wherefor they go not vnto the church ys Christ one abrode and an other at home that which ys not lawfull in the church ys not lawfull at home c. How saye you then Doth S. Hierome in this place inueigh against the maner of receiuing at home Is it not most playne and euident that he speaketh against such as had no feare to communicate at home after the nightes pollution and yet would not venter to come vnto the places where Martyrs bones rested or into the church And why should any man feare to come vnto the chappelles or memoryes of Martyrs after the nightes what shall I call it with his wyffe Vndoubtedlie for reuerence sake and honor which thei gaue to Martyrs as S. Hierome also testifieth of hym selfe saying I confesse vnto the my feare least perchance it come of superstition when I haue ben angrye and haue thought vpon some euyll thing in my mynde and when some fancy of the night hath deluded me I dare not goe into the churches of Martyrs I doe so thorowghly quake for feare in bodye and sowle Therfor wheras the Romanes after the vse of their wyues the night before would not come the next daye into the presence of Martyrs memories and yet were not ashamed to receiue the body of Christ at home he asketh of them earnestlie VVherfore they goe not vnto the church not in this sense which you haue inuented as though he should saie Wherfore do you receiue at home why goe you not to the church why receiue you in corners why come you not to the open congregation I lyke not these communions at home the doores of the congregation be open to the faithfull it is a shame so to receiue by your selues alone the institutioÌ„ of Christ is excedinglie broken he instituted not his sacrament that they should haue it brought home to theÌ„ or that they might cary it home with them I know not what place is better for that purpose then the house of God where all the people may be present togeather and edifie one the other through beholding the felowship and communion of themselues S. Hierome was not so full of the spirit or so emptie of wytt but onlye he correcteth their folye which in some thinges made a conscience in other some of greater force made none at all And he asketh why they doe not as well come in to the church and in to the chapples of Martyrs after they haue coÌ„panyed with their wyues as they dare to receiue the bodye of Christ at home for all the formar nightes fancye and pleasure Is Christe one abroad and an other at home As who shold saie will it hurt you if you come to church in the presence of Christ his Martyrs and make you no conscience of recâ—â—uing Christ his body at home in your houses whose Martyrs thei were Yet he doth not reproue them for receiuing at home as by his owne wordes appeareth saying That the faythfull receyue at all tymes the bodye of Christ I neyther reproue neyther allow But to this conclusion he labored to dryue the matter that whilest they should be sorye that they had not communicated some certayne daye because of their pleasure taken the night before with their wyues they might therby abstayne a lytle from them that thei might communicate with Christ. But goe you furth Haue you any other authoritie to proue that sole receiuing at home was euer condemned In Socrates the seconde booke we reade that Synodus Gangrensis coÌ„dempned Eustathium for that contrary vnto the Ecclesiastical rules he graunted liceÌ„ce to coÌ„municate at home Where a man should fynde this Socrates of whom you speake you only I beleiue doe know For in the second booke of the Tripartite historye Socrates maketh no mencion at all of any such Eustathius as you speake of but in the .2 of that booke we doe reade of one Eustathius a verâ—e good Byshop condempned by a false forged tale made against hym by a common harlot his judges being to the outward shew Catholike Bisshops but in hart and deede Arrians For which cause sayeth the historie Many holy meâ— and priestes with others forsaking the company which râ—sorted vnto the coÌ„mon churches did come togeather emong them selues whom all other callâ—d Eustathianos bâ—cause that after Eustathius departure they 〈◊〉 â—â—gâ—ather a syde from others Now if you doe allow the condempnacion of this Eustathius then must we beware of you hereafter least you bring forth new Arrians vnto vs. And any other besides this catholike Eustathius I can not fynde in the seconde booke of the Tripartite historie Therefore I turne me vnto the Councelles and there in deede I fynde that Synodus Gangrensis condempneth one Eustachius not Eustathius for many notable heresyes but yet there is no mencion that he was condempned as you saie for graunting of licence to receiue at home But rather as it appeareth by the epistle prefixed before that Synode these Eustachians were of the opinion that no prayer or oblatioÌ„ should be made in maryed mens houses thei coÌ„tempned also the places of holy Martirs or churches and reproued all such as resorted to them thei tooke further vpon them to distribute the oblations made in the church and therefore the fifth canon of that Councell is this Yf any man doe teach that the house of God is to be contemned and the meetinges which are celebrated in it let hym be accursed And the sixt canon saieth Yf any man doth make conuenticles without the church and despising the church wyll vsurpe those thinges which be the churches without the priest commyng vnto it let hym be accursed according 〈◊〉 the decree of the Bysshope This much 〈◊〉 I fynde in Gangrensis Synodus which doth not so much as seeme to found any thing nigh vnto your purpose Where then is that your Eustathius which was condemned for graunting licence to communicate at home or how well haue you proued that the custome of the primitiue church which for that tyme was tolerated was at any tyme after forbydden as prophane and wycked Yf therefor these testimonyes of S. Hierome and Gangrensis Synodus by which you would proue that to receiue at home was greatlie inueighed at and condempned do no more make for your purpose than to saye that a laye man should not lye with his wyfe the night before he receiueth or that those heretikes are to be condemned which contempne Martirs chapples or churches how lytle at all could you proue that any myslyking was euer had of the sole receiuing at home vsed in the very primitiue church The vse of which tyme you dare not openlye condemne but priuely you leaue to be gathered that it was pius error in them Whereas contrary wise if sole receiuing be such a matter as you make it that it goeth most directlie and playnlie against the substance of Christ his institution then I am sure that the contempt of this lyfe and world was so
great in the Christians at those blessâ—â— dayes that rather then â—hei would haue receiued alone to the confounding of Godes lâ—w and ordenance thei would haue ben coÌ„tent neuer to eate any thing in this world but â—uffre the most cruell death of hunger And vpon this ground so sâ—re that it is not against Christ his institution to receiue alone we can do none otherwise but confesse that the priest receiuing alone is not to be pulled by you from the aultar not denying but that in the primitiue church the people most tymes receiued with the priest and that if thei had not done so thei were coÌ„maunded to go out of the church which thing yet you doe labor so to proue as though the obtayning of it did make any thing to the purpose but orderly folowing our intent which is to proue that sole receiuing is not against Christ his institutioÌ„ and that it is not necessarye to haue allwaies a particular communion Now because the Catholike in his authorities of Tertullyan S. Cyprian and S. Ambrose proued not only sole receyuing to haue ben vsed at that tyme but also communion vnder one kynde which thing secondly in this chapiter you take vpon you to reproue let vs marke your fighting in this parte and trye masteryes with you Fyrst you saye that the institution of Christ is expresly against vs for In the Euangelistes and S. Paule we see testified that Christ tooke bread and gaue with it his bodye and afterwarde tooke the cupp and gaue with it his bloud and willed them to obserue and vse the same You make a shamefull and wycked lye in sayeing that it is testified either in the Euangelistes or Pawle that Christ tooke bread and gaue with it his body for it is maniâ—est that he tooke bread and delyuered it sayeing This is my body and not as you reporte with this I geaue my body But the scriptures I perceyue are not yet playne inough for your purpose and you will I feare neuer be contented vntyll after many affected translations of the scripture in to the mother toÌ„gue you alter the autentike and pure text of it by conneighing in these wordes Take and eate with this is my body Then as concerning Christ his institution lyke as he spake then to his Apostles only and in them vnto his priestes ' of the newe lawe so the priestes doe allwayes when they coÌ„secrate receyue vnder both kindes but as for priestes not consecrating or the laye people standing by it is not of necessitie to delyuer it vnto them in both And hereof we haue alleaged this cause vnto you that it is a matter indiâ—â—erent and not of the substance of the Sacrament O saye you ye flee to your olde place of refuge why Syr what would you haue vs to doe if you keepe styll one argument maye not we lykewise applye one answere And is euerye thing fresh and gaye which you bring although it be twentye tymes repeted and not once proued and shall not we haue licence to refell your obiections with such an answer as you neuer yet haue disproued yet we haue not barely affirmed our saying but we haue geauen good cause for it that to receyue vnder both kyndes should not be of the necessarie substance of the Sacrament as concernyng the people Of which causes you choose out one where we saye that per concomitantiam the body of Christ is neuer without his bloud and his bloud is not seperated from his body so that no losse or hinderance cometh vnto the receyuer which taketh as much vnder one kynde as he should haue doone vnder both At which cause you peck with a skornefull exclamation and saye O profounde and deepe fett reason wherein you seeme to make your selfe wyser then Christ hymselfe that ordeyned the sacrament But I would that you or the best of your syde were but a quarter so godly or learned or wyse as those Masters of diuinitie which were authors of the worde â—oÌ„comitantia the meaning of which worde was euer beleiued in thâ— church of Christ It is yet a comfort vnto vs that such thinges as we beleiue 〈◊〉 not inuented of late by our selues but receiued of the teachers of Christendome but o superficiall and light wittes of yours which make Christ not to haue beÌ„ so wise as he was which resist his holyeghost and goe about to reade a lecture vnto the Church of God What fault doe you fynde with concomitantia Mary saye you The communion of Christ his bodye and bloud ys not the worke of nature in this Sacrament What meane you by the wordes communion of his bodye we talke of concomitantia that is whether vnder the forme of bread there be his bodye accoÌ„panyed with his bloud and his flesh togeather And you tell vs that the communion of his bodye is not the worke of nature Speake vnto the matter and shewe some reason why that his bodie shold be without bloud in the sacrament of bread VVhat so euer is here geauen vnto vs is to be taken by fayth As whoe should saye that fayth might rest vpon a fancy or figure or that by the same fayth by which I beleiue that I receiue his body I might not also beleiue that I receiue togeather his bloud But agayne So much is geauen vnto vs as God appointed to geaue of whose will and pleasure we know no more then his wordes declare vnto vs. Why Syr doth not the worde bodye declare well inough that it is not without bloud When Saint Iohn in his ghospell sayeth The worde was made flesh will you saie with olde heretikes that the worde tooke not also our lyfe and sowle vnto hym because S. Iohn mencyoneth none of them expresly but only that the word was made fleshe Yet allmightie God wâ—â—ch spake by the Euangelist was wise and able inough to declare his mynde In Christes naturall bodye that ys in heauen I know his flesh ys not without his bloud but in the sacrament which is no naturall worke how will you assure me that the flesh and bloud ysioyntly signified and geauen vnto me vnder one parte onlye Yf the sacrament be no naturall worke what is it then Supernatural or artificial Yf you make it a lesse worke then naturall then do you debate greatlye the glorye of the new testament whereas the manna of the olde lawe and water which issued out of a rock for the Israelites were more excelleÌ„t figures then the verities of them which are emong true Christians But if you thinke that they be not naturall to make vs thereby to conceyue a greater estimation of them then saie I so muche the more it is credible that the bloud should be ioyned vnto the body because that in very common nature we see it so and nothing wonder at it But yet saye you Christ which knew as well as you the ioynt condition of his flesh and bloud dyd not
that the church hath prouyded that they should not receaue generally at other tymes of the yeare but only at Easter Which is as false as God is true For the Canon and decree of the church is that who so doth not receaue at Easter shall not be accoūted a Christian. The wordes are these Omnis vtriusque sexus sidelis postquam ad annos discretionis peruenerit omnia sua solus peccata confiteatur fideliter saltem semel in anno proprio sacerdoti iniunctam sibi poenitentiam studeat pro viribus adimplere suscipiens reuerenter ad minus in Pascha Eucharistiae sacramentnm c. and they are thus much in Englishe Let euerie faithfull man woman and child after they come to yeares of discretion confesse by them selues faithfully vnto their owne priest all their synnes once a yeare at the least and studie to fullfill according to their power the penance inioyned them reuerently receauing the Sacrament of the Eucharist at Easter at the least c. By which decree she doth not I trow take order that the people shall generallie receaue onely at Easter but that if they receaue not at that tyme ad minus at the least they shall be punished for it Declaring hereby how much she mislyketh that the people will not voluntarilie prepare them selues to receaue their maker wheras she is constrained to put furth a law that at the least they shall receaue at Easter or els be accoūted for not Christans where lerned you then that the people were apointed to receaue onlie at Easter Or in what text or glose do you find it that the church hath takē order for them not to receaue generally at other tymes Tell vs I praie you whether all be one in your iudgement to saye you shall receaue at Easter at the least and you shall receaue only at Easter The first the church decreeth constrainyng thereby herr childerne to remember their dutie and to receaue the cumfort of their sowles The second is only by you imprinted to make the laity suspect the gouermēt of the Catholike Bishopes as though they should study how to diminisshe the cōmon peoples profit and knowledge and therefor had taken order and diligence that they should receaue only at Easter What authoritie you haue to make such open and wicked lyes I knowe not but allthough it might be geauen yet a good man wold not vse it And allthough you might scape vnespied thorough the greate credence in which your brothers haue you perchaunse yet should you not shew such malice or boldnes towardes the good and indifferent reader or towardes a neuer so euillbeloued aduersarie But now to an other matter An other matter I maye well saye For whereas it was consequent to bring in the testimonie of S. Chrisostome you deferr that ouer vnto the fifthe chapiter and occupie the reader and the replier allso when any such would be found out for you with the question of the sacrifice In which matter although I might be long and copious in answering you yet as much as I can prouide for it I will be short and compendious in declaring the truth Therefor let vs heare of you where your griefe is that by answering yea or no vnto it we may the quicklier end this extraordinarie eruption of yours against the truth of our sacrifice First you alleage that to saie that the priest is bound to offer vpp the daily sacrifice ys The roote of all the abuses of the Lords supper that haue ben brought in to the church of Christ. c. Do you thinke then that if priestes were not bound vnto it all abuses which haue sprong vpp as you saie would straitwaies decaie and wither the roote of them being taken awaie But who shall then stand at the aultar and intend vpon the misteries for dutie sake And when the parissheners shall make courtesie and saie one to the other Goe you and nay goe you and by my trothe I am not readie and by my trothe then lett all stand wyll you permitt such disorder to contynue when the roote of abuses shall be taken awaie by you or will you apoint some one or other which shall be bound to serue in the office whom yet if you will apoynt to be a reader only and to haue no further authoritie thēto open the boke and tell what is writen in it then shall you disgrace very much the priesthode and order of the newlaw which by all common reason should be more worthier then any ptiesthode that euer was in the world Now if you being venterous to take the rule of Christen sowles in to your owne handes are enforced to keepe officies and dignities emong you for the better commendation of your Ghospell thinke you that the wisedom of God and a God hym selfe Iesus Christ would gather a multitude of natiōs togeather in to one faith one hope and one absolute forme of seruing and honoring God and prouide no officers cōcernyng that effect ouer them Or when he hath apointed most perfect and excellent offices to be taken and exequuted of men for the wealth of his welbeloued would he leaue them to their pleasure whether they did folow their office or no and lett them stand vnbound and vncharged It seemeth then that as by his diuine prouidence he as man began a priesthode to serue for his church in matters apperteinyng vnto God so by as necessarie consequēce he charged his leuetenantes and vnderofficers in that kind to exequute his wyll and doe their dutie Wherefor that priestes should be bound to daily offering concernyng the whole body of priesthode and not euery particular person it is so farr of to be the roote of abuses that except such a dutie were folowed we should by this tyme haue had no supper of our Lords at all I warrant you Iniquitie would so much haue preuailed when the dayly sacrifice should haue ceased and no man his law could haue continued it if by the law of God it had bēfound vnrequired And further I saie that the church hath brought in or alowed no abuses in the ministration of any sacramēt But you goe forward and lie This is wherewith you do pitifully deface the death and passion of Christ makyng your selfe for your glories sake as it were meanes of reconciliation between God and his people This is a shamefull lie yea rather it is a slaunder whereas you make the desire of glorie to haue ben the cause in the church of Christ of hauing her priestes endued with such excellencies and prerogatiues And you speake so aduisedlie as though Aaron had not stode laudablie betwyxt God and the people when the plague was sent furth against them or Moyses had done presumptuously to be the spokesman for the people vnto God or as though Christ had not sent his Apostells euen as his Father sent hym or S. Paule had not geauen warnyng vnto the Corinthians cōcernyng such as he
which the old fathers vsed peruerted yet of vs but what old father or young brother hath taught you the mightie contrarietie which you speake of betweene sacrifice and sacrament Yet goe to if we haue mistaken the old fathers how well doe you vnderstand them you can not denie but the old fathers do call the sacrament an oblation or sacrifice but you will expound their meanyng vnto vs. Wherevpon you tell vs that in the beginnyng the people at the celebratiō of the Lord his supper offered vp wyne breade and other victuals partlie to find the priestes and partlie to refresshe the poore and allso to serue the communion And so partlie It came to passe the example being taken first of the common people that the administration of the sacrament of this offering was called an oblation An other occasion that the Doctours vsed those termes of sacrifieng and offering was that in the celebration of the sacrament thei had praier for all states and thankes geauing to God for all benefites After the fathers called euerie good action a sacrifice were it priuate or common And therfor their successors by litle and litle bent the same name vnto the action and celebration of the Sacrament An other cause that the holie fathers call the sacrament an oblation or sacrifice is because according to Christes ordenance we celebrate the remembrance of his death and passion which was the onlie and true sacrifice Where I may begyn to speake against you for this your diuision of sacrifice I can not readelie tell there are so many thinges which are to be moued and reproued First the imperfectnes that you haue vsed in it ▪ because you haue not expressed the full cumpasse of this word sacrifice as the holie Fathers haue vnderstode it Then your superfluousnes because you make many partes of that which you should haue concluded in one member As if euerie good action be called a sacrifice thē should you haue well brought the other kindes which you speake of vnder this one signification as the principall largest aboue all other Allthough you in deuising three maners after which the fathers take the word sacrifice do leaue this one out of the number by which euerie good action as you report is called a sacrifice which yet deserueth to haue the first place emong them if that which is most generall should not be omitted in diuiding Thirdlie your diuision is to be reproued for the greate vntruth which is conteined in it as I shall declare vnto you hereafter If first you will consider what an other maner of diuision was to be lerned out of the Doctours and in what sense it is spoken and beleiued of vs that a sacrifice propiciatorie is offered in our misteries Vnderstand you therefor that A sacrifice is a reuerent seruice and worshipp due vnto God onlie Now againe Of sacrificies some be internall and inuisible other some externall and visible The inward and internall sacrifice may be thus defined It is that worshipp and seruice in which our hart and will is geauen vnto God and this is done vpon the aultar of our hart when either we burne the incense of holie and deuoute loue in his sight or when we vowe to hym ourselues and his giftes in vs or when we remember his benefites in solempne feastes and holidaies or when vpon the aultar of our hart with the fyer of charitie we burne the offeringes of humilitie and praise vnto hym And this is the pure and acceptable sacrifice which onlie God requireth of vs not because of his owne profit and vantage but that we by vniting of ourselues to hym might liue and continue for euer with hym But how shall a man know that there is such a spirituall inuisible and acceptable sacrifice Of his owne doing a man perchaūse may know but of an others mynd who can tell without some externall signe or token shewed Againe if a man would vtter his owne inward deuotion how can he exemplifie it without some externall signe either of bowing of knees or holding vp of handes or lifting vp of eyes or knocking of breast or offering vp of some gift yea rather the soule and bodie being so nigh togeather as they are it ys impossible that the hart soule shold entierlie be occupied in the true worshipe of God and that by no maner of similitude it shold be perceaued in the bodie Therefor by necessarie and naturall consequence and folowing there must be an externall sacrifice And that is defined of S. Augustine by these wordes The visible sacrifice ys a sacrament that ys to saie an holie signe of the inuisible sacrifice Of this second kind of sacrifice if you require exāples you may easelie find them in the sacrificies of Abel Noe Abraham and others in the law of nature and in the boke of Leuiticus as concerning the old law and in the churches and deuotions of Christiās in this tyme of grace as whē thei offer candells burne frankincense take ashes beare palme and do anything outwardlie to the honor of God In which thinges except the offerer haue an internall deuotiō and pietie all those externall ceremonies are not to him worth the vsing and if he be in hart and memorie fullie disposed and aduised to consider his owne miserie and god his mercie then are these outwarde actions and obseruations holie signes and tokens of the internall sacrifice and may be called externall sacrificies But let vs speake of one singular example for all The visible and bitter death of our Sauior Christ vpon the crosse was an external aud bloudie sacrifice But in what sense and meaning vndoubtedlie as it was and is called visible But what meane I by visible I meane that so painefull maner of hys hanging by the handes and fcete vpon the crosse and so vniuersall a wounding of euerie part of his pretiouse bodie so that from the croune of his heade to the soele of his feete there was no whole place in hym and the panting of euerie vaine and stretching of euerie ioynt and incredible torment in all his blessed fleshe these thinges with manie other were I meane holie signes of his inward sacrifice in which he offered vp before hym and to hym which seeth all secreates his liffe his hart his will his thankes his praises and praiers and all that was his for the sauing of mankind and satisfieing of his fathers Iustice. Yea concernyng the eies of men not onlie the sight of God who may doubt of his patience which in all those tormētes dyd neuer once murmur who can mistrust or suspect his charitie which emong so manie cruellties done to hym forgat not to loue his enemies who should not but consider hys endlesse obedience whose soule could not be remoued from the keeping of his fathers will when the bodie was disioynted the one member from the other In verie deed this was an holie signe and sacrament of the inuisible and
Therfor he calling the Bishop vnto him asked whether he did agree with the Catholike Bishopps that is to saye with the church of Rome for the church of that countrey as concerning that place was in a schisme Which being well considered of hym and that allthough they of those quarters had beleife in God yet they were not faythfull vnto the churche he departed from thens differring the payment of his thankes the debt which he was in for receiuing the Sacrament and went forth vntyll he came to such place where he might be safely discharged Now therefore if thei had ben ministers which deliuerd the Sacrament vnto S. Satyrus in the shipp he might haue receiued it at their handes wheÌ„ he was now come to lande and neuer haue sought further for the matter but whiles he was so desyrous to receyue his Lorde and defendor Praesulem suum sayeth S. Ambrose and yet was not so bolde as to receyue him in that couÌ„trey he declareth therebie not only that he had no priestes in his companie but also that we shold not coÌ„municate with schysmatikes â–ª and he interpreteth vnto vs what a Catholike Bishopp is saying that he is such a one as agreeth with the church of Rome But to make more doubtes and that in speaking much it should appeare that the historye of Satyrus is not cleane and cleare against you There ys say you nothing to the contrarye but that the same persons which had the Sacrament of our Lord his bodye had also about them the Sacrament of the bloud Yf you leese the cause yet you prouide to wynn the praise of a man full of nymblenes and actiuety in his inuentioÌ„ And truly you finde nothing to the coÌ„trarie but that Christ deliuered the Sacrament of his bodie only without the cupp vnto the rest of his disciples and folowers whiche were in other chambers of the house where he kept his maundey But if they of whom ye speak had the SacrameÌ„t of the bloud about them wherin had they it I praye you Eyther in some conuenient vessel or els after some other fasâ—ion as diuers of simplicitie vppon a zeale at that tyme vsed Doth the history geaue you any occasioÌ„ to thinke so or els doe you speake it but vpon your owne head For if some at the beginning when the church was persecuted openlie by the princes of the world dyd carie the sacrament of Christ his bloud about them it doth not folow that in Sainct Ambrose his tyme wheÌ„ the church was more enlarged and better setteled the lyke manner was allwaies vsed You tell vs that in taking of a long iorney some caryed the sacrament of the blould with them and because they could not conuenietly carye wyne with them they soked the Sacrament of the Lorde his bodye in the bloode As whoe should saye that thei might not more coÌ„uenient lie haue caryed the bloud in some vessel for the purpose Other saie you moysted a lynnen cloth in the SacrameÌ„t of bloud Some either because they could not by nature or would not for religioÌ„ drinke wyne vsed only water Some other vsed mylke for wyne But what of this Can you inferr vpon these perticular cases that it is lykely that they which delyuered the Sacrament vnto Satyrus as S. Ambrose writeth had the Sacrament of bloud also about them as you doe suppose As well it will folow then that thei had the Sacrament of Christ his bloud eyther in forme of water only or of milke because that you haue readen that in such formes it hath ben receyued Consider also that in S. Ambrose his time the church was not so much vnder feare of princes as before neyther was holy Satyrus such a simple sowle allthough a nouice then in our faith as to receiue the Sacrament of such whom he knew not to be perfectlie instructed in the Christian religion And he being a man of honor it is not lykely that the Iniâ—â—ati the full Christians I meane which were in the selfe same ship with him did kepe the sacrameÌ„t with theÌ„ in such sort as was to be wynked at for a tyme and not absolutely to be allowed But let yt be with them as you will and you shal freely make as many supposinges as you can that thei had the Sacrament of the bloud eyther in a vessell or soked in bread or in a lynnen cloth or in any other maner Yet what saie you to holy Satyrus how did he receyue it at their handes In a stole as you call yt Well Sir the worde is orarìum which if it be not well Englished a stâ—le what other name do you geaue it You leaue it with out a name and will haue orarium to signifie perchaunse a what shall I call it to the intent you maye applie it to what so euer thing you will S. Ambrose in his oratioÌ„ made of the beleif which we should haue of your resurrection speaking of Lazarus sayeth that Facies eius orario colligata erat His face was bounde vpp with a sudarye or kerchey Againe in his tenth booke of epistles speaking of the holye relyques of Geruasius and Prothasius Quanta oraria iactitantur quant a indumenta â–ª supra reliquias sacratissimas vt tactu ipso medicabilia reposcantur How many napkins or kercheyes how manye coates or clothes are cast vpon the most holye relyques that being made medicinable through the verye touching of them they might be requyred for and had awaye agayne Therefor if orarium shall not be englysshed a stole yet that you maye not thinke that it was a bottle to carye wyne in I haue shewed you two places out of Saint Ambrose in which it is taken for a lynnen cloth And now if holy Satyrus dyd put that sacrameÌ„t which he receiued in a lynnen cloth and wrapped it about his neck it is very probable vnto vs that it was in forme of bread onlye except you will yet styll contynew in your imagination and make a gesse that it was either a mylkesopp or a wynesopp or a lynneÌ„ cloth moysted with wyne which he folded vpp in a kerchey napkyn or stole And then lett any indifferent man be iudge which of vs two speaketh most reasonably you which thinke that he had the sacrament of bloud togeather with the sacrament of Christ his bodye or we which can not deuyse how wyne should be there inclosed where we reade no mencion of other thing but only of a lynen cloth Now as concernyng that where you saye that lerned and holye men did wynke and beare with many thinges in the begynnyng as though the reseruation of the blessed Sacrament or vsing of it in suchesorte as that holy Satyrus dyd were to be numbred in that kynde of thinges you make S. Ambrose therein to lack a greate part of his fortitude of mynde and wysedome For he such a Bishop would neuer haue suffred any substanciall parte of our fayth to be defaced within
reseruation Yet in that place there is nothing lesse intended which as euery meane learned maye perceiue is wholy sett furth and decked with the coopling of contraries togeather as To be distributed which importeth a making of partes and not to be dismembred which signifieth no parte to haue ben pulled from the whole To be incorporated which should not seeme to be done without some alteration and yet not to be iniuried which declareth agayne the thing to contineâ—â— in his former estate To be receiued by which worde we seeme to haue it within vs and not to be included which setteth agayne the thing at libertie Wherfore this place as it maketh nothing for your purpose so yet it maye serue vs and all other which haue regarde of their soules to beware how thei go vpon other mens feete or ryde if thei be gentlemen vpon an others bayard except thei be sure before that togeather with his boldenes he hath also his eyes After this you alleage out of Isichius that the residue of the sacrament not receiued was in his tyme burned and out of S. Clement whom you contemptuouslie doe call our Clement you recite that the ministers must with feare and reuerence eate vpp the remaynent of the consecrated hostes wherevpon you conclude that reseruation was not generally vsed which being graunted vnto you it remayneth yet that S. Cyrill maye stande well inough with S. ClemeÌ„t and Isâ—chius For as examples are brought for declaration of both partes so is reseruation a thing indifferent to be vsed or to be omitted And lyke as we should proue our selues very ignorant if we should denye absolutelye that reseruation was at anye â—yme omitted so doth S. Cyrill saie wiselie and trulie that thei are madd men which make no price of the sacrament if it be once reserued In the later end of the chapiter you presse vs with S. Clement his authoritie as though we had euer graunted vnto you that all is to be folowed now of necessitie which was once obserued in the primitiue church or as though our answer had not euer ben that receiuing alone or with cumpany is in it selfe a thing indifferent But it seemeth you were well apaied that you had shifted away the article of reseruation which troubleth you verye â—ore to which your aunswer is exceding symple and vnperfect yea rather it is no aunswer at all Because you confesse as much as we do requyre that reseruation was then sometymes vsed But you tell vs that sometymes it was not vsed which maketh nothing so the purpose Now one thing more will I saie and so end this chapiter You protested to admit the Doctors in such degree as S. Augustyne teaceth you which is to saie if they bring either scripture or good reason Therefor what saie you to the reason which S. Cyril maketh that the sacrament if it be reserued is for all that of one state and strength because the vertue and power of consecration continueth with it It is not man which blesseth or consecrateth the bread but it is Christ hym selfe which doth sanctifie and chainge the bread and wyne whose worde being permanent and out of the dainger and mutabilitie of tyme how can it be otherwise then his bodye that which is once coÌ„secrated if it should remayne vnreceiued a thousand yeares to geather vnto this reason and question you haue to aunswer with all your cunnyng and learnyng The nynth Chapiter SYrapion of Alexandria lying in his death bedd sent in the night season for the priest to minister the sacrament vnto him The priest being syck him selfe deliuered it to his ladd and badd him moyst it and so geaue it to his syck master Of this history it is to be gathered sayeth the Catholike that the Sacrament was reserued that it was receiued vnder one kynde and that it was receiued without companie Therfore what saye you the Master of the defence vnto it First you aunswer that It was a case of necessitie or great difficulty As though that were not inough for vs to shew that sole receiuing reseruation and receiuing vnder one kynde are not against the substance of Christ his institution Secondlye you tell vs that The history speaketh not generally of all that lye in they re death â—edd but only of one sorte but only of one sorte that before were restrayned froÌ„ coÌ„munion whom they called penitentes As though it were materyal what maner of person it was whiche laye in his bed and not rather in what manner of fasshion he receyued the Sacrament which in those dayes was reserued For how soeuer the person was the thing which â—elonged for is called his viaticuÌ„ which is his viage prouisioÌ„ and was not so much geaueÌ„ vnto him because he shold be therby deliuered from danger of excoÌ„munication as that he might haue comfort of the sacrament in the terrible passage froÌ„ this world vnto an other And the pâ—â—nitentes of the old tyme were not properly excoÌ„municated as they now are which by definitiue sentence are cutt of from the body of Christ but they coÌ„tinued in the payne which the officers of Christ his church did sett vpoÌ„ their fault and were in the meane tyme yet in the state of grace so that if they had departed this world without the external receiuing of the sacrament yet they should not haue ben damned for euer with those which dyed excoÌ„municated And therefor although SyrapioÌ„ was in a great necessity and difficultie as concerning his owne lyfe yet ther was no such necessitie wherfore he more then any other Christian shold receiue the sacrameÌ„t as he dyd Yea rather if they which haue not fully satisfied for their offences are fauored yett so much of the church wheÌ„ they are at the point of death that they shal enioye the benefite which is reserued for true vpright Christians how much more is it good reason that he which hath not fallen into lapse and hath not in any thing offended the church should enioye the comfort of his viage prouision which is not denyed vnto the manifest before now penitent synners Yf the beggars at our dore be serued with the white bread of childreÌ„ when pâ—nges of sicknes or death come vpoÌ„ them how much more ought the children to haue of their owne proper loffe when they come vnto the lyke cases Therâ— was one which told me saieth blessed Chrisostome not which had ben taught it of an other but which was accompâ—ed worthy to see yt and heare yt hym selfe that they which are departyng out of this lyfe if they be made partakers of these mysteries meanyng the Sacrament with a pâ—â—â—e and cleane conscience when they are geauing vp the ghost they are caryed from hence vp straitwayes into heauen by Angâ—ls which for that holy thing sake which was râ—ceyued doe stand thyck about their bodies in maner of a garde or of â—anchmen Therefore as you can neuer proue that reseruation was
place so sone as we would have wyshed thē Let vs see thē how you proue that Mary say you whē they were rooted God stirred vp frō tyme to tyme diuers in all ages that reproued them This shall be no lye at all if you can name the persons And because we will not trouble you much we shal requyer of you but the name of one for your side against vs for euery one of the last .900 yeares in which Christendome generally hath gone against you If you dare and if you can shew now your cunnyng and learnyng so shall the world easyly perceiue what maner of predecessors you haue had in your religion and what maner of credit you geaue to holy blessed men or els what a greate and open lye you haue made in this matter For to make this more plaine in one short example In S. Bernardes tyme we reade of certaine which named thē selues Apostolicos as if you should saie folowers of the Apostles and some of their opinions were these That maryage was vnlawfull except it were betweene virgin virgin that all meates which come of engendring are vncleane that chyldren are not to be baptised that the dead are not to be prayed for and that there is no fyer of purgatory after death but that straytwayes the sowles goe vpp to heauen or downe to hell How say you then by these felowes shall they be in the numbre of them whom God styrred vpp againste our doctrines for that age in which S. Bernard was Yf you saye they were of God then doe you condempne Saint Bernard which of purpose wrote againste them in his .66 sermon vpon Cant. Canticorum and you must also then forbyd mariage flesh meates and baptizing of children Yf you say they were not of God then let vs haue your testimony that they were vile heretikes and so shall you holde with praying to Sainctes praying for the dead purgatorye c. And further tell vs what they were in S. Bernardes tyme ▪ except they were these which God styrred vpp to reproue our doctrynes Now if you will or can tell what they were in euery one of these last .900 yeares whom God sent to testifye his truth against the doctryne of our knowen Catholike church it will folow I am assured that you shall name either playne heretikes or els condempne most holye and learned men whom now you will not seeme but to receyue with much fauor and reuerēce But now agayn what an vnlyke tale is this that for these .900 yeares God hath from tyme to tyme labored and at no tyme preuayled and that he being allmightie hath styrred vp the hartes of diuers in all ages to reproue our doctryne and yet that no man knoweth their writinges or the only names of those iolye prophetes when the holy Ghost was not yet geauen because IESVS was not yet glorified and in the night and shadowes of the olde law yet the longest captiuitie that euer the people of God had was much lesse then .400 yeares in Egypt and when it pleased God to sende them delyuerance cōsider with what diuine force and power he made Moyses and Aarō to ouerturne the might of Pharao But we which are in the tyme of grace and are cōducted not by Moyses and a pyller of fyer or a cloude but by IESVS CHRIST and his holye and cōfortable spirite yet say you we haue ben in miserable and blind captiuitie these 900. yeares togeather and the prophetes whom God hath sent vnto vs haue lefte no signe of their doinges The spirituall powers you saye but you lye haue disgraced such men and abolyshed theire bookes and memoryes as much as might be flatterers also haue corrupted auncient fathers and forged new workes c. It were pytty to troble your weake head with the prouing of all these thinges at large therefore we will aske no more of you at this tyme but that you tell vs the names onlye of those spirituall powers corrupters and flatterers with the place where we shall finde it declared that there were such as you report some to be Not because I denye that flatterers and forgers are to be found emong the Christiās but because you can neuer proue that by such meanes our doctrine hath ben maintayned against the wil of God and labors of his seruantes As for the donation of Constantyne although it appertayne to no article of our fayth who so euer gaue it so that the church lawfully haue it yet we haue to saye further therein against you when you haue declared how Sainct Syluester came by the possession of Rome with manye Seignioryes belonging vnto it or what Constantyn the Emperor did with the olde and auncient Rome when he buylded his palace at Byzant and called it Constantinople and new Rome Then for your recityng of places out of the Decrees such as are not found in the Doctors vpon whom they are fathered except any place in all the Decrees conteine an vntrue and vngodly doctrine it is no matter of my faith I assure you if the author be mistaken and if the scribe or the printer doe fayll in his memorie or attention And last of all where you saye that the east church hath not allowed our errors I will make no other replie against that your saying at this tyme but desyer you to consider quyetly how well they are rewarded for their labor For whilest thei contentiously and wyckedly endeuored to make them selues and their Archebishopp as high as the Bishop and churche of Rome and to departe from the vnitie thereof they were brought in to myserable and pytefull bondage and affecting the first place whilest they florished in the seconde they are long agoe fallen in to the lowest and worst of all And if you thinke it more sure to beleiue the Greeke then the Latyne church tell vs I praye you what you beleiue of the holye ghost And so whereas the donation of Constantyne and quotations of the decrees do make nothing for you so should the example of Grece geaue an occasion to amende you When you cōsider that the whole West church within it selfe hath continued so many hundred yeares in one state of doctrine and that her syster and fellow the East church in coueting to be maestres hath lost her perfect libertie of body by reason of the Turkes of sowle because of schisme and the diuell But as you be alwaies good vnto vs when it is not worth thankes as you do geaue it so you suffre vs to take that as it were a gyft of your handes which for verie truth and euidencie of the matter we doe wring cleane out of your fingers whether you will or no. And you saie But be it so that the most parte of Christendome .ix. hundred yeares hath taught as you doe is that a sufficient argument to reiect a doctrine euident by the worde of God Syr if a doctrine be euident
lothsomenes might trouble vs if it were geauen in visible forme of flesh and bloud vnto vs. And to conclude The sonne of God is vnited vnto vs through the mysticall blessing corporally as man spirituallye as God Wherefore we doe not destroye one truth by an other neyther so beleiue the presence of Christ his bodye that in no case we wyll admit any significatiō or figure neither againe so magnifie signes and figures that we take awaye all reall presence S. Augustine teaching vs That the body of Christ is both a veritie and a figure a veritie whiles the substance of bread and wyne is made his bodye and bloud by the power of the holyghost and a figure because of that which is outwardly seene and perceyued And so against the next tyme if you can haue any answer prouide to proue not that Christ gaue a figure but that he gaue nothing else but a figure For if you will so graunt a figure that yet you will not denye the reall presence then will all our other cōclusions which you despyse now be deduced out of the principle of Christ his reall presence that you neede to make no further question about them As for the kynges brode seale vnto which you resemble the sacrament it may be well and trulye sayd that in deede the sacrament is a most sure confirmation of all the actes which Christ dyd worke for vs in the tyme of his visible conuersation emong vs. For how might we haue his verye true bodye emong vs except he receyued a true nature of man vpon hym or how might we Christians doubt of it whether he be rysen from death to immortalitie whose flessh and bloud is daily geauen to such as will to saue them frō corruption But if you make no more of it then that as the king his brode seale doth geaue a force to his letters patentes so lykewyse the sacramentall bread should confirme the testament and promyses of Christ and that in such a sense that as truly as our body is fedd with that bread so truly our sowle is norysshed with his spirite verely you haue taken a great wonder at a common and easye matter For euery man when he will not only in the church but at home and else where and not only by bread or wyne but also by euery thing that is true maye vse the lyke phrase and saye as truly as I stand as I sytt as this fyer burneth as the sonne shineth as I lyue as I eate c. so trulie God dyed once for vs to saue vs from death euerlasting And if you wil cōtend that although one maye so say of al thinges which are true yet that there is a speciall regarde to be had vnto bread wine which Christ him selfe appointed for that purpose yet you haue no great cause of wonder no more then you shold maruell in some weighty accompt which the kyng himselfe would sett for some profitable effect that one such peece of golde which right now stood but for a shilling should be sodainly remoued and made to signifie 1000000. Li. For if al the dignity and price of the Sacrament consisteth herein that it representeth a most wonderfull gyfte and benefyte which the soune of God bestowed vpon vs then are you very much to blame for defacing spoyling breaking and burning of crucifixes which did more lyuely represent the death of Christ then any externall forme of bread and wyne can doe Whereunto if you will answer that Christ appointed the one and not the other you maye yet gather thereby that according vnto your imagination there is no such great excellencye in the institution of bread and wyne to represent and declare vnto vs the veritie of Christ his promyses but that a paynter or caruer maye as euidently expresse them by his arte and colours and more effectually also perchaunse for the playne symple deuout and good men of the world Wherefor that the holye doctors and fathers of Christ his church ▪ should meane nothing els by their termes of transmutatiō transelementation mutation conuersion alteration c. But the chainge of the externall elementes into this meanyng that they doe showe the effecte of the Sacrament and seale vpp vnto vs the promyses of Christ it is a very abiect and vyle mysconstruyng of them For they declare most expreslye that in the externall elementes there is no chainge at all but the chainge is onely in the substance of the bread into Christ his bodye which at an other tyme is to be proued more largelie but now S. Cyprian alone maye suffise saying This bread which our Lord◠dyd vnto his disciples delyuer being chainged not in outward shew but in nature is made flesh by the allmightynes of the worde c. But as much as you can for shame you extenuate and debase the greatnes of Christ his benefytes towardes vs. For Christ saying this is my body you vnderstand hym to meane a figure onely of his body and the holy doctors prouing vnto vs that it should not be vncredible that of simple bread he maketh vnto vs his precious body because he made all thinges of no thing and can doe more then is ordynary by the cōmon course of nature yet saye you they speake of no other chainge but that which is about the external elementes And one of them hauing this similitude Lyke as wax being sett vnto fyer is lykened vnto it no substance remaineth no ouerplus resteth so doe thow thinke the misteries to be consumed by the substance of Christ his bodie No say you it is not so or els it is to be vnderstanded after this maner that lyke as when the king his broad seale is sett vnto his lettres patētes then haue those letters their effect so I trow that the Sacrament should be lyke a pece of wax to confirme I can not tell what letters For if you meane the promysses of euerlasting lyfe before we come to receiue the Sacramēt we beleiue God and his church doubt nothing of them and therefor I confesse my ignorance that I can not tell what maner of leases or grauntes you conceyue to be vnconfirmed before the seale of bread and wine be added vnto them But as I began to tell you you take all thinges at the lowest and basest maner and this perchaunse is that which you obiect vnto vs when your delicate and deyntie eloquence could not abyde to heare the Catholike to speake of the pulling skaulding drawing and rosting of a capon before you dyd eate hym resembling vs vnto the seruant which being commaunded to make the dyner readye would thinke vpon great prouysion the master hym selfe meaning to haue nothing els but such colde meate set vpon the table as was in the house As who should saye we shal be saued and fare well inough if we do but imagine that Christ dyed for us As for the hauing of his naturall bodye because it is a matter
of greate prouision and it keepeth a great sturr within a mans hart to conceyue how it should be a naturall bodye and placed now in heauen and yet present and perfect on euery aultar in the whole worlde and because it were lytle inough to thynke all nyght long and mornyng before how to come to such a feast with contrition confession and satisfaction therefore it is but superfluous cost and a torment vnto the conscience Colde meate shall serve vs well inough and we shal be as merye with bread and drink in the remembraÌ„ce that Christ dyed for vs as with all the prouision which the papistes saie Christ to haue made In which similitude you haue as rightly expressed your inward thoughtes as maye be And we truly if we make greate prouisioÌ„ we doe no other then we are commaunded because we be his seruantes which euery daye geaueth the fatt calfe for ioye of his sounes which were lost and are returned agayne which was neuer a niggard of his meate and drinke in so much that when he had none other but seruantes in his howse yett he prouyded so royally for them that as euerye one of them wysshed so dyd his meate taste in his mouth For consider onlye the excellencye of Manna of the olde law First of all it came from heauen without any labor of the Israelites it came dayly except one daye in the weeke that they should haue it fressh and fressh it came so plentyfullye that yt couered all the grounde about theyr tentes and yet so equallye that he which gathered more dyd not abounde and he which gathered lesse did not want it came so simply as if it had ben the seedes of coryander and it tasted so wonderfully that it conteyned all delycates and hartes desyre it continued to them .xl. yeares togeather and as surely as their bodyes were noryshed with that bread so sure thei might be that their sowles mindes were fed with the grace of Christ. And all this yet was bestowed vpoÌ„ the Iewes before the incarnation of the souâ—e of God before the comming of the holyghost in the law of bondage in the tyme of figures and when God as I may saye did not yet keepe open householde in all coÌ„treyes of the world neither make so great cheare as he mynded to doe afterwarde Therefor if such thinges were geaueÌ„ vnto the Iewes what was to be reserued for Christians and if we haue not in deede the reall body of Christ emong vs what lyke thing haue we vnto their Manna Yf there were no other argument but this one which is gathered upon the conferring of tyme with tyme state with state figures with truthes Moyses with Christ Iewes with Christians yet of very congruence and conscience we should looke to fare better then the Israelites dyd in the barren wyldernes But except our Sauior his wordes this is my bodye this is my bloud be vnderstanded literally and really we fare a thousand partes worse For as in our bread vnitie is represented so might it haue ben in 〈◊〉 Manna and as you be as verely assured that your sowle doth participate Christ in spirite as your bodye doth receyue the externall bread so likewise they which were spirituall emoÌ„g the Israelites did in their Manna conceyue and receyue the bread of lyfe and the Sauior of the world and againe as your sacramentall bread is a token and seale vnto you of the goodnes and promyses of God so was Manna vnto them and that with much more myracle and coÌ„fort So that you haue nothing in this your Sacrament of the new law which should be most excellent which one maye not fynde in the Manna of the olde law which yet was but a shadow and figure of the bodye of Christ in the Sacrament but Manna of that tyme had many wonderful prerogatyâ—es by which it farr passeth in estimation the Sacrament of Christ his bodye and bloud if there be no more in it then you doe conceyue and vtter Which because it is vnreasonable therefore we can not but vnderstand Christ his wordes This is my bodye c. in that sense which we doe and we doe not feare least we shall offende in making to great a price and value of the SacrameÌ„t but rather we coÌ„fesse that we shall neuer be able to expresse the maiestie the miracles and the dignitie of it As for you if you be delighted with cold rost and would not if you might haue Christ really and naturally God and man bodye and sowle to be geauen vnto you but can satisfye your appetyte with only figures sygnes and similitudes you shal sytt by your selfe for the Catholikes vntyll God shall sende you more charitie Which if it were as it should be in you you could not fynde fault with the reall presence of Christ in his Sacrament and call it a torment vnto your conscience but rather you would be werye of all scrappes and leauinges of an yesterdayes feast and contemne all counterfait dyshes which haue more apparance then substance When you were a childe if one had brought vnto you a byrde or a fysh made in fyne and sweete paste with a figg or such lyke thing within you would haue ben more delighted in it theÌ„ with the true meate of the byrde or fysh but after that you be come to the state of a man you should couet the sounde and strong meates and lett all such creekes and knackes alone to serue for children God graunt that you fynde not hereafter fault also with the Catholikes that they teache you to beleiue a true and natural flesh and sowle in Christ and that you reproue not the charges and cost which God hath bestowed vpon the redemption of mankynde because the only worde of his blessed will was able to saue vs so that his incarnation needed not but only a similitude of a body But for this tyme let this be an end of this Replye and I would to God here might be an end of all coÌ„trouersie which because it is not verye credible in such confusion and vnrulynes of sectes and diuisions therfor some answer is to be looked for or rather some similitude of it For as concerning any true answer in the defence of your part you can neuer make it in those pointes which you are burdened withall in this Replye as your mysconstruyng of holye Fathers and reasoning out of the purpose with many absurde and vnlearned conclusion Yet no doubt but you will coÌ„tinew styll in your stoutnes and by one meane or other mayntayne your Capitaynes against vs. For if Goliath be stroken downe yet you sett vpp an Achilles and by chainging of the name you thinke to chainge the cause But if your bastard brauery had not ben sufficiently exemplified by the fact of the vncircumcided Goliath yet now by the crake which you sett vpon your prophane Achilles you proue your selfes more lyke that fell Gyant theÌ„ euer you were before For allthough