resurrection as also in Heauen before his Ascensiō Againe these Mysteries could not be truly performed except the Body of Christ did truly really mooue from one place to another But Christs Body being in euery place cānot be said to moue from place to place for true Locall Motion of a Body cānot be conceaued without obteyning of a new place which afore it had not so many points of Christian Religion and of all true Philosophy Luthers Vbiquity impugneth of our Faith and retayning ouer much leauen of Eutyches his Heresie so easily will a Lutheran transplanted grow vp a perfect Eutychian And thus much of Luthers errour herein in this progressiue digression Now heere we are to note that the difficulties in this Passage sway much the iudgements of our sensible and materiall Christians for so I may well style them since they measure their faith by the Lesbian Square of their Sense And therefore in regard thereof I haue thought good in two or three subsequent Chapters seposed only to this end to exemplify the said difficulty of multiplicity of places in other points acknowledged and confessed by our Aduersaries Wherefore I could wish that when they doe looke vpon the Mysteries of Christian Religion they would shut the Eye of Sense and Naturall Reason since so they might no doubt by seeing the lesse be able to see the more and be like herein to that great Apostle who by loosing his Eyes obtained Light q Eutiches Heresy The Heresy of Eutiches besides other points was that the Flesh of Christ was not of the same nature with ours And that the VVord was not changed into true flesh but rather into an apparent only and seeming flesh So as the VVord rather counterfaited it selfe to be Man to be borne to haue died c. then that there was any such true performance of these things He further taught that because the Diuinity was in the Sunne the starres c. that therefore this apparent Body of the VVord was there also And hitherto doth Luthers Vbiquitie tend for how can Christs Body be a true and naturall Body if it be in all places THE THIRD PASSAGE CHAP. V. NOVV to ascend to the last Mount of difficulties in this miraculous Transelementation We are to obserue that though the Body of Christ be heere indued with Life yet it is not a Not obiectiuely sensible That is that the externall sense of another cannot apprehend it to haue life Now the Catholikes doe generally teach that in regard of the peculiar manner of the existence of Christs Body in the Eucharist Adiectiues which include a necessary reference ad Corpora circumstantia do not predicate of his Body as it is in the Eucharist though they may be said of it as it is in heauen The reason hereof being in that the Body of Christ is vnder the formes of bread and wine without any reference respect or order ad Corpora circumstantia And therefore though his Body as it is in the Sacrament be a naturall and corporall substance indued with life sense and colour yet it is not there tangible sensible or visible c. because to be actually tangible sensible or visible implieth a reference ad Corpora circumstantia in whose senses and eyes the Body is so to appeare obiectiuely sensible though it be a true corporall Substance it is not tangible and though it be coloured it is not visible In b In like sort we teach Christs Body in the Eucharist hath eyes and eares because it is there a true and perfect body which it could not be except it were organized with those parts And yet those organs of Sense do not exercise in the Eucharist as they are in the Eucharist these facultyes as the Eye to see the eare to heare The reason hereof is that which was touched afore to wit that not only Adiectiues which haue relation ad Corpora circumstantia but also Verbes which imply a presence of his Body in the Eucharist with reference ad Corpora circumstantia do not predicate of his Body as it is in the Eucharist in regard of his spirituall and peculiar manner of existing there though they do predicate of it as it is in heauen Now to see to heare c beares a necessary reference ad Corpora circumstantia to wit to the externall obiect of the Eye and to the sound caused by some body c. Notwithstanding Christ in the Eucharist may be said to see to heare c. and this for a double reason First because it is there the said body which it is in heauen but his body in Heauen seeth heareth c. therefore his Body in the Sacrament doth see and heare though not quatenus est in Sacramento A second Reason may be in that as his body is in the Sacrament so it is accompanied with the Diuinity in the fruition whereof the Humanity seeth and heareth all things And in these two respectes the ancient Fathers according to that saying of S. Basil Verba Inuocationis c. quis Sanctorum scripto nobis reliquit c. 27. lib. de Sp. sancto as also the Priest in those words Agnus Dei qui tollis peccata mundi miserere nobis did and doth daily pray vnto Christ as he is in the Eucharist as being most confident that he doth there heare him like sort we teach that it heere performing the operations of Sense and enioying the organs of Sense doth yet performe them without the help of those said organs We heere also find Quantity without c VVithout Diuision The Body of Christ as it is considered in it selfe hath a true quantity and consequently it is diuisible but yet in regard that it existeth in the Eucharist after the manner of a spirit and not of a naturall body as being exempted from all extension of place for it is whole in euery part therefore it may in this sense be said that it is not diuisible Diuision Magnitude without d Magnitude without place Most of the difficulties in this Chapter are solued by knowing what is of the essence of Magnitude or Quantity and what not therefore I will insist the longer in setting downe the iudgements of the best learned herein The Philosophers then doe assigne three things to concurre to Magnitude of which the one euer causeth the other The First of these three is that euery Magnitude should haue an extension in it selfe and haue Partem extra Partem that is that one Part should not be confounded in it selfe with another Part and consequently an intrinsecall site and disposition of parts And this is of the very essence of euery Magnitude and cannot be separated from the same Thus we say that a Body is an extension in Longitude Latitude and Profunditie Superficies an extension in Longitude and Latitude A Line an extension in Longitude only So as extension euer presupposeth different parts of the body and consequently a Body cannot want extension The second thing agreeing
manner opinions deliuered hereof Thus that we see it is cleare but how we see if we belieue diuers no Man yet cleerly seeth And now to come to that point which may seeme in some sort to patterne one of the greatest obscurities in the Eucharist we find heere following the most approued iudgment of the best n The best Learned The most Learned doe for the most part hold that the Eye seeth after this second manner to wit Intromittendo Learned that the Eye being small in Quantity is able to containe in it the true proportion of things most great since the formes therof multiplyed in the ayre and still retayning the figure of the true Quantity are at the last receaued in at the Eye there appearing in those perfect dimensions of breadth and length which their subiects doe truely enioy And which is more we see by experience that the Eye is able to discerne the true proportion of a great body in a small glasse or in a point of a Diamond where it is more wonderfull because the forme of the said Body entreth into the glasse or diamond in a Pyramidall or Spyre-like point and yet being multiplied from the glasse to the Eye recouereth againe as I may say it former Quantity and so is presented from the glasse to the Eye as it was first from the subiect to the glasse An obseruation most strange were it not that the daily and familiar sight of any thing is euer the greatest Enemy to Admiration Now out of all this I thus inferre That if naturally the formes of things so great can truly appeare in their owne bignes in the small compasse of a glasse or the Eye cannot a Body really be in a lesser place then naturally is answerable to the externall coextension of all it parts And where it may be heere replied that the formes which are receaued into the Eye are only immateriall we graunt this to be true and therfore we vrge this Example not to paralell it exactly in all circumstances with the other but to proue thus farre since there seemes to be in some sort the like touch of the doubt that if the one be daily performed by the ordinary course of Nature why may not the other be also accomplished by the Omnipotency of that one yet Vntuersall Nature who gaue the first being to this secondarie Nature A Second Point wherein I will heere insist is that these Species visibiles or formes of Subiects being multiplied in the Ayre as they come to the Eye if the Ayre be changed either by any wynd or suddaine alteration yet as the chiefest o Chiefâ—st Philosophers Many great Philosophers of our tyme doe teach that such Accidences which doe naturally continue their Inherence in that Body from which they first proceed cannot naturally remoue from this their Subiect into another such is the whitenesse in the Swanne and the Blacknesse in a Crow c. But their Iudgement is otherwise in those Accidences which haue their Inherence in another Subiect then that from which they originally proceeded Such is the beames of the Sunne inhering in the Aire and the formes of Obiects multiplied in the Aire In these they hould that the Beames of the Sunne and the formes of the Obiects being the same numero may and actually doe remoue from one part of the Aire into another if so the Aire it selfe be changed And their Reason hereof is this For say these Men the beames of the Sunne or the formes of Obiects and the like haue no affinity with the Aire in respect of their originall proceeding but only by reason of existency But any one part of the ayre is as indifferent and ready to affoard them existence as another part Therefore say they there can be no reason assigned why such an Accident may not remoue from Aire to Aire rather then through the chang only of the firster part of the Aire to be extinct Philosophers of this time both Catholikes and Protestants doe hould the said formes euen eaedem numero are not extinct but that they inhere in the next succeeding Aire and so doe remoue from one Subiect to another Subiect Now this consideration moueth vs thus to conclude That if the same Accidences doe naturally remoue from Subiect to Subiect without any destruction of them cannot God supernaturally preserue an Accident without a Subiect as we Catholikes doe belieue that he doth so preserue the formes of Bread and Wine in the most holy Mysterie of the Eucharist And thus farre concerning these difficulties But now seeing we haue begun to intreate of the Eye I will end this Chapter with certayne pertinent animaduersions drawne from this Instrument and applyed to our vnderstanding the Eye of our soule First then we know that Nature hath giuen to Man two eyes either of which though they see a thing as one thing seuerally by themselues yet both of them looking vpon the same thing do behold it but p But as one The Reason hereof is in that the sight of any thing is not perfectly performed vntill the forme thereof be conuayed to the common Sense Now this Conueyance is made by the meanes of Neruus Opticus which Neruus doth deuide it selfe into two parts from the Forehead to either Eye But from the Forehead to the common Sense it is but one and therefore the forme of any Obiect being carried through this Neruus Opticus doth represent the Obiect but as one not as two to the common Sense as one not as two whereby we may learne that the Naturall light of our vnderstanding ought to conspire and ioyne with the supernaturall light of faith in apprehending one and the same thing And so in the Mysterie of the Eucharist our Vnderstanding and Reason ought not in seeing the difficulties thereof to vary from our Faith but to subordinate and subiect it selfe to that heauenly and infused Power Againe that very part of the Eye to wit Pupilla Oculi where with we properly see is depriued of all Colours to the end that it may indifferently see all Colours So should his vnderstanding who eyther in this Mysterie of the Eucharist or in any other would sincerely behould the grounds and reasons both of Catholikes and Protestants be voyded of all preiudice of iudgment wherwith the Intellectuall faculty is otherwise discoloured and blemished for so shall he more clearly and indifferently weigh and consider the force of the seuerall Reasons and Arguments produced on ech side Lastly to omit many other resemblances and Proportions heerein the q Optickes doe teach So we see that the different falling of the beames of the Sunne vpon the Cloude which causeth the Iris or Rainbow doth cause to the eye the different representation of seuerall Colours for as the Beames doe more or lesse fall vpon the Cloud so accordingly the Colours appeare varied to the Eye Optickes do teach that one and the same Colour doth appeare as diuers eyther to the same Eye
all of these obscurities were first through an incessant agitatiō of the mind discouered by our Catholike n Catholike Schoole-men For these and such like are handled and discussed by S. Thomas Aquinas The Maister of the Sentences Scotus Suarez Vasquez and diuers others School-men for the more exact search of the truth and after most fully answered by them so as these short currents of doubts from thence receaued their stops from whence they first did spring But now our Aduersaries for it is the misfortune of learning euer to be wounded by her owne hand are not ashamed euen to turne the edges of those Arguments first propounded and answered by Catholike Deuines vpon vs who maintayne the said faith which those Doctours did By which course of proceeding we may easily discouer how barren dry our Sectaries are for they bring little or nothing of themselues to impugne our faith heerin but only Eccho forth what they haue heard our learned Catholikes afore speak yet do they Eccho after a strange manner for they do not repeate the last words as in nature and reason they should but this were for their disaduantage since they containe the answers and solutions but only the firster part thereof wherin do lye the obiections The other point wherof the Reader is to take notice is this That most of the former difficulties especially of the two latter Passages or Chapters do consist in the repugnancy which they beare to the outward Sense and therfore seeing that these are chiefly insisted vpon and more more reinforced by our Aduersaries we may heere truly say that no small part of a Sacramentaries Faith lyes in his eye Thus howsoeuer such rapt Spiritualists will at other times vaunt of their hidden reuelations from God concerning the secrets of their Profession yet you shall euer find them euen in the midst of these their aerie high-towring Illuminations to looke downe vpon Sense and naturall Reason though Reason teacheth vs not to rely vpon Reason in things transcending Reason bearing thēselues herein not much vnlike to your great vnprofitable Kites which though they fly high yet they haue their Eye still fixed vpon the earth THE PROTESTANTS DIFFICVLTY OF A Body being in diuers Places answered from two more difficult Mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation CHAP. VI. NOvv after we haue dissected as it were point after point such difficulties in the Blessed Sacrament wherein the very synewes and strength of our Aduersaries cause doe chiefly lye We are further heere to aduertise the Reader that through the consideration of many Dogmaticall a Dogmaticall Assertions A third Example besides those two chiefe Mysteries afore specified may be the wonderfull difficulty of Creation or Annihilation which to Heathen Philosophers may seeme to imply a Contradiction for to say that Something may be made of Nothing which is Creation and that Something may be turned into Nothing which is Annihilation may be thought to say that Something is Nothing and Nothing Something And doubtlesse it cannot be apprehended by Mans vnderstanding that a Thing should now exist which afore was Nothing and in like sort that Something should be turned into Nothing except this Nothing be Something A fourth Example may be the Resurrection of the Dead Now the difficulty in this Mysterie is how one and the same Indiuiduum or particuler Body should be twice made for if it be twice then is it with a double action and if with a double action how comes it to passe that it is not two seeing that the Effect depends on the Action vt eius Terminus Furthermore this Mystery is made more incomprehensible by reason of the Anthropophagi or Cannibals who feeding vpon Mans flesh neuerthelesse both their owne bodies and the bodies of those others vpon whom they feed and whose flesh is turned into the flesh and substance of the Canniballs shall rise at the day of the resurrection most distinct and seuerall Bodyes where we see that one Body is turned into the substance of another and yet hereafter that very said substance is to rise vp most different and distinct Bodies A fifth Example may be taken from the Paynes of the damned where the soules and the Diuells are tormented and punished with corporall fire for if the burning of the fire doth not otherwise torment a thing then dissolueudo continuum then how can it afflict an Indiuisible Substance as the Soule of Man or a Spirit is of which Point see Augustine lib. 21. de Ciuit. Die cap. 2. 3. 4. 5. A sixt is the Obseruation how a Spirit can be detayned and holden by a Body for it seemeth no lesse difficult to be vnderstood how a Spirit should be holden by a Body that it passeth not wheresoeuer it would then that a Body should not be detayned and hindered by another Body but that it may freely passe through any solide bodyes as if they were no Bodies at all Now the firster part of this difficulty appeareth in the former example of the Diuells who being incorporall Substances are detayned with Hell fire so as that they cannot passe whither they would which point may be also exemplified by our Soule which being an immateriall Substance is deteyned and holden by our Body A seauenth may be taken from the Examples out of the Scriptures where we read that the Fire by Gods Power did suspend it faculty of heating Dan. 3 And that Christ and S. Peter by the same Power did walke vpon the waters Matth. 14. and the like Now if God can effect that that which is naturally hoate shall no◠heate and that which is naturally ponderous and heauie shall not descend downwards hauing no hinderance by the same reason is he able to make that a true body may want also circumscription of place For the reason why through diuine power that which is hoat shall not heate nor a thing ponderous shall not descend towards the Center is in that Causa est prior Effectu the cause is before it effect and therefore not depending on the effect may by God be separated from the same but the like reason is found in Magnitude which is the Cause and to fill or possesse a place which is the effect arising from the said cause and therefor later in nature then it Besides Grauitas or Ponderosity is not only the cause why a heauy body doth descend being out of it naturall place but it is also the cause thereof euen in that kind of Cause to wit in genere causae formalis in which Magnitude is the cause why a Body doth possesse a place An eight may be deduced from other Examples in Scripture whereby is proued that diuers bodies may possesse one and the same place and consequently that a Body may want all circumscription of place Hereof are no few Examples borrowed from our Sauiour himselfe as that of his Natiuitie where our Sauiour did proceed out of the wombe of the Blessed Virgin without any breach of
IX AMONG other Elementary grounds and Principles of the Mathematikes this is one a Maximus Circulus Apud Euclidem Those Circles are called Maiores Circuli whose Center is the same CeÌ„ter with the Sphere wherof they are Circles And this is the demonstration why the Sunne being in the Equinoctiall the day and night is of an equall length in all places to wit because the Horizon and the Equinoctiall are Circuli Maiores hauing their Center the same with the Center of the world and therfore intersecting themselues they cut one the other into two equall parts and consequently so much of that Circle which the Sunne then runneth is vnder our Horizon as is aboue our Horizon Maximus Circulus maximum Circulum secans secant se inuicem in duas aequales partes secus autem de Minoribus A great Circle cutting a great Circle they euer deuide the one the other into two equal parts The like may we say by allusion of the two vast Circumferences of Gods Power and Wisdome both which meeting togeather in the Center of euery thing created and in the Creation therof mutually intersecting themselues they appeare of one and the same Proportion I meane both discouering themselues to be infinite and surpassing all humane capacity Now these being indeed of the very essence of God for that Axiome is true Quicquid b Quicquid in Deo c. The reason hereof is as is aboue touched because to haue Proprietyes as Qualities and Accidents implyes composition and imperfection from which God is most free as being Maximè Vnus Simplex in Deo est Dei est do with most admiration manifest themselues among all his Creatures chiefly in those which enioy life Among those which enioy life chiefly in Man among all the corporeall parts of Man chiefly in that small great organ of the Eye For who will not be astonished and burst our with the Psalmist c The Psalmist Psalm 103. Quam magnificata sunt opera tua Domine in coÌ„templating the fabricke therof First to behould the prominency and bearing out of the Forehead and Nose which serues as certaine fortresses to beaâ—e backe all suddaine attempts endangering the same Then the hayres of the Eyelids standing in most precise maÌ„ner order as pales or pikes to repell and keep of the entrance of any noysome thing Next to obserue the Lyddes themselues which as Portcullisses lifted vp and downe by the help of the synewy chaines do let in all pleasing obiects to the Eye and forbiddeth entrance to all things domageable After these are preseÌ„ted to vs the many d Tunicles There are six Tunicae or Skinnes of which the Eye consisteth to wit 1. Adnata otherwise called Alba 2. Innominata 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Cornea 4. Vuea called also Secundina 5. Amphiblistroides or Retina 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Arauea Tunicles and Skins which serue as certaine walls or Countermures to incompasse strengthen and fortify this litle yet rich Citty of the Eye And lastly besides the e The Veynes c. It is a Principle in Anatomy that all Veines proceed from the Lyuer and giue nourishment all Arteries from the Heart and giue life all Synewes from the Braine and giue Motion and Sense I meane that the grosse bloud in the Veines doth giue nourishment the spirituall Bloud in the Arteries life and the Animall Spirits in the Nerues or Synewes Sense and Motion veines giuing nourishment the f The Veynes c. It is a Principle in Anatomy that all Veines proceed from the Lyuer and giue nourishment all Arteries from the Heart and giue life all Synewes from the Braine and giue Motion and Sense I meane that the grosse bloud in the Veines doth giue nourishment the spirituall Bloud in the Arteries life and the Animall Spirits in the Nerues or Synewes Sense and Motion Arreties life and the g The Veynes c. It is a Principle in Anatomy that all Veines proceed from the Lyuer and giue nourishment all Arteries from the Heart and giue life all Synewes from the Braine and giue Motion and Sense I meane that the grosse bloud in the Veines doth giue nourishment the spirituall Bloud in the Arteries life and the Animall Spirits in the Nerues or Synewes Sense and Motion Synewes motion to the same as also besides the two Opticke h Opticke Synewes These two Opticke Synewes are termed Nerui visibiles by these the Species or formes of all Obiects are carried from the Eyes to the common Sense Synewes which serue as the Porters betweene the common Sense and the Eye to consider the diuers i Diuers Humors There are three Humors in the Eye 1. Aqueus which is in the vttermost part of the Eye 2. Chrystallinus whose place is almost in the middle of the Eye this Humor is almost the chiefest Instrument of seeing and therefore it is called Idolum or Simulacrum Visionis 3. Vitreus which is seated in the inmost part of the Eye so as the Christalline Humor is placed betweene the Vitreus Humor and the Aqueus Humors which are to the Eye as so many Riuers by means wherof sufficient prouision k Prouision For these Humors giue nourishment to some of the Tunicles as also the Eye purgeth it selfe by the meanes of them is brought in for the maintayning of the seuerall Partes thereof as also all l Ordure For these Humors giue nourishment to some of the Tunicles as also the Eye purgeth it selfe by the meanes of them ordures whose stay and putrefaction would much offend it are conuayed away And thus much of the compacture and frame of the Eye where if we remember that all those parcells most different one from another in substance forme vse and operation are made by Gods power of one the same part of a little slimy matter and by his Wisdome and Prouidence are become thus subordinate one part to another and all seruiceable to the faculty of Seeing how can we rest doubtfull that the same Power and Wisdome are not able to effect the greatest difficultyes appearing in the Mysterie of the Eucharist But to proceed further herein all this curious structure of the Eye is framed that this Instrument may performe the operation of Seeing and so we find it doth But if we should enter into the manner how it absolueth this it faculty we enter into a Labyrinth of intricate speculatioÌ„s in regard of the different m Different Opinions There are two chiefe Opinions touching the manner of seeing The one they call Extramittendo that is That the Eye doth send forth certayne Spiritus visibiles to the Obiect which the Eye seeth and doe returne backe againe to the Eye with the true forme of the said Obiect The other is Intromittendo that is That the Species or formes of the Obiect are spherically multiplied in the Aire or water and are receaued in at the Eye per medium Conoidis viz. in a Pyramidall
be nourished of God But the flesh is washed really and truly with water as also it is annoynted really and truly with oyle therfore it ought really and truly to feed vpon the Body and Bloud of Christ Ignatius epist ad Smyrnenses as Theodoret citeth Dialog 3. thus saith Eucharistias oblationes non admittunt quòd non confiteantur Eucharistiam esse Carnem Saluatoris quae pro peccatis nostris passa est quam Pater sua benignitate suscitauit They do not admit to wit certaine Heretickes denying that Christ had true Flesh the Eucharists and Oblations because they acknowledge not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Sauiour which flesh suffered for our sinnes the which the Father through his benignity raysed vp againe Heere Ignatius sayth not that the Flesh of Christ is giuen to vs in some one manner or other as our Aduersaries would expound him but he saith that the Eucharist is the flesh of Christ Heere also we are to note that these Heretickes against whom he heere speaketh did refuse the Eucharist least they should be inforced to confesse that Christ had true flesh if they did admit the Eucharist which was the Flesh of Christ But if the Eucharist did only signify the flesh of Christ they had no reason to deny the Echarist for they did not deny the Images and Figures of Christ but only his true Flesh for such bodies as are only apparent and not true bodyes may be painted or figured out in Images as appeareth by the Images and Pictures of Angells OF THE FATHERS AVTHORITIES touching the Change made in the Eucharist CHAP. III. A SECOND Branch of the Fathers Testimonies may extend it selfe to the Change which is made in the Sacrament of the Eucharist which change that it is reall is necessarily included in their writings For they teach that after the Mutation is once made the Bread remayneth not and in further acknowledgment heerof they purposely do paralell it with other reall Mutations As first with that of the Water turned by our Sauiour into Wine But if an imminent Act of his will was of Power to turn water into wine cannot a Transient operation of the said will breaking out into words of a positiue Assertiō change wine into Bloud Secondly they compare the change heere with that of the Wands of Moyses turned into Serpents But what proportion can there be betweene these stupendious Mutations and a little representatiue Bread and Wine still remayning Bread and Wine Therfore we may iustly say that as those true Serpents a True serpents Exod. 7. of Moyses did eate vp those counterfaite Serpents made in emulation therof by the false Prophets euen so ought the reall Transelementation taught by the Fathers exyle and banish this but Sacramentall and Sophisticated chang brought in by the Sacramentaries They further teach for the more facilitating of this great worke that he who could first giue the Essence and Forme to euery thing could more easily superinduce a second forme And therefore with good reason one of them saith Non b Non minus est Ambros de mysterijs initiand c. 9. minus est nouas rebus dare quà m mutare Naturas Since the first includeth an Absolute and Primatiue Creation the very Maister-peece of Gods Omnipotency and such as Man cannot apprehend but by apprehending that Nothing is Something The second implieth a former Existence of something and consequently only a new kind of inuesting of it Which later point much more the First the Fathers ascribe only to his power who causing all changes is yet himselfe vnchangeable and producing all mutations is immutable Ego c Ego sum Dominus Malach. 3. sum Dominus non mutor Now then by reason of the true and reall chang heere made the Fathers doe further write that our Sense which in other things hath a great Soueraignty ouer our Iudgemēt is heere deceaued for though the Eye would persuade vs that there is Bread and Wine in the Eucharist yet they say plainly that there is neither bread nor wyne thus teaching that the vnderstanding heere corrects the Eye in seeing though only by the Eye it learnes that there is any seeing and affirming that the vnderstanding for Faith is an Act therof which seeth not at all heere only truly seeth Thus if we belieue those ancient Doctors a Faith wrought out of sense only is no better then Israel whereof the d The Apostle 1. Cor. 10. Apostle speaketh according to the Flesh But now to descend particulerly to their authorities sorting to the passages of this Chapter First then Eusebius Emissenu serm de Corpore Dom. sayth Inuisibilis Sacerdos c. The inuisible Priest doth change through a secret power of his word the visible Creatures into the substance of his body and bloud And againe he saith more plainly Quando bencdicendae c. When the Creatures which are to be blessed are placed vpon the Altars before they be consecrated with the inuocation of the highest Power they are the substance of Bread and wine but after the words of Christ they are the body and bloud of Christ. What meruayle if those things which he could create by his word he can chang being already created Proclus Bishop of Constantinople lib. de Trad. diuinae Liturgiae Per quas preces Spiritus sancti aduentum expectabant vt eius diuina praesentia propositum in Sacrificio panem vinum aqua permixtum ipsum illud corpus sanguinem Saluatoris nostri Iesu Christi efficeret By the force of these prayers meaning the words of the Institution we expect the comming of the Holy Ghost that so his diuine presence might make the bread and wine mingled with water the very Body and Bloud of Iesus Christ our Sauiour Augustine serm quem citat Beda in c. 10. prioris ad Cor. Non omnis panis c. Not euery bread but that receauing the benedictiō of Christ fit Corpus Christi is made the Body of Christ where the word fit includeth heere a true change at least against the Lutherans Chrysostome homil 83. in Matth. Non sunt humanae c. The words heere performed are not in the power of Man we only hould the place of Ministers but it is he that sanctifieth and changeth the things And then after Qui dixit c. He who said This is my Body confirmed the fact with his word And homil de Eucharist in Encaenijs Num vides panem num vinum num sicut reliqui cibi in secessum vadunt Absit ne sic cogites Quemadmodum enim sicera adhibita illi assimilatur nihil substantiae remanet nihil superfluit sic hic puta mysteria consumi corporis substantia Doest thou see Bread Doest thou see Wine Do these things passe into the Common passage as other meates do Let it be farre from thee to thinke so For euen as wax laid neere to the fire doth assimilate it selfe to it nothing of the substance
sunt sub vmbra culminis mei We are your Subiects and therefore stand obliged to acknovvledge the strictest Band of Allegiance due either by the Lavv of Nature by the Lavv of God or by the example of any Christian Subiects tovvards their Princes euer since our Redemption till the fall of that most vnhappy and Apostating Monke Let not then the perpetrated crymes of some fevv so diuert the beames of your Gracious Clemency from vs all as that the PunishmeÌ„t due only vnto them like the Effect of another Originall Sinne should propagate and extend it selfe vpon the vvhole Body and Posterity of Catholikes but rather reiecting all the subtile Machinations vvyse follyes of our Politick Aduersaryes vvhich vve trust that finally God vvill frustrate haue a frequent remembrance of that saying Superexalt at Misericor dia iudiciuÌ„ Iustitiae tuae in vvhich vvords your Highnes may thinke that the Apostle Iames preacheth to King Iames. BVT NOW as fearing to become ouer tedious for vvhich reason as also out of an humble ReuereÌ„ce I do forbeare hereafter in this Treatise to direct further speaches to your Highnes I heere vvill cease casting my selfe at your Maiestyes feet as lovv as Humility and Loyalty can prostrate themselues and praying to the Almighty to preserue you in a Blessed Gouerment ouer vs many many yeares and after the Period of this life to graunt your Highnes the Honour and Happines in being another Dauid by enioyning tvvo Ierusalems Your Maiesties most Loyall humble Subiect R. N. THE PREFACE TO THE READER GOOD Christian Reader Heere I present thee with a small Treatise of a large Subiect it being one of the chiefest Questions of Christian Religion coÌ„trouerted at this day betweene the Catholike and the Caluinist It is written with intention to confirme thy Iudgment in so weighty a Point being already rectified to reforme it being erroneous and therfore I expect a retaliation charitably to entertaine my charitable meaning If this little worke the yong Samuel proceeding from the long barren wombe of my Braine may become profitable to any one I haue my desire As for the censures which will passe therof I presage they will be as various as Mens iudgments are various but heerin I am indifferent for how meane soeuer it is as it is and of all the Elements I least pryze the Ayre Yet heere by the way I must aduertise my ignoraÌ„t Protestant Reader for to the more Learned this is needlesse who euer dislikes what is not so courteous as to come within the reach of his narrow head-peece that I do looke that he should charge these poore Leaues especially the first Part heerof with mayne Contrarieties and Contradictions Yet if his Pryde would vouchsafe to remember or rather to learne that all true Contradictions do euer consist in one and the same reference of Circumstances and that such seeming heere are reconciled by different Respects explicated in the marginal Annotations he might well rest satisfied Wherfore I do heere premonish all such but particulerly them who eyther by Pen or Tongue are become publike Patrones of the Sacramentarian Nouelty not maliciously to insist alone in the said naked appearing Repugnances concealing their Illustrations tragically by this means amplifying the strange supposed Paradoxes forsooth defended by vs Catholikes heerin Which if they shall attempt by diuorcing the one from the other now after this conuenient forwarning they are to be reputed but as Men conscious of their owne bad Cause and willing fraudulently to abuse the weake Iudgments of their followers I haue deuided this Treatise into two Parts In the first I proue that it is possible for the existence of any thing euer presupposeth a possibility of the same existence that the sacred Body and Bloud of our Sauiour may truly really be contayned vnder the formes of Bread Wine and that though the effecting therof doth transcend Nature yet doth it not ouerthrow Nature This labour I am forced to vndertak◠〈◊〉 regard of our Aduersaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and â—oâ—â—â—station with God heerin for they maintayne in their Wrytings with great estuation and heat of dispute like a Raging waues Iudae Epist raging waues of the sea foaming out their owne shame that to be at once in diuers places or to want all circumscription of place besides many other difficulties occurring in the Catholike doctrine of the Eucharist are against the nature of a true Body and therfore caÌ„not be accomplished by God In which point they partake ouer neere with the ancient Philosophers though perhaps with their greater offence towards God then it was in those Heathens since in such cases that saying houldeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Falsa fides infidelitate peior 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The reason why the Sacramentaryes do belieue the words of Christ in the doctrine of the Eucharist so little is because they belieue their Sense therin so much for they are resolued that their outward sense shall heere euen prescribe Lawes to their faith whatsoeuer may seeme to be incoÌ„patible therwith as the forme the colour the tast c. the maintayning therof to be reputed as an exploded Errour In which kind of proceeding they appeare in my conceipt to deale more niggardly with the faith of Christ then euer the c Donatists August de Vnitate Ecclesiae Donatists did with the Church of Christ since they though banishing the Church out of all the other partes of the World yet were content to allot to it the whole Countrey of Africke wheras these labour to withdraw our faith heerin from all the chiefe Powers of our Mind and to confine it within the narrow compasse of the ball of the Eye or the end of the tongue So far off is the Soule immersed in Sense from apprehending truly this high and reuerend Mystery The second Part heerof iustifying his Maiesties learned Iudgment heerin deliuereth the diuine Authorities of both the Testaments for confirmation of the Reall Presence it contayneth the Prophesies of the ancient Rabbyns therof it reporteth the Myracles exhibited by God in warrant of the same it discouereth the weaknesse of such testimonyes as are out of the Scripture obiected to the coÌ„trary finally it displayeth the innouation and first appearance of the Sacramentarian Doctrine But because our Aduersaries do vse diuers circulations and inflexions to and fro for they most strangely detort the holy Scripture and insolently reiect the other proofes therfore to draw them to a more particuler fight I haue reduced the issue of this point to the iudgments of the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church in whose * In whose wrytings See hereof the later end of the Marginall References of the first Chapter of the Second Part at the letter q Wrytings many of the Sacramentaries seeme to haue good confidence and from whose Censures they cannot iustly appeale since it is said Non d Non te praetereat
Bodies haue heate and other such qualities per productionem non per inhaerentiam that is they cause the same qualities in other Bodies and so may be said to haue them but these qualities do not inhere in the said heauenly Bodies for these primae qualitates are originally peculiar and naturall to the Elements only and to other Bodies compounded of them by participation But the Heauens are not compound of the Elements hauing either heate or life But now if we turne our Pen more particulerly to the most Blessed Reuerēd Sacrament of the Eucharist where the Word being made Flesh by his Word made Bread Flesh we shal be able to discouer whole seas of wonders and be forced to acknowledge that Mans vnderstanding is not of force to sound them or that it best apprehendeth them in not apprehending them still bearing an obsequious and inuolued beliefe of what Gods Church teacheth therin no otherwise then the Memory often serues to remember that some things it did not remember Now seeing it is my intended Method to spend this first Part in explicating and vnfoulding our Aduersaries greatest and strongest difficulties which they vse as so many Arietes or Engines to ruinate and batter downe the walles of the ancient Catholike doctrine therin All which though they shal be fully reconciled explaned so as our vnderstanding shal be conuinced of the possibility therof and consequently that Christ was able to exhibite his Body truly and really vnder the formes of Bread and wine yet neuerthelesse the externall betraying Sense the alluring Eue entising our Vnderstanding the proper seate of Faith to giue assent to it owne danger will still be whispering in our eares the contrary doctrine Therfore I haue thought good to premonish the Reader in the entrance hereof that in this Mystery he is to relinquish all entercourse with Sense to stand in hostility with the same yea euen forcing and constrayning his Vnderstanding to receaue no intelligence from thence and euer to remember that he who first made the Eye still retaines a commaund ouer the Eye Thus violence only in enioying of him who forbiddeth all violence is warrantable for not only touching life but faith also f Regnum Caelorum Matth. c. 11. Regnum Caelerum vim patitur and heere rapine is true purchase so in all other things for vsing of force we are punished heere for not vsing we are punished OF THE OMNIPOTENCY OF GOD. AND VVhat he is able to performe CHAP. II. THE small streames wherewith the floud of the Sacramentarian Heresie is fed and maintained spring chiefly from the extenuating of Gods omnipotency intimating therby that the abstruse Mysteries which are confessedly acknowledged by the Catholikes to be in the Reall Presence are greater then can be performed by that power which through it infinitnesse is euer vnknowne though through it continuall manifestatiō still eminent In this manner doth that a French Apostata viz. Caluin who saith l. 4. Instit c. 72. Cur inquiunt vi◠Catholici non faciat Deus vt caro eadem plura diuersaque loca occupet vt nullo loco contineatur vt forma specie careat Insane quid à Dei potentia postulas vt carnem faciat simul esse non esse carnem first French Apostata that late b Late Patriarch viz. Beza lib. de Coena Domini contra Westphalum Patriarch of Geneua dispute of this matter In like sort that c False Martyr Peter Martyr lib. contra Gardinerum obiect 10. 11. 12. c. false Martyr who with the Apostle of his owne name denied his Maister but neuer with him lamented his denyall laboured to shorten Gods arme and omnipotency heerin so ready are these great Rabbins to interleague compart with the very Heathens in depressing of his might whose Greatnesse is without d VVithout Quantity The hauing of Accidences euer implyes composition therfore God being most simple can haue no Accidences Quantity whose Goodnesse without Quality and whose Eternity without Tyme But before we vndertake to shew the possibility of all such points as are found in this Mystery of the Eucharist it will much conduce I suppose to our intended proiect if we lay downe the graue iudgments of the learned concerning what things be factible or may be done by God and what things may seeme to transcend his might who in might transcendeth all things fince so the impartiall Reader may the better obserue whether the acknowledged doubts in the Eucharist imply in themselues any absolute impossibility or no. First then it is generally agreed vpon by the Learned that God is able to do euery thing which Mans vnderstanding is able to conceaue The reason hereof being that fince the Obiect of our mind is Ens and Verum in generall and that which may be conceaued or vnderstood may really truly exist Therfore it followeth that God can effect all that which Man is able to conceaue in his Mind Secondly the Learned especially those which are Christians affirme that not only those things which Man is able to apprehēd in his mind but also many other things incomprehensible in Mans vnderstanding God can effect For seeing say they that totum Ens of it selfe is intelligible and to be conceaued and that which is non Ens cannot be conceaued neuerthelesse our Vnderstanding through it weaknesse and imbecillity except it be cleared with the Light of Grace is often deceaued in cōceauing of things supposeth many things cannot exist or be and consequently not to be apprehended by our Vnderstanding or in themselues to be factible which may indeed exist and so become the obiect of our Mind Thus our Vnderstanding may apprehend that some things there are which it cannot apprehend neuerthelesse the more the vnderstanding doth lift it selfe vp towards God the more it is illuminated and the better refined for the penetrating of any difficultie no otherwise then a vapour the higher it is eleuated vp by the Sunne the more cleare and purified it becomes This doctrine of theirs as it is warrantable in the Authority of Gods sacred word so is it iustifiable in diuers exemplified Articles of our Faith which the Heathen Philosophers esteemed as things impossible and by deniall therof ascribed vnto God only a kind of impotent Omnipotency Thirdly they teach that God hath in all things so much an Actiue Power by how much they haue in themselues a Passiue Power And in this sense perhaps the Heathen Philosophers acknowledged Gods Omnipotency But their Errour was in that they thought that the Actiue Power of God could not extend beyond the Passiue Power of things thus we see it verified in these learned men e That the world 1. Cor. c. 1. That the world through wisdome knew not God wheras all Christian Philosophers do teach the cōtrary and therfore they belieue that God could did create the world of Nothing Now to make a thing of Nothing is not to depend
the bread is not annihilated for Annihilation is an action which terminateth and endeth in Nothing but this action in the Eucharist by the which the bread ceaseth to be doth not terminate in nothing but in something to witt in the body of Christ not annihilated A Change which is caused by a e Successiue The words of Consecration are the cause of this conuersion and therefore this conuersion is not made without a true successiue pronouncing of the said words Successiue pronouncing of seuerall words and yet wrought in an f Instant Though all the words successiuely pronounced doe worke this Conuersion yet the said words haue no perfect signification and consequently causeth not the change till the last instant wherein the last word is pronounced for in that last instant and not before the effect of the words doe really and truly exist â—hat is the Conuersion of Bread into the Body of Christ and of the wine into his Bloud The like difficulty we find in the words of Baptisme which produce no effect till the last Instant Now heere it is to be obserued that though the signification of the words and the Conuersion be perfected together in one instant yet in order of Nature they reciprocally precede and follow one the other for as the truth of this Proposition This is my Body depends à rei essentia of the essence or being of the thing touched in this Proposition so the Conuersion doth precede the signification of the words but as those words are the Cause of the Conuersion so the words precede the Conuersion instant A Change wherein the Priest may be said of Bread g To make In a sober construction the Priest may be said to make the Body of Christ in that by his only and no lay persons pronouncing of the wordes of Consecration the bread is really turned into the Body of Christ and in this sense the Ancient Fathers doe most frequently teach that the Priest maketh the Body of Christ See Cyprian l. 1. epist 2. 9. lib. 3. epist 25. Athanasius 2. Apolog contra Arianos Basil l. â— de Baptisin c. S. Chrysostome l. 3. 6. de Sacerdotio Hierome lib. contra Luciferianos Now though the Fathers in this their peculiar sense were accustomed to write so in regard that none could consecrate but a Priest yet if we will speake in precise termes the Priest maketh not the Body of Christ because Christs Body being afore the Priest by his words doth not produce it of new but only causeth it to be vnder those externall formes of Bread and wine vnder which afore it was not to make the Body of Christ yet the Priest maketh not the Body of Christ A Change wherein the Body being made h Of Bread The Body of Christ may be said to be made of Bread because the Bread is truly and really conuerted into his Body though the Body doth truly exist before any such Conuersion And in this sense diuers ancient Fathers doe write that the Body of Christ is made of Bread Cyprian saith Serm. de Coena Domini Panis iste quem Dominus Discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed natura mutatus omnipotentia Dei factus est caro Gaudentius tract 2. de Exodo Ipse naturarum Creator Dominus qui producit de terra panem de pane rursus quia potest promisit efficit proprium corpus qui de aqua vinum fecit de vino sanguinem suum facit S. Augustine in his Sermon cited by S. Bede vpon the tenth chapter of the first to the Corinthians saith Non omnis Panis sed accipiens benedictionem Christi fit Corpus Christi so vsuall and obuious was this phrase with the ancient Fathers which is so harsh to the curious eares of our new Brethren of Bread a thing farre different from flesh is the very same which was made of the flesh of the Queene of Heauen A Change where by the force of Consecration the Body is without Bloud and yet euen then the Body is i Not without Bloud The reason hereof is because Christ is there whole vnder either of the externall formes in regard of the naturall vnion of his soule with his Body which vnion is neuer more to be dissolued since he is neuer more to die But if his Body should be without Bloud then should it be a dead Body and consequently himselfe were hereafter to die againe contrary to that of the Apostle Rom. 6. Christus resurgens ex inortuis iam non moritur mors illi vltra non dominabitur not without Bloud In like sort by the same vertue the Humanity of Christ is only intended and yet k His Diuinity The Humanity of Christ is euer accompanied with the Diuinity and therfore his Humanity being in the Sacrament by force of Consecration his Diuinity is also there with it per concomitantiam as the Deuines do speake Now that where the Body of Christ is there the Diuinity of Christ must be also is proued from this Principle of Faith to witt That Christ is one diuine Person subsisting in two natures and therefore wheresoeuer the Body of Christ is it can haue no other then a diuine subsistence which subsistence is the same in matter with the diuine Essence So as we see by force of the Hypostaticall vnion which is neuer to be dissolued where the Body of Christ is there the Diuinity is also his Diuinity which is euer l In all places If the Diuinity of God were not in all places then should it be circumscriptible or at least definitiue in place and consequently not Infinite then it were no true Diuinity in all places is * Heere of new In like sort all do grant that the Diuinity of Christ was in the wombe of the B. Virgin before her Conception and yet the Diuinity was there after another manner at the tyme of her Conception heere of new truly and really exhibited A Change where the Body of our Sauiour is present and yet m Represented It may be said to be represented First because the externall formes of Bread and wyne doe represent the Body of Christ as it dyed vpon the Crosse and the Bloud as it was shed vpon the crosse for the Eucharist is a commemoration of the Passion of Christ according to those words of S. Paul 1. Cor. 11. Mortem Domini annunciabitis donec veniat And in this respect his Body may be said to be represented in the Eucharist because it is not there after the same manner as it was vpon the Crosse but only by similitude and in this sense Augustine epist 23. ad Bonifacium is to be vnderstood where he saith Secundum quemdam modum SacramentuÌ„ Corporis Christi Corpus Christi est Secondly it is said to be represented or in figure because the externall formes of Bread and wyne are the signes of the Body and Bloud of Christ there present
is made of the Bread into the Body but a Consubstantiall coexistency of both which opinion though resting only in the manner of the Conclusion we repute no lesse then Heresy since in points doctrinall once s Definitiuely For the Generall Councell of Lateran vnder Innocentius the third defined for an Article of Faith the doctrine of Transubstantiation though this doctrine was generally belieued afore in the first Chapter of the Decrees of that Councell He therfore that reiecteth the authority of a lawfull Councell reiecteth the authority of Gods Church and consequently his Errour though resting but in the manner or circumstance of any question cannot be small since in such his Errour is included his greater Errour in thinking that a true and lawfull Generall Councell may definitiuely and sententially erre definitiuely true or false who erreth litle erreth much We also dissent from the Sacramentaries who relying altogeather vpon their sense herein like Labans sheep led mainly by their Eye do inforce an impossibility of our Doctrine whereas Faith assureth vs that the Body of Christ is heere really exhibited And therefore we teach that the vnderstanding which is in this place the Eye to the Eye though borrowing all knowledge from Sense euen in knowledge heere controles Sense and secureth vs that his Sacred Body and Bloud through the vertue of his owne speaches is heere really present though through the dignity thereof veyled ouer from our sight and yet not veyled ouer with any thing since they are not t Are not things The Philosophers do teach that Substantiae only are truly and perfectly Entia And that Accidentia are only Analogicè Entia being in their owne nature imperfect And thus in this sense the Accidents of Bread and Wine vnder which the Body and Bloud of our Sauiour lye may be truly tearmed Non Entia things but formes vnder which it lieth Thus against the Sacramentaries we hold it most cleare that heere to peruert Christs words is to impugne Christs power THE SECOND PASSAGE CHAP. IIII. BVT let vs passe on to the difficulties of another nature We find that Christs Body by force of those operatiue words is in diuers places Churches at one and the same time for though Christ be incircumscriptibly in the Sacrament yet we teach that as a Body by Gods power may want all a VVant all Circumscription See the explication of this difficulty hereafter in the next Passage at the letter D Circumscription so by the same power it may haue diuers b Diuers Circumscriptions A Body may by Gods Power haue at one time diuers Circumscriptions which is to haue seuerall places extensiuely And the reason hereof is because that only implies a contradiction and consequently as we touched afore cannot be done by God which impugnes the very essence of a thing so as it doth presuppose a Being and a Not-Being of the said thing But to be in place or in diuers places at once is extrinsecall and accidentary and not of the Essence but what is extrinsecall or Accidentary is posterius and later then the thing it selfe and consequently by Gods Omnipotency may be deuided from the nature and essence thereof The proofe of this doctrine is also deduced from the example of our Sauiour who neuer leauing Heauen appeared to S. Paul vpon the Earth as we read Act. c. 9. 22. That it was not any voice which spake to him made by Gods Power or the ministery of the Angells only as some doe answere but our Sauiour himselfe appeareth both because mention being made hereof in diuers places of the Actes it euer toucheth Pauls seeing of Christ in his owne Person So we read Act. c. 22. That Ananias put Paul in remembrance of his seeing of Christ In like sort c. 26. Christ himselfe saith That he appeared to him thereby to make him a witnesse of the things which he saw but he could not be a witnesse thereof especially of the Resurrection except he had truly and really seene the very Body of Christ And answerably hereto we read that S. Paul 1. Cor. 15. after he had reckoned diuers who had seene our Sauiour after his Resurrection concludeth in the end with these words Nouissimè tamquam abortiuo visus est mihi which saying of his had beene false except he had seene Christ himselfe seeing that the rest numbred by S. Paul had seene him in his owne true and naturall Body Neither can it be said as some others would haue it that S. Paul saw Christ as he was in Heauen and not heere vpon the Earth or in some neere place of the aire and this for diuers reasons First because those that were with Paul did heare a voyce and saw a great light Act. 9. 22. but the Eares and Eyes of his Companions could not penetrate so farre as Heauen Secondly because the light which appeared to S. Paul himselfe was so great as it almost stroke him dead for the time which could not haue had in likelyhood such force if it had come so farre as from Heauen Thirdly if S. Paul had seene Christ only in Heauen it might haue beene obiected to him that he was no true witnesse of his Resurrection and that what he had said to haue seene was only in imagination and a strong apprehension of the Mind Now our Aduersaries cannot heere obiect that if our Sauiour did appeare heere vpon the Earth or in the Ayre truly and really to S. Paul that notwithstanding he was not circumscriptible in that place for the time in that he is only circumscriptible as he is in heauen This vrgeth nothing For for a Body to be circumscriptible in a place it is not required that it should not be circumscriptible in no place also but only it is required that it should be truly commensured with that place so as the Termini of the Place and the Body be answerable the one to the other Circumscriptions much more then may it be at once in diuers places Sacramentally since c Vnity of Essence The essentiall vnity of a thing dependes not of the vnity of Place seeing a thing is one before it hath one place so as to be in place is but subsequent and accessory to the nature of any body but it dependes of the internall principles of the said thing Vnity of Essence and Nature is not dissolued by diuersity of place Hence is it that it may be neere d Neere to the Earth The same Body in seuerall places may be neere to the ground and far of from the ground Neither doth this imply any contradiction for seeing that when a Body is in diuers places and the relation is terminated to diuers places it therefore necessarliy followeth that this diuerse relation is multiplied for it is to be vnderstood that those contrary relations are in one and the same subiect per diuersa fundamenta to wit in a different respect of seuerall places which diuersity of respect taketh away all
or to seuerall Eyes according to the different Angles to vse the imposed Phrase herein of Irradiation or Incidency made by the entrance of the Obiect into the Eye wherby we may be admonished that in points of faith one and the same Authority doth seeme of a different weight according as the VnderstaÌ„ding is afore either lightened with Gods Grace or darkened with the myst of Passion And thus far hereof where we see that the Body contrary to the accustomed manner is able to schoole and instruct the soule HEERE now I will conclude this first Part in which the Reader hath all the chiefe obscurities of this great Mysterie explicated at large and diuers of them paralelled by other acknowledged difficulties both in Diuinity and Philosophy For the close wherof I only wish him to haue his mind euer fixed in this one position which is That what Faculty or Operation God doth impart to any thing created the same he also eminenter retaineth to himselfe since otherwise the Creature should transcend in Might the Creatour and is able to performe it without the help of any secondary Cause being in such cases sole Agent of the same Effect Which Axiome if he do apply to most of the r Most of the abstrusest Points To instance this ground in some difficulties of the Eucharist God hath imparted to a Substance the facultie of supporting and sustentating an Accidence by meanes of Inherency therefore it followeth out of this Principle that God is able of himselfe to support an Accident without it Subiect for otherwise he should giue more power and ability to the Subiect then he keepeth to himselfe or can by himselfe performe which were both impious and absurd to maintaine In like sort God hath giuen this property to Place for the better conseruing of the Subiect conteyned that it should circumscribe euery sublunary naturall Body with a certaine coextension answerable to the Quality of euery such body Therefore God can of himselfe as we belieue he doth in the Sacrament of the Eucharist keep a Body without any such circumscription of place since otherwise it would follow that he hath so qualified this circumstance of place to performe that which himselfe immediately cannot This might be exemplified in many other difficulties touching the doctrine of the Reall Presence neither is there found herein in a cleare Iudgement the least appearance of any Contradiction abstrusest Points in this Question of the Eucharist he shall easily acknowledge that the extending greatnesse of them become confined by him who is only confined within his owne illimitable Power and vnsearchable Wisdome himselfe being the sole bound to himselfe The end of the first Tract THE CHRISTIANS MANNA THE SECOND TRACT The Catholike doctrine of the Eucharist proued from the Figures therof in the Old Testament from the Prophesies of the Rabbins from the New Testament from Miracles c. CHAP. I. IN the precedent Passages the possibility of the Catholike doctrine herein is I hope most cleerly and irrefragably proued partly by soluing all the abstrusest difficulties which are accustomed dangerously to inuade our Iudgment by the assault of the Eye of other the senses and of naturall Reason and partly by shewing that God still is God and his diuine Maiesty euer himselfe I meane that he is in Power infinite boundlesse and inscrutable And that whensoeuer this proud slyme of Man presumes to assigne limits to him by obiecting that Omnipotency cannot passe it selfe and the like he endeauours but to graspe the water or to bind the Ayre since he labours to restraine him euen Him whose Ocean euer flowes without any borrowed streames whose Day stil continues without ensuing Night and whose Center is without any bordering Circumference It now remayneth briefly to demonstrate that not only it is possible that Christs sacred Body and Bloud may lye really vnder the formes of bread and wine but that actually in the Eucharist so it doth Which point though it receaue it chiefest synewes strength of proofe from the two Oracles of Gods written Word to wit from the Propheticall and Apostolicall Scriptures yet such is the petulancy and wantonnesse of our Aduersaries in detorting those sacred Testimonyes as that they tell vs except we will admit their owne expositions of the said Scriptures though contrary to the words themselues and to all the accessarie circumstances we do but idely diuerberate the ayre with impertinent allegations And thus Let vs produce such Texts of God Word which conteyne euen by their owne confessions the Types or Figures of the holy Eucharist during the time of the Law which Tyme a VVhich Tyme serued According to that Omnia eiâ— contingebant in figuris 1. Cor. c. 7. serued but as the Eue to the greatest Festiuall day of Christianitie as that it was shaddowed by the Paschall b Paschall Lambe Exod. 12. S. Augustine saith of this Figure l. 2. contra literas Petiliani cap. 37. Aliud Pascha quod Iudaei de oue celebrant aliud quod nos in corpore sanguine Domini accipimus That the Paschall Lambe was a figure of the Eucharist is further testified by Leo Serm. 7. de Passione Domini by Cyprian lib. de Vnitate Ecclefiae by Chrysostome homil de proditione Iudae by Hierome in c. 26. Matth. by Tertullian l. 4. in Marcionem and diuers others Lambe by the c The bloud of the Testament Exod. 24. That this bloud was a figure of the Eucharist appeareth out of Luc. 22. where our Sauiour plainly saith Hic calix nouum Testamentum est in meo Sanguine In like sort Matth. 26. Our Lord in these words Hic est Sanguis meus noui Testamenti seemeth in both places to allude to the words of Moyses Hic est Sanguis Testamenti quem misit ad vos Deus Now heere it cannot be replyed that the bloud of the Testament was a Figure only of the Passion and not of the Eucharist and the reason hereof is this in that a Testament ought to be made by a free man before his death and by some publique Instrument for the remembrance thereof after the Testators death All which circumstances are more truly and liuely found in the Institution of the Sacrament then in his Passion Bloud of the Testament and by the Manna d Manna descending Of this we read Exod. 16. That the Manna was a Figure of the Eucharist appeareth from our Sauiours owne words Ioan. 6. Patres vestri manducauerunt Manna in Deserto mortui sunt Qui manducant hunc Panem viuent in aeternum The same is confirmed by the Fathers See hereof Ambrose l. 5. de Sacramen c. 1. and De ijs qui initiantur Mysterijs c. 8. 9. Augustine Theophylact Cyâ—il and Chrysostome in c. 6. Ioannis descending from Heauen vpon the Iewes wherein we affirme that the accomplishment of these figures ought to be more noble and worthy then such naked representations and that therefore if nothing be in the
therof remayning or superfluously redouÌ„ding So maist thou suppose the Mysteries heere to be consumed by the substance of the body Gaudentius tract 2. de Exod. Ipse Naturarum Creator Dominus qui producit de terra panem de pane rursus quia potest promisit efficit proprium Corpus qui de aqua vinum fecit de vino Sanguinem suum He who is the Creatour and Lord of all Natures who bringeth forth Bread out of the earth and againe who of the bread maketh his proper Body for he is able and he promised to do it and who made wine of water and of wine his owne Bloud And after againe O altitudo diuitiarum c. O the depth of the riches of the wisdome and knowledge of God! Doe not thinke that terrestriall which is made heauenly by him which passeth into it and made it his owne Body and Bloud And finally Non infringamus os illud c. Let vs not breake that most solide and firme bone This is my Body This is my Bloud Now what remayneth in the sense of any one which he cannot conceaue by this exposition let it be consumed and burnt away with the ardour heate of faith Epiphanius in Ancora to circa medium Videmus quod accepit Saluator c. We do see what our Sauiour tooke into his hands as the Euangelist noteth that he did rise from Supper that he did take these things and when he had giuen thankes he said This is mine and This and This. And we do see that it is not equall nor like to the proportion or Image in flesh to the inuisible Deity to the lineaments of MeÌ„bers for this is of a round forme and insensible according to Power And he would through grace say Hoc meum est Hoc Hoc And yet euery one belieueth his speach for who belieueth not to be his very true Body doth fall from grace and saluation Now when he heere saith that it is to be belieued though it be repugnant to sense this must needs be vnderstood of the Body it selfe and not of the signification therof since the sense rather helpeth then hindreth why we should belieue the SacrameÌ„t And when he saith that we ought to belieue that it is ipsum verum Corpus the true Body hereby are excluded all Tropes and Figures S. Gregory Nyssen Orat. Catechetica c. 37. Quamobrem rectè etiam nunc Dei verbo c. Wherfore we now truly belieue euen by the word of God that the sanctified Bread is changed into the Body of the word of God c. That these things which are seene to wit bread and wine are changed into that Body of oar Lord is to be attributed to the vertue of Benediction S. Ambrose l. 4. de Sacramentis c. 4. Tu fortè dicis Panis meus c. Perhaps thou sayest My bread is vsuall bread but this bread is bread before the words of Consecration but after Consecration is finished of bread it is made the flesh of Christ. Though our Aduersaries doe answer this place by reiecting this booke as not written by S. Ambrose yet is it cited vnder his name by Lanfrancus Guitmundus and others who liued aboue fiue hundred yeares since In like sort in his booke de mysterijs init c. 9. he thus writeth Fortè dicas Aliud video quomodo tu mihi asseris quòd Christi Corpus accipiam Et hoc nobis adhuc superest vt probemus quantis igitur vtimur exemplis vt probemus non esse hoc quod Natura formauit sed quod Benedictio consecrauit maioremque vim esse benedictionis quà m Naturae quia Benedictione etiam Natura ipsa mutatur Virgam tenebat Moyses proiecit eam facta est serpens c. Quod si tantum valuit humana benedictio vt naturam conuerteret quid dicimus de ipsa consecratione diuina vbi verba ipsa Domini Saluatoris operantur Nam Sacramentum istud quod accipis Christi sermone conficitur c. Quod si tantum valuit sermo Heliae vt ignem de Caelo deponâ—râ—t non valebit Christi Sermo vt species mutet Elementorum De totius mundi operibus legisti Quia ipse dixit facta sunt ipse mandauit creat a sunt Sermo ergo Christi qui potuit ex nihilo facere quod non erat non potest ea quae sunt in id mutare quod non erant Non enim minus est nouas rebus dare quà m mutare Naturas Perhaps thou mayst say I see another thing how prouest thou to me that I take the body of Christ And this remaineth yet for vs to proue What then or how great examples may we vse to proue that it is not that which Nature formed but what benediction hath consecrated And that there is greater force of Benediction then of Nature for euen Nature it selfe is changed by Benediction Moyses houlding a wand in his hand did cast it from him and it became a serpent c. Now if Mans Benediction or blessing be of such force as that it can chang Nature what do we say of that diuine CoÌ„secration where the very words of our Lord our Sauiour doe worke for this Sacrament which thou takest is made by the speach of Christ And if the speach of Elias was of such power as to draw fire from heauen shall not the words of Christ be of force to chang the formes of the Elements Thou hast read of the workes of the whole world Because he spake the word they are made he commanded and they are created Therefore the words of Christ which of nothing could make that which was not can they not chang those things which are into that which afore they were not for it is not a lesse matter to giue new natures to things then to chang Natures So cleare and euident is S. Ambrose in these places for a true and reall chang in the Sacrament of the Eucharist S. Cyril of Ierusalem Catechesi 4. Aquam aliquando mutauit in Vinum c. our Lord did once by his sole will in Cana of Galilee turne water into Wyne which is neere to Bloud and is he not worthy to be belieued that he hath changed wyne into bloud Wherefore with all assurednesse let vs take the body and bloud of Christ for vnder the forme of Bread is giuen to thee his Body and vnder the forme of Wine is giuen his Bloud The same Father in the same Booke also saith thus Ne ergo consideres tamquam nudum panem nudum vinum corpus enim est sanguis Christi secundum ipsius Domini verba Quamuis enim sensus hoc tibi suggerit tamen fides te confirmet neâ— ex gustu rem iudices c. Hoc sciens pro certissimo habens panem hunc qui videtur à nobis non esse panem etiamsi gustus panem esse sentiat sed esse Corpus Christi Et vinum quod
à notis conspicitur taâ—â—tsi sensui gustus vinum esse videatur non tamâ—â— vinum sed Sanguin in Christi esse which latter words are afore related Doe not then consider it as bare Bread or bare Wine for it is the Body and Bloud of Christ according to the word of our Sauiour himselfe For though sense may suggest this to thee yet let thy faith so confirme this as that thou iudge not the matter from thy tast And againe after Hoc sciens c. This knowing and accounting it as most certaine that this Bread which we see is not Bread though our Tast do tell vs that it is Bread but it is the Body of Christ and the Wine which we behould though it seemeth wine to our sense of Tast yet it is not Wine but the Bloud of Christ. And can any Catholike at this time speake more plainly then are the sayings of this Father One who is most ancient learned and of whose booke from whence these testimonies are produced there was neuer any doubt made S. Cyprian serm de Coena Dom. Panis iste queÌ„ Dominus Discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed natura mutatus Omnipotentia Verbi factus est Caro sicut in persona Christi Humanitas apparebat latebat Diuinitas ita Sacramento visibili ineffabiliter diuina se infudit Essentia This Bread the which our Lord gaue to his Disciples is changed not in outward appearance but in substance and by the Omnipotency of the Word it is made Flesh And as in the Person of Christ the Humanity did appeare and the Diuinity did lye hid so in the visible Sacrament the diuine Essence hath ineffably infused it selfe But what Omnipotency is required to giue a signification to any substance Or if the Change be only by adding a new signification how can the Bread be said to be changed non effigie sed natura Lastly the Diuinity was truly and really latent in Christs Humanity therfore the Body and Bloud must be truly and really latent vnder the formes of Bread and Wine which to be Cyprians meaning appeareth euen by the word Ineffabiliter there added by him but what difficulty or mysterie is it that Bread should signify Christ Tertullian l. 2. ad Vxorem where speaking of Christian Women that are married to Gentiles and shewing that such marriages are hurtfull to the receauing of the Blessed Sacrament thus saith Non sâ—iet Maritus c. The Husband shall not know what thou doest tast before all other meates and if he did he belieueth not the Bread to be him whom it is said to be Which wordes do euidently imply a Change of the Bread into the Body of Christ Irenaeus lib. 4. contra Haereses cap. 34. disputing against such Heretikes as denyed Christ to be the Sonne of the Creatour thus disputeth Quomodo autem constabit ijs c. How shall it be made euident to such men that Bread wherupon thankes are giuen to be the Body of Christ and the Cup the Bloud of him if they will not acknowledge him to be the Sonne of the Maker of the World That is the Word of him by the which Word the Wood doth fructifie the Springs do flow who first giueth a kind of grasse then an Eare of corne lastly the Eare full of wheate Heere we are to obserue that Irenaeuâ— proueth Christ to be the Creatour from this that Bread by force of Consecration is made the Body of Christ therfore he belieued that Bread was really and truly changed into the Body of Christ and not only in signification for it is not an imposition of a new signification but a true and reall chang which necessarily requireth Gods Omnipotency OF THEIR TESTIMONIES CONTEYNING The Comparisons of the Eucharist with other Great Mysteries CHAP. IIII. A THIRD point which indeed is the CeÌ„ter wherin the Lines of diuers such passages doe meet manifesting the Fathers beliefe heerein may be the Obseruation of their Comparisons of the Eucharist with other things Thus they compare it with the Paschal Lambe with the Manna with Panis Propositions teaching that it doth transcend all these as much as a Diuine and inconsumptible substance excells a terrene and corruptible the Body the shaddow and the Truth the Figure But if Christs Body be heere only by representation then is the Eucharist a thing corruptible a shadow and a meere Figure and then may our Sauiour worthily vse towards them the expostulation in Esay Cui a Cui comparastis me Esa 46. comparastis me Others also in regard of the sublimity therof compare it with the Creation as I touched before where not to insist in other points we find that by force of the Creation all Creatures are conteyned in the Creatour for in ipso viuimus c. and by force of this Sacrament the Creatour is conteyned after a peculiar manner vnder the formes of some of his meanest Creatures Some likewise do teach besides other such comparisons that Christ in the Sacrament is to the eye of the soule as when Angells by assuming bodyes appeared to Men though these being spirituall seemed corporall and Christ being Corporall appeareth heere only as spirituall Finally diuers of them seeme to equall it with the Mysterie of the Incarnation and one Father resembleth the difficulty herein to that where Christ being as well God as Man was borne of a Woman and a Virgin Now if the chiefest obscuritie in the Eucharist doth rest in Types Representations and Resemblances how cold disproportionable dissorting yea absurd and false are the comparisons heere made with those former stupendious Mysteries of Christianity and particulerly of the Incarnation Where to omit all other passages therof aboue our capacity we find the Vine to bud out of the Branch the Ocean to flow from a shallow Riuer and the Sunne to borrow it light from a small Starre First then occurreth S. Leo serm 7. de Passione Dom. who thus saith Vt ergo Vinbrae c. That therfore the Shaddowes might giue place to the Body and Images or ResemblaÌ„ces to the presence of the Truth the ancient obseruation is taken away by a new Sacrament the Hoast is changed into an Hoast bloud excludeth bloud and the Legall Solemnity whiles it is changed is fulfilled and accomplished S. Augustine l. 3. Trinit c. 10. Illas etiam Nubes c. What man knoweth how those Clouds and Fires were made which the Angells assumed and tooke on to signify what they were to deliuer or speake yea though our Lord or the Holy Ghost appeared in these formes Euen as Infants knew not that which is placed vpon the Altar and consumed after the celebration of Piety is finished how it is made and by what meanes it is vsed in Religion And if they neuer learned either by their owne experience or of others and should neuer see the formes of those things but in the celebration of Sacraments when it is offered giuen and said to them by most graue authority