory sacrifices under the Old Testament were made by the death of the victime and no propitiation was made without shedding of blood saith the Apostle Heb. 9. â—2 In summe it is to speak against the commâ—n sence to argue thus Melchisedek offered bread and wins Therefore the Priest sacrificeth the Lords body and blood They object likewise a place of Malachy chap. 1. wherein God promiseth that in every place Incense shall be offered unto his Name and a pure offering Which is a Prophesie of the calling of the Gentiles whereby God foretels that among the â—â—tions and acceptable service shall bee offered unto him Of the Sacrifice of the Lords body he speaketh nothing of it The novelty of this service is that it shall be made among all Nations whereas in Malachies time â—it was but made in the Jewish Nation They say also that the Passeover of the Old Testament was a Sacrifice and by consequent that the Lords Supper that succeeded thereunto must be Sacrifice They speake with as much reason as if I should say that the night must be cleare because it succeedeth to the day which is bright and cleere and that old Age is strong and lusty seeing it succeedeth to yong Age which is strong and lusty The succession of one thing unto another bringeth commonly great alterations Adde to this that our Adversaries will not have the Masse to be such a Sacrifice as that Passeover was For the Passeover was not offered by the Priests and was not made upon the Altar of the Temple it was a domesticall sacrifice which particular men made at home in their own houses As it appeareth by the Passeover which Christ did celebrate among his Disciples in which no Priest was employed And even though by this example our Adversaries had prooved that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice yet there would remaine for them to prove that in this Sacrifice Christs body is really sacrificed CHAP. XXXV In what sense the Fathers have called the Eucharist a Sacrifice THe ancient Fathers indeavouring to draw the Heathen unto the Christian Faith who esteemed there is no Religion without sacrifice and the Jewes whose Religion under the Old Testament did chiefly consist in Sacrifices have called the holy Supper a Sacrifice and the Sacred Table an Altar and those that serve at it Levites But they shew sufficiently how they call the holy Supper a Sacrifice since they call it Eucharist that is to say Thankesgiving and not a Sacrifice of Propitiation Saint Austin calleth it indeed the Sacrifice of our price in the ninth Book of Confessions chapter 12. But wee have produced a multitude of places out of the same Father that say that in matter of Sacraments the signes are wont to take the name of