as if wee were to eate the flesh of Christ after the same manner as we doe eate the flesh of beasts boiled or rosted cut and mangled In which sence if the letter be vnderstood it doth kill as Origen saith and as S. Augustine in the place aboue cited it imports a crime But seeing our Sauiour saith his flesh is truelie meate Ioan. 6. and that his words are Spirit and life they are to be vnderstood so that they be expounded both properlie and also Spirituallie or mysticallie VVhich thing wee rightlie doe when we say they are to be expounded properlie according to the substance of the thing eaten because that substance which in the Eucharist wee eate is the verie substance of the bodie of Christ and also spirituallie according to the manner because wee do not eate cutting and mangling it but without hurting it at all no otherwise then if it were a Spirit THE NOTES OF S. E. HEere D. Featly without taking notice of what was tould him out of S. Augustine and S. Cyprian repeates againe that the Capharnaiticall manner of eating was the same with our eating of the flesh in the Sacrament whereas the difference is most cleere (a) S. Au. enar in Psal 98. They thought our Sauiour would cut of some peeces from his bodie and giue them to eate (b) Ser. de coena Cyp. They imagined they were taught to eate it boild or rosted and cut in peeces Wee beleeue teach that it is receaued c work entire vnder the forme of bread And that Origen did admit and beleeue this our manner of receauing it these his words declare plainely When thou takest that holie and vncorrupted banquet Origen Hom. 5. in diuersa loca Euang. See D. Andr. Serm p. 476. Euerie MaÌ„ carries one of these houses about with him and the Mâ—ster of it is his soule when thou doest enioy the bread and cup of life eatest and drinkest the body and blood of our Lord then our Lord doth enter vnder they roofe wherefore humbling thy selfe imitate the Centurion and say Lord I am not worthey that thou come vnder my roofe For where he enters vnworthily there he goes in to iudgment to the receauer Here Origen declares that he beleeued our Sauiour all to be in the blessed Sacrament and will haue vs speake vnto him there as the Church doth in the Masse Domine non sum dignus c. Lord I am not worthy thou enter vnder my roofe He doth not call bread Lord acknowledging himselfe vnworthy it enter but Him that is in the exteriour forme of breade And herein he doth consent with S. Augustine before alledged who saith that wee receaue the Mediatour with our month and whith Tertullian Supra p. 78. Caro vescitur Christi corpore Flesh eateth the Bodie of Christ Moreouer suppose the soule be wicked notwistanding He Christ goes in this Authour saith but in whither not into the soule by meanes of faith that way you haue shut vp therefore you must confesse he goes in to the bodie at the mouth as S. Augustine tould you Who said also that Iudas receaued the price of our Redemption not with the minde sure Supr ap 79. he was then a Traitour but with the mouth D. Featly Should we eate with the mouth the flesh of man we should runne vpon the point of S. Cyrills reproofe In expos anath 11. Doest thou pronunce this Sacrament to be man-eating and doest thou irreligiousty vrge the mindes of the faithfull with grosse and carnall imaginations Answer The grosse and carnall conceit of eating mans flesh he reiects the Sacramentall manner we speake of he did beleeue EueÌ„ in that anathematisme which you mentioÌ„ A 〈◊〉 1â— and which he there defeÌ„ds he saith the thing proposed on the altar 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is before the Preist is our Sauiours 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his owne body So neere he tnought our Sauiours body was to the communicant Againe he saith that by meanes of the benediction coÌ„secration the Sonne of God as man is vnited to v◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 corporally Li. 11. in Ioan. c. 27. Ibid. Li. 10. c. 13. And that We doe receaue the Sonne of God corporally and substantially In an other place he saith the power of benediction doth bringe to passe that Iesus Christ dwelleth in vs corporallie with the coÌ„munication of the flesh of Christ. And the manner of compassing it is as he doth also teach (a) Epist ad Calo. In Answer to your marginall note about Bereng See the Answer to Bels challeÌ„g ar 2. c. 5. by conuerting breade and wine into the verity of flesh and blood D. Featly Doe those words nisi manducaueritis carnem vnlesse you eate the flesh sound after the Capharnaiticall straine Answer To flesh and blood they did and doe but the holy Ghost hath taught the Church an other way of eating flesh not in the proper but in another shape Mat. 26. Doe but harken and you shall heare the Ghospell mention eating a mans bodie in the forme of breade Take and eate this in my hand is my body THE FOVRTH ARGVMENT D. Featlie S. Augustine in Gratian dist 2. can hoc est saith As the heauenlie bread which is Christs flesh is after a sort called the bodie of Christ when as in truth it is the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ the Glosse addeth The heauenlie Sacrament which truelie doth represent the flesh of Christ is called the bodie of Christ but improperlie wherefore it is said in a sort but not in the truth of the thing but in a signifying mysterie D. Smith Gratian first See Bellar Descriptor Eccles is not an authenticall Authour amongst vs much lesse the Glosse Secondlie I oppose other words of S. Augustine in the same place of Gratian where he saith that the Sacrifice of the Church doth consist of two things the visible forme of elements and the inuisible flesh and blood of Christ both of a Sacrament and re Sacramenti that is to saie the bodie of Christ as the person of Christ doth consist and is made of God and man Thirdlie I answer that S. Augustine in those words vnderstood that which is Sacramentum tantùm a Sacrament only D. Featlie S. Augustine speakes of that breade which he saith is the flesh of Christ but that which is Sacramentum tantùm is not the flesh of Christ therefore he doth not speake of that which is Sacramentum tantùm D. Smith The words of S. Augustine are not cited entirelie for epist 23. if that be the place Gratian meanes This place is quoted in the margine of Gratian he saith that the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ is the bodie of Christ after a certaine manner and it is not inconuenient to say that that which is Sacramentum tantùm is the bodie of Christ after a certaine manner according to which manner he saith baptisme is faith D. Featley Indeed Gratian
emptie of his bodie or in Ieremies time as he was God Tertullians word being Deus sic enim Deus in Euangelio c. vt hinc iam eum id est Deum intelligas corporis sui figuram pani dedisse mark also the preterit if I say he as God be said in Ieremies time to haue giuen to bread to be the figure of his bodie yet should you not haue translated the wordes so as you do I do not speake of translating dedisse he gaue I suppose you meant dedit but of translating the word suppose dedit he gaue to be Which translation in other matter your self would not endure Sempronius Lepido dedit asinum were this Lepidus a frinde of yours you would not turne dedit he aue to be In the margine pag. 23. S. E. had cited other words of Tertullian for a further exposition of his meaning Caro corpore vescitur and these next you glosse Apologist the meaning of Tertullian in those wordes caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur vt anima de Deo saginetur is that the bodie receauing in the outward element which otherwhere he cals the figure of his bodie the soule presentlie apprehends the thing signified vzt the bodie of Christ Censure See Masters a golden exposition cleere natiue proper subtile accurate The bodie eates the flesh that is the soule doth apprehend it O monstrous wit able to make quidlibet ex quolibet I can not sufficientlie admire I am astonished when I consider thy streingth and perspicacitie Before I knew thou couldst make coÌ„tradictions which omnipotencie it self cannot and now I see thou canst finde senses where they be not But Pluribus intentus minor est ad singula sensus Whilst you were looking beyond the obiect of Gods power to tell vs what he cannot do you did not consider that Tertullian being in that book whence the wordes are cited to defend the Resurrection of bodies which Hereticks did impugne chieflie out of the basenes of flesh and it 's origen at first corruption at last as appeares by the fourth châ—pter of that booke he on the contrarie speakes much in commendation of it Vituperationem laudatione depâ—llas ita nos rhetoricari quoque prouocant haeretici c. you may refute and repell the dispraise of a thing by the praise and commendation of it and Hereticks prouoake vs to plaie the Rhethoricians in this kind so he ca. 5. where he beginns to praise it continuing to the tenth chapter in the middest of of which discourse hauing spoken in the praise of humane flesh in common he betakes himself to speake of the dignitie of the flesh of Christians particularly So much quoth he be said out of the publik forme as it were of humane condition in the behalf of flesh let vs consider now how great a prerogatiue this friuolous as Hereticks in contempt stile it and base substance hath from God in as much as it is the forme of Christian men Porro si vniuersa per carnem subiacent anima carni quoque subiaceÌ„t c. Et hac quidem velut de publica forma humanae conditionis in suffraguim carni procurauerim videamus nunc de propria etiam Christiani nominis forma quanta huic subtantia heretici friuolae ac sordidae apud Deum praerogatiua sit si sufficeret illi quod nulla ommino anima salutem possit adipisci nisi dum est in carne crediderit adeo caro salutis est cardo de qua cum anima Deo allegitur ipsa est quae efficit vt anima allegi possit Sed caro abluitur vt anima emaculetur Caro vaguitur vt anima consecretur Caro signatur vt anima muniatur Caro manus impositione adumbratur vt anima spiritu alluminetur Caro corpore sanguine Christi vescitur vt anima de Deo saginetur non possunt ergo separari in mercede quas opera coniungit Tertullian de Resurrect carnis cap. 7. 8. Obiter aduertet Lector quot in hac vna sententia Tertullianus indicat sacramenta and there come in the wordes aboue cited wherein as appeares both by the wordes them selues and also by the scope of his discourse it is euident that he meanes to say the flesh euen that which Hereticks vilified doth receaue into it self by the mouth the bodie and blood of Iesus Christ to the end the soule by the worthie receauing of it be diuinelie fatned the flesh saies he caro vescitur and what doth it eate a meere signe or figure bakers bread is this the greate prerogatiue no vescitur corpore the bodie it self that his sacred and diuine bodie his creature man by his bodilie mouth the flesh doth eate and thereby the whole hath benefite the soule grace so he receaue woorthelie in time glorie and the bodie as other auncients haue more clearlie expressed themselues immortalitie He that eateth this bread shall liue for euer In another place he saith the hands also touch it wherein he doth agree with S. Augustine De Idol n. 31. 34. out of whom the next argument was taken who saith our Sauiour had his owne bodie euen that which was crucified in his owne hands and that we receaue it with our mouth Citat inserius Apologist He D. Smith or S. E saith he hath good reason to referre that which followes the propostion this is my bodie vzt the figure of my bodie to the subiect his and not to the predicate bodie because it may be shewed otherwhere in him that what followes the proposition in that manner must be referred to the subiiect and not the predicate Censure This is willfullie to mystake and misreport when D. Featlie in the conference had said it did not follow that Tertullian in the place obiected had disordered his words because he had done the like elswhere pag. 17. my Lord answered as you find in the Relation that he did not inferre that Tertullian did heere speake so because he had donne the like in other places but because he doth affoorde in this verie place cited four seuerall reasons why he must be soe vnderstood which thing was inculcated againe by S. E. so that you doe manifestlie impose against your owne knowledge when you tell vs the authour saies he hath good reason to referre c. because it may be shewed other where in him that what followes c. In the end of this your first section you bring a place out of the Sermon de vnctione which makes against your self and for vs as will appeare to him that reades it Dedit itaque D.N. in mensa in qua vltimuÌ„ cum Apostolis participauit conuiuium propriis manibus panem vinum in cruce verò manibus militum corpus tradidit vulnerandum vt in Apostolis secretius impressa syncera veritas vera synceritas exponeret gentibus quomodo vinuÌ„ panis caro esset sanguis quibus rationibus
doth represent which is not exactlie true you will sweare in the example of your mother if the forsaid exteriour forme be wanting Apolog. pag. 44. Heere was you see little cause for you to come in with your let me tell you that a proposition is not said to be true c. Did wee suppose a vocall proposition had formallie in it self veritie in comparison to the thing or obiect still the discourse of S. E. doth stand good for euen in that case you must saie that words had their significations giuen them by men that vnderstand who appointed them to be signes not of what thinges soeuer but of those which they conceaued whence it will follow that the word or name cannot be exactlie verified in the thing if in the same thing be not all imported by the name But formall veritie if Aristotle may be iudge is in the vnderstanding non enim est falsum verum in rebus sed in mente 6. Mâ—t. tex 8. And vocall propositions are said true inasmuch as they be signes of true mentall propositions Sunt ergo ea quae in voce earum quae sunt in mente passionum notae ea quae scribuntur earum quae sunt in voce lib. 1. de Interp. tex 1. For the interpretation of which words we will not be beholding to Smiglecius as you would haue vs. many write Philosophie that vnderstand not the Philosoper and whether he be one of those or not I neither know nor meane to looke the words are cleere without a Comment Wherein formall veritie doth consist wherein transcendentall veritie and how the vnderstanding whilst it doth attribute the predicate to the subiect doth in actu exercito know truth are things not appertaining to this place nor if one may iudge of your skill in this by the rest which you haue vttered within the sphere of your knowledge I had almost forgot to take notice of two other passages in this your Examen of the Digression the one is how easilie in the heate of your passion you bring a man had it beene your Aduersarie you might haue begd a solemne Triumph to almost nothing Hauing defined him you say out of S. E. a thing not in his pure essence and quidditie but extended and coloured c. first your a. Heare what your owne words say this word man signifies a thing so then we will be beholding to you for perfecting the definition of a man thus homo est animal quantum coloratum as good as that of Plato Homo est animal bipes inplume and as the Philosopher put a cock with his feathers pluckt of into Plato his schoole cryed Ecce homo Platonicus so might wee put a picture of a man into yours and crie Ecce homo Iesuiticus because you will be content with this definition Homo est quid quantum coloratum VVaferer pag. 42.43 words are in the margine you laugh at this man belike your Father was not such a thing but one of the naked abstracted substances which otherwhile conuerse with women you first I say laugh at the man and then begin to dispoile him of his definition the difference rationale you cut of and define him animal quantum coloratum then you laugh at him againe and bring in Diogenes ghost to keepe you companie After this you take out animal and so make him sensles thus homo est quid quantum coloratum He is mangled enough now one would think hauing neither eies nor hands nor eares you haue made of him a lump of earth quid quantum coloratum one blow more and you may beat him into dust but that will not satisfie your rage you turne him thus diffigured this quantum coloratum into a meere shape or picture that he may be without substance and then you stab him through with an Ecce homo Iesuiticus wherewith you fixe him to the paper where he hanges Pag. 43. till he be torne out to light tobacco and so turned into smoke The other passage is about sucking (a) will you saie that an Ivie bush is not a signe that wine is to be sold there because you caÌ„not suck sack claret white wine out of an Ivy leafe VVafer pag. 44. wine out of an Iuie bush you do but bungle in the application I will help you to do it better It is an Embleme of your communion wherein you suck blood out of wine your opinion is that it is nothing indeede but wine standing for the signe of blood as an Iuie bush before the tauerne dore is nothing but Iuie standing for a signe of wine You saie alsoe that it doth exhibite to you reallie the blood of Iesus Christ euen that which was shed vpon the crosse Is not this like sucking wine out of a signe wherein it is not out of a bush of Iuie It is as fit an exposition as apt a simile as one would haue desired onlie we must recite some of your doctrine which it doth illustrate Pag. 10. you saie Though the verie bodie and blood of Christ be not substantiallie contained vnder the shapes of bread and wyne yet they are reallie communicated by the holie Ghost vnto vs at by marke that by the faithfull worthie receauing of those mysteries Pag. 13. bread is more then a bare figure of the bodie for it hath the effectuall presence of the bodie ioyned with it though substantiallie it be not become the same And though the bread be not in substaÌ„ce Christ yet the faithfull receauer hath since to giue him effectuallie and in substance is the same the substance communicated to his soule as veritie as the bread enters his mouth Pag. 62. I le graunt you that the out ward signes are signes of Christs bodie present after consecration but I denie that the bodie is there present after the manner you define T is not there corporallie but mysticallie and sacramentallie and yet so as besides the intellectuall presence there is also a reall exhibitiue presence in respect of donation on Gods part and reception on mans part Heere besides the intellectuall presence by faith is a reall exhibition and a reall reception of the bodie the verie substance of it is as reallie communicated to the soule and as verilie as the bread deliuered by the Minister is receaued in the mouth and all this is donne by meanes of the signes exhibiting those thinges vnto vs. Is not this sucking blood out of wine and wine out of an Iuie bush To our tenet which is the Catholick that embleme doth not agree for in our Sacrament there is vnder the exteriour signes flesh and blood according to the substance and veritie the whole bodie the whole humanitie of our Sauiour the Mediatour he himself with all the ornaments of his humanitie and all the infinite perfections of his Diuinitie is there and receauing the blessed Sacrament into our mouthes wee do receaue in it all this The vintners wine be not
receaue with faithfull heart and mouth the mediatour of God and man man Christ Iesus this is not bakers bread giuing vs his bodie to be eaten and his blood to be drunck though it seeme to such as Waferer is more horrible euen thus with the mouth to eate mâ—s flesh then to kill and to drinck mans blood then to shed it In Baptisme wee were incorporated into Christ made one flesh and this vnion he doth consummate as S. Augustine doth insinuate by the reall exhibition of his bodie in the Sacrament But this matter is to high for M. Waferer who at least should haue regarded the words of Origen before his eies who saies of our Lord in the Sacrament Suprà Conf. pag. 65. Where he enters vnworthilie there he goes in to iudgment to the receauer Mark well there He He to whom Origen will haue the communicant saie Vt ad perficiendum mysterium vnitatis accipâ—amus ipsi d. sâ—o quod accepit ipse de nostro Cap. firmiter ex Conc. Lateran as the Church doth at Masse Domine non sum dignus vt intres sub tectum meum Lord I am not worthie that thou enter vnder my roofe this is not bread he would not haue you call bread Lord as S. E. told you in his Notes Where He enters vnworthâ—lie there He goes in to Iudgment to the receauer The like of inuocating our Lord there in the forme of bread on the Alter wee haue in a. RogaÌ„tes Agnum propositum S Chry. Hom. 41. in 1. Cor. S. Chrysostome b, Obsecratio sancti illius tremendi quod in altari positum est Sacrificij Saint Cyrill Hier. Cathec Myst 5. S. Cyrill and others the thing which heere I vrge is that the Church did in S. Augustines time receaue that which he calles the Mediatour not with heart onlie but also hoeuer to infidels the thing might appeare horrible with the mouth that the Apostles did eate panem Dominum bread the Lord which bread vnderstood well what they did and that Iudas notwithstanding his malicious infidelitie receaued he doth nor saie the outward signes onlie as you do but the price of our Redemption adding that the faithfull know it so to be Those know it that haue learned the difference betwixt blood and wine betwixt panis Dominus the Mediatour and bakers bread He knowes it c. S. August tract 62. in Ioan. qui diiudicat hoc est discernit à caeteris cibis Dominicum corpus with the eie of faith who perceaues that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 d. S Cyrill Hier. Catech. t. 4. that which appeare bread is not bread in substance what then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the bodie the bodie how did not our Sauiour take bread yes he did but that e, Serin de Caena Cypr. bread being changed not in shape but in nature is by the omnipotencie of the word made flesh as you were told from Antiquitie You will replie that the rest of the Apostles hauing faith did receaue two thinges one with the bodie by the mouth to wit the outward elementes or signes the other With the soule by faith to wit the bodie and blood which later Iudas wanting faith could not do and therefore onlie with his bodie by the mouth receaued the signes this S. Augustine you think insinuates when he saith of him that he receaued panem Domini hauing said of the rest that they receaued panem Dominum Answer of panis Dominus bread the Lord the Mediatour you heard before from S. Augustine that the Church in his time it is the same of the Apostles receaued it not onlie with their heart or soule but also with their mouth that mouth which in his words is distinguished from the soule or heart Of the bread of our Lord panis Domini which S. Augustine expounding the 40. Psalme qui edebat panes meos c. saith Iudas did eate contra Dominum against our Lord according as it was before prophecied I will speake afterwards Per buccellam illum designauit vt appareret de illo dictum qui edebat panes meos S. Aug. Enar. Psal 40. he designed him by the morsell to make it appeare that it was said of him He that eateth my bread Let that bread alone a while and let vs consider whether Iudas who did not receaue spirituallie tooke anie more according to S. Augustine then onlie the outward signe Sure our Sauiours blood the price of our Redemption is more then your outward signe which you speake of and Iudas according to S. Augustine receaued he doth not saie the signe of the price but that which the faithfull know to be the price of our Redemption such indeed as had not faith Iudas himself thought it bread and wine but the faithfull the rest of the Disciples they knew that in substance the thing was not bakers bread as before consecration but panis Dominus bread the Lord not wine from the grape but the price of our Redemption Act. 20.28 the verie blood of God Number now the thinges receaued by the rest all that is antecedeÌ„t to the effect which the Sacrament doth giue and the thinges receaued by Iudas and see whether you can find what such thing they receaued more the signes both receaued the bodie and blood the price of our Redemption both receaued what is there els in the Sacrament that is antecedent to the effect which it produceth in the worthie receauer If wee consider the effect of the Sacrament the Apostles by it by the Sacrament receaued increase of grace they receaued it to life but Iudas coÌ„ming vnworthilie with treason in his heart increased by a sacrilegious act the grieuousnes of his sinne A man ought to come with great reuerence and preparation to receaue the benefites of God but peculiarlie to this Sacrament wherein with the benefites he is to receaue God himself he ought to examine himself well and look into euerie corner of his conscience that there be nothing amisse in it when he comes that searcheth Hierusalem with a candle and hates iniquitie with his heart If malice if abomination be not remooued if due preparation be not made the Diuine Iustice will reuenge the contempt or neglect and that also for example of others euen oft in this life which made the Apostle giue a generall warning vnto all that offer to come to this table to trie themselues first 1. Cor. 11 Let a man examine himself and so let him eate of that bread and drink of that cup and the reason For he that eateth and drinketh vnworthilie eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords bodie not omitting to mention the execution of Gods vindicatiue iustice vpon the transgressors For this cause many are weake and sicklie amongst you and many sleepe There are in S. Cyprian and other auncient Writers S. Cypr. Serm. de lapsis diuers examples of Gods iudgmentes in this behalf vppon such as ante expiata
quod Christus fecit vt maiori Charitate nos astringeret vt suum in nos ostenderet desiderium non se tantum videri permittens desiderantibus sed tangi manducar f Idem in eadeÌ„ Hom. Why doth he adde which we break this in the Eucharist wee may see not vpoÌ„ the Crosse but quite otherwise you shall not bruise a bone of him But what he suffered not vpon the Crosse that he suffers in the oblation the Masse g Idem Hom. 26. in Matth. Then what sun-beames had not that hand need to be more pure that breaketh vp this flesh that mouth which is filled with this spirituall fier that tongue which is embrued or sprinkled with this wonderfull blood h Idem de Sacerdotio l 3. O the miracle o the benignitie of God! he that sitteth aboue with the Father is touched at the same time with euerie ones hands i Idem de Sa. cerd l. 6 Dare you Mirch Featlie Morton publiklie call your coÌ„munion bread so when he the Priest hath inuocated the holy Ghost and celebrated the most reuerend and dreadfull Sacrifice touching dailie with his hands the Lord of all I demaund of thee in what rank or order wee shall place him k Idem Hom 46 in Ioa. Who would grauÌ„t to vs to be filled with his flesh this Christ hath donne to oblige vs vnto him with more loue and to demonstrate his affectioÌ„ to vs suffering himself not onlie to be seene of such as desire it but to be touched also and eaten Reflect on this Christ himself the Lord of all he that sitteth aboue with the Father this is not bakers bread is touched with hands and * Et dentibus carni suae infigi Ibidem teeth also l Cyrill Hier. Catech. myst 5. Accedens ad communionem non expansis manuum volis accede neque cum disiunctis digitis sed sinistram veluti sedem quandam subijcias dextrae quae tantum regem susceptura est concaua manu suscipe corpus Domini Approaching to the communion come not with the palmes of thy hands spred out nor with thy fingars parted but holding thy left hand as it were a resting place vnder thy right haÌ„d which is to receaue so great a king that with the hollownes of thy hand thou maiest receaue the bodie of our Lord. Before you heaâ—d Saint Augustine saie that wee receaue the Meditatour Supra pag. 45. God and man with our mouth If against these Fathers you should obiect that the flesh of Christ is impassible in it self and that our Sauiour vnder the consecrated species doth not appeare in his owne forme to our eies they would Answer that yet notwithstanding he may be seene and touched with hands and mouth according to the Sacramentall forme wherein he is God in himself is impassible but because he was in the forme of man he might suffer and be nailed vppon the Crosse and this without driuing the nailes as you seeme to conceaue through the Diuinitie And according to the same humane forme he was trulie seene though the mens eies discouered him not according to the diuine forme within For had they knowne it they would hot haue crucified the Lord of glorie If secondlie you obiect the Capharnaites interpretation the Reader by that which hath beene said before out of S. Augustine will take notice of your willfull errour in that behalf and acquit these great Schollers heere cited from so foule an imputation Wee neither eate not touch with mouth or hands the flesh of our Sauiour according to it's proper forme which was the Caphernaietes errour but in the forme of bread we touch and eate it The bread which I will giue is my flesh Ioan. 6. Mat. 26. 1. Cor. 11. My flesh is meate indeede take with your hand and eate with your mouth this in forme of bread is what my bodie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this is my bodie which is broken for you Apologist To that part of the section where he mistakes S. Augustine to maintaine a corporall eating when he affirmes that Iudas receaued the price of our Redemption not by his faith for that was shut he being reprobated therefore into his bodie I answer that there are two kinds of eating in the Sacrament one both corporall and spirituall wherein the bodie feeds on the outward elements corporallie whilst the soule receaueth the true bodie and blood of Christ by faith the other onlie corporall wherein the receauer partakes onlie the outward signe and not the bodie signified So I say Iudas receaued the last waie onlie and not the first though his faith had shut out Christs bodie yet his mouth was open to let downe the Sacrament of his bodie He as all the wicked receaued paneÌ„ Domini the bread of the Lord Sacramento tenus according to the visible signe the other eleuen as all the faithfull did also reuera indeed partake panem Dominum of bread which was the Lord. Censure It is well you confesse that your Answer is but to part of the discourse it hath hetherto beene your manner the rest is such as you know not how to cauill at it The words of S. E. which you pick out be these Iudas according to S. Augustine receaued the price of our Redemption not with the mind sure he was then a traitor but with the mouth The substance of your Answere is that he receaued bread and wine the signes or elementes but not the bodie and blood which answer is so farre from satisfying the place of S. Augustine that it is directlie coÌ„tradictorie S. Aug. Epist 162. his words are Tolerat ipse Dominus Iudam Diabolum furem venditorem suum sinit accipere inter innocentes Discipulos quod fideles nouerunt precium nostrum Our Lord himself suffers Iudas a deuill a thiefe who sould him he lets him receaue amoÌ„gst the innocent Disciples that which the faithfull know our price That which the faithfull the Apostles knew to be the price of our redemption that he Iudas tooke what was that wine or blood non corruptibilibus auro vel argento redempti estis saith our Pastor sed pretioso sanguine quasi agni immaculati Christi 1. Pet. 1. You were not redeemed with corruptible things gold and siluer but with the precious blood of Christ as of a lambe without spot or blemish And the Saints in the Reuelation Apoc. 5. Redemisti nos in sanguine tuo thou hast redeemed vs in thy blood This is the price of our Redemption as the faithfull know and this Iudas though he was a traitor did receaue amongst the rest of the Disciples not with deuotion nor with faith neither not corde no he was one of those qui non crediderunt but ore tantum with his mouth onlie whereas the other both with heart Aug. l. 2. con Aduers leg c. 9. and mouth into themselues did receaue it And so did the Church in S. Augustines time Wee
nothing els as to the communicantes after faire promises of the bodie and blood of Christ present by (a) VVafer pag. 8â— Mor. p. 135. Gods omnipotence changing the exteriour elementes and penetrating into our soules according to the substaÌ„ce of flesh and blood you giue nothing but meere bread and wine Apologist Doctor Smith should haue proued that the same proposition may be true in a natiue genuâ—ne and proper sence though the wordes be vsed in a peregrine figuratiue and impropre sence Censure It was ridiculous enough to challeng at buckler onlie as he did who came into the feild to answer distinctions but to be an andabatarian in such a combat not daring to open his eies to behold his enemies so blunt a weapon is superlatiuelie absurde His populus ridet The word questioned for improprietie is corpus in this proposition hoc est corpus meum This word corpus doth directlie signifie if we speake as the chiefest Science doth conceaue it the (a) Fit conuersio totius substantiae panis in substantiam corporis Christi Conc. Trid. sess 13. c. 4. Ex vt sacramenti quantitas dimeÌ„siua corporis Christi non est in hoc sacrameÌ„to S. Tho. 3. p. q. 76 a. 4. proinde neque ea quae sequuntur quantitatem Ex vt realis concomitantiae est in hoc sacramento tota quantitas dimensiua corporis Christi omnia accidentia eius Ibidem vide eundem 1. p. q 76. a. 4· ad 1. substance or part of substance which requires three dimensions leingth breadth and thicknes according to which notion it is in the words of institution taken properlie and the proposition proper by the possessiue meum this word corpus bodie was determined to a mans not whose soeuer but our Sauiours The same word Corpus Bodie both in the apprehension of the vulgar as you may learne by present experience when you please and according to the Philosopher as heereafter shall appeare doth import withall the naturall manner of being of such a substance which manner is to be a thing extended according to the foresaid dimensions and a mans bodie to be a thing figured and visible which manner of being naturallie flowes out of that kind of substance and vsuallie comes into the conceit with it And in regard of this manner the proposition is improper for such an extension imported also commonlie by the word corpus is not there It is improper I say if you regard the manner of being vsuallie imported also by the word corpus bodie but proper if you regard the substance of the thing directlie signified by the same word If you regard the substance of the thing directlie signified the wordes are taken in their natiue genuine and proper sence and the proposition is in that kind natiue genuine proper If you regard the manner of being imported also vsuallie by the word the attribut is not taken properlie nor the proposition proper Had you opened your eies to look vpon the distinction which you answer RelatioÌ„ pag. 39. you might haue seene that in these wordes This is my bodie there is a figure not a meere or naked one voide of truth and proprietie because although they signifie that the Eucharist is the bodie of Christ trulie reallie and properlie according to the thing yet they doe not affirme it to be the bodie of Christ after such a corporall and naturall manner as other thinges are the thinges which they are sayed to be but after a spirituall inuisible mysticall sacramentall manner and such a one as doth figuratiuelie shew and represent the naturall manner of being of the same bodie in another place Now though for words to be taken in their natiue sence and not to be taken in their natiue sence as long as it is secundum idem be contradiction yet to be taken in their natiue sence according to the substance of the thing directlie signified and not to be taken in their natiue sence according to the manner of being vsuallie imported also by them is not secundum idem nor any contradiction Apologist Good Master Doctor take notice that since a propâ—r speache is when wordes are taken in their genuine sence and a figuratiue when they are translated or taken from their genuine sence that to be taken in their natiue sence and not in their natiue sense besides that it is a meere fiction is a plaine contradiction because the sence would be natiue and not natiue Censure Against whom do you fight good Andabatarian who tould you that the speach was proper absolutè simpliciter and figuratiue or improper absolutè simpliciter that the wordes were taken in their natiue sence and that they were not taken in their natiue sence that secundum idem they were and were not This is a fiction of your braine a chimericall goblin that your ignoraÌ„ce hath made for your argument to fight against Those against whoÌ„ you preteÌ„d to deale haue noe such thing they doe not saie the speach is proper absoluté simpliciter and that it is absolutè simpliciter figuratiue they say onlie that it is proper absolutè simpliciter and figuratiue or improper secundum quid Which you will proue to be a contradiction when you proue this to be so Aethiops est niger Aethiops est albus secundum dentes and haue demonstrated against the logick rule that an argument holds well from secundum quid to simpliciter Open your eies braue challenger and read in great letters what they defend THE SPEACH IS ABSOLVTè TO BE SAID PROPER AND FIGVRATIVE ONLY SECVNDVM QVID By this time hauing beene distempered with a giddines of vnderstanding so that you could hardlie peceaue what you were to doe you are reeld ouer the entrie into the matter of the first argument where you beginne to shew your Diuinitie and will reade a lesson to my Lord and S. E. before you know what it is your self My L. had said figures some were not meere figures as were the legall but had the veritie ioyned with them of which kind he brought 3. the first an increated figure the sonne of God who is according to the Apostle the figure of his fathers substaÌ„ce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and hath it also with him yea and in him heereunto M. Mirth as followeth Apologist I graunt since the Diuiné essence was incarnat that the sonne is essentiallie the same with the Father who though quoad hypostasim in respect of his filiation he be a distinct person from his father yet quoad naturam according to his essence he is equallie sharer of the same godhead and is not an other but the same God But I pray Sirs take notice that these wordes are spoken of the Sonne as his Diuinitie manifested it self in his humanitie so then as the Diuinitie of the sonne did manifest it self in his flesh he had the image of his fathers person ingrauen in him so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies tell me then is this image the same with the
comportment abroad by this triumph that warre He would haue men call to mind that He was in that action that there He shewed his valour making it appeare how that His hand merited the scepter and His head the crowne And whilst you coÌ„ceaue it otherwise you come short of the nature of the shew you take away the grace of the royall action represented in taking out of it the kings Person which is the life and lustre in it you take the soule out of the bodie the diamond out of the ring the sunne out of the daie To say nothing of your subtilitie in conceauing by occasion of that representation or signe postures without members wounds without bodies a battell fought a victorie obtained without thinking on a man If your braine be the theater of such spectakles you must needs purge Nauiget Apologist His last similie or instance is the weakest Bread saith he exposed in the shop is a figure of it self as to be sould But by the Doctors leaue bread as it is to be sould is not it self Ergo it is not the figure of it self Censure Now you are in forme and therefore your Aduersarie had need to looke about him least with your Ergo you draw the strings and shut him in the bagge You are examining the last instance Bread as exposed is noâ—â—or then bread as vendible A stone or the bakers Cat in that place is no signe of it wherein it was said that bread suppose a white loafe exposed in the bakers shop is not onlie bread but a signe and not onlie a signe but bread it is both It is a signe of vendible bread and it self is the verie thing whereof it is a signe as you may presentlie knowe if you will but agree with the baker for it You need not aske of him whether he will sell it or no he signified his mind to sell it by exposing it there Wee doe not say that the vendibilitie is the signe of the vendibilitie but that the same thing which is exposed the loafe of bread is the subiect of both the denominations for it is theâ—e vendible you graunt and it stands there to signifie that bread euen that loafe if you like it is there vendible And if the same substance may be in the signe the thing signified wee looke no further into the similie we do not conteÌ„d that to signifie is to be signified that is not in our thoughts I would here haue left you in the bakers shoppe but that you leâ—t ouâ— into the margine to see whether possiblie the manna as in the Arck could be a signe of it self as in the desert By that which hath beene saide about the two former instances it appeares that it might The same substance is according to seuerall reasons Your coloure hath a reference to your bodie your bodie hath a reference to your soule that is within it why may not the Sacramentall species haue a reference to the bodie that is inuisiblie within it See the place of Gratian Arg 4. or to the bodie visiblie on the Crosse Ibidem where you confesse as much See also Peter Martyr suprà pag 55. capable of both denominations I say seuerall because the reason founding the one denomination is diuers from the reason fouÌ„ding the other You looke perchance for a reall order or relation betwixt the signe and the thing signified but such an order is not necessarie nor in some cases possible The King you say by his triumph doth represent actions past that relation cannot be reall because those actions are past yet an understanding hath power to make them or rather as I told you before to make the king in that action stand before our apprehension obiectiuè and so may compare this to that or rather the King in thâ—s posture to the king in that posture And reflecting againe vppon this comparison finds a reference But these nicities which you call into the dispute are troublesome to the Reader that neuer was in schooles The An est he perceaues better then the quid let vs put that the An est in an example within his reach Your tailor hauing made you new cloathes brings his bill and bidds you cast it vp NOW let it be supposed that you haue onlie shillings in your pocket and vse them as counters in casting vp this bill It will happen that as they the shillings stand for pounds and pence so they may stand for shillings too When all is done and all abated that may be be the summe rigorouslie due fiue pound and three shillings which three shillings you may let the tailour take whilst you go into your closet to fetch the fiue pouÌ„d and to studie whether those shillings were the signes of themselues Vpon the table in the account they were signes of shillings and when you first tooke them out of your pocket they were shillings if now you will not haue the same to be the signe and the thing signified you must giue other to the taylor and let those be hereafter bullion for hauing once beene signes If this case had any difficultie yet in ours there is none Who cannot conceaue that the species of bread may be referd to a bodie as a signe of it if it be indeed inuisiblie within He is verie stupid that cannot vnderstand it Well Sir if you be resolued about your shillings bring Tertullian out with you for the next busines is about a place in him Acceptum panem Professus itaque se concupiscentia concupisse edâ—re Pascha vt suum indignum enim vt quid alienum concupisceret Deus acceptum panem distributum discipulis corpus suum illum fecit hoc est corpus meum dicendo id est figura corporis mei figura autem non fuisset nisi veritatis esset corpus caeterum vacuâ— res quod est phantasma vide quod infrà citatur ex li. 5. c. 20. figuram capere non posset aut si propterea panem corpus sibi finxâ—t quia corporis carebat veritate ergo panem debuit tradere pro nobis Faciebat ad vâ—nitatem Marcionis vt panis crucisigeretur cur autem panem corpus suum appellat non magis peponem quem Marcion cordis loco habuit non intelligens veterem fuisse istam figuram corporis Christi dicentis per Hioremiam aduersus me cogitauerunt cogitatum dicentes Venite conijciamus lignum in panem eius scilicet crucem in corpus eius itaque illuminator antiquitatum quid tunc voluerit significasse panem satis declaruit corpus suum vocans panem Sic in caliâ—is mentione testamentum constituens sanguine suo obsignatum substantiam corporis confirmauit nullius enim corporis sanguis potest esse nisi carnis nam si qua corporis qualitas non carnea opponetur nobis cerie sanguinem nisi carnea non habebit ita consistit probatio corporis de testimonio carnis probatio carnis de testimonio
quia idipsum in â—ymbolo creditur Interroges vltra circuli strepitus â—ommouentur fautores clamitant Audisti resurreâ—tionem carnis quid quaeris amplius Et in peruersum â—udiis commutatis nos sycophantae illi simplices apâ—ellantur Quod si obduraueris frontem vrgere â—oeperis carnem digitis tenens an ipsam credant reâ—urrecturam quae cernitur quae tangitur quae incedit 〈◊〉 loquitur primò rident deinde annuuÌ„t Dicentibusâ—ue nobis vtrum capillos dentes pectus venâ—em manus pedes caeterosque artus ex integro â—essurrectio exhibeat tunc verò risu se tenere non â—ossunt cachinnoque ora soluentes tonsores nobis â—ecessarios placentas medicos ac sutores ingerunt â—dem S. Hieron de Error Orig. in Epist ad Pammach â—cean Congregatis Episcopis volentibusque voces imâ—etatis ab Arianis inuentas è medio tollere litteâ—rum sacrarum voces certas confessas scripto comâ—ecti nimirum ex Deo esse silium natura vnigeâ—tum esse verbum cumque solum virtutem sapieÌ„â—am esse patris verum Deum esse vt Ioannes dixit â— splendorem gloriae formam substantiae patris vt â—aulus scripsit hic Eusebiani prauas suas opiniones quentes inter sese mussitate Imus quoque nos inquientes in vestram sententiam Nam nos quoque ex Deo sumus c S. Athanas Epist ad Episc Aphric Episcopis verò denuò interrogantibus paucos istos Anne agnoscerent Filium non creaturam esse sed virtutem vnicam sapientiam Patris per omnia imaginem indemutabilis patris Deum verum Deprehensum est Eusebianos inter se conlusuriate annuere nimirum quasi ista etiam ad ipsos pertinerent Nam nos inquientes imago gloria Dei appellamur Quod si etiam Deum verum Filium nuncupent id nos quoque non malè habet quoniam verus Deus factus est Haec Arianorum corrupta peâ—uersa mens Caeterum Episcopi intellecta eorum fraude collegerunt in vnum has voces c. Ibid. Non omnibus dormio Post panis vinique benedictionem se suum ipsiuâ— corpus praebere ac suum sanguinem disertis ac perspicuis veâ—bis Christus testatus est Quae verba à sanctis Euangelistis commemorata à D Paulo postea repetita cùm propriam illam ac apertissimam significationem praese ferant secundum quam à Patribus intellecta sunt indignissimum â—â—nè flagitium est ea à quibâ—sdam contentiosis prauis hominibus ad fictitios imaginarios tropos quibus veritas carnis sanguinis Christi negatur contra vniuersum Ecclesiae sensum detorqueri Conc. Trident. Sess 13. c. 1. Animam sub vtraque vi naturalis illius connexionis concomitantiae qua partes Christi Domini c. c. 3. Quid credant ne filio ita dicenti Ego Pater vnum sumus Certè inquient quia ita scriptum est credimus Sed quomodo vnum sint c. S. Athan. vbi supra and more particularlie in his 9. Sermon Of the Resurrection pag. 476. At the name of IESVS euerie knâ—e should bow c Philippens 2. If to his name then your argumeÌ„ts against relatiue image worship are confessedlie inualid His name He Iesus hath left behind to vs that wee may shew by our reuerence and respect to it how much wee esteeme Him how true the Psalme shall be Holy and reuerend is his Name But if wee haue much adoe to get it bow at all much more shall wee haue to get it donne to his name There be some that do it not What speake I of not doing it there be that not only forbeare to do it themselues but put themselues he speakes of Puritans to an euill occupation to finde faults where none is and cast scruples into mens mindes by no meanes to do it Not to do it at his name Nay at the Holy mysteries themselues not to do it where his name is I am sure and more then his name euen the bodie and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ and those not without his soule nor that without his Deitie nor all these without inestimable high benefits of grace attending on them So he your Doctor Andrews Are these things all within your communion-bread surelie no Iesus a Sauiour secunduÌ„ rationeÌ„ spiritualis Vniuersalis salutis nomen est proprium Christo S. Th. 3. p q. 37. a. 2. Ego sum Dominus non est absque me Saluator Isa 43. Not more nor so much as in his Name the soule for example is not there at all any way no not as in a signe vnles at leingth the words of Institution souÌ„d with you thus Hoc est corpus meum this bread doth signifie my soule Which interpretation had your a. Doctor Carolstadius ex his sacrosanctis vocabulis Hoc est corpus meum miserè distorquet pronomeâ— Hoc Suinglius autem verbum substantivum Est macerat Oecolampadius nomen Corpus torturae subiicit Alij totum textum excarnificant inuertunt Alij dimidiam partem textus crucifigunt Alij dicunt non esse articulos fidei ideoque non esse de hiâ— contendendum liberum enim cuique esse vt hic sentiat quicquid velit Hi omnia pedibus conculcant destruunt Veruntamen Spiritus Sanctus est in his singulis nullus vult erroris argui in his tam diuersis contrariis probationibus textus ordinationibus cùm tamen vnam tantùm textus collocationem veraâ— esse oporteat Adeo crassè manifesté Diabolus noâ— naso suspendit Luther Desens verb. coenae pag. 387 Grand-Father heard of he would with open laughter haue redoubled his crassé manifeste Diabolus vos naso suspendit The fourth Argument was taken out of Gratian and the Glosse that the Heauenlie bread is the flesh of Christ secundum queÌ„dam modum It was Answered that the Glosse which doth vse the word Sacramentum speakes of that which is Sacramentum tantum and Gratian of the Canon saith the Heauenlie bread which includes the flesh of Christ is the visible flesh or bodie secundùm quemdam modum Apologist For satisfaction concerning Gratian if you but please to reade D. Featlie on another occasion you shall finde him instead of yeelding that Gratian contradictes himself proue that he oppugnes your transubstantiation See the CoÌ„ference betwixt D. Featlie and M. Musket pag. 60. c. Censure He must looke for satisfaction somewhere els it seemes who doth expect it as no man euer did froÌ„ you to my knowledge Well! at your request I haue turned vnto the Conference and the page 60. What is there Featlie I make a breach vpon you with two Canons the Canon-lawe and the Canon of your masse Answer Nonne hoc spumosum But stay let vs make a demurre vpon the Doctors preface and consider whether it be likelie that he doth vrge Authoritie sincerelie
substantiall indiuidualitie of the bodie for the bodie was before and will be the same after when they be not at all how then could it be concluded that two of them be two substantiall indiuidualities they neither are substantiall indiuidualities which is as easie to be proued as it is easie to proue that your vbication in this place where you are which you may be without when you will is not that whereby you are substantiallie distinct from other mē nor out of their pluralitie doth there ensue a pluralitie in the bodie their subiect for accidēts take not away their proper subiect so to be without any but are in it and these presences which we speake of are accidents not of a bodie in common what euer bodie but of this indiuiduall bodie of our Sauiour Iesus Christ Featlie pag. 140 This way failing your Doctor he takes another to proue against Master Wood a substantiall dualitie in the bodie out of the motion of it for if the same bodie be vnder two seuerall dimensions it might be he thinks the terminus à quo and the terminus ad quem of the same direct motion be moued from it self which is saith he a contradiction But neither can he bring about his intent this waie That which is the subiect of locall motion or the thing which properlie is moued when the Priest for example takes an hoaste out of the pixe are the dimēsions of bread which dimensions haue localitie or situall extension and are in loco in a place whose definition you heard before out of the Philosopher the terminus à quo of which motion is not our Sauiours bodie but the pixe where it was and the terminus ad quem is the communicants mouth wherein he puts it Our Sauiours bodie which is in those dimensions is not in loco per se but per accidens that is to saie though that accident place which is terminus continentis c. doth not affect in in it self yet is it in the dimensions of bread which dimensions are so affected And as it is per accidens in loco so is it locallie moued per accidens not per se The Sacrament is not locus the place of the bodie properly speaking neither is it the bodie commensurated to the place of the species The bodie is not there after the manner of a bodie extended situallie but rather according to the manner of a Spirit though not altogether that way neither but another more vndetermined and supernaturall way whereof the Philosopher wanting faith had no knowledge The Soule Aristotle saith is in loco per accidens 4. Phys t. 45. and his Commentator there Anima est in loco quia sublectum eius quod est corpus est in loco And the Soule is moued per accidens because the bodie or the part wherein it is vnited is moued this motion being nothing els but a successiue comparison to place Motis nobis necessarium est quae in nobis sunt omnia simul moueri saies Aristotle 2. Topic. loco 24. and 4. Phys t. 31. Motum autem aliud mouetur per se aliud mouetur per accidens illud quod mouetur per accidens aliud est quod potest moueri per se verbi gratia membra hominis clauus in naui aliud non potest sed semper mouetur per accidēs verbi gratia albedo cognitio ista enim non mutant sua loca nisi quia illa in quibus sunt transferuntur The connexion or vnion of the Soule vnto the bodie disposed wee know by nature and by reason of this connexion it comes to passe that mouing the bodie vnto a place the soule consequentlie is also there The connexiō of the bodie of our Sauiour with the species is reuealed and made by the forme of consecration which is practicall This in the shape of bread is my bodie And the Councels acknowledge it when they say it is contained in the species sub speciebus panis vini veraciter continetur Conc. Later sub Innocent 3 c. firmiter §. vna est Conc. Trid. Sess 13. c. 1. 3 so the Lateran Councell and the Councell of Trent in the same tenour In sanctissimo Eucharistiae Sacramento continetur verè realiter substantialiter corpus c. and sub singulis cuiusque speciei partibus separatione facta totus Christus continetur So that a double relation is vnderstood there one of the bodie to the species another of the species to the bodie which remaine so that no force in nature can dissolue or separate them whilst the species remaine vncorrupted and this by vertue and power of consecration and of the diuine omnipotence This for the an est of this vnion or connexion the modus of it in particular sainct Thomas saith is ineffabilis It sufficeth to know there is such a connexion by which it comes to passe that mouing the species to a place the bodie of our Sauiour is also there for the species and the bodie cannot be separated or diuorced And as it is there in place in the sence aboue specified namelie per accidens so is it moued per accidens It is further to be noted that when a thing one in it self is multiplex secundum esse I take the word heere in a great latitude it may be moued and not moued secundum diuersa The Sonne of God our blessed Sauiour who is in himself one vnum Ens was moued according to his humane forme Vado ad Patrem quia Pater maior me est Ioa. 14. and according to his diuine forme he was immoueable Your soule which is but one may be moued in your arme and vnmoued in your breast and your bodie may be moued according to one accidentall forme as qualitie though it be not at the same time moued according to another VVere this in English he that is no Scholler could not vnderstand it suppose quantitie Cum aliquid est vnum subiecto saith our Doctour S. Thomas multiplex secundum esse nihil prohibet secundum aliquid moueri secundum aliquid immobile permanere sicut corpori est aliud esse album aliud esse magnum vnde potest moueri secundum albedinem permanere immobile secundum magnitudinem 3. p. qu. 76. a. 6. And in the same place answering an Obiection which was made to proue that our Sauiours bodie is in the Sacrament mobiliter quia nobis motis mouentur ea omnia quae sunt in nobis as before was said out of Aristotle he answers Dicendum quod ratio illa procedit de motu per accidens quo ad motum nostri mouentur ea quae in nobis sunt aliter tamen ea quae per se possunt esse in loco sicut corpora aliter ea quae per se non possunt esse in loco sicut formae spirituales substantiae Ad quem modum potest reduci quod dicimus Christum
moueri per accidens secundum esse quod habet in hoc Sacramento in quo non est sicut in loco Out of these words I take an instance to declare the solution which I gaue to your Argument whereby you would proue that if our Sauiours bodie were in seuerall dimensions sacrameÌ„tally it might be moued froÌ„ it self so be substaÌ„tiallie diuided in it self The Answer is that diuision in it self followes not out of that motus per accidens My Soule whilst I write is moued per accidens from it self but yet remaines one It were ridiculous to think that I cannot moue my fingers without diuiding an indiuisible and destroying that immortall thing on which the motion it self dependeth As for the termini à quo and ad quem they be those that be the termini of the motus per se When your bodie is in London in your Chamber per se your soule is there in eodem loco your chamber per accideÌ„s the place is one but the manner of being in it is diuerse Per se and per accidens distinguish the manner WheÌ„ your bodie is in motion thither to your chamber per se your soule is moued thitherwards too to the same terminus ad quem your chamber per accidens Suppose you be sitting in your studie at your table holding your right hand on the one end and your left hand on the other end When you moue your hands to the middle of the table and put them there together the termini a quibus in these two motions be not your soule which is and was in either hand but the two ends of the table where your hands were be the termini from whence you moued them and the terminus ad quem is not your soule which is in your hands now being together but the middest of the table is the terminus ad quem You must now keepe your haÌ„ds there together still for feare least at parting them againe you diuide your soule substantiallie into two by mouing it from it self whilst you moue the right hand wherein it is all from the left wherein it is likewise all or put of your too melancholie imagination of a contradiction to ensue in case a thing should per accideÌ„s be moued from it self or be in two dimensions whereof one is locallie moued from the other Of distance or resting it is the same Whilst your hands or armes do moue one from the other your breast and other parts may rest and the soule in the right hand is neerer to the same soule in the left wheÌ„ they be ioyned then is the a Of it self and by it self it caÌ„not be distaÌ„t from it self soule in the feete Neerer how per accideÌ„ that is it is in a part that is neerer moued how per accidens that is it is in a part of dimension which is moued resteth how per accidens that is it is in a part that doth rest Of it self it is not the subiect of these corporall accidents or affections as I told you before Applie this to the bodie existing according to the manner of a spirit after a more eleuated high manner theÌ„ that of the soule more incontracted more indetermined more independent of locall affections in seuerall dimensions some testing some moued some neerer some farther of and when any man offers to conclude a contradiction Some learned Deuines haue thought it probable that an angel can be naturallie in two places at once as in two seuerall assumed bodies and you will haue much adoe to demonstrate against them Celarent looke neere whether there be affirmatio and negatio eiusdem de eodem and secundum idem according to the same dimension and you will mile at their ignorance who by their wits do striue to put Gods omnipotencie to the non-pâ—us Apologist The next tedious busines is about this proposition This is my bodie wherein that substantiall change which is aimed at is attributed to the power of that practicall proposition Censure That the proposition is practicall was the tenet of the first of those witnesses which your Doctor cited as for himself in those words which he cited Acceptum parem corpus suum illum not illud as in Featlies margine fecit how so Hoc est corpus meuÌ„ dicendo if by saying those words Hoc est corpus meuÌ„ he made it his bodie those words were practicall the like maÌ„ner of speach and more expresse too you shall find in other a. Per orationem Verbi Dei ab ipâ—o EucharistiaÌ„ That factum â—ibum â— illius carnem sanguinem esse edect sumus S. Iustin Apol. 2. Qui est à terra panis percipiens vocationem Dei iam non est communis panis sed Eucharistia ex duabus rebus constans terrena coelesti S Iren. l. 4 c. 34 Benedictione etiam natura ipsa mutatur S. Ambros de myst init c. 9. Quòd si tantum valuit humaná benedictio de miraculis loquitur per Moysen aliosque patratis quid dicemus de ipsa consecratione Diuina vbi verba ipsa Domini Saluatoris operantur Ibidem Vide eundem l. 4. de Sacram. c. 5. Panis per Verbum Dei orationem sanctificatur non quia comeditur eo progrediens vt verbi corpus euadat sed statim per Verbum in corpus mutatur vt dictum est à Verbo Hoc est corpus meum S. Greg. Nyssen Orat Catech c. 37. Vox illa hoc est corpus meum semel quidem dicta est sed per omnes mensas Ecclesiae vsque ad hodiernum diem vsque ad eius aduentum Sacrificio praestat firmitatem S. Chrysost de Prod. Iudae vide eundem Hom. 2 In 2. ad Tim. Panis noster calix certa consecrations mysticus fit nobis non nascitur S. Aug. l. 20. cont Faust c. 13. Absit vt de his quicquam sinistrum loquar qui Apostolico gradui succedentes Christi corpus sacro ore conficiunt S. Hier. epist ad Heliod Transformatur arcanis verbis panis iste per mysticam benedictionem accessionem Spiritus S in carnem Domini Theophilact in c 6 Ioan. Virtute Spiritus-S per Verbum Christi fit sanguis Domini Paschal lib. de Corp. Dom. c. 12. Per eius virtutem prolatum ab eo Verbum quae videntur tam sanctificata sunt vt cunctum carnis sensum excedunt I sich l. 6. in Leuit. c. 22. Auncients whom you will not I suppose yet I haue cause to feare the contrarie but you should not I am sure offer to controule That which was aimed at or disputed of was not the change but the Read presence as you haue beene oft put in mind though it be true also that those words do serue to proue there is a change of substance For that which was vnder them before consecration was bread S Cyril Hier. and that which is vnder them after consecration is not
1. c 20. of Iudith c. Ergo he was à Protestant and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles See Gretser his defence of Bellarm de verbo Dei Clemens Alexandrinus saies our Lord †Vinum benedixit cum dixit Accipite c. l. 2. Paedag c. 2. Sanguis vitis verbum quod pro multis effunditur in remissionem peccatorum sanctum laetitiae fluentum allegoriâ—â— significat Ibidem blessed not beare but m. The same would Elfrick saie touching the other kind when he tells you there is much difference betwixt the bodie Christ suffered in and the bodie that is hallowed to how sell That which the Priest consecrateth and that which our Sauiour tooke was bread and there is great difference betwixt bread and a mans bodie But after consecration he tells you In that holy housell there is one thing in it seene and another not seene but vnderstood that which is there seene hath bodilie shape and that wee do there vnderstand hath ghostlie might The housell is dealed into sundrie parts chewed betweene teeth and sent into the bellie Howbeit neuerthelesse after ghostlie might it is all in euerie part See aboue pag. 330. the testimonie of Stephanus Eduensis about whose time this Elfrick is by the Protestants said to haue liued and of Lanfranck Archbishop of Canturburie who liued soone after and tells what was the beleefe of England and of the world in this point at that time vt vere dici possit ipsum corpus quod de Virgine sumptum est nos sumere non ipsum ipsum quidem quantum ad essentiam c. hanc fidem tenuit a priscis temporibus nunc tenet Ecclesia quae per totum orbem c. Suprà pag. 331. wine that he had learned to walke vpon earth not absolutely and for it self to n. Relatiue honour in due circumstances he denies not Put of thy shoes for the place wheron thou standest is holie ground Exod. 3 The Israelites were commaunded to bow before the Arck which had in it two Cherubins made of gold Adore his footestoole because it is holie Psalme 98 And they did so Venerabantur quondam Iudaei Sancta Sanctorum quia erant ibi Cherubim propitiatorium c S. Hieron Epist ad Marcell Marke that Quia The Prophets their directors knew the meaning of Adorate scabellum and Non facies tibi sculptile better I trowe then Iohn Caluin As for Clemens Alex. the learned know that his discourse in the booke obiected is against the Pagan Idolatrie Cur o stolidâ— he speakes to the Heathens inanium rerum dediti cogitationi coelestem locum maledictis incessentes pietatem ac religionem in soâ—â—m detraxistis Terrestres Deos Mercurium Iouem c. vobis fingentes haec gâ—nita ante Deum ingeniâ—um persequentes in profundiorem incidistis caligineÌ„ Pulcher est lapis Parius sed nondum est Neptunus Pulchrum est ebur sed nondum est Olympius Materia semper arte indiget Deus autem nullius indigus Cleâ—ens Alex. in Protrept siue Orat. adhort ad Gentes Ego â—utem terram those Idols made of gold or other preâ—ious matter were originallie of earth and therefore â—e calls them so calcare didici non adorare non enim â—â—hi fas vnquaÌ„ rebus inanimatis credere spes animae Ibidem Mercurium tanquam ianitorem c. si tanquam â—nsensibiles eos iniuria afficiunt cur adorant vt Deos Romani auteÌ„ qui res maximas praeclarè gestas Forâ—onae attribuunt eam esse Deam maximam existiâ—ant posuerunt eam in sterquilinio dignum Deae templum secessum tribuentes Ibidem â—â—pridius whose words are vsed to proue ChristiaÌ„ Churches had no pictures in theÌ„ speakes of Idols Alexander â—mperator Christo templum facere voluit eumque inter Deos recipere quod Adrianus cogitassé fertur qui templa in omnibus ciuitatibus sine simulachris iusâ—etat fieri quae hodie id circo quia non habent Numina dicuntur Adriani c. Lamprid. 〈◊〉 Alexand worship it Ergo he was a Protestant and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles The Church of Smnirna could not be â—nduced to leaue Christ and worship any other for him and they did o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 looke your Dictionarie great Rabbin And read againe S. Iustins words suprà pag. 546. honour his honourers Ergo they were Protestants and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles Polycarp when he gaue thankes to God for calling him to Martyrdome did not inuocate the Saincts Ergo he was a Protestant and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles Hegesippus liued in this second age he was of the Iewish Nation and was afterwards conuerted to Christianitie Ergo he was a Protestant and would haue subscribed to the 39. Articles These are the men all that he names in the †In the first Age he names Christ and his Apostles which is a begging of the Question Vide Collationem doct Cathol aâ— Protest cum expressis S. Scripturae verbis Parisiiis anno 1622. Adding two more S Denis citing his book ex quâ— Pontificij mâ—lle petunt testimonia saies Cook and S Ignatius in whose few Epistles be many testimonies against Protestants whereof â—ome haue beene obiected to Featlie vpon the like Challeng by D. VVeston second age Birckbeck In the second age from 100. to 200. Iustine the Martyr Hegesippus The Church of Smyrna touching the Martyrdome of their Bishop Polycarp Melito Bishop of Sardis Pope Eleutherius his Epistle to Lucius the first Christian king of Britaiâ—e Polycrates of Ephesus and the Easterne Churches touching the keeping of Easter â—â—enaeus Bishop of Lions Clemens Alexâ—ndrinus These I saie be men which he brings and I haue brieflie pointed at â—is proofe running it as I did suddainlie ouer for though he were long â—n making I do not think the booke worth serious reading If any of his Parish thinke the forsaid Arguments â—e good I pittie them Sapientia priâ—a est stultitia caruisse Some there will see by this little â—ight how easilie his pretence may be â—ut of by the neck The head of it is his claime to our Sauiour and his Apoâ—â—les whose words in Scripture you thinke and would force vs to beâ—eeue be Protestantish Whereas the â—earned on both sides know the Scripture and consequentlie the Writers and Authors of it to be for vs so dâ—rectlie that Protestants refuse to staÌ„â— vnto the proper sence An experiencâ— whereof the Reader hath seene in thâ— Question here discussed whereiâ— Scripture is for Catholikes so manâ—fest that our Aduersaries themseluâ—â— confesse Suprà pag. 293 they must yeild vs the caâ—se if it be taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properlie The trunc of a mans bodie beinâ— deuoid of life and soule that contaâ—nes and holds all together quicklâ— resolues rendring to each element hâ—â— owne share The imagination is nâ—â— sooner quiet but the Chimera whicâ— it had made vp of