conioyned they be sometimes by some occasion seperated and remoued the one from the other as touching their bodies yet for all that do they not leaue to be one flesh and one body by meanes of the societie and matrimoniall familiaritie which is betweene them In like case albeit that Iesus Christ with whom wee are conioyned and vnited by the faith and trust which wee haue in him and his promises bee as touching his bodie resident in heauen wee yet abiding vppon the earth and that by meanes thereof there is great distance and space betweene him and vs as touching his bodie that neuerthelesse hindereth vs not to bee flesh of his flesh and bones of his bones that hee is not our head and wee his members that hee is not our husband and wee his spowse that wee bee not of one selfe same body that wee bee not engrafted into him that wee be not cloathed with him that wee abide not in him as the boughes and buddes in the Vine And there is neither distance of times nor places whatsoeuer it be there is no difference of times which can hinder such a coniunction and that the faithfull eate truly his flesh and his bloud For as the auncient Fathers albeit they were two or three thousand yeares before Iesus Christ dyed yet left they not to communicate in his flesh crucified and to eate the same spirituall meate which we eate and to drinke the same spirituall drinke which wee drinke The faithfull also which are come twelue or fifteene hundred yeares after leaue not what place soeuer they be in to participate as did the Fathers in the same meate and in the same drinke which they haue done And no other difference there is betweene the eating of the Fathers which were before the comming of Iesus Christ and of them that haue followed him but the reason of more or lesse that is to say that there is in the one more ample and expresse declaration of the good will of God towards vs then in the other Whence must be concluded that from the beginning of the world vnto the end there neuer was nor shall be other coniunction betweene our Lord Iesus Christ and his Church then spirituall that is to fay wrought by the spirit of God For euen as there is but one faith in the Fathers and in vs which respecteth alwayes on the one part and the other our Lord Iesus Christ so are we not also otherwise conioyned with him then they haue bene As then it is so that the Fathers haue had no other societie nor communion then spirituall It followeth thereof that we also are not nor can be otherwise then spiritually cōioyned with him Neuerthelesse it is not said that wee and the Fathers are not flesh of his flesh and bones of his bones and that all together doo not partake as well in his humanitie as in his diuinitie But that which wee say is that all this participation which wee haue in him is by the operation vertue of the holy Ghost which thing Christ Iesus in S. Iohn speaking of the meane of this coniunction teacheth clearly when he saith The things which I speake vnto you are spirit and life And S. Paul also when hee saith Our fathers did eate the same spirituall meate and dranke the same spirituall drinke Now when wee speake of this spirituall eating common to vs and to the Fathers it must not therfore be thought that we reiect the holy Supper of the Lord or any way thinke that the same vse of bread and wine is superfluous no more then the vse of the water in Baptisme For our Lord knowing the blockishnesse of our vnderstandings and the infirmitie and weakenesse of our hearts and through the pittie he hath of vs willing to helpe and remedie the same hath not contented to haue left vs the ministerie of his word to assure vs of the participation which we haue in his flesh in his bloud and in all the good things thereon depending but hath also willed to adde therevnto the signes of bread and wine which he hath as seales to his word to seale in our hearts by the vse of the same the faith we haue of the foresaid coniunction by his word So that it sufficed him not to haue contracted a couenant with Abraham by the word and promise which he made vnto him but added moreouer therevnto the signe of Circumcision as a seale for more ample confirmation and assurance of the said couenant To the end then that each one may vnderstand what is the Supper of the Lord and what the Ministers do thereof beleeue and teach it is meete to consider and acknowledge in the same three things First the ordinance of the Lord contained in his word and declared by his Ministerie according to his commaundement by which this holy cerimony hath bene ordained and established in the Church for the edification and entertaining of the members thereof which thing must bee diligently obserued to haue it in that honour and reuerence as appertaineth and not to place it in the ranke of other cerimonies which haue no foundation nor reason to authorise them but the onely will and tradition of men Neuerthelesse heed must be taken that by the institution and ordinance whereof we make mention we vnderstand not a certaine pronuntiation of words or any vertue which is hidden in the same as do the Priests of the Romane Church who by ignorance and superstitious opinion which they haue thinke to haue consecrated and transubstantiated the bread and wine in the Masse by the vertue of fiue words Hoc est enim Corpus meum For this is my body breathed and pronounced ouer the Elements Wherein they are greatly deceiued and abused for as much as the word which is the formall cause of the Sacrament is not a word simply said and vttered but a declaration of the institution and ordinance of God made by the Minister according to his commaundement and a preaching of the death of Iesus Christ and of the fruite thereof by which the hearts of the hearers are lifted vp vnto the contemplation and meditation of his benefite and their faith stirred vp and inflamed in his loue and where the same shall not thus be done it must not be thought that the Elements be Sacraments As S. Augustine in the 80. Tract vpon Saint Iohn in these termes teacheth Whence commeth this vertue to the water that in touching the body it washeth the heart sauing that it is done by the word not because it is pronounced but because it is beleeued This word is the word of the faith which wee preach This saith the Apostle to wit If we confesse with our mouth that Iesus is the Lord and beleeue in our heart that God raised him from the dead wee shall be saued And continuing his speech hee addeth in the end these proper words to wit This word of faith which wee preach is that doubtlesse by which baptisme is consecrated
betweene the true reuelations of the Lord and the Word which proceeding from him is as true as the reuelation And the reuelation reciprocally as true as the Word Yet doth it not therefore follow that the word and the reuelations of the spirit of the Lord by the which we may be conducted to the vnderstanding of the word are not things different and that the one doth not go before the other And where the said Vigor prayeth the said De Spina to hasten to the point he answereth That he cannot else where ground his answeres then vpon the demaundes which be made vnto him Reply Whereunto the said Vigor replyed that hee referred himselfe touching the sence to that which is touched in the answere of the said De Spina And where he saith that the word goeth before the reuelation that is of no value to make difference vpon the question proposed And to come to the point the said Vigor demaundeth whether a man may be assured that he hath reuelation from the Lord that a booke is a booke of the holy Scripture and when he may iudge assuredly of his inward inspiration Also how he can assure any of this inspiration giuen him of the Lord Answere Touching the first Article of the last demaund It is not a thing impertinent to distinguish the scripture from the interpretation thereof inaâ—much as they bee things diuers and diuers gifts of the Lord. And to answer to the question proposed how a particular man before the reuelation and inward testimonie of the spirit of God in his heart may acknowledge that it is Canonicall The spirit of God varieth not from himselfe And abiding in one particular man he wil acknowledge the Scripture which is come from him and beareth his markes And for answere to the second demand hee also saith that the selfe same spirit beeing likewise in a third person will acknowledge both that the word and the reuelation are of him for the reasons alledged That is to say that the spirit of God in diuers persons is alwayes equall and like vnto himselfe Obiection This is no full satisfaction to the first question proposed by the which it was demaunded how some man may iudge in himselfe that hee hath the holy Ghost to discerne one Booke to be the holy Scripture and another not but Apocrypha and how he may declare vnto another that he hath his inspiration from God Answere The spirit of God is called a seale in the scripture therefore is it that the first effect which it produceth in the heart of him vnto whom it is communicated is to assure him of his presence As for assuring a secoÌ„d person of the reuelation that one hath receiued of the spirit of God it is easie Forasmuch as the spirit of God which openeth the mouth of the one to speake doth also open the eares of the other to listen to his word and the heart to beleeue it to be perswaded thereof So that betweene the maister and the scholler between the teacher and the hearer when they be both furnished and enlightened by the Spirit of God there is alwayes one mutuall consent to acknowledge one another Obiection Such certaintie is a great incertaintie And there is not any of what sect soeuer which doeth not assure himselfe to haue the holy Ghost and the trueth on his side which is a foolish presumption How can a man distinguish a presumption from a true inspiration Answere S. Iohn Chrisostome saith that in vaine a man boasteth of the spirit without the word which is a meane to represse sectes and heresies and to iudge of all things which heretiques others would propose vnder the authoritie tytle of the Spirit of God For as by the spirit we know the true sence of the word so do we also mutually acknowledge by the word who those be which haue the spirit of God or no. Obiection This is no answere to the question For the question is not to examine the doctrine by the word but the question is to know whether it be the word of God by which a man will examine and approoue a doctrine And how a man shall iudge assuredly that hee hath a reuelation of the Lord that that is the word of God Answere If he be faithfull therefore shall he iudge by the Spirit of God which is in him as in him which telleth the same vnto him And if he be vnfaithfull as impossible it is that he should iudge thereof as it is to a blinde man to iudge and discerne of colours presented vnto him Forasmuch saieth S. Paul as the Spirit of God is he by whom wee know and iudge the things that are of God Obiection Yet is not this an answere to the question proposed let the iudgement thereof be left to the readers and hearers Now make they another demaund that is to say Whether we be not very certaine by the word of God that the Lord doeth assist his Church and will assist it vnto the end of the world And whether it be not a more assured thing to stay on the consent and iudgement of the Church touching the determination of the Canonicall bookes of the holy Scripture the distinction of them from the Apocrypha then to leane vpon his owne iudgement esteeming it to bee an inward inspiration whereof a man can make no proofe but supposeth that he hath the holy Ghost Answere The Doctors doo confound the opinions which fantasticke men may haue with the witnesses and reuelations of the holy Ghost although betweene those two there is as much distance as is from heauen to earth And as touching the consent of the Church suppose that it proceedeth from the spirit of God Infallable it is also certaine that particular reuelations may be as of Esay and other Prophets And forasmuch as the one and the other do proceed from one selfe same Authour which is the Spirit of trueth The certaintie of the reuelations of God his Spirit made vnto all the Church in generall and to euery member of it in particular is of one selfe same moment Obiection The Minsters cannot shew to the Catholiques nor to any others that they are not fantasticall for asmuch as they make no proofe more then do other sects of the reuelation of the holy Ghost made vnto them and as touching that is said suppose that it proceedeth froÌ„ the Spirit of God They doubt it seemeth of the assistance of the holy Ghost in the Church of God which saith S. Paul is Columna firmameÌ„tuÌ„ veritatis the pillar ground of truth And a thing it is to be wel considered that they are more certain of the assistaÌ„ce of the Lord in one particular person then in the Church vniuersal And where they say that to know the truth the holy Spirit assisteth as well euery member of the Church as the whole church By that might a man conclude that the particular faithful could neuer erre that the
particular faithfull man should be aswell the pillar of truth as the vniuersal church Moreouer in making of particular reuelatiō of like waight with the iudgement of the church they plainly contradict the 4. article of their confession of faith where it is thus written We acknowledge those bookes to be canonicall and very certaine rules of our faith not so much by the common consent and agreement of the Church as by the testimonie and inward perswasion of the holy Ghost which maketh vs to discerne them frō other Ecclesiasticall bookes By the said article men may see how much more they attribute to themselues then to all the vniuersall church Which article they now contradict attributing as much to the one as to the other And also in their confessiō of faith lastly printed the said article hath been taken away as is seene by that which De Spina hath now brought hither imprinted at Geneua 1564. Whereby it appeareth that they be retracted as confessing that it behoueth to rest more vpon the common cōsent of the church thē vpon any particular mās iudgemēt Which thing is very reasonable seeing the holy Ghost is promised to the church vniuersall not to euery particular person Answere If men may esteeme the Ministers fantasticke although they haue the word of God more shall the Doctors bee holden for such in things they maintaine and defend without and contrarie to the word of God Touching the second point where the Doctors reproach the Ministers that they doo doubt as it seemeth by their answere of the assistance of the spirit of God to the church The answer is that that is not the doubt but to know which is the true Church And touching the third point whereof say the Doctors might bee inferred that particular persons could not erre The consequence is naught for as much as the spirite of God may sometimes depart from particular persons and in this case they may faile and erre as Dauid confesseth to haue happened to him To the fourth point the Ministers do answere that they no way contradict the alledged Article of their confession for that comparison is made in the answere of two reuelations of the holy Ghost the one made to the bodie and the other to the members which they maintaine to bee of like waight touching the certaintie thereof And in the confession mention is made of the reuelation of GOD his spirite which is the cause of the Churches consent which doth follow as the effect thereof Now so it is that the cause being preferred before his effect there is great reason that the reuelation of God his spirit compared with the consent of his Church be preferred vnto it as the cause to the effect which it produceth And touching the contrarietie which they pretend to happen in the confessions printed at diuers times and by diuers Printers they shall bee answered when it shall please them to debate the Articles particularly Obiection Where they set foorth the doubt they haue of the true Church as much men may say of pretended reuelations of God his spirit vnto particular persons Of whom likewise it may bee doubted whether they bee members of the Church For the other point where they denie that they contradict the fourth article of their confession it seemeth in shew that there is contradiction for as much as they compare the particular reuelatiō with the consent of the church as by their answere appeareth Also that which is alledged that reuelation is cause of consent to preferre it to that as the cause to the effect seemeth to serue to small purpose for it is as if one shuld say that the reuelation is to be preferred to the word of God and the holy scripture For very certaine it is that reuelation goeth before the word and scripture And as it appeareth in the text of the Confession as euery one may easily iudge the authors thereof speake of the certaintie and infallibilitie of two reuelations as holding themselues more assured of that they haue in their owne spirit then that which is of the iudgement of the Church And touching an other point where it is said that particular persons may sometimes faile when the holy Ghost doth leaue them By that wee may conclude that wee must not infallibly rest on the pretended inspirations of particular persons because we may doubt of them whether they be destitute of God his spirit or no which cannot be done of the Church Wherefore more sure it is to stay vpon the Church infallably gouerned by the holy Ghost then vpon priuate pretended inspirations And so do the Catholikes therein neuer following their priuate iudgement and therefore cannot be esteemed phantasticke But rather those which preferre their proper iudgement which they shrowde with the title of particular inspiration The Doctors require one text of the scripture by the which the holy Ghost is promised vnto euery one in particular as it is to the Church vniuersall to know and iudge and discerne which are the scriptures Answere Touching the first point As indeed they approue not all Churches to be true Churches which say they be so So do they not also approue them all faithful who boast themselues to be so For the second point the comparison of the Doctors is not proper which thus they haue made as who should say that reuelation is to bee preferred to the word of God c. Forasmuch as the word of God all the writings aswell of the Prophets as of the Apostles are as much of the reuelations of the Spirit of God that no more difference there is betweene the one and the other then is betweene Genus and Species And touching that which is added in this article that the reuelation precedeth the Scripture It behooueth to distinguish betweene the reuelations made to the Prophets before they put them in writing and those which haue beene made to them that read their writings for the vnderstanding of them Touching the first we confesse they goe before the Scripture And touching the second wee say that they follow the same For the third article the Ministers doo answere that it is easie to iudge whether the Spirit of God assist a particular person or whether it bee withdrawne by the things which he proposeth when they bee reduced to the word of God and censured by the rules which are there proposed vnto vs as is sayde Touching the demand it should bee too tedious a thing to alledge all the places where it is written That the Spirit of God is communicated to the particular members of the Church onely let them see in the 1. Cor. 2. where expresly it is said that the Spirite of God is communicated to the chosen to know and discerne the things which bee of God And in Esay 55. the Lord doth promise to shed his Spirite vpon the faithfull as water vpon the earth And in Ioel likewise the second and Ieremie 34. And the 1. Epistle of Saint Iohn
because men do alledge propose many things to the contrary To the end therefore that God and his Angels bee maintained true in their words it must not be doubted but God can much more easily change and alter his creatures and all their qualities then a Potter can play with his clay and forme at his pleasure some vessell thereof Moreouer there is daunger that if we limit Gods power towards his creatures wee fall to denie him his Lordship and dominion ouer them For no other thing is it to be Lord of a creature then to haue power to change alter and giue it such a nature and qualitie best pleasing to him as hauing the same in his owne power And therefore God in Ieremy to shewe that hee had power to destroy and ruinate or to maintaine Ierusalem as seemed him good saith I am the Lord of all flesh is there any thing too hard for me Therefore the Doctors do conclude that there is daunger if this question bee maintained as impossible to God that each one therein will dare as much alledging the same examples which the Ministers do to exempt from the power of God euery thing shall displease him And when men shall produce vnto him such things out of the scripture he may interpret the scripture in an other sence saying that such a thing shall be impossible to God by the naturall sence of the words of the scripture Euen as the Ministers doo change and alter the scripture which saith that the body of Iesus Christ is in two places To wit the word of the Supper compared with that of the Ascention and say that that of the Supper ought not to bee vnderstood litterally for that one body should be in two places is impossible to God So say the Doctors that each one wil corrupt the litterall sence of the scriptures saying that the thing is impossible vnto God And therefore must the scriptures be otherwise vnderstood And notwithstanding it may bee because it displeaseth him and yet will hee bring forth the selfe-same reasons and allegations as do the Ministers to shewe that all things are not possible to God The Doctors do againe conclude that it is better to maintaine the scripture in the truth thereof albeit it propose in our iudgements incomprehensible and impossible things then to open a gap for euery one to depraue the word of God to raunge and subiect it to his will and iudgement vnder shadow of saying that it is impossible to God and alledging for the same some examples They will not omit that the Ministers who haue often protested to relye vpon the pure word of God do alledge only auncient Doctors against the power of God flying for aide to them against Gods expresse word which importeth that generally without exception there is nothing impossible to him Answere The Minister answere that the Doctors proue not their consequence and that they leaue it for some distrust they haue as is likely that they are not able to proue it They mentiō but the antecedent of their said consequence to the confession whereof it is not possible for them to lead the Ministers by their reasons and authorities alledged to weaken their said consequence for as much as of one particular they inferre a generall which is contrary to the rules of Logicke And where they say that the authorities alledged by the Ministers nothing serue to reproue their consequence and to shew that God leaueth not to be almightie although he cannot do any thing which doth derogate to his nature they referre themserues therein to the said auncient authors which for the same end and reasons as the Ministers doo alledge and propose the aboue said exceptions Where they pretend that the authorities and sentences alledged out of the auncient Fathers do nought appertaine to the present question for as much as they denie that they should be vnderstood of other things but those only which do containe in themselues contradiction The Ministers do answere that so also doth that which they propose of a body that at on selfe instant it may be in diuers places For as much is it as if they should say that a body is and is not at one selfe-same time and that a body is one and is not one Also that a creature is incircumscriptible and not inclosed within certaine limits which happening it should no more be a creature but God As may bee gathered of that which S. Basil writeth in his booke of the holy Ghost Chapter 22. saying thus The Angell that appeared to Cornelius was not in the same place where Phillip was And he that spake to Zacharie from the Aultar filled not whiles hee spake vnto him his seate and place in heauen But the holy Ghost is in Habacuck and Daniel in Babylon and in Ezeehiel vpon the floud of Chobar for the spirit of God doth fill the earth And the Prophet writing thereof saith Where shall I hide me from thy spirit or whither shall I flye from thy presence Didymus in his booke of the holy Ghost confirming that aboue said saith thus Were the spirit of God a creature his substance should he haue circumscript and limitted as haue all things made and created As then so it is that the spirit of God doth fill the world and is not circumscript nor in any place limitted therof it followeth that he is God Vigilius in the disputation hee wrote betweene Sabellius Photius Arrius and Athanasius vnder the person of Athanasius thus writeth Thereby may it chiefly appeare that the spirit of God is God that he is euerie where and is not contained in any one place as the Prophet writeth Whither shall I flye to hide me from thy spirit Of these places may we conclude that if a body bee not circumscript finished and closed in certaine limits it is not a creature which ought to bee vnderstood not onely of other bodies but of that also of Iesus Christ himselfe as appeareth by that which Theodoret writeth in his second Dialogue where hee thus saith Then is the body of our Lord risen exempted from all corruption impassible and immortall adorned with diuine glory adored and worshipped of the heauenly powers Neuerthelesse albeit it be in such sort qualified yet ceaseth it not therefore to be circumscript as it was before it was glorified whereof it followeth that being a true body and a creature it cannot be in diuers places at one instance Whereas they alledge that the foresaid examples do nothing pertaine to the question proposed for as much as in it the question is onely to know whether God can chaunge the qualities in a substance the substance remaining The Ministers do denie it because in the question there is mentiō of a body which cannot be without hs measure Now the measures and demensions are not as qualities and accidents which may happen to a body and depart from it without corrupting thereof which is the nature and condition of accidents but are
body Moreouer in numbring of the errors sometimes coÌ„demned by the facultie of Paris it is expresly said That the heauen by them called Empyreum is the place of Angels of blessed spirits and glorified humane bodies Where the Doctors pretend that of the doctrine which the Ministers maintaine that a body cannot be without place nor in many places at one instant may be inferred that they blaspheme the omnipotencie of God The Ministers contrariwise say that the Doctors blaspheme his Maiestie and diminish the same in attributing to the creature that which appertaineth to him alone to wit to be vncircumscript As it appeareth by that which Didimus saith in his booke of the holy Ghost where he proueth that the holy Ghost is God not a creature because he is incircumscript and that al creatures necessarily be circumscript and limited As much thereof also say S. Basil and Vigilius and the Mr. of the sentences in his first booke Where they confesse that the Angels and blessed spirits be circumscript although they be not corporall This reason is against themselues and proper to proue what the Ministers haue here aboue maintained of bodies to wit that it cannot be but that they be circumscript in some place For by an argument froÌ„ the lesse to the more If the Angels which want dimension and measure by their own confession in as much as they be creatures be necessarily circumscript by a more strong reason the bodies of men which be creatures and measured shall be so likewise And where they adde that the auncient Fathers haue not said that one body by the power of God could not be in diuers places That is contrary to the saying of S. Augustine in his 30. tract vpon S. Iohn which is recited De consec distinct 2. C. Prima quideÌ„ Where speaking of the body of Iesus Christ he saith namely It behooueth that the body of our Lord wherin he rose again be in one place teaching therby that at one selfe-same time it cannot be in diuers places And touching the reason they adde taken froÌ„ the Sacrament to proue their assertioÌ„ the Ministers say that the fathers neuer vnderstood nor said that the body of Iesus Christ was in heauen and in the Sacrament in one selfe same sort maner nor do they teach that he was otherwise then Sacramentally in the Sacrament And wheras in their resolutioÌ„ they pretend to proue that the Angels may at one self instant be in diuers places when the Ministers shall haue vnderstood their reasons then they wil answere therevnto That which they say of a body it being dispoiled of it dimensions ceaseth not to be a body notwithstanding is a very absurd thing For did it happen that a corporal substance were wholly dispoiled of it dimensions it should no more be a body but an incorporeall substance of like nature as the Angels spirits And although God by his power can seperate the dimensioÌ„s of a substance without corrupting it yet can it not be that they be seperated froÌ„ a body without the corruptioÌ„ of the same Because the quantitie dimensions are accidents of the substance but not of the body which cannot subsist without them in as much as they be of it proper essence Whereas the Doctors say afterwards in their obiection that the waight in a body is a thing essentiall The Ministers do deny it And the reason is that were it of the essence of a bodie and the same wanting the bodie should cease to bee Neuerthelesse we see that the glorified bodie of Iesus Christ wherevnto the bodies of all the elect shall be like after the resurrection doth not leaue to be subsist although it be now exempted from all waight And as touching their alledged very strong and mightie argument That if two bodies may be in one selfe place togither one body at one instant may be also in diuers places The Ministers not graunting the antecedent vnder correction say that the consequence is not good and that the argument is very weake Adding therto that the Doctors haue nor prooued and neuer can prooue by the scriptures nor by any authoritie of the auncient Fathers nor by any sufficient reason that which they propose in their antecedent or the consequent which they inferre thereof to be true Wheras the Doctors to proue that two bodies may be together in one selfe place alledge out of the scripture that Iesus Christ entred into the house where his Disciples were the doores being shut The Ministers do answere that it is not written that he entred through the closed doores but only the doores being shut which the auncient Interpreter hath well giuen to vnderstand expounding in one of the places of S. Iohn where mention is made of that aboue said Cuum fores essent clausae Then when the doores were shut Iesus came c. Neuertheles the Ministers say they verily belieue and are assured of that which the scripture doth clearly say to wit that the doores being shut he came and stood in the midst of his Disciples But they cannot certainly define nor determine which way he entered whether it were through the walles or doores of wood which Hillary himselfe maketh doubt of in that place of his writings alledged by the Doctors Howsoeuer it be the Ministers do say that in entering he miraculously made way And that a body be it the wood or wall did yeeld and giue place to the body of Iesus Christ entering or that an opening was made vnto him by the Angell which opened and afterward shut againe the doores in a moment as before hath bâ—ne said And that howsoeuer it was done two bodies were neuer found in one selfe same place together Touching that they alledge out of S. Augustine in his booke de agone Christiano that Iesus Christ entered through the doores The Ministers deny not that he entred through the doores but that two bodies onely were neuer in one selfe same place together But if Iesus Christ entered through the doores that the doores at his entire gaue him place as is said For that which the Doctors alledge touching the Apostles suspition that it was a vaine vision it nought appertaineth to the present matter nor that also that they maruelled at the maner of his entry which was miraculous as they euer confessed And touching that which they adde afterwards in the opinion held by the olde heretiques of the bodie of Iesus Christ that it was not a true bodie because it did things aboue nature The Ministers doo shewe them that they litle think what occasion and foundation of their errour the auncient Fathers had presented vnto them had they confessed what the Doctors haue set foorth and doo obstinately defend of the bodie of Iesus Christ that it doth things not only aboue nature but also contrary to nature yea euen contrary to the will and ordinance of God And there is no doubt but such an opinion should be a great proofe for Marcion and other heretiques which
and therefore it is circumscript But they haue maliciously omitted as it is to bee supposed this little word place For the question is not whether a body be lymited or no seeing that no man doth call it infinite But the question is whether it bee essentially circumscript of place so that it cannot bee a body if it bee not in place for as much as the Ministers could not answere to the argument of the Doctors they haue cut off that which annoyed them The foure next articles deserue no new reply and therefore the Doctors send backe the readers to that which heretofore hath bene said They onely admonish that it is a great matter which the Ministers do hold that a myracle could not bee done in the body of Iesus Christ without chaunge of his nature and such an opinion do they impose vpon Instine who hath said and maintained with the other Auncients that the body of Iesus Christ passed through the doores without chaunge of nature albeit that the operation of the myracle was wrought in the nature of the body without changing the same but in giuing it a spirituall qualitie and perfection to wit subtiltie aboue the natural qualities of a body With like boldnesse call the Ministers the scripture of the Camells passage through the eye of a needle a parable and similitude as they doo that of the Supper and all others which withstand their errors And the better to escape they say that God saueth not but changeth and conuerteth the rich man and so cannot make a Camell to passe through the eye of a needle without diminishing and changing of his grossenesse But the Ministers will not consider that when our Lord spake of the rich man his entrie into the kingdome of heauen he put not the difficultie in the entring of the kingdome properly but in the conuersion of the rich man by which hee should obtaine the entrie and possession of heauen Therefore when our Lord saith that it is more easie for God to cause a Camell or Cable to enter through the eye of a needle then a rich man the kingdome of heauen hee intendeth to compare the conuersion of a rich man which is vnpossible with men to the passage of a Camell abiding in his grossenesse otherwise there should bee no apparance of difficultie and our Lord would not haue saide that such a thing had beene impossible to men The Doctors say moreouer that they haue not produced this place to proue and inferre properly the penitration of dimensions but to shewe that God can make a body to occupie place not proportionable to it greatnesse which is as well contrarie to the nature of a grosse and thicke body as that one body be in diuers places Where the Ministers do boast that they are not constrained to confesse any thing of Gods workes alledged by the Doctors out of the scripture it followeth not that the Doctors out of the scripture it followeth not that the Doctors haue brought forth vaine reasons to constraine and conuince them And for the same referre them to the Acts of the Conference And as touching the knowledge whether God could do such myracles alledged aboue the nature of a body the Ministers cannot escape whatsoeuer euasion they pretend vnconuinced if not openly yet silently at least to haue denied as well the power as the deed For affirming that God canot cause one body to be in diuers places because it repugneth the order by him established in the world and his wisdome and wil which disposeth all by good order and that it was against the nature of a body albeit as much may bee said thereof as may truly bee said of all the other things mentioned touching one body and that there are like reasons in confessing the one they must necessarily confesse all the others that there is the like reason The Ministers vnable to giue any difference and shewe why God cannot do the one and that he can doo the others haue silently consented thervnto And although they would neuer confesse the debt and yeeled themselues vanquished as they do boast it is no maruell for it is the nature of heretikes to be obstinate and resist the truth what reasons soeuer are proposed vnto them The Scribes and Pharisies neuer confessed to be ouercome of our Lord albeit his arguments were vnreproueable And albeit they that withstood S. Stephen had nothing to answere yet left they not to resist the holy Ghost which spake by him as the Ministers doo resist the same spirit which speaketh in the scripture and by the mouth of the auncient Fathers concerning myracles done in the body of Iesus Christ aboue nature Which the Ministers do repugne by I know not what vaine and friuolous starting holes S. Ierome speaketh well to this purpose Haeretici conuinci possunt non persuaderi Heretikes may bee conuinced not perswaded And Tertullian writeth Duritia baeretica vincenda est non suadenda Hereticall obduration is to be vanquished not perswaded And as touching the iniuries which the Ministers in this behalfe do multiply against the Doctors in that doo they imitate all the aduersaries of truth and giue testimony of the disquiet which such manner of people endure in theyr mindes when their errors are shewed them Of whom the Doctors haue pittie and compassion pray God to restore thē to their right sences For as much as they know that the conuersion of an heretike is one of the matters reserued to the omnipotencie of God In vaine doo the Ministers labour to produce store of Greeke to shewe that Penetrare Caelos dooth not signifie to passe the heauens without opening because the Verbe Dierchestai is found for passing where there is an opening But the Doctors neuer said that Penetrare or Dierchesthai may not be applied to open places or that one pearceth in opening of them for well do they know that it is met with in all Authors They haue well said that the Ministers would inferre a reall opening of the heauen by the rigor and proprietie of the verbe Aperire So might they also inferre that the heauens were shut in the ascention of Iesus Christ by the verbes Dierchesthai and Penetrare which strictly do signifie to pearce or passe through without that of it selfe it importeth an opening albeit a man may vse the same where there is an open passage But by the rigour of theyr signification can they not necessarily inferre an opening if the opening bee not shewed from some other place by some word or euident condition of the thing pierced as it is in the texts by the Ministers alledged Now in the ascention these words Dierchesthas and Penetrare are put for to pierce and no word is there added which importeth a division of the heauens The condition of which nor the state of the glorified body of Iesus Christ doo not constraine that one necessarily vnderstand an opening to haue beene made to suffer the body of Iesus Christ to enter Therefore did
resolution of all the Conference determine by Gods grace to couch briefly by writing and in the clearest manner they can all what God hath taught them concerning the same and what they haue learned thereof by his word as well to satisfie the debt and bond which they haue to God and his honour to obey my Lord of Neuers and Madame de Buillon as lastly for the contentment and edification of the whole Church The Conclusion and resolution of the points as well of the Supper as of the Masse containing a declaration of that which the Ministers beleeue concerning the same and teache thereof in their Church by the word of God THe end and chiefe felicitie of men is to be conioyned with God and to abide in him For as much as it is the only meane by which all their desires can be contented and satisfied and by the which also their mindes and hearts can be plainly freed and deliuered from the hard and cruel bondage of sinne and of all the passions greedie desires feares distrusts which do assaile them Which was the cause why S. Paul placeth perfect beatitude and entire repose of the blessed in this that God is all in all in them But for as much as men be naturally corrupt and wicked and contrariwise God in all perfection is pure and holy the difficultie is to knowe and choose the meane by which they may approach vnto him Seeing that there is no societie betweene light and darknesse nor any communion betweene righteousnesse and vnrighteousnesse In them cannot this meane bee found by reason that of themselues they are wholly vnable and vncaple to relieue themselues from the miserie and curse into which they be cast headlong So that beeing blinde of vnderstanding they cannot know their owne good nor seeke it being rebels and heart-hardened and therefore of necessitie must they goe out of themselues and seeke the aboue said meane in Iesus Christ who was giuen them of the Father to bee their righteousnesse wisedome sanctification redemption way life and truth Then resteth it now to knowe how they may bee vnited and conioyned with him The Apostle dooth teach vs that the same is done by faith by which Iesus Christ dwelleth in our hearts and abideth in vs so that hee and wee are made one and hee and his Father are one Now there are two principall causes of this faith the one outward and the other inward The inward is the holy Ghost who is called the spirit of faith for as much as he is the Author thereof and createth and bringeth it forth in the harts of men mollifying and disposing them to receiue with all obedience the word and promise of God which is preached vnto them by the faithfull stewards and Ministers of the same Which word is the outward cause of faith And as the same faith groweth and riseth by degrees euen so doth the vnion which we haue with Iesus Christ and by his meanes with God vntill as saith S. Paul wee all meete together in the vnitie of faith and knowledge of the sonne of God vnto a perfect man and vnto the measure of the age of the fulnesse of Christ The increase of faith is wrought by the working and power of the holy spirite who was the first beginning and author thereof and afterwards by the continuance of the word purely preached and denounced and finally by the lawfull vse of the Sacraments ordained as seales for the certaintie and confirmation of faith and assurance wee haue of the foresaid coniunction with God through Iesus Christ and of the participation of all the good things grauntes gifts graces and blessings which by his fauour are purchased and gotten for vs. As of the remission of sinne of our regeneration of the mortification of the flesh and the lusts thereof To signifie which things and more amply assure vs of the exhibition and enioying of the same Baptisme was ordained of God to the end that in the water which is powred vpon our bodies and in the promise of God which is therevnto added we may behold as it were with our eies the inuisible grace which God vouchsafeth vs to wash and cleanse vs from our spirituall filthinesse and to fanctifie vs and make vs new creatures As also to further assure vs alwayes of life eternall and make vs growe in the hope wee haue thereof by the participation of the flesh of Iesus Christ crucified for our redemption and of his bloud shead for remission of our sinnes the bread and the wine are distributed vnto vs in the Supper by the ordinance of Iesus Christ But as the Ministers acknowledge that there is a vnion and sacramentall coniunction betweene the outward signe and thing thereby signified so say they on the other side that betweene them two there is such a distinction that the one ought neuer to be confounded with the other nor the spirituall thing in such sort fastened to the corporall which representeth the same that the one without the other cannot be receiued or that the two by necessitie bee alwayes inseperably conioyned together Whereof it followeth that they erre which will haue the bread in the Supper to bee chaunged into the substance of the bodie of Christ Iesus And they likewise which will haue him to be conioyned and corporally vnited therevnto So that whosoeuer receiueth and taketh the signes bee hee faithfull or vnfaithfull taketh and receiueth forthwith the thing by them signified Which error with the most part of others happening in this matter proceedeth of not well comprehending nor conceiuing what it is to eate the body and drinke the bloud of Iesus Christ Which thing ought not to bee vnderstood in sort as corporall meates are taken and eaten but after a spirituall manner onely as is declared in the sixt of Saint Iohn which in this consisteth that Iesus Christ dwelleth in vs and we in him and is done by the faith we haue in him as teacheth S. Augustine in the 25. tract vpon S. Iohn saying Why preparest thou the belly and the tooth beleeue and thou hast eaten And in the third booke and 16. Chapter de Doctrina Christiana where he saith as followeth When Iesus Christ saith except yee eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud ye haue no life in you It seemeth that hee commaundeth to commit some great offence It is therefore a figure wherby we ought to vnderstand no other thing but that it behoueth to communicate with the passion of the Lord and to retaine in our memorie that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. The eating then of the flesh and body of Iesus Christ is no other thing then a straight coniunction and vnion wee haue with him which is made by the faith wee adde to his promises Euen as by the mutuall promises made and receiued betweene man and woman the marriage is concluded and setled betweene them And although being so
same out of Gratian. And that men may knowe there is no great trust to be giuen to the fragments of Gratian without recourse to the copies of Saint Augustine in the tytle of Canon these words are there extracted out of the exposition of S. Augustine vpon the 54 Psalme From whence hee draweth the onely beginning of his Canon and yet doth he not truly cyte it The â—est of the said Canon is taken from diuers passages of S. Augustine And although there should bee Oportat S. Augustine speaketh after his wonted manner according to the proprietie of a body opposing the diuinitie to the humanitie without touching the operation of Gods omnipotencie Whereof when he maketh mention and that he speaketh of the Sacrament he plainly affirmeth the body of Iesus Christ to be in diuers places by the omnipotencie of God As the Doctors hope in their resolution to deduce as well out of him as other auncients also The 8. artide containeth many errors against Philosophie and truth First because the Ministers make no distinction betweene the body they cab Mathematicall to wit hauing dimension of breadth length and height and the Phisicall or naturall body to wit which is composed of a substantiall forme and matter by the vnion whereof it is made a naturall substantiall body Secondly although the body should bee without quantitie yet should it differ from our soules seperated which bee not materiall substances and consequently should it also differ from the Angells and spirits Thirdly the Ministers by the conclusion of this article doo manifestly declare that they acknowledge not any substantiall body And where they say that although God might seperate the dimensioÌ„s from a substance without corrupting the same that such substance should remaine spiritually as the Angels they are deceiued For such substance should not remaine immateriall as are our soules and the Angels which be not capable of dimensions and therefore should it yet bee different from Angels and our soules Concerning the ninth article the Ministers answere nothing to the purpose For the Doctors say not that the massinesse and waight bee essentiall in a body but to presse downeward is essentiall to the sadnesse and waight of a body And by their obiection they demaunded to knowe whether an earthly and massy body abiding in it substance and natural waight might not by the omnipotencie of God be hanged in the ayre without falling downward albeit it were against it nature and inclination Moreouer for answere to many articles which concerne the act of two bodies in one place and the passages of holy scripture and auncient Authors produced by the Doctors to proue that it was in Gods power to cause two bodies to bee in one onely place and contrariwise that by the same reason it was in the same power to cause one body to bee in two places First the Doctors say that the Ministers doo wrong to denie this consequence Two bodies by the power of God may be in one selfe-same place Then on the contrarie part one body may be in two places by the selfe-same power For as great repugnancie there is to Gods established order in the one as in the other and as great contradiction in nature founded vppon one selfe-same cause and reason to wit in the limitation and circumscription of a body Which as it is naturall to be in place so is it naturall for it to bee in place proportioned and answerable to it measures And if for the number of diuers places where a body should bee one may inferre that it should no more bee a body as implying contradiction by the same reason according to one onely place where many bodies should bee may also bee inferred that they should no more be many bodies or that many bodies should be one Which would imply the contradiction as the former And where the Ministers denie the antecedent which is that two bodies may bee in one place the Doctors to proue it haue produced the passages of scripture of the closed doores the birth of the body of our Lord of the Virgin the going out of the Sepulchre the passage of a Camell through the eye of a needle and the piercing of the heauens made by Christ in his ascention And for as much as the Ministers denie these actes contained expresly in holy scripture and expounded by the auncient Christians and depraue the same at their pleasure The Doctors estsoones vpoÌ„ the texts of scripture do say as followeth First as touching the closed doores Saint Iohn saith That Iesus came meaning into the place where his Disciples were But hee came not there without entering thereinto For to bee found in the middest of them without entring there should bee a much greater myracle then that hee entred there simply Secondly it is said Cum fores essent clausa or Ianuis clausis To wit that hee there entered the doores beeing shut And there is no apparance that the scripture maketh mention of doores rather then an other place were it not to shewe the place by which hee entred Thirdly it is added not in vaine that the doores were shut without saying that any opening was myraculously made For it is alwaies said Quod venit Ianuis clausis That hee came the doores beeing shut And were it true that the doores had bin opened by diuine power this should be false that our Lord entred Ianuis clausis for hee should haue entered Ianuis apertis howsoeuer they had bene opened And to shewe that the common consent of all the Auncientes haue bene that Iesus entered therein by the closed doores the Doctors set forth foure foundations drawne from the auncient Fathers The first is that all expresly confesse the myracle of such an entrie to haue bene wrought in the body of Iesus Christ The second is that such myracle was there wrought by the power of God aboue the nature of a body The third is that the Fathers especially iudge that herein consisteth the myracle that the body pasâ—ed through the closed doores and that so it was with an other body And for the fourth ground they adde that the Apostles by reason of such entring supposed that the body of Iesus Christ was not a true body but a spirit or vaine vision which the Ministers lightly passe ouer without any answere Now so it is that if by the power of God as the Ministers will haue it an opening was made of the doores or any other part of the house to giue entrie to the bodie of Iesus Christ then the myracle did not consist in the said body but in the doores or other part of the house which was open and nothing had beene there against the nature of the bodie of our Lorde for it is not repugnant to any bodie whatsoeuer to enter by an opening made by myracle or otherwise Bee it that Iustine was not Author of the questions against the Gentiles yet can they not deny but they are of some auncient Christian of the
are well done and ordained although that the reason and order therein be oftentimes vnknowne to men which Salomon wrote saying God maketh all things good in their season Wherevnto may be also applied that which is read in the booke of Sentences of S. Augustine Sent. 283. and 284. God who is the Creator and conseruer of nature doth nothing in his myracles which are against nature And it followeth not that that which is new to custome is contrary and repugnant to reason c. If the Doctors will know more thereof let them reade the two bookes of Order which this holy man composed and that which he wrote concerning myracles in the fift and sixt Chapter of his third booke of the Trinitie This answere shall serue for confutation of two other pretended blasphemies which follow in the obiection of the Doctors Concerning the fourth the Ministers for answer say that the will of God after the doctrine of Diuines may in two sorts be cōsidered to wit according to that which by words signes and effects is declared to men and according to that which is reteined hidden in himselfe The one is called the will knowne by signes and the other the will of the good pleasure of God For the first consideration the Ministers do confesse as heeretofore they haue to the Doctors that God can do many things which he will not do But as touching the other they say that it is equall to his power as is also his power in this respect equall to his will According to which consideration the sentence of Tertullian alledged by the Ministers and to the Monarchians ill applied by the Doctors ought to be vnderstood and expounded As all those may iudge which attentiuely shall read the passage by the Ministers produced Who to answer one slaunder of the said Doctors which accuse them to haue wronged the auncient Fathers in saying that they excepted some causes of the omnipotencie of Cod are yet constrained here to repeate that which Theodoret saith thereof in the 3. Dialogues who writeth as followeth It must not be said without any determination that all things are possible to God For who so absolutely saith this comprehendeth all things as well good as bad which no way ought to be attributed to God whereby it appeareth that this good author and the other before alledged by the Ministers haue not indifferently submitted all things to the power of God but excepted from the same whatsoeuer is contrary to his will and essence To be briefe but one meane there is to appease the difference between the Ministers who say that it is impossible for one body to be in diuers places at one instant and the Doctors which affirme the cōtrary to wit that the Doctors without taking so long circuit loosing so many words and alledging so many superfluous things do proue briefly by one only passage of scripture that God willeth the same Whether the Ministers haue well or euilly alledged Saint Augustine to proue that a body cannot be without place and measures and also whether they haue well or euilly said and defended that quantitie is essentiall to a body and not accidentall as hold the Doctors they leaue the iudgement to the Readers of the Actes of this Conference Touching that which followeth in the writing of the Doctors to wit that there is no place aboue the heauens that Iesus Christ is not therein comprised nor conteined that bodies and spirites bee indifferently there without any distinction or distance of place the Ministers say that touching all these points they rather beleeue the scripture and expresse word of God by them alledged then all the subtilties sophistries of vaine Philosophie which the Doctors or others can propose Ioyned herevnto that it is expresly cōteined taught in one of the articles of our faith where it is said Frō whence he shall come to iudge the quick the dead Wherevpon must bee noted that there is Vnde an Aduerbe signifying place As touching the 4. and 5. articles to know whether the Ministers haue ought imposed vpon the Doctors which is not true they send backe the readers to the precedent conference And also to know in what sence and to what end the auncient Fathers haue bene alledged by the said Ministers which they may easily perceiue by the reading and diligent obseruation of the passages and sentences of the said Fathers there inserted For the 6. article wherein the Doctors had rather confesse their Canons to be false then accusing their authoritie to auouch that the body of Iesus Christ is a true dody and that to be such it ought necessarily to bee in one certaine place the Ministers answere that by the obseruation of the place of S. Augustine whence the said Canon is taken it is easie to iudge that the word Oportet is there much more conuenient then that of Potest To the 8. article the Ministers answere that a substance is not without quantitie and whiles it is such and so remaineth it cannot any waies be a body And the reason is because that of the substance and that of the quantitie are two diuers predicaments vnder which one selfe-same thing for one selfesame respect cannot be any way comprised Moreouer Iesus Christ alledged no other reason to shewe that his body was not a spirit but that hee had members and parts which in respect of their measures might bee handled and touched Whence it followeth that without this a substance cannot be a body And as touching the difference which by the Doctors opinion should remaine betweene our soules and our bodies exempted from quantitie if that were possible the Ministers say that although they were substances both in number and different they should neuerthelesse be like as touching the kinde and that the one and the other should be contained vnder the kinde of an incorporeall substance The Ministers passe ouer the 9. article because it is but a repetition and that they haue largely answered what the Doctors there repeate To the 10. article the Ministers answere that the consequence whereof is the question cannot bee otherwise defended by the Doctors but by the rule which saith that of one absurditie may all things be inferred Moreouer they complaine of time which the Doctors make them loose by reading so many things wherevnto they haue alreadie answered and which it seemeth they repeate not for any other ende then to fill vp paper and to make men thinke they say something For first the Euangelist saith not as the Doctors pretend that Iesus Christ entered by the shut doores but onely that he came the gates beeing shut So that he speaketh nothing there of the maner of his entry nor how the doores were opened or other place about the house by the which he entered And all that which the Doctors say cannot be grounded neither vpon the scripture nor vpon any authoritie of all the auncient Fathers by them alledged which bee more against them then with
Christ And sometimes it happeneth that one Doctor in this matter expoundeth an other As one may perceiue it in the conference of two passages the one of S. Augustine alreadie alledged and the other of Tertullian in the booke De Corona militis where hee saith Wee very hardly suffer any thing of our bread and wine to fall vpon the ground And in stead of that which S. Augustine saith to the same purpose he saith as hath before bene recyted we carefully regard that nothing of the body of our Lord fall vpon the ground Now as in diuers passages the auncient Fathers as hath bin declared haue vsed the two foresaid maners speaking of the Supper now by figure now simply and properly so it is sometimes found that in one selfe-same place these two manners of speaking haue beene vsurped in their writings As in a Canon of the Councell of Niece where it is said It was thus concluded of the table of the Lord and of the mysterie which is therevpon that is to say of the worthy body and bloud of Iesus Christ. At the table of the Lord we ought not to abide tyed here below to the bread and wine which bee there proposed but to lift vp our hearts on high by faith and meditate that on this holy table is proposed vnto vs the Lambe of God which taketh vpon him the sinnes of the world which is sacrificed of the Priests and not slaine And in communicating truly with his precious body and bloud we ought to beleeue that these things be signes of our resurrection Whence we may see how the Fathers in one selfe-same place haue spoken properly calling bread and wine the signes and Elements which be presented in the Supper and also by figure naming the same signes the Lambe of God which taketh vppon him the sinnes of the world By that which is said touching the said two manners of speaking they which read the scripture and auncient Authors ought to be admonished carefully to regard that for default of well distinguishing the places where the said speeches are vsurped they do not confound them taking that which ought to be vnderstood by figure as if it were spoken properly and that which is said properly as if it were vnderstood by figure And it behoueth them alwayes to remember in the reading as well of the scripture as of the auncient Fathers what S. Augustine hath written in his booke De doctrina Christiana We must beware saith hee that we take not a figuratiue speech according to the letter For herevnto must that bee referred which the Apostle saieth The letter killeth and the spirit giueth life So that to vnderstand that which is spoken by figure as if it were spoken properly is fleshly wisedome And in the end of the Chapter he hath one memorable sentence namely that it is a miserable bondage of the soule to take the signes for the things signified and not to be able to lift vp the eye of the spirit aboue the corporall creature to draw eternall life To come to the third part of the Supper which is the spirituall and heauenly thing represented proposed there vnto vs as well in the Elements as in the whole action the Ministers say that it is Iesus Christ crucified and offered on the Crosse to God his Father for the whole and perfect expiation and satisfaction of all the sinnes of the world And that to make vs enioy the fruite of this sacrifice and to apply vnto our selues the righteousnesse forgiuenesse of sinnes life the grace of God and all other fauours and blessings which by the same sacrifice haue bene purchased and obtained for vs the word and Sacraments haue bene left and ordained for vs chiefly that of the Supper wherein as in a picture we behold Iesus Christ suffering for vs the paines and sorrowes of death paying our debts cancelling and adnulling the hand-writing which was contrarie to vs bearing vpon him our malediction to free vs from the same and by his obedience reconciling vs to God his Father and appeasing his wrath towards vs. All which things are represented and assured vnto vs in the Supper when with a true faith we present our selues there to celebrate the same The Supper then was not ordained to be a propitiatorie sacrifice as the Doctors do teach and as they falsly beleeue in the Romane Church but to be a Sacrament to the ende to renue and alwayes conserue the memorie which wee ought constantly to retaine of the death and sacrifice of Iesus Christe Now betweene a sacrifice and a Sacrament there is great difference For as much as in a sacrifice we present our oblations vnto God and in a Sacrament God contrariwise offereth and communicateth vnto vs his graces and gifts Also in a sacrifice for sinne there is the death and effusion of the bloud of the Host and sacrifice and not in a Sacrament but the onely perception and applycation of the fruite and effects of the sacrifice In the Supper then Iesus Christe is not againe sacrificed but the fruites of his obedience and merite of his sacrifice are there distributed and receiued by the faithfull Of the reasons aforesaid do the Ministers conclude that it is blasphemy and sacriledge to call the bread of the Masse of a Romish Priest a wholsome host And if for proofe therof they wold alledge the Fathers in whose writings is found that they call sometimes the Supper an oblation and sacrifice The Ministers answere that first it nought appertaineth to the Masse of the Priests between which the Supper there is no agreement And afterwards that what the Fathers haue said they neuer vnderstood it of the propitiatory sacrifice by which remission of sinnes is gotten and obtained And they haue neuer beleeued nor thought that there was any other sacrifice to appease the wrath of God and obtaine reconciliation and agreement betweene him and men then the onely sacrifice of Iesus Christ made by him alone one onely time vpon the Crosse Three things then in briefe doo the Ministers say first that there neither is nor can be other sacrificer of the new Testament then Christ Iesus The reasons are because there is none but he of whom it hath bene said Thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedeck Also there is none but he to whom may agree and be fitly applyed the conditions and essentiall qualities of a sacrificer and the sacrifice Which are that the Priest be holy innocent without spot seperated from sinners and made higher then the heauens which needed not to offer daily sacrifices first for his owne sinnes and then for the sinnes of the people Also there is none but he which is nor could bee Mediator betweene God and men which could satisfie the diuine iustice which is capable to beare and sustaine the wrath of God which could tame and conquer death which by his death and proper bloud could worke the confirmation of the new Testament and which to