Mystery Speaking of the B. Sacrament of the Lords supper he tells us that Christ S. Paul and the Church of England all say that his body is there and that saith he truly and substantially c. At this word substantially I do stick and cannot well make it into an Orthodox sense I remember the Archbishop professeth to believe the true substantiall presence of Christ This must be taken with great caution because the words will bear the sense of our adversaries and why delight we to walk upon the edge of a knife Is it good Divinity to say that Christs body is there yes it is but where in the holy communion true but in what part in the whole action or in the symboles and elements Take heed you will be at Rome before you are aware How then shall I take the Doctours substantially and the Bishops substantiall presence They make mysteries or rather riddles and why should they presse my faith with such expressions as without a deal of interpretation are unsound I can find no substantiall presence but by Faith and so by Faith I receive the very Deity of Christ and of God the Father So then Christs body is there and Christs body is not there in different acceptations The substance of his naturall body is not there at all but a reall communication of the substance of Christ both body and soul is there solemnly signed and sealed unto us This my Faith discerns and the not discerning of this makes the wicked guilty of eating and drinking unworthily In this participation of Christ by a living faith in this spirituall way of communicating I can admit of all your adventerous expressions taking them sanâ— modo but with what honesty do you put us off the ignorant Laity in your Sermons upon such desperate precipices Your selves do know the brink before you come at it and so take up and make a fixed stand to save your selves but in recompence of many Ignorants who by this ill conduct topple down into the abysse of errour may not Justice one day thrust you also into an abysse as being the wofull offense and stumbling-block whereat they fell Beside I can more easily avoid Bellarmine Cardinall Alan Stapleton Suarez I know them a great way off by their skinnes then I can in sheeps clothing Bishop Laud Bishop Mountague Dr Heylin Dr Lawrence c. But the Archbishop as before asserted a true substantiall presence he unjustly voucheth reverend Calvin for it yet honestly he doth put Calvins words in the margin where I find Substantialis Communicatio Calvin was in the right a true reall and substantiall Communion not an aery phantasme without a truth of participation Neque enim fallax est Deus qui figmentis inanibus nos lactet So he hath participes substantiae ejus facti made partners or partakers of his substance Great difference in my understanding between the Bishops Substantiall Presence and Calvins Substantiall Communion as between a true Presence of body and a true Communion of his body We can and do with excellent Calvin say Realiter hoc est verè nobis in Coena datur Christi corpus The body of Christ is really that is truly given to us in the Supper And Christus verè exhibetur fidâ—libus Christ is truly given unto the faithfull But we cannot say with Dr. Lawrence that his bodie is there nor can we with Bishop Laud falsifie good Calvin by obtruding upon him that he affirmeth the true and reall body of Christ not onely to be received in the Eucharist but to be there When as Calvin teacheth Christum in coelo manentem à nobis recipi that we here receive Christ who remains in heaven Therefore he bids us to leave unto Christ the true nature of his flesh Sine ut in coelesti suâ gloriâ maneat illuc aspira ut indè se tibi communicet Be content that Christ remain in his celestiall glory and aspire thou thither that from thence he may communicate himself unto thee So that for ought I see Calvin saw no true reall body of Christ in the Sacrament though he did see and all faithfull do feel a true reall Communion of his body in that holy celebration Is it all one to have Communion with the body of Christ really and truly and to have his body in the Eucharist really and truly If it may be qualified and excused into a sound sense yet it can never be construed into a safe sense And therefore when you will use any dark doubtfull dangerous term let it not be a trouble to you to explain and expound it lest some poore soul misuse the knife which carelessely you threw about In a word the body of Christ is there and the body of Christ is not there it is there by spirituall communion it is not there in any other construction for representation and commemoration though reall are still spirituall wayes of his being there Much of this Mystery is cleared by this expression Christ is represented and really offered unto all the Receivers but Christ is really exhibited onely to the true believers And thus much occasionally upon the adventerous expressions of Dr. Lawrence There is a sermon forth by one Mr. Wats licensed by Mr. Baker 1637. I would gladly learn of the Authour whether he will in plain English abide by it That king David did constantly observe all Canonicall houres He voucheth that of the Royall Psalmist At midnight will I rise to give thanks unto thee And then inferres Mark here that he praised not God lying but used to rise to do it At other houres the Saints may sing aloud upon their beds but when a Canonicall houre comes of which midnight was one David will rise to his devotion The morning watch was another Canonicall houre And this David was so carefull to observe that he ofttimes waked before it In the next place I ask of Richard Tedder upon his visitation sermon preached before and dedicated unto Bishop Wren How farre he would have this allowed It is saith he the Consecration that makes our Churches holy and makes God esteem them so They receive by their consecration a spirituall power whereby they are made fit for divine service And being consecrated there is no danger in ascribing a holinesse unto them Now the reason why this sanctitie is thus pleaded for is to be read about a leaf forwarder where he delivers that the Priest hath no way to maintain his own honour but by keeping up the honour of the Temple for if there be no reverence to the Temple there will be no reverence to the Priest Doth not this man preach himself and not Christ Jesus To shut out any light that may be usefull in Gods house is with the Jews to make it a denne as they would do that would shut out the Ceremonies out of the Church for take away Ceremonies out of the Church and take away the
and Idolatry Dr Jones said thus we have begun in sound and pure Religion let us not end in Popery It seems my young licencer would end there and therefore he cannot let passe this counsel Let us not end in popery but changeth it thus Let us not end in prophanesse and so it is printed he durst not it seems passe it to the presse with a plain wish not to end in popery Mr Ward another good man and industrious Devine hath issued forth an ample volume of Questions Observations and Essayes upon the Gospel of S. Matthew This work hath undergone the severity of the same masters I had the Catalogue of their adulterated clauses by the advantage of my being trusted with the Chair for what had been ill hindred from the presse and what had been worse thrust abroad by the presse but I very lately parted with those notes to a worthy member of the House and most of my other notes are rotted in their damp lodging whilst I was away and some of them otherwayes lost Mr Birkbeck wrote a learned laborious piece called the Protestants evidence but Dr Haywood rejected it back from publication because Mr Birckbeck took occasion to commend Wicliff a man who considering the age he lived in did deserve I may justly say as well as Martin Luther or Mr Calvin though for my part I do reverence Calvin equall with any the best of the ancient Fathers and do think he hath according to the quantity of his writings as little vain and lesse erratick then any one among them This above may serve for instance how sedulous our ill guides were to hinder the publication of good doctrines If I should collect together all the passages of ill doctrines which with the same care they have issued forth more then all the money I have now would not buy paper to write them down in But some you shall have And first I will begin with one who labours himself out of breath and sense to prove the very point which in my subsequent treatise I have disapproved Like a friendly adversary I will lend some arrows to my Jesuite taken out of Dr Pocklingtons quiver and yet touch none of the passages recanted by Dr Bray 11. Aprill 1641. He voucheth a passage in Irenâ—us and so proceedeth Deus nos vult offerre munus ad Altare frequenter sine intermissione And this he saith was not an allegâ—ricall and improper Altar but a true proper Christian Altar both name and thing So that we have an earthly Altar here on earth a materiall Altar of wood stone silver or gold And miserable was their case for whom the Priest made no offering at Gods visible Altar Thus he more bold and false then my Jesuite and in Popery as absolutely grosse for yield as he doth that proper Altars are necessary in the Church of Christ and proper Sacrifice will come in whether you will or no But the base intent of a delusion appears in this He makes Irenaeus a foundation to his fraud by cutting off Irenaeus before he hath spoken out The words by Pocklington vouched are there Deus nos vult offerre munus ad Altare frequenter sine intermissione God willeth that we should offer gifts at the Altar frequently without intermission This may in some sense be drawn over to serve him and the Jesuite But take the very next words in the same line of Irenaeus and the sense is clear with us against them both Est ergò Altare in coelis c. our Altar then is in heaven c. Now Pocklington where is your visible materiall earthly Altar in Irenaeus He is as bold and false to say that The holinesse of the blessed Eucharist was on the holinesse of Altars and could not else where be consecrated There hath been and yet remains a great controversie whether S. Peter ever were at Rome but this bold Romane can tell you I think what chamber he lay in there the first night he came I would he had told us what night or with probable evidence what year he came thither but believe him upon his credit his words are S. Peters first lodging there was in the Lady Claudias house We poor ignorant and despised Laity must be kept farre off from the mysteries of our Religion wherein we are to be saved The celebration of the holy Supper must be in one place we in another He tells us that Pope Boniface the second did no more then his duty in dividing the people from the Clergie when the Sacrament was celebrated a good argument for Rails nor must we see what the Priest doth for he saith that none of all the holy offices belonging onely to priests were performed in the body of the Church where every one might be present and see what was done When he hath argued for his materiall Altar when he hath pleaded the partition of it from the rest of the Church he then would have it reverenced and if the piety of those times had gone on he would have plainly expounded with what kind of Reverence He tells us of the honour and reverence which of right belongs unto the Altar in regard of the presence of our Saviour whose chair of state it is upon earth Where pag. 108. Christ is most truly and really present in the blessed Sacrament an offensive expression and unsuitable to our Church I would he had expounded what he meant by in the Sacrament and how much Christ is in the sacramentall wine of the Eucharist more then he is in the sacramentall water of Baptisme These and some other I observe not recanted among the 24. points by Dr Bray who being under the protection of the titular great Grace durst give attestation to this pestilent Authour with a Perlegi and nihil reperio sanae Doctrinae contrarium quo minùs summa cum utilitate imprimatur But Pocklington then bragged of the piety of the times and the holy endeavours of the Governours of the Church The same song which Peter Heylin did sing a year before him He very highly sets forth and commends the piety of the times as if he would fell them He tells us there is a good work now in hand Anno 1636. And in his Coal from the Altar he affirmeth that we have a Sacrifice and an Altar and a Sacrament of the Altar I believe he will be ashamed to explain now what he shamed not to affirm then I think the times were impious if it were but for this that Heylin and Pocklington by licence from Bray and Baker should dare to slight and cast disregard upon pious reverend and admirable Bishop Jewell and Calvin one of them doth it in his Altar pag. 89. and the other in his Coal 15. but though they slight a good man yet I can in one of them find the great commendations of Cardinall Borromaeus a man of violent superstition who is highly applauded
and is not this an improper sacrifice if it be not tell me what you mean by your proper sacrifice if there be none improper 4. You will say that being a Protestant I do detort the sense from a reall to a Metaphoricall Sacrifice Is it possible that men should be so mad for superstition that they will detort this text to a proper sacrifice and wilfully will not see that it is impossible for the Prophet or for Eusebius to mean so Are not the very next words in Eusebius after this by you avouched plain words for a spirituall and improper Sacrifice and doth he not conclude this chapter and this whole book in a few lines after wherein as if he would crown this text of Malachy with an ample Commentary he reckoneth up all these severall sacrifices in a few lines A broken spirit an humble and contrite heart the sweet-smelling fruit of all virtue and divinity the incense of prayer the remembrance of that great sacrifice according to the mysteries delivered to us thanksgivings for our salvation offerings of religious hymns and holy prayers and consecrating our selves to God and Christ in soul and body a chast body and a refined soul Thus Eusebius doth magnifie our Christian duties dignifying all with the high title of Sacrifices yet in all this not once dreaming of a carnall presence as you do which if he had believed how could he have omitted that which he rather would have gloried in nay how could he have confined himself so short as to call it but {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the memory of that great Sacrifice if so be Christ himself were bodily present 5. Yet you rave for a proper Sacrifice and if a Protestant do shew with Eusebius that which cannot be other then a Metaphoricall Sacrifice you will slander him beforehand with detâ—rtion of Eusebius Was Bellarmine a Protestant I would he had been unhappy man how great pains he took to misse his way and with how much learning he unlearned his own salvation He your great Achilles even upon occasion of this very text of Malachy doth affirm that prayers prayses good works c. b are sacrifices improperly so called which is the same as to say they are Metaphoricall He saith again c Nomen ratio Sacrificii propriè non convenit invisibili oblationi The name and nature of a Sacrifice properly doth not belong to an invisible offering Now I poore Protestant do take prayers and praises to be invisible oblations yet you promise here by and by to detort this sacrifice of praise and to shew that it doth mean a proper sacrifice And when that is done perhaps you will shew that Christs Table before spoken of is a proper Altar also But when you go about it do not endeavour to detort both the sense and words of your Authour and then prove what you can 6. In the mean time here is a word detorted if I be not much mistaken you construe {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} a sacrifice in which God is The Latine hath no such sense though printed within these ten or twelve years at Paris nor hath any other man I believe beside your self ever translated it so I deny not but that God is all in all and in that extent he is in our prayers prayses Sacraments virtually powerfully spiritually but you will have him in your sacrifice circumscriptivè confined and limited in all and every fragment of your Host How else and in what manner do you mean that God is in your sacrifice more then in our Sacrament The meaning of Eusebius was no more but that our Sacrifice is a Divine Sacrifice and the common English and Latine of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is Divine Aristotle faith of Poetry d {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Poetry is a Divine thing so Suidas {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Divinely to determine CHAP. X. A. B. C. 1. BUt to shew that Eusebius here meaneth a proper Sacrifice he speaketh presently of an improper Sacrifice such as David speaks of a contrite heart and he saith we offer this also but he calleth this offering of uncense nor doth he use the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} as before but the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} we offer the propheticall incense and explicateth himself of Prayer But to conclude he distinguisheth them both most perfectly in these ensuing words {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} that is Therefore we do both offer Sacrifice and incense one while indeed celebrating the memory of that great Sacrifice according to the mysteries by him delivered and offering the Eucharist for our salvation to God with devout hymns and prayers Another while wholy dedicating our selves and casting our selves prostrate body and soul to him and to his high Priest the Word Where it is evident to any man that understandeth Greek that by the particles {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the former part of the sentence where he speaketh of celebrating the memorie of that great sacrifice and offering the Eucharist hath reference to the former word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} which doth properly signifie sacrificing and the latter part of the sentence to the latter word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} which signifies offering of incense which is as much as if he had said We then offer Sacrifice when we celebrate the memory of that great Sacrifice and offer the Eucharist and we then offer incense when we dedicate our selves wholly and prostrate our selves both body and soul to God And this will be yet more evident if we consider that when he had explained the place of Malachy of offering a clean Sacrifice according to the new Testament he makes as it were an objection to himself that a contrite spirit is called a Sacrifice by holy David as if that might be thought to be the clean Sacrifice which he spoke of out of the Prophet Malachy and answers it by saying That we do also offer that kind of Sacrifice calling it not by the name of Sacrifice but incense and this he saith we offer by holy conversation and prayer and thereupon immediately concludeth his discourse with this sentence by the now alledged wherein as I said he doth most perfectly distinguish these two kinds of sacrifices proper and improper externall and internall or indeed to use his own words Sacrifice and Incense So as this may satisfie any reasonable man for as much as concerneth Eusebius Sr. EDWARD DERING 2. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Good Bellerophon who wrote this for you and made you believe it would help your cause Surely you have gotten some protestant to write this paragraph for this place of Eusebius is quick and pregnant against your bodied Sacrifice Belike you foresaw that having produced some peices of this treatise in
Eusebius distant enough from what you would prove in way of answer this would have been returned to you and therefore by way of a strange anticipation you would seem first to own it though it carrie a direct adverse sense to your Romish carnalty of presence But the seaven Aphorismes out of Bellarmine and the formerly vouched sentences of S. Augustine Lombard and Aquinas do turne aside any impression which you can make upon our faith though you should argue much stronger then hitherto yet this pretensed argument must also have an answer 3. Eusebius say you doth most perfectly distinguish these two kinds of Sacrifices proper and improper externall and internall Most perfectly yet here is no mention at all of proper improper externall nor internall surely then this is most imperfectly said by you But Eusebius you say doth mention Sacrifice and incense so doth all the world multis modis many wayes we sacrifice but never once in your Romish sense Eusebius doth indeed pursue the text of Malachy and the prophet speaking of both In every place incense and a clean Sacrifice the Sacrifice saith Eusebius immediately upon the words of Malachy is a Sacrifice of praise A Sacrifice of a contrite Spirit of an humble and broken heart Will this serve for your proper and externall Sacrifice we do also saith Eusebius following the same Metaphor burn incense offering the sweet-smelling fruit of Theologicall virtues and prayers c. What saith Eusebius in all this but absolutely different from the faith of your Sacrifice which had he believed now was his time to have come forward and have told the Jews that in stead of their one altar we have many altars In place of their annuall Sacrifice we have daily In room of their Paschall lambe we do Sacrifice the lambe of God the very Sonne of God in his flesh In which piece of all this passage in Eusebius do you find your proper Sacrifice you have fixed upon these words Celebrating the memory of that great Sacrifice What make these words for you doth not our Church celebrate the memory of that great sacrifice of our Saviour on the crosse You know we do If it be a celebration of a memory how can it be the sacrifice it self If it were as you affirm the proper Sacrifice it self how then were it a celebration of a memory This is too weak on your side to help your cause This is so strong on our side that you can never answer it untill you can prove a favour and the remembrance of that favour a conquest and the story of that conquest Cesar and Cesars picture to be all one CHAP. XI A. B. C. 1. YEt I will adde one place more out of his 5. book 3. chapter where discoursing of the 109. Psalme and of that place where our Saviour is said to be a Preist according to the order of Melchisedec he saith thus {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} That is And the fullfilling of the prophesie is admirable to one that considereth how our Saviour Jesus the anointed of God doth to this very day according to the rite of Melchisedec perform the office of Preisthood among men by his ministers For even as he that is Melchisedec being a Preist of the Gentiles is no where found to have used corporall Sacrifices that is to say of beasts but onely blessing Abraham with bread and wine so after the same manner our Saviour and Lord himself indeed first then the preists coming from him over all nations exersicing the spirituall Preisthood according to the Ecclesiasticall laws or rites of the Church by bread and wine do obscurely represent the mysteries of his body a and bloud Melchisedec foreseeing them by the Divine spirit and using before-hand the figures of what was to come after What can be more clear The prophesie of David fulfilled by the exercise of Christs preistly function offering b bread and wine first by himself in his own person then by his Preists succeeding him And this among all nations this Preisthood and Sacrifice being prefigured in the person and sacrifice of Melchisedec His sacrifice being bread and wine and ours the body and bloud of our Saviour contained under the accidents of bread and wine for so doth the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} signifie which is here used It is therefore evident by this that Christ did at his last supper offer and institute the proper Sacrifice and Preisthood of the new Testament Nor can any man with reason doubt thereof yet because I see that unwillingnesse to believe the truth makes men stick at toyes many times I reflect upon two words which perhaps a man may take hold of to misunderstand Eusebius The one is where he saith Melchisedec did not use Corporall Sacrifices the other where he calleth our Saviours Preisthood spirituall But his meaning is clear that by Corporall Sacrifices he understandeth sacrifices of beasts such as Aarons were which therefore a little before he called {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} according to the property of the greek word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} And it is clear that he speaks in this sense for he affirmeth that Melchisedec used bread and wine from whence may be gathered the meaning of that other word spirituall preisthood to wit that it is clean another kind from that of Aaron which was a carnall and bloudy preisthood and of the same kind with Melchisedecs which was in some sort spirituall But our Saviours is much more spirituall for his sacrifice was not bare bread and wine as Melchisedecs was but his body and bloud which had and hath a spirituall manner of being under the accidents of bread and wine not using any corporall sense or facultie but onely those of his soul as I signified before when I shewed why Eusebius called our sacrifice {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} that is a reasonable or intelligent sacrifice for so ours is indeed And so though it be a reasonable or intelligent sacrifice and spirituall also for the spirituall manner of being which our Saviour hath there yet it is a true and proper Sacrifice as I have made it clearly appear by Eusebius his whole discourse with whom having now done Sr. EDWAD DERING 2. You have a worse fate then Bellerophon he but once did carry his own condemnatory letters you severall times do make your own rods I could pitty you if you were not of age to see what your self do doe And yet as you are I am sorry for you not that you bring this which otherwise I had produced against you but because you flatter your own misconceit so farre as to imagine this authority to stand on your side which is indeed unanswerably against you you find your self pinched and do strive to pull out the thorns which your self have stuck in your own sides You bring in Eusebius saying thus 3. Even as Melchisedec is no where found to have used corporall
of wine is gone but the species or accidents of colour c. are there I reply that Cyprian would no more call those accidents wine then you do now had he been either a Philosopher of your schools or a Divine of your Religion But mark the last words quo Christi sanguis ostenditur By the wine Christ his bloud is shewen He saith not that the wine is bloud or turned into bloud but the bloud is shewen by the wine yet the bloud with you is seen without wine Again Miror satis unde aqua offeratur in Dominico calice quâ— sola Christi sanguinem non possit exprimere I wonder enough from whence water should be offered in the Lords Chalice which cannot alone expresse the bloud of Christ Was the bloud of Christ then to be expressed and signified it seems S. Cyprian did forget that the bloud it self was there to expresse and signifie it self Or rather he was unacquainted with your late faith of Transubstantiation But you will say I am now in another theam what is this to sacrifice Yes as a foundation to a building This being gone your work is down for you say that you do not sacrifice bread but the body of Christ made of bread z Corpus Domini ex pane confectum If then no Transubstantiation it follows in your Doctrine by consequence no Sacrifice 7. Lastly I observe also that Cyprian doth call the bread a Sacrifice and that before any consecration thereof He taxing a rich dame for eating the consecrated bread which poorer persons as was customary there had presented and not bringing of her own to be consecrated hath this reprehension Matrona locuples dives quae in Dominicum sine sacrificio venis quae partem de sacrificio quod pauper obtulit sumis Are you a rich and wealthy matrone who come into the Lords house without a sacrifice who take part of that sacrifice which some poore body hath offered Here is Sacrifice and that before consecration and that offered by the poore and expected from a woman These places do evidently conclude that figurative and metaphoricall sacrifices were all that were known unto S. Cyprian in whom your self cannot find one passage whereby to evince your proper sacrifice 8. To return and in a word more to shut you quite from all authority out of Cyprian let any man with heed and judgement reade this Epistle written onely against the errour of the Aquarians who ministred the holy Communion in water onely without wine and he may easily find what Cyprian drives at and if he be sensible he will offer to conclude no more then Cyprian himself did undertake to prove This holy Martyr with much earnestnesse in severall places of this Epistle doth presse the example of our Saviour as our all-sufficient rule and guide herein In this very period whence you take this passage which is the eleventh in this Epistle he saith Non nisi Christus sequendus solus Christus audiendus quid Christus prior fecerit c. Wherein In what point is this example urged even in those things ad ipsum Dominicae passionis nostrae redemptionis Sacramentum pertinentia which concern the sacrament so comes he to your words that the Priest should imitaâ—e Christ and if he will offer a true and full sacrifice he must offer how Secundùm quod according to that he seeth Christ himself to have offered According to that How so what is secundùm quod but as before according to the example of Christ His example what example and wherein doth Cyprian here mean plainly against the Aquarians who in the administration of the Cup used water and therein did not imitate Christ by whose example we are taught to celebrate in wine And this I will abide by to be the true plain and full scope and sense of this Father in this your choice alledged place CHAP. III. A. B. C. HEre I might as well have followed the Edition of Pamelius which saith Sacrificium Patri seipsum primus obtulit He offered himself a sacrifice first as that of Erasmus which leaves out the word seipsum but onely to avoid all exception and the rather for that the sense is clearly enough the same without that word at least for my purpose which is to shew that Christ did institute a proper Sacrifice which was to continue in his Church Sr. EDWARD DERING Since that you inferre nothing out of the differencie of Editions I have therefore no cause of answer to this piece But if you had vouched that of Pamelius and argued upon his seipsum you knew well that I have the much elder Edition by Erasmus which is enough to controll Pamelius CHAP. IIII. A. B. C. ANd besides S. Cyprian in this same Epistle had said the same thing and in a manner the same words for proving his intent by the example of Melchisedec his Sacrifice he saith thus Quis magis sacerdos Dei summi quà m Dominus noster Jesus Christus qui Sacrificium Deo Patri obtulit obtulit hoc idem quod Melchisedec obtulerat id est panem vinum suum scilicet corpus sanguinem Who is more the priest of the most high God then our Lord Jesus Christ who did offer a Sacrifice to God the Father and offered the same which Melchisedec had offered that is bread and wine to wit his body and bloud Now to offer his body and bloud is the same as to offer himself and in this place I find no variety of readings so as here again it is clear that our Saviour did offer a proper Sacrifice such as Melthisedecs But lest any man should think our Saviours bread and wine to be no more then Melchisedecs â—e explicateth himself that our Saviours bread and wine was his body and bloud and a little after compareth them together calling the sacrifice of Melehisedec the image and resemblance of the other and that this resemblance did consist in bread and wine imago Sacrificii saith he in pane vino constituta and that our Saviour did perfect and fulfill the same when he offered bread and wine which was the night before his passion when he took bread and blessed it and gave it to his Disciples and the rest as followeth in the Gospel Sr. EDWARD DERING The place needs no variety of readings it is plain enough except for your interpretation wherewith you do obscure it by inferring more then you have ground for You conclude for your advantage but you want proof for your Conclusion You say our Saviour did offer a proper sacrifice Who ever denied it You say this Sacrifice was himself It is confessed But this that the Sacramentall bread and wine being converted into our Saviours body and bloud was sacrificed which I see you intend in the last words He offered bread and wine when will you prove it or rather why do you disprove it For whilest you say he offered bread and wine you do against your
in the Greek of which anon The brief and true sense of Eusebius here arguing against the Jews is this The celebrating of the remembrance of our Saviours death and passion is a better Sacrifice and celebration then that we should fall back to their weak elements which were but signes and shadows More I see not here yet since you offer to instruct me further I hearken A. B. C. 3. For first here is expresse mention of the body and bloud of our Saviour daily offered in remembrance of him Sr. EDWAD DERING 4. Give me leave to say that this is either willfull fraud or grosse mistaking What expresse mention then the words are too plain to be disputed of You say that Eusebius doth expressely mention the body and bloud of our Saviour daily offered in remembrance of him Quo fronte Qua fide Do not your own words here before vouched {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. Daily celebrating the remembrance of his body and bloud confute your fraud what a crafty Metathesis of words is this you chop in the word offer and shift the place of the rest and presently cry out {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} you have found your late Romane faith in old Eusebius But your legerdemain is not so fine a conveyance you are espied and therefore place the words as you found them Daily celebrating the remembrance of his body and bloud out of which you can never draw any other but the same faith which the Primitive Church and our present Church do both conspire in A. B. C. 5. For the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is a word properly pertaining to the action or function of sacrificing Sr. EDWARD DERING 6. The Grammarians must now be judge who argues aright in Divinity This word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} say you doth properly appertain to the act of sacrificing This is gratis dictum so let it be gratis auditum said without proof heard without belief Suidas his {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} will not force {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} properly to signifie any more then to finish to perform or to perfect It is also to celebrate or solemnly to perform for that is to celebrate But never is it to sacrifice unlesse the word following do so rule the sense as in Plutarch {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} to celebrate or perform sacrifice But in this place it cannot relate to sacrifice unlesse you can make us believe that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. celebrating or performing the remembrance ought rather to be in English sacrificing the remembrance of the body and bloud of Christ a Herodian saith {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} He did not perform what he promised Eutropius speaking of the younger Scipio saith that Asdrubal was afraid to deal with him b {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. as being a man ready to perform his work Our Saviour saith c {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} I perfect cures this day and to morrow S. Paul speaking of Moses hath d {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} to finish the Tabernacle thus your Rhemist do translate he saith not to sacrifice the Tabernacle nor will these or any other places bear this propriety of sense which you pretend Do not marre a good translation with a bad comment for you have well translated in this place {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} as again do you the tenth chapter {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} celebrating the memorie or remembrance A. B. C. 7. And the article {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} when he saith {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} sheweth the remembrance here spoken of not to be a bare or empty remembrance by words onely or some slight action at any mans pleasure but a solid substantiall and speciall remembrance that is by some publick and solemn action instituted and ordained for that purpose such as was that of our Saviour at his last Supper whereto it is evident here that Eusebius alludeth Sr. EDWARD DERING 8. Your inference here is in all likelihood more then was intended by Eusebius in that so common article {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} yet since a solid substantiall and speciall remembrance is all that here you conclude for I am ready for so much to joyn and consent with you in this period A. B. C. 9. Secondly here is expresse mention of a proper sacrifice and priesthood or priestly function For though the word proper be not here yet the words {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} do by their own proper signification signifie a proper Sacrifice and Priesthood Sr. EDWARD DERING 10. I see you know the point in difference and it is enough for me that you confesse the word proper is not in this authority neither indeed is it in any other authority that you have brought or can bring But say you the originall Greek doth signifie a proper sacrifice and Priesthood Boldly asserted How weak was Bellarmine and all the rest of your Writers who never knew before the full force of these words {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Bellarmine will not say that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} must signifie a proper Sacrifice though indeed he say thus near it that it doth properly signifie a sacrifice But if so be that originally this should be their proper sense yet you are still to prove that without a Metaphor such is their sense in this place and lastly that the Sacrifice here meant is as yours of the Masse May not this better Sacrifice here spoken of be that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the truth of types our Saviours passion and what is this then unto your Missall Sacrifice Surely you are too adventurous Is it necessary to take {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} for a sacrifice proper I wonder then that this dispute was ever raised or being raised maintained so long But I have been taught that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} comes {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} from mactare to slay and so your a Cardinall confirms me b {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} you will not translate this that the Thief comes to sacrifice your Rhemist have rendred it The theif cometh not but to steal and kill Again c {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} my beeves and fatlings are killed you translate not sacrificed Therefore if you will have your {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} to be a proper sacrifice as you pretend you must make it appear in what part of your Masse this mactatio this death or killing properly so called doth consist which I am bold to say is more
then Bellarmine could or you can perform 11. In the next place you would have me to swallow your construction of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and to believe it properly to signifie Priesthood The sense of the place doth not admit your sense nor hath the word any such propriety For the place it is plain that Eusebius doth preferre the Christian Sacrifice or to speak properly Christs Sacrifice or in the words of Eusebius {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. The remembrance of Christs body and bloud the celebration whereof he there calleth {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} before all the typicall shadows among the Jews This is all that Eusebius hath or intendeth here For the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} you will strangely impone upon the ignorant when you can perswade that it signifieth proper priesthood The truth is that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is generally any manner of service and ministration of holy things d Bellarmine doth controll Kemnitius for saying that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is to sacrifice He sayes indeed it is sacrum facere but not sacrificare to do or perform some sacred work but not properly to sacrifice and then tells you that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is in Dionysius sacrum ministerium not sacrificium a holy ministery or function or holy operation not a sacrifice Mark how S. Paul useth the word e {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} which your Rhemist call sanctifying not sacrificing the Gospel of God Like as your Masses of Basil and S. Chrysostome where you have {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} which is no more then holy service or operation or at the most as there it is rendred consecration of this ministeriall and unbloudy sacrifice Where when and with whom it ever was construed or taken for proper priesthood I do expect from you who have affirmed it A. B. C. 12. But besides the very comparison of our Sacrifice and Priesthood and preferring them before those of the Jews which were true and proper shews ours to be much more true and proper For if the signes and shadows be true and proper much more the truth and substance it self And this very difference or comparison which he makes shews plainly the reality of Christs presence in this Sacrifice for otherwise our bread and wine would be but weak Elements or shadows as well or more then those ancient sacrifices of the Jews whereof yet he saith the contrary to wit that theirs were but weak elements and shadows and ours the truth it self Sr. EDWARD DERING 13. The comparison here instituted by Eusebius is evident by that attribute {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} to consist in the meliority or betternesse not in the propriety of the severall Sacrifices Although indeed the comparison may here hold well in both kinds For iâ— is most clear by this whole page in Eusebius that the Sacrifice here by him preferred before all other is that of our Saviour on the Crosse not that of your Masse on your Altar Whereby saith he all former prophesies were fullfilled even by him who gave himself {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} The great and precious ransome for the Jews and Gentiles that expiation for the whole world that soul for all souls of men c. and a little before this to stop all exception and to destroy all your collection he plainly telleth you what this better sacrifice and truer Hierurgy is where he saith that the former things which here he calleth the former and weak elements were now all abolished {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} By this better and true holy service This is the Christ of God Is not this plain enough Why then would you transferre unto your erroneous Masse all this which by Eusebius is spoken peculiarly and onely of our blessed Saviour Eusebius in the mean time being as ignorant of your popish Masse and fleshly presence therein as he was that you would translate his Greek {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} into your English Priesthood A. B. C. 14. Thirdly this Sacrifice and Preisthood did not cease with Christ but the exercise nay the dayly exercise thereof did then continue in Eusebius time which was 300 year after Christ Sr. EDWARD DERING 15. Are you not ashamed with these poore reasons so pittifully to beg the cause in question you flourish out this peice of Eusebius into three pretended arguments This is the last Thirdly this Sacrifice and Preisthood did not cease c. As for Preisthood it is not once named here either in the Greek or Latine But yet you can in your English turn holy celebration of a remembrance into a proper Preisthood This is done with the same fidelity as another a Anonymus of your tribe who producing that of S. Matthew 5. 23. If thou bring thy gift to the Altar turns it thus If thou offer thy host at the Altar The Latine in both places both for him and you is munus which he calles hâ—st or Sacrifice and you call Preisthood neither truly nor ever so rendred by any other man unlesse with purpose to deceive You are not like to want proofs who can create authorities for what you say your selves 16. As for the word Sacrifice it is confessed that Eusebius hath it here But as before S. Augustine Tho. Aquinas c. do allow a Sacrament to be called by the name of what is thereby represented can you think us so unwise as from hence to grant you your dayly Sacrifice when your own English doth say We dayly celebrate the remembrance of his body and bloud The difference between your dayly Sacrifice and Eusebius his dayly remembrance is as much as between your person and your picture 17. You promised us a few strong arguments in this cause instead of such which ought to be quick open clear and convincing you bring a few weak inferences stretched by your own phansie upon a few impertinent vouchers For not one of these comes near your Roman sense of sacrificing up by you the sonne of God in his entire flesh both body and soul as you most desperately and most grosly do teach and yet with these you do miserably beg the cause nay you brag beforehand as if you had it already a It is clear say you b Again it is clear c Expresly averred and a clear proof d Nothing can be more clear nor do I see what can be said against Almost every word is a pregnant proof of what I intend These bold assertions and many other in the following chapters may passe for true with them who are so shallow as to be led by the noise and sound of your braveries and are not solid enough to pierce the sense of your authorities CHAP. VIII A. B. C. 1. WHich is further confirmed in the ensuing discourse where
may not Eusebius allude unto that of S. Paul where speaking of a a living sacrifice he telleth us it is our reasonable service {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} So that Reasonable service in S. Paul is Reasonable sacrifice in Eusebius 8. Every man doth abhorre them who are {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} men-eaters Cannibals Yet you think it no impiety to be {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} God-devourers nor any impossibility to be {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Soul-eaters Forbear forbear this carnall barbarisme of eating our Saviours body thus Capernaitically or else shew how his body and the free use and exercise of his reason and rationall faculties can be between your teeth without a sensible soul also to feel what you tear with them 9. You make too much of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} when you construe it exercising a most high office of Preisthood {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is no more then prospera sacra facere to perform holy things happily So {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is to work well or to perform a fair or good work In a second sense {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} may be to sacrifice and then it signifies to sacrifice well and that is all For indeed the word is more generall then to be restrained among holy actions onely to the particular act of sacrificing it signifieth the performance of all manner of sacred service So b Herodian hath {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and c {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Therefore how I may find in this word all that sense of exercising a most high office of Preisthood as you have Englished it and where I may find that it is a most proper word signifying the exercise of Preisthood in a singular manner I pray instruct me by your next In the mean time I wish you would force Eusebius to speak no more in English then in his own language But alas something you must say and your timber is so crooked that it cannot be measured by a streight line 10. Lastly There is one word more in this voucher from Eusebius which I must not passe over Bellarmine as before alledged will assist me if I put you in mind that Altar and Sacrifice are relatives proper to proper and improper to improper Insomuch that he fixeth this d sine Altari non potest sacrificari No Altar no Sacrifice So your Canon law e Sacrificia non nisi super Altare offerantur Let not sacrifice be offered but upon an Altar Ledesma f Missa est veri proprii nominis sacrificium erâ—ò necessariò requirit altare super quod offeratur The Masse is a Sacrifice of a true and proper name therefore it necessarily requireth an Altar whereon to be offered So Paludanus Sâ—tâ— and all of you that I have heard From hence I observe that a Table proper and a Sacrifice proper cannot relate why then did not you avoid this place of Eusebius where {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the sacrifices of Christs table do unavoidably conclude that your authour did mean such Sacrifices as were performable at a Table which yours are not for you can never prove that Sacrifices properly so called were ever celebrated at a Table properly so called CHAP. IX A. B. C. 1. ALl which he goeth proving thus out of other places of Scripture and particularly out of Malachias the Prophet where Almighty God rejecting the sacrifices of Moses saith that from the rising to the setting of the sunne his name is great among the Gentiles and that in all places incense is offered to his name and a clean sacrifice And to shew that this prophesie is fulfilled he saith thus {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} We sacrifice therefore to God a sacrifice of praise we offer a sacrifice in which God is for so signifies {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} a most venerable a dreadfull and most holy sacrifice we sacrifice in a new manner according to the new Testament a clean sacrifice All which words do signifie a proper Sacrifice and that in the singular number and with a speciall emphasis expressed by the articles {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} more then can be in English save onely that one word of sacrifice of praise which a Protestant will detort to a metaphoricall sacrifice But I shall shew by and by out of this man and afterward out of S. Augustine that they mean by that proper Sacrifice to wit the holy Eucharist which other Fathers as well they may because by it God is more praised and honoured then by all other sacrifices in heaven and earth Sr. EDWARD DERING 2. This place of Malachy is beyond all sense so boastingly produced by most of your Writers as if alone it might confute us all when as the Fathers make perpetuall use of it to prove our Sacrifices contrary to those of the Jews and contrary to yours also to be in themselves spirituall and in the Circumstance of celebration tied to no place or places and that in qualitie they are pure and clean and that in the persons celebrating they are universall a From the rising of the sunne even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles and in every place incense shall be offered to my name and a pure offering This offering or sacrifice here meant is to be celebrated {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in every place but yours onely where an Altar is and that prepared with many circumstances as Ledesma delivers Yours is tied to a morning exercise this free at all times and seasons as before you alledged {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} throughout all ones life 3 But to shorten as much as I can the trouble which you multiply more by weak impertinencies then by any strength of proof let Eusebius who vouched Malachy expound him He saith that Malachies {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in every place is as much as not at Jerusalem which was then their sole place for sacrifice {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} neither definitively saith he in this or that place but yours is defined to the Altar This {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} which you call clean sacrifice and our translation pure offering is there by him affirmed to be {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the incense of prayers and a sacrifice not by bloud {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} but by religious works and duties Again in this very place by you alledged assoon as ever he hath repeated the words out of Malachy headdeth what you have drawn out {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. Therefore we sacrifice to God the sacrifice of praise Thus Eusebius expoundeth Malachy
Sr. EDWARD DERING 4. I presume you bring this for three words Sacrificium pretii nostri The Sacrifice of our price If S. Augustine do call the blessed Sacrament a Sacrifice you have it acknowledged before to be so multis modis many wayes and you have S. Augustine before who gives you good reason why the Sacrament is so called To confirm this you may find in the very next Chapter to this by you alledged that S. Augustine there calleth Sacramentum pretii nostri the Sacrament of our price which here he nameth the Sacrifice of our price But remember your undertaking which is not to prove Sacrifice at large which never was denied but Sacrifice properly so called and so instituted by Christ our Saviour as your self before have stated it A. B. C. 5. The chap. 13. which is a long prayer for his mother speaking to God how at her death she did not take care to have her body embalmed nor to have a choice monument nor to be buried in her own countrey Sr. EDWARD DERING 6. You have not day enough to finish your journey yet you will step out of the way to see a friend Your journeys end is at proper Sacrifice which it seems you dispair to arrive at before you be taken and therefore you make an out-leap into prayer for the dead thereby to stay me in my pursuâ—t Good Hippomenes I will no stay my course to take up the balls you cast yet for the present I may step so farre as to tell you that this Long prayer and speaking to God in this chapter is as all the whole thirteen books of his confessions are one entire continued speaking to God But pardon me I will not be drawn again out of my line of Sacrifice A. B. C. 7. He saith thus Non ista mandavit nobis sâ—d tantummodo memoriam sui ad altare tuum fieri desideravit cui nullius diâ—i praetermissione servierat undâ— sciret dispensari victimam Sanctam quâ deletum est chirographum quod erat contrarium nobis qud triumphatus est hostis She gave us not charge of these things but onely desired she might bâ— remembred at thy altar at which she had attended without omitting a day from whence she knew that holy victimâ— or Sacrifice for victima is materiall Sacrifice to be dispensed or distributed by which was cancelled the hand-writing which was against us by which the enemie was overcome Which are the very words of S. Paul Coloss. 2. speaking of Christ upon the Crosse So as here is clear mention not onely of an Altar but also of a Sacrifice offered for the dead and a sacrifice daily offered and the very same which was offered upon the Crosse for the redeeming of the world Sr. EDWARD DERING 8. The Myndians made their gates too big for their city but your postern is wider then their gates your conclusion is ever too full beyond all proportion of your premisses Some friend had need to help your conclusion after you as the Arabian shepherds do their sheeps tayls for it is too heavy for your own carriage Here you say is clear mention of an Altar Be it so If the bare mention of an Altar and Sacrifice be an argument for reall and proper Sacrifice you have the cause Here say you sacrifice is offered for the dead Quid ad Rhombum Shoot at the mark man Here is daily sacrifice Yet you are wide Here is the very same which was offered upon the Crosse for the redeeming of the world I this is to the purpose indeed But what if this be not here now I find here dispensari victimam c. that there is a dispensation or distribution of that saving Sacrifice of the Crosse which in the same sense but in other words by S. Paul is called The Communion of the body and bloud of Christ but this Communion is between Christ and his members this dispensation and distribution is to the people and what may that be to your dispensing of your sacrifice up to God in heaven and that in such a bodily sense as you must prove or else confesse your undertakings vain All that Monica required of her sonnes was Tantùm illud memineritis mei and tantummodo memoriam fieri c. A better carver then Polycletus or Pyrgoteles can fashion no more out of this stuff so long as tantùm and tantummodo are not cut away And then for a memory of Saints departed and a loving commemoration of them and their piety and virtue and a thanksgiving for them we do not quarrel nor is it to the Theam of your adventure CHAP. XIIII A. B. C. 1. ANother place maybe out of his work against the adversary of the Law and Prophets l. 1. c. 20. where speaking of the Church he saith Haec quippe ecclesia est Israel secundùm spiritum that is This Church is Israel according to the spirit from which is distinguished that Israel according to the flesh that is the Synagogue which did serve in the shadows of sacrifices by which was signified the singular sacrifice which Israel according to the spirit that is the spirituall Israel doth now offer singulare sacrificium quod nunc offert Israel secundùm spiritum And a little after again Iste immolat c. This Israel offereth to God a sacrifice of praise not according to the order of Aaron but according to the order of Melchisedec They knâ—w that they have read what Melchisedec brought forth when he blessed Abraham and are now partakers of it they see such a sacrifice to be now offered to God over the whole world And here he explicateth the place of Malachy the Prophet c. 1. v. 11. of this Sacrifice and useth the same discourse also elsewhere De Civit. Dei lib. 18. cap. 19. Here then according to S. Augustine is a Sacrifice and that a singular or speciall sacrifice signified by the shadows of the sacrifices of the Old Law and this Sacrifice is now offered that is in S. Augustines time 400. years after Christ and after the Sacrifice of the Crosse was passed A Sacrifice not according to the order of Aaron that is bloudy and of beasts but according to the order of Melchisedec and of such things as he offered viz. bread and wine And now that is in the time of S. Augustines writing they see such a sacrifice offered over all the world and they are partakers thereof All which is so clear as nothing can be more clear Sr. EDWARD DERING 2. All is so clear as nothing can be more clear Your arguments please your self but satisfie no man else When will you come to the point Your self have stated the question That Christ did institute a sacrifice and that the sacrifice by Christ instituted is a proper sacrifice Let any Reader judge whether in this of S. Augustine or in any other voucher throughout your whole Treatise you have one argument or authority that comes home
inward but also from the invisible sacrifice whereby we are to offer our selves as a sacrifice in our hearts to God the outward sacrifice being a signe of the inward as words are of our inward thoughts and affections You see Christ is the Priest and the sacrifice that there is a visible sacrifice in the Church as a daily sacrament signe or memory of that which Christ offered upon the Crosse that Christ is wont to offer his Church as she doth him that is he being there invisibly offereth her invisibly and the offering him visibly by sacrifice doth also offer her self by him And lastly you see he calleth this a true sacrifice adding To this most high and true sacrifice all the false sacrifices have given place Sr. EDWARD DERING 2. In the first two lines of this chapter you promise us out of S. Augustine proof for a true visible and proper Sacrifice yet in the close you will shuffle the cause away invisiblie For you say that Christ is wont to offer his Church as she doth him How is that you tell us presently He being there invisibly offereth â—â—r invisibly Thus you promise to prove visible Sacrifice yet you conclude for invisible The words in S. Augustine are of Christ Et Sacerdos est ipse offerens ipse oblatio cujus rei Sacramentum quatidâ—anum esse voluit ecclesiae Sacrificium quae cùm ipsiuâ— capitis corpus sit se ipsam per ipsum dicit offerre He is the prtest he the offerer and he the offering the daily Sacrament whereof he willed to be unto the Church a sacrifice which the Church being the body of him the head saith that she offereth her self by him that is offereth her self to God through Christ What is here for you or against us As for your wide inferences whereby you wâ—nder both from the question of Christs institution and from the authorities themselves which you produce as I told you before I intend not to pursue them As for your last period where you bring in as from S. Augustine the word true Sacrifice which you would have to be understood to be the body of Christ under the shew of bread as you teach If you remember the title of this chapter in S. Augustine the Sacrifice by him meant is Christ himself the mediatour of God and men not your unseen Christ in a wafer And if you remember the text in S. Augustine it is Christ himself in forma servi in the form of a servant not Christ counterfeited by you in the shape of bread and therefore nothing to what you are to prove CHAP. XVII A. B. C. 1. A Fifth place may may be lib. 8. De Civit. cup 27. where he saith that we do not erect Churches priesthoods Sacrifices c. to the Martyrs for saith he who did at any time hear the priest as he stood at the altar though built over the holy body of the Martyr for the honour and worship of God say in the prayers I offer Sacrifice to thee O Peter Paul or Cyprian seeing it is offered to God at their memories or places of buriall And whereas there was a custome in some places to bring meat and drink and to feast at the tombes of the Martyrs he saith Any man knows these not to be the sacrifices of the Martyrs who knows the one or onely sacrifice of Christians which is there offered to God Sr. EDWARD DERING 2. What is in this for the proprietie of Sacrifice or concerning the institution of our Saviour CHAP. XVIII A. B. C. 1. ANd that this sacrifice is the body of Christ is apparent by this holy Father in his 22. book De Civit. cap. 10. which discourse I cannot here omit Having therefore said that the Pagans did build Temples erect altars appoint priests and sacrifices to their gods who were but dead men he shews that we do not so to our Martyrs We saith he do not build temples to our Martyrs as to gods but memories as to dead men whose souls do live with God that is churches in memory of them nor do we there raise altars on which to sacrifice to the Martyrs but we offer sacrifice uni Deo Martyrum nostro to the one God both of the Martyrs and of us at which sacrifice they are named in their place and rank as men of God who in confession of him have overcome the world but they are not â—nvocated by him that offers the sacrifice for he sacrificeth to God and not to them And the Sacrifice it self is the body of Christ which is not offered to them for they are also his body These are his very words so plain for proof of a proper Sacrifice as I think no man can denie it But because a man that is unwilling to see this truth may catch at two little words by the by in this discourse to wit that the Martyrs are not invocated and that they are the body of Christ I must explain his meaning which is nothing in the former place but that the priest in offering Sacrifice doth not say I offer sacrifice to thee Peter Paul Cyprian as he saith in many places but that they may be prayed unto is insinuated even here and expressed plainly by him in Joh. tract. 84. where speaking of this sacrifice he saith that we do commemorate the Martyrs or name them not as we do others who rest in peace so as to pray for them but rather that they may pray for us that we may follow their footsteps His meaning in the latter word is nothing but by way of allusion from the true body of Christ to his mysticall body to them that the sacrifice which is Christs bodie cannot be offered to the Martyrs for they are also his bodie to wit his mysticall bodie or members as he saith truly and as he said before of the Church Sr. EDWARD DERING 2. You have brought forth this place of S. Augustine you have declined it and indeed answered it against your self These two little words which you say a man may catch at in this discourse are both of them materiall the first against invocation of Saints departed which being nothing to our theam I passe by the other is a plain convincing evidence to prove what was herein the sense of S. Augustine His words are a Ipsum Sacrificium corpus est Christi quod non offertur ipsis quia hoc sunt ipsi The Sacrifice it self is the body of Christ This you make much of but take the whole period which body saith S. Augustine is not offered to the Martyrs because even they are this bodie So then it is evident that the body of Christ in this place is as you find it his mysticall body that is the Church Universall which being part militant part triumphant as the martyrs are is honoured with the title of Christs body Just as S. Paul to the faithfull at Corinth b ye are the body of Christ and to
disserit ut valdè etiam jejunafutura esset responsio CHAP. XXI Catastrophe THus have you what my little leisure and lesse learning can afford wherein I might have shortned my pains and with one line have answered all for in all these six sheets of paper you never come near the proof of what you assumed Viz. That Christ Jesus did institute a sacrifice and that this sacrifice by him instituted is a sacrifice properly so named This proprietie and this institution I say you have not in any authority by you alledged once touched and are therefore farre from proof of your cause Your masse is the highest act in your Religion your sacrifice is a that point wherein consisteth the very essence of the masse wherein saith your Jesuite Caussin b The life of a Saviour is sacrificed yet for this highest point the very essence of your masse the sovereigne act of your faith devotion and Religion you have not one text throughout the whole Law of Christian Religion either convincing or pregnant nay you have not one probable deduction whereby to prove your determined errour Two places you grasp hard hold by but both in the old Testament First that of Malachy which you will take for your externall visible and proper sacrifice contrary to the plain sense of the place and contrary to the frequent exposition of the Fathers who receive it as of internall visible and improper sacrifice as Eusebius demonstr. Evang. l. 1. c 6 and l. 2 c. and l. 1. c. ult. Justin Martyr Dial. cum Tryphone Irenaeus l. 4. c. 32. Tertull cont. Marcion l. 3. c. 22. l. 4. c. 1. advers. Judeos in â—ine cap. 5. initio cap. 6. Chrysostom in Psalm 95. and advers. Judaeos Hom. 2. Hieron. in Malach. 1. 11. Augustin cont. advers. Leg. proph l. 1. c. 20. de civitate Dei l. 18. c. 35. l. 19. c. 23. contra Judeos c. 9. The other place is that of Melchisedec where he both a priest a King doth exercise both dignities As a priest he blesseth Abraham as a King he feasteth him and his army and this is the plain truth of that story so much and so impertinently by Papists drawn over to their Missall sacrifice CHAP. XXII Antistrophe 1. I Was minded to have cast anchor here and not to have whetted a disputation sharp already yet since that in matter of Religion one side is never to be blamed though it do proceed Disputationis serram reciprocando for truth must not be deserted because her adversaries bark at her I am therefore resolved to change my style and to proceed Semper ego auditor tantum nunquâmne reponam Yes the defendants buckler having warded your blows let me now take the assailants sword and be you respondent another while wherein I am well content to be concluded within three sheets of paper as you promised and did undertake You have produced three Fathers who all have answered themselves yet omitting many other I think fit to give you three for three First John Bishop of the Patriarchall sea of Constantinople for his eloquence surnamed Chrysostome The next Cyrill who held the famous Patriarchate of Alexandria whom Anastasius saluteth with the title of most clear light of the Fathers Thirdly S. Ambrose of Millan the ghostly father of S. Augustine And thus I begin with S. Chrysostome First having produced that of Malachy He clearly delivers himself what this pure offering is {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} It is not offered saith he by fume and smoke neither by bloud mark it and ransome but by the grace of the spirit And that our Christian sacrifice is not tyed to any place as yours to your altars he saith that every man sitting at his own home shall worship God And for the manner he telleth you that our Saviour Christ did bring in {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} a more sublime and spirituall kind of worship But of a bodily sacrifice no word Secondly Chrysostome in another place doth number up tenne severall sorts of sacrifices in the Christian Church yet as if he were ignorant of all proper externall and visible sacrifice they are all of them metaphoricall and spirituall The place is full and copious I must contract it The first is imitation of Christ or charity 2. Martyrdome 3. Prayer 4. Psalmes or Hymnes 5. Righteousnesse 6. Almes 7. Praise 8. compunction or contrition of heart 9. Humility 10. Preaching Is it not pity that you or some body for you was not at this ancient Fathers elbow to jog him and to put him in mind of your Popish sacrifice But alas your present Romish faith or rather folly was then unborn Thirdly speaking of Christ he saith a {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} He is both sacrifice and preist as Epiphanius before alledged whence I inferre that if the body of Christ be really present in your sacrifice by conversion of the substance of bread into the substance of his body then also since relatives do alway stand and fall together and that Chrysostome in that place saith that he is offered {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} by himself it must follow that your priest also as well as your sacrifice is Christ really and properly by the like conversion or transubstantiation of persons For Chrysostome and other Fathers do affirm that Christ is both our sacrifice and our priest and in all relatives if you will take one of them properly you must take the other properly also You may believe Cardinall Bellarmine cited before in my sixth Aphorisme cap. 6. Fourthly in the same Homily we do not saith he perform another but the same sacrifice whereupon as if he had been adventurous in this expression which happily might incurre a misconstruction the immediate words following do seem to retrench that latitude of sense thus {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} or rather saith he we do perform a remembrance of a sacrifice Fifthly upon these words in S. John Except ye eat the flesh of the sonne of man and drink his bloud ye have no life in you and vers. 63. It is the spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} All these things are carnall and which ought to be understood mystically and spiritually for saith he if any man take them {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} fleshly he will gain nothing by them But you take say you the very flesh of Christ and look to gain thereby Therefore S. Chrysostome and you are of two religions Sixthly in the Liturgie ascribed to S. Chrysostome which on your side is called S. Chrysostomes masse after the consecration there is a prayer {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Send down thy holy Spirit upon us and upon these gifts here placed before