is no consecration THis change and so horrible a depravation of the institution of the Lord hath wholy abolished the nature of the Sacrament For Sacraments are sacred signes Not onely the Ancient but also all the Doctors of the Roman Church doe define the Sacrament after that manner saying that Sacramentum est sacrum signum So in Baptisme water is the signe and Christs blood is the thing signified And in the holy Supper the bread and the wine are the signes but the body and blood of Christ are the things signified Even therefore as if the water were taken away from Baptisme it would be no more a Sacrament nor Baptisme so the Eucharist in the Roman Church is no more a Sacrament since the signes to wit the bread and wine are abolished in stead of which they put Christs naturall body and blood which they call the Sacrament Wherefore the Councell of Trent ordaineth that the Sacrament be worshipped Ses XIII chap. 5. By this meanes Christ in the Masse is the figure and the signe of himselfe Bellav lib. 2. de Euchar cap. 24 Christus sui ipsus sigura fuit as Bellarmine with the rest teacheth as if one should say that a man is the picture of himselfe Moreover the Sacraments are not instituted for to make Christ come downe to us but to lift up our hearts to him Nor for to eate Christ with our teeth but to feed our soules and strengthen our faith Againe by Transubstantiation the consecration of the Sacrament is destroyed and there is nothing in the Masse that is consecrated The bread is not consecrated for they hold that the bread is no more bread Christs body is not consecrated for Christ cannot be consecrated by men Neither can the accidents of bread and wine be consecrated For lines colours and taste are not the offering which is pretended to be offered unto God Therefore there being nothing consecrated there is no consecration and there being no consecration there is no Sacrament CHAP. IV. That by altering the Lords Institution the Romane Church hath changed the nature of Christ THis change is gone so farre that Christs humane nature by Transubstantiation is wholy destroyed and abolished For the Scripture speaking of Christs humane nature saith that he is like unto us in all things Heb. 2.17 c. 4.15 sinne excepted But the Roman Church gives unto Christ a body that is nothing like ours Whence followeth that he is no more our brother so that all the glory of the faithfull which consisteth in haveing a brother who is the eternall Sonne of God is altogether abolished For the Church of Rome forgeth unto Christ a body which is in many severall places at one and the same time which is in Heaven and upon severall Altars but not in the space that is between From whence followeth that Christs body is separated from it selfe and farre from it selfe and higher and ower than it selfe There is no lesse aburdity in willing that an humane body â—e at the same time in severall remote places than to will that a man in one and the selfe same moment be in two severall yeares and so be young and old at once and out-live himselfe The same doctrine giveth unto Christ an humane body which is whole in every crumme of the Hoste and hath his head and his feet in one and the selfe same place and both his eies under one point Can a man say that a body whose parts are not one out of the other and differ not in situation and which taketh and filleth no place and is more spirituall than the very spirits themselves is a true humane body And for that cause the priests of the Romane Church shave or keep short the beard of their upper lips For that Church beleeveth that if a Priest should dip his mustachoe in the chalice the whole body of Christ would remaine hang'd at every haire thereof The same doctrine forgeth unto Christ two bodies of a contrary nature and unto which are attributed contradictory things For the body of Christ which was at the table celebrating the Eucharist did speake and stirre his hands But he that was in the mouthes and stomaâ—â— of the Apostles neither spake not stiâ—â— his hands The soule of Christ as he at the table was in anguish but tâ—â— which was in the Apostles mouth suâ—â—red no griefe Christ after he was riâ—â— from the table entred into the gardâ—â— did sweat great drops of blood but that was in the Apostles stomacks did 〈◊〉 sweat drops of blood Which of thâ— two is our Saviours Or if it be the sat Christ how is he contrary to himselfe Furthermore by this doctrine 〈◊〉 whole history of Christs life is madeâ—â— diculous and turn'd into a fable Fâ—â— if Christs body may be in severall remoâ—â— places at once it may be said that whilâ—â— he was in the Virgins wombe peradventure he was in other wombes And thâ— whilst he was upon the Crosse he walked in Spaine From thence also followeth that all the journies that Chrisâ— made to and fro going and comminâ— from Galilea to Judea were to no purpose For why did he goe from Galilea to Judea if he might be in both places at one the same time and be found it Judea without budging from Galilea What say they is not God omnipotent for to doe this I answer that God without question could doe all these things if he would But I say It is impossible that God should will such things For he is no lyar and cannot contradict himselfe But it were to contradict himselfe if he would that at one and the same time a man should speake and not speake stirre and not stirre suffer and not suffer and be farre and remote and divided from himselfe He will have Christs body to be a true humane body God will not have a thing so absurd and contradictory wherby they will that in the Hoste there be accidents without a subject Innoc. III. lib. 4. de myster Missa cap. 11. Est enim hic color sapor quantitas qualitas cùm nihil alterutro sit coloratum aut sapidum quantum aut quaâ—â— and as Pope Innocent the third teacheth that there be in the hoste greatnesse and nothing great color and nothing coloured As if one should suppose an ecclipse of the Sunne without a Sunne a halting of a legge and no legge a sicknesse without a sick-man Besides the omnipotencie of God is not the rule of our faith but his Will By that meanes a man might maintaine all the fables of the Alcoran saying that God is powerfull so to doe Joyne to this that God doth nothing but wisely Therefore he will never have Christ to be subject to sinnefull men now that he is glorified and be exposed to 〈◊〉 disgraces and ignominie which thâ— make him suffer every day whereof shâ—â— be spoken hereafter CHAP. V. Of Maldonats audaciousnesse 〈◊〉 giving Saint Paul and Saiâ— Luke the lye and
taking it figuratively For the body of Christ was not dead when he did institute this Sacrament But it is very true in the sense that we take it to wit that the bread which he did breake and give to his Disciples was the figure or remembrance of his body dead for us For we have shewed already that in the holy Supper Christs body is presented to our faith not as glorious and spirituall but as broken and dying and dead for us This is confirmed in that in the Evangelists this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth body is in most places taken for a dead body As in the 17 of Saint Luke Verse 37. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Wheresoever the body is thither will the Engles be gâ—thered together †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Mâ—tthew 27.52 * Many bodyes of Saints which slept arose And Mark 14.8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to annoint the body For the proper word in Greek for to signifie a dead body is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 T is true that in the Syriack Testament the word Peger is taken sometimes for a living body But it is not credible that Christ tooke this word in an other sense than it is taken in the Old Testament where it signifieth alwayes a dead bodie Neither is it to be omitted that Saint Paul cals oftentimes the Church Christs body Ephes 1.23 and Chapter 5.23 If then from these words This is my body they will inferre that the bread is transubstantiated into Christs body by the like reason when the Scripture saith that the Church is the body of Christ it may bee inferred that the Church is transubstantiated into Christs bodie CHAP. XII That our Adversaries to avoide a cleare and naturall figure forge a multitude of harsh and unusuaall ones and speake but in figurative tearmes And of Berengarius his confession OVr Adversaries who make a shew to be enemies to Figures forge neverthelesse a great number of absurd and violent figures and turne all into figures When Christ saith This is my body by This they understand an individuum Vagum or that which is under these species without determining any thing Others interprete the word IS by shall be or shall become For they say that the Transubstantiation is not made or effected till the words be pronounced When the Evangelists say that the Lord gave bread by this word bread they understand flesh And wee have heard them confesse that these word This cup is the New Testament in my bloeâ— are figurative By their doctrine which puts 〈◊〉 body into the cup Christ giving 〈◊〉 cup might have said This is my body and had spoken truely if wee beleeâ— them Christ called that which he dranâ— in the Eucharist the fruit of the Viâ—â— But our Adversaries by the fruit 〈◊〉 the Vine will have the blood to be understood By these words Doe this they understand Sacrifice me but the words following Doe this in remembrance of 〈◊〉 doe refute that interpretation For it 〈◊〉 impossible to Sacrifice Christ in remembrance of Christ Wee shall see anone that when iâ— the 6 of Saint John Verse 53. Chriâ—â— saith Except yee drinke my blood yee haâ—â— no life in you our adversaries least thâ—â— should be accused of taking the liâ—â— from the Lay people in depriving theâ— of the cup by the word drinking they understand eating And that wheâ— Christ saith I leave the World and am 〈◊〉 more in the world they add this taile to it to wit by my visible presence We have seene before that the Apostle saith foure several times that in the Lords Supper we breake bread and eate bread To shun the force of these words they wrest them into figures saying that it is not bread that we eate But that figuratively Christs body is called bread because it seemes to be so Which thing they know to be false for Christs body never seemed to be bread Item they say that it is called bread because it was bread before the consecration Which also is false For the Lords body was never bread To such figures Rhethorick affords no name They bring indeed for example Moses Rod which is still called a rod after it was turned into a Serpent and the water of the wedding of Cana Iohn 2. which is still called water after it was turned into wine Which are examples making against them For of that rod it is expressly said that it was turned into a Serpent Exod. 4.3 And of that water it is said in expresse termes that it was turned into wine John 2.9 But of the bread of the holy Supper it is not said that it was converted into flesh Of this Serpent one might have truly said that it was once a rod and of this wine that it was once water because it was the same matter clothed with another forme But of Christs body it cannot be sayd truely that ever it was bread The matter or substance of the body of Christ is not the matter of the bread For Christs body is not made of bread and was never bread Others say that the Apostle saith not When ye eate bread but when ye eate of this bread understanding by the pronoune This a spirituall and heavenly bread But they consider not that the Apostle in the first to the Corinthians Chapter 10 saith not THIS BREAD but the bread that we breake And Saint Luke in the 20 of the Acts 7 Verse The Disciples came together to break bread There their Philosophy fayles them They must also learne that when the Scripture taketh this word Bread in a spirituall sense it is never opposed to the cup because that when the question is of a spirituall foode to eate and to drinke are but one and the same thing But Saint Paul opposeth this bread to that cup saying Let every man eate of this bread and drinke of this â—up That if any one consider exactly all the termes which our Adversaries use in this matter hee shall perceive that they be unintelligible figures They say that the Priest breaketh the hoste and that this hoste is the body of Christ which neverthelesse cannot be broken They say they lift up God but God cannot be lifted up They say the consecrated hoste is round And that Christs body is in the consecrated hoste Whence will follow in good Logick that the body of Christ is round Which neverthelesse they doe not beleeve They grant both propositions and deny the conclusion Which is against common sense And when they speake of drinking the cup by drinking they understand a swallowing downe of flesh and bones and the Soule of Christ with his Divinity This confession of Berengarius is to be found in the 2 Distinction of the Consecration at the CanoÌ„ Ego Berengarius The Roman Councell under Nieholas the second prescribed to Berengarius a forme of abjuration of his doctrine in the most exquisite and formall tearmes that ever they could devise These tearmes are
corporis ejus sanguinisque contineant c. The Sacrament of Adoption to wit Baptisme may be called the Adoption even as we call the Sacrament of his body and blood which is in the bread and in the consecrated Cup his body and blood Not that to speake properly the bread is his body and the Cup his blood But because they containe in them the mystery of his body and blood This Book of Facundus drawn out of the Vatiean Library was published by Jacobus Sirmoudus a Jesuite who for this cause was suspected And I heare he hath been in trouble about it a Turrian li. 1. de Eucharist c. 18. §. Ad illud Vasq in 3. part Thomae Tomo 3. Dis 180. c. 9 pag. 107. Greg de Val. lib. de Trans c. 7. Sicut enim antequam sactificetur panis paneÌ„ nominamus divina auteÌ„ illum sanclificante gratia incdiante Sacerdote liberatus quideÌ„ est ab appellatione panis â—lignus habiâ—us est Dominici corporis appellatione etiamsi natura panis in co remansit Turrianus and Vasquez and Gregory of Valentia Jesuites object unto themselves a place of Chrysostome in his Epistle to Caesarius which Epistle also is in Biblioth Patr. Printed at Colen anno 1618 in the 8 Tome That place is such Afore the bread be sanctified we coll is bread But the divine grace sanctifying it by the meanes of the Priest it is freed indeed from the appellation of bread and is honored with the name of the body of the Lord though the nature of bread remaine in it These Iesuites answer that this place is not of John Chrysostome but of another John of Constantinople Which they say without proofe Yet it matters not for it sufficeth they acknowledge that place to bee of an ancient Author The 8 Books of Apostolicall Constitutions attributed to Clement the first Bishop of Rome are not of him Neverthelesse these Books are ancient and there is much good to be learned in them In the 5 Book chap. 16. it is said that b Cum verâ— anttypa mysteria pretiosi Corporis sanguinis sui nobis tradidisset Christ having given the figurative mysteries of his body and blood went to the mount of Olives And in the 7 Book chap. 26. c Etiam agimus gratias tibi Pater pro pretioso sanguine Iesu Christi qui effusuâ— est pro nobis et pro pretioso corpore cujus haec Antitypa perficimus We give thee thankes for the precious blood of Christ which was shed for us and for the precious body whereof we performe the signes by his command for to shew forth his death There would never be an end if wee should gather up all the places of the ancient Fathers wherein they say that that which we receive in the Eucharist is bread and that the bread and wine are Signes Symboles Figures and Antitypes of the body and blood of the Lord I will adde but two Canons of a Councell which are very formall The 24 Canon of the III Councell of Carthage is such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let nothing be offered in the sacred service but the body and blood of the Lord as also the Lord hath ordained it that is to say nothing but bread and wine mingled with water The same Canon is found repeated in the very same words in the Councell of Trull in the Canon 32 aswell in the Greeck as in the Latin Copies Upon which Canon Baâ—samon maketh this Commentary The two and thirtieth Canon of the Councell of Trull hath ordained very at large a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the nonbloody Sacrifice was made with bread and wine mingled with water because that the bread is the figure of the body of the Lord and the wine the figure of his blood Here is then above two hundred Bishops gathered in a Councell that interpret these words the body and blood of Christ by the bread and wine mingled with water The same Councell in the 23 Canon ordaineth that when a man officiates at the Altar the Prayer must always be directed to the Father Whence appeareth manifestly that then they worshipped not the Sacrament seeing that the Councel forbiddeth when men assist at the Altar to addresse their Prayers to Christ If this hoste be Christ it must be worshipped and by consequent invocated And that it may appeare how lately this opinion of Transubstantiation was received in the Tome de Divinis officiis which is in Biblioth P atr we have an Epistle of that Great Emperor Carolus Magnus where he saith b Cum adaltare assistitur semper ad Patrem d rigatur oratio Christ supping with his Disciples brake bread and gave them likewise the Cup in figure of his body and blood This Epistle happily might bee written about the yeare of our Lord 800. Walefridus Strabo who wrote about the yeare 850 in his Book of Ecclesiasticall things chap. 16. c Christus coenando cii discipulis panem fregit calicem pariter cis dedit in figuram corporis sanguinis sui In coena quam ante traditioneÌ„ suaÌ„ ultimaÌ„ cum discipulis habu t post Paschae veteris solemnia corporis et saÌ„guinis sui SacrameÌ„ta in panis et vini substaeÌ„tia cisdeÌ„ discipulis suis tradidit et ea in coÌ„memorationeÌ„ sanctissimae suae passionis celebrare perdocuit The Lord at the last Supper he made with his Disciples afore he was betrayed after he had made an end of the solemnity of the ancient Passeover gave to his Disciples the sacred signes of his body and blood in the SVBSTANCE of the bread and wine and taught them to celebrate them in remembrance of his most holy Passion Rupertus Abbot of Deutsch neare Colen who lived in the yeare 1112. and whose works are yet extant hath condemned Transubstantiation and taught that the Substance of bread remaineth after the Consecration Here are his words upon the 12 chap. of Exodus d Rup Tuitiensis in Exo. 12. Sicut Christus humâ—na naturam nec mutavâ—â— nec destruâ—â—â— sed assumpsit ita in SacrameÌ„to nec destruit nec mutat substantiaÌ„ panis vini sed assumit in unitatem cororis et sanguinis sui Even as Christ neither changed nor destroyed the humane nature but joyned himselfe to it So in the Sacrament he neither destroyeth nor changeth the substance of the bread and wine but joyneth himselfe to it in the unity of his body and blood This place of Rupertus is alleadged by Salmeron in the 16 Treatise of the IX Tome § Ruit and Bellarmin in his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers alleadgâ—s out of him many such like places and blameth him for it To so many places that say that the substance of the bread remaineth after the Consecration our Adversaries do reply that by the word of Substance the Fathers understand the Accidents As it is a great absurdity by the word of Accidents to understand the Substance So
hoste which is made admirably in remembrance of Christ But it is not lawfull in it selfe for any one to eate of that which he offered on the Altar of the Crosse And in the same place at the Canon Corpus taken out of Saint Austin c Corpus sauguinem Christi dicimus illud quod de fructibus terrae acceptum prece mystica consecratum c. We doe call body and blood of Christ that which being taken of the fruits of the earth is consecrated by the mysticall prayer Certainely a body of Christ taken of the fruits of the earth is not the body of Christ crucified for us Tertullian in the sixth chapter of his Booke of Prayer d Panis est Sermo Dei vivi qui descâ—ndit de coelis Tum quod corpus ejus in pane censetur Hoc est corpus mâ—um The bread is the word of the living God which is descended from heaven Item the body that is holden to be in the bread This is my body Ensebius of Cesarea in his third Booke of Ecclesiasticall Divinitie Chapter 12. e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Lord spake not of the flesh which hee tooke but of his mysticall body and blood Saint Austin calleth very often that which we receive in the holy Supper the body of Christ But that we may not thinke that that which we receive by the corporall mouth is that body of the Lord which was crucified for us he bringeth in Christ saying unto us Yee shall not eate this body that you see f In Psal 98. Non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturiestis neque bibituri illis sanguinem queÌ„ fusuri sunt qui me crucifigent Sacrament um aliquod vobis coÌ„mendavi spiritualiter intellectum vivificabit vos â—nd shall not drinke the blood shed by those that shall crucifie me What then I have saith he recommended a Sacrament unâ—â— you which being taken Spiritually shall quicken and vivifie you Saint Ambrose in his Commentarie â—pon Saint Luke maketh a plaine diffeâ—ance betweene these two kinds of body of Christ expounding the words of the Lord Luke 17. Wheresoever the bodie is â—hither will the Eagles bee gathered togeâ—her First he saith that by the body may be understood the dead body of Christ and by the Eagles which are about it Mary wife to Cleophas and Mary Magdalen and Mary mother of the Lord then he addeth There is also that body â—f whom it is said My flesh is meate indeed Pope Innocent the third in the fourth Booke of the Mysteries of the Masse Chapter 36. distinguisheth in expresse tearmes these two kindes of flesh or body of Christ saying The forme of the bread comprehendeth both the one and the other flesh of Christ to wit the true and the mysticall Salmeron the Jesuite in his fifteenth Treatise of the IX Tome gathereth the same distinction of two sorts of blood of Christ out of the Booke of the Lords Supper attributed to Saint Cyprian Why saith he in the Law it was forbidden to eate blood and it is commanded in the Gospell Cyprian teacheth it excellently well in his Booke of the Lords Supper For in the abstinence of that blood is designed the Spirituall and reasonable life farre from brutish manners b Bibimus verò de Christi sanguine humane pariter ac divino ut intelligamus per ejus gustum ad eternae ac divinae vitae participium nos vocatos Now we drinke of Christs blood both of that which is humane and of that which is divine To the end we may understand that intasting of him we are called to the participation of eternall and divine life Wee have in the former Chapter alleadged Eupbraemius calling the bread of the Eucharist the body of Christ and yet saying that that body loseth not the Substance of bread And the Canon Hoc est in the second Distinction of the Consecration drawne out of Saint Austin saying that the bread which is the flesh of Christ is after its manner called the body of Christ though indeed it is the sacred signe of the body of Christ And Saint Austin The Lord made no difficultie to say This is my body when hee gave the signe of his body And Theodoret likewise saying The Lord hath given to the signe the name of his body And Origen calling the bread of the Supper a figurative body of Christ The same appeareth more cleare than the very day in that the Fathers which say that in the Eucharist we eate Christs body attribute unto this body things which cannot agree with the naturall body of Christ borne of the Virgin Mary and crucified for us Saint Cyprian c Domiunâ— corpus suiâ— paneÌ„ vocatâ— de multorâ—â— granorum adunatione congestum in his 76 Epistle saith The Lord calleth the bread his body which is made and composed of many graines And in the 63 Epistle d Nec corpus Domini potest esse sarina sola aut aqua sola insi utrumque adunatum fucrit c. The Lords body cannot be of the flower alone or of the water alone except both the one and the other be kneaded and conjoyned together Certainely this body of Christ composed of many graines and kneaded with water cannot be the body of Christ crucified for us Justin in his second Apologie saith e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Deacons doe give to every one of those that are present to participate bread and wine and water whereupon thankesgivings have beene said Then he addeth that this bread is the body of Christ But he sheweth manifestly that this bodie of Christ is not that which was crucified for us in that he saith a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is a meate wherewith ouâ— flesh and blood are fed by the transmutation He speaketh of the change made by the disgestion For our bodies are not fed of or with the body crucified for us that bodie is not changed into our flesh and blood For that Justin beleeved not the Transubstantiation he sheweth it sufficiently in the Dialogue against Tryphonius saying b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The oblation of fine flower was a figure of the bread of the Euchâ—rist which our Lord Jesus hath ordained to be made in remembrance of his Passion Ireneus in his first Booke saith the same c Euâ—n calâ—cem qui est cre tura suum corpus confirmavit ex quo nostra auget corâ—ora The Lord hath affirmed that the Cup which is a creature wherewith bee maketh our bodyes grow is his bodie Would Ireneus have lost his wit so farre as to beleeve that our bodies grow and are fed with the crucified body of the Lord and with the blood shedde upon the Crosse which did not returne into his body The same distinction of two sorts of body of Christ in the writings of the ancient Fathers appeareth in that they doe speake of the peeces of the
that in this Sacrament Christs body is not onely worshipped but also the roundnesse colour and savour of the bread That if any religious worship were to be given to this Sacrament some trace of it would be found in the Institution of the holy Supper and some commandement of the Lord But neither trace nor appearance of that is to be found But rather we see that the Apostles sate at the table during this action as it appeareth by what is said iâ— Saint John 13.12 that Christ after hâ— had taken his garments he sate downe againe During which repast Saint John was leaning on Jesus bosome Verse 23. And Saint Paul relating the Institution of the Lord saith I have received of the Lord that which I delivered unto you Since then hee doth not speake of any adoration of the Sacrament it is certaine hee had not received it of the Lord and beleeved not that the Church was obliged to worship the Sacrament The ordinary shift of our Adversaries is to say that the Apostles worshipped not the consecrated hoste because they had Christ every day with them and must have beene continually kneeling before him I answer that to eate Christ with their teeth and receive him in their mouthes and sacrifice him in sacrifice propitiatory are actions which were new to the Apostles and which necessarily required Adoration Every Sacrifice is performed in the worshipping of him to whom the Sacrifice is offered up These things so extraordinary and admirable if they were true did well deserve an extraordinary veneration Specially in the first Institution which was to serve for a rule unto the Church and a patterne to conforme her selfe unto And since our Adversaries will have Christ in the holy Supper to have eaten himselfe he might by the same reason worship himselfe and bowe the knee before himselfe which is a very merry and recreative conception and sutable unto Transubstantiation Whereupon we give our Adversaries the choice Will they have Christ to have adored the consecrated hoste But it would follow from thence according to their doctrine that Christ had worshipped his owne selfe and that he was holyer than himselfe And it is certain that he that worshippeth and he that is worshipped are two persons Will they have Christ not to have worshipped the consecrated hoste But it will follow from thence that the Apostles neither then nor since never worshipped it For Christ saying unto them Doe this commanded them to doe as he had done That if the Lord would have had the Apostles to have worshipped the Sacrament he would have made an elevation of the hoste as was observed in al Sacrifices for to binde the sacrificers and the assistants to the adoration A thing neverthelesse which Christ did not doe for he offered up nothing to his Father He did not say Father receive this oblation But sayd to his Apostles Take Eate Even in the very time of Tertullian and of Cyprian as we shall see hereafter the custome of divers Christians both men and women was to carry into their houses the sacred bread they had received in the Church to wrap it up in a cloth and to lock it up at home in a chest or cupbord A manifest proofe they worshipped not the Sacrament For would they have permitted a woman to take God with her hand put him up in her pocket and keepe him locked up close at home Would the Christians have upbraided the Pagans that they worshipped Statues that could not move themselves See Arnob. lib. 6. and Lactantius lib. 2. cap. 2. nor rise when they were fallen nor breathe subject to rust wherein mice make their nests c. if the Pagans might have upbraided them the same and tell them that they worshipped an hoste that could not breath nor rise up when it is fallen nor open its eyes nor stretch out its hands that may be stolne by men and eaten by mice and will grow mouldie c Durst Theodoret have sayd in the 55 question upon Genesis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it is an extreame folly to worship that which one eateth if the Christians of his time had worshipped the Sacrament afore they are it It is this errour above all others that keepes the Pagans from embracing the Christian Religion as Averroes testifieth of whom Salmeron the Jesuite cites these words out of the 12 booke of his Metaphysickes Salmeron Tomo 9. Tract 18. S. Ca lvi nus Quoniam Christiani Deum suum quem adorant manducant sit anima mea cum Philosophis Since Christians eate the God they worship let my soule be with the Philosophers The ancientest forme of celebrating the Eucharist in the Christian Church is that which is described about the later end of the second Apologie of Justin Martyr wherein no mention is made of any adoration No more than in that which is extant in the booke of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchie of Denis who is surnamed Areopagite There are some places in the Fathers that say that Christ is worshipped in the Eucharist but that makes nothing to this purpose For the Father also and the Holy Ghost ought to bâ—â— worshipped in the Eucharist It is one thing to worship Christ in the action of the Sacrament and another thing to worship the Sacrament Yet notwithstanding the third Councel of Carthage in the 23 Canon forbids one to addresse his prayer to the Sonne in the Eucharist in these words When any one assists at the Altar Cum ad altare aâ—â—â—statur semper ad l'atrem der gatur oralâ—o let his prayer alwayes be directed to the Father If then they had worshipped the consecrated hoste doubtlesse it would not have beene forforbidden to invocate it There be also in Ancient Fathers some Oratorie Apostropho's wherein they speake to the water of Baptisme Ambros in Luâ—am cap 10. O qua qua Saâ—â—amâ—utum Châ—â—st esse â—â—â—ruâ—sti and to the bread and wine of the Eucharist but that makes nothing for the adoration neither of the water nor of the bread So the Scripture speakes often to heaven to the Earth to the Sea to the Mountaines yet none can inferre from thence that they must be worshipped Of Theodoret who in his 2. Dialogue saith that the signes are worshipped â—â—all be spoken hereafter There is in the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which cannot be understood of the soveraigne adoration â—â—eing he speakes of the signes or Symâ—â—les which cannot be worshipped reliâ—â—ously and with the worship of Latria without manifest Idolatry In the Greeke copies of the Affrican codex Aurelius Bishop of Carthage is ofteÌ„ called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Abraham worshippeth or rather proâ—â—rateth himselfe before the Sons of Heth Genes 23. vers 7. 12. And Jacob doth the same to his brother Esau Gen 33.3 and David to Jonathan 1. Sam 20.41 Whom neverthelesse Abraham and Jacob and David esteemed not to be Gods Tertullian against Hermogenes chap. 22. saith that he worshippeth the plenitude of
Cardinall du Perron writing against du Plessiâ— maketh many exclamations against Origen and cals him origine of all errors and cries out Shut yâ—â— eares Christian people as if men did read with their cares What Cardinall dâ— Perron saith that Theophilus Patriarck of Alexandria did condemne Origen for speaking so is false and shall never be found Theodoret in his first Dialogue titled the Vnchangeable speaking of these words This is my body saith * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Lord hath honored the visible signes with the appellation of his body and blood not having changed their nature but having added grace 〈◊〉 nature A little before he had said The Lord gave to the signe the name of his body And in the second Dialogue tearmed the Non confuse The divine mysteries are signes of the true body And a little after he introduceth an Eutychian Heretick maintaining Transubstantiation To whom he answereth in these words Thou art oâ—â—ght by the nets that thou hast woven For even after the consecration the mysticall signes do not change their own nature * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For they remaine in their former Substance Forme and Figure And in the same Dialogue Tell me then the signes that are offered unto God what signes are they of The answer is Of the Lords body and blood In the Books of Sacraments attributed to S. Ambrose in the fourth Book cha 5. We have a clause of the publick forme used in the Eucharist in these words a Dixit Sacerdos Fac nobis hanc oblationem asscriptam rationabileÌ„ acceptabileÌ„ quod est figura corporis sanguinis Domini nostri Iesus Christi GraÌ„t that this oblation be imputed unto us as acceptable reasonable which is the FIGVRE of the body and blood of Christ Iesus our Lord. Which cannot be understood of the unconsecrated bread for it is not an acceptable oblation for our sins This clause is retained in the Masse except this word Figure which they have taken away Eusebius in his 12 Book of the Demonstration chap. 8. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We have been instructed to celebrate at the table according to the laws of the New Testament by the signes of the body and blood the remembrance of this Sacrifice And in the eight Book after he had said that Christ delivered to his Disciples the signes or symboles of his dispensation he addeth a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Commanding to celebrate the Image or figure of his own Body Euphraemius Patriarck of Antioch b Ex Bibliothe Phocii p. 415. editionis Augustanae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Christs body which the Faithfull receive loseth not its sensible substance and is not divided from intelligible grace So Baptisme being wholly made spirituall and one doth retaine the property of its sensible substance tâ— wit water and yet looseth not that which it is made This place is very forcible for he calleth the bread Christs body and acknowledges not therein any conversion of substance and teacheth that in the Eucharist there is no more conversion of substance than in Baptisme where the water remaineth always water Gregory Nazianzen in his 2. Oration of the Passeover speaketh thus of the participation of the Eucharist c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We shal indeed be partakers of the Passeover in figure though more evidently than in the old Passe over For the Passeover I dare say wâ—â— a more darke figure of a figure And the same Father in his Oration in the Praise of his Sister Gorgonia commendeth her devotion in that having received with her own hand the Sacrament she carried back home a parcell of 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. If saith he her hand had shut up us in treasure any thing of the signes or aâ—â—itypes 〈◊〉 the body or of the blood of the Lord she minded it with her teares Euphraemius Deacon of Edissa b Ad eos qui Filii Dei naturam scrutari volunt Inspice diligenter quomodo sumens in manibus paneÌ„ benedix it ac fregil in figuram immaculati corporis c. Behold â—iligently how the Lord after hee had taken â—e bread in his bands blessed it and brake it 〈◊〉 figure of his immaculat body and blessed â—e cup in figure of his precious blood and gave to his Disciples The imperfect work upon S. Matthew â—â—tributed to Chrysostome in the 11 Hoâ—ily speaking of those that imploy the â—â—cred vessels as Plates and Chalices to â—ofane uses c Si haec vasa sanctificata ad privatos usus transferre â—periculosum est in quibus non est verum corpus Christs sed â—â—sterium corporis ejus continetur quanto magis vasa corporis â—â—stri c. If it be so dangerous a thing 〈◊〉 transport to privat uses the sacred vessels â—herein Christs body is not but where the myâ—ry of his body is contained how much more â—â—e vessels of our bodies which God hath preâ—red to himse fe for to dwell in them Note â—at hee doth nor say that the body of â—hrist was not in these vessels but that it not in them that it may not be thought â—e speaketh of the vessels of Salomons â—emple The same Fathers upon the third Psalme a Dominus Iudam adhâ—buit ad câ—nviv um â—n quo corporis sangumis suâ— siguram discipulâ—s commondavâ—t tradid t. The Lord admitâ—ed Judas 〈◊〉 the banquet in whâ—ch he recommended anâ— gave to his disciples the figure of his bâ—â—â— and blood The same in his third Booke of Châ—â—stian Doctrine Chapter 16. When 〈◊〉 Lord saith b N si manducaveritis inquit carnâ—m siâ—iâ— hom nis â—iberitis sanguinem non habebi tis vitam in vobis facinus vel flag tium vâ—detur jubere Fâ—gura ergo est praecipiens passions Dominicae esse communicandum suaviter atque utiliter is memoâ—â— recondendum quòd â—aro ejus proâ—obis crucifixa vulâ—â—â— rata sit Except yee eate the flâ—sh of 〈◊〉 Sonne of man and drinke his blood ye havâ— no life in you he seemeth to command a wiâ—ked thing or haiâ—us offence It is therefore a figure that commands to communicate to the Passion of the Lord and to puâ— sweetly and profitably into our memory that his flesh was crucified and woundâ—â— for us Note that Saint Austin saith noâ— onely that these words Exce t yee eâ—â— c. are figurative But alâ—o expounâ— unto us the sense and meaning of thâ—â— figure saying that it signifieth we mâ—â— meditate with pleasure and profiâ— that Christ is dead for us Which 〈◊〉 an exposition our Adversaries approâ—â— not The same Author in the first Treatise upon the first Epistle of Saint John c Dominus consolans nos qui ipsum jam in coelo sedentem manu contrectare non possumus sed side contingere The Lord comforteth us we that can handle him no more with our hands but touch him by Faith And in the 53 Sermon of the
Cup his blood These things Bethren are called Sacraments because in them one thing is seene and another is understood What is seene hath a corporall forme What is meant hath a spirituall fruite If then thou wilt understand what the body of Christ is heare the Apostle saying to the Faithfull Ye are Christs body and his members If ye bee therefore Christs body and members your mysterie is set on the table of the Lord c. He giveth the same exposition in the 26 Treatise upon Saint John By this mâ—ate and by this drinke the Lord will have to bee understood the society and fellowship of his body and of his members to wit the holy Church of the Predestinate And in the Roman Canon in the a Distinction of the Consecration at the Canon Hoc est a Coelestis anis qui â—hristi caro 〈◊〉 suo modo â—ocatur â—rpus â—hristi cum 〈◊〉 vera sit â—cramentii â—rporis â—hristi illiâ—s videliâ—t quod â—alpabile â—ortale in â—uce posiâ—m est tâ—b Glos â—oeleste Saâ—amentum â—uod vere â—praesenâ—t Christi â—rnemdiciâ—r corpus â—hristi sed â—aproprie crum diciâ—r suo moâ—â—sed non â—iveritate sed significante mysterio Vt sit sensus vocatur Chriâ—â— corpus id est significatur The heavenly bread which is the flesh of Christ is after its manner called the body of Christ although to speake truely it be the sacred signe of Christs body to wit of that which being visible palpable mortall was put upon the Crosse And thereupon the Glosse of the Doctors hath these words which truely are excellent The heavenly Sacrament that representeth truely the flesh of Christ is called the body of Christ but improperly for it is thus called after its manner but not according to the truth of the thing but by a significant mystery So that the sense is that it is called the body of Christ that is to say that it is signified S. Cyprian in his 63 Epistle will have in the sacred Cup water to be mingled with the wine His reason is because that as the wine is the blood of Christ so the water is the People and that the People ought not to bee divided from Christ b §. 9. Quando in Calice vino aqua â—iscetur Christo populus adunatur c. Sivinum tantum quis â—crat sanguis Christi inc pit esse sine nobis si veroaqua sit sola â—ebs incipit esse sinc Christo If saith he any one offereth nothing but wine Christs blood beginneth to bee without us but if the water be alone the people begins to be without Christ Whereby it followeth that as Cyprian did not beleeve that the water was transubstantiated into the people so did he not beleeve that the wine was transubstantiated into the body of Christ And in the same Epistle c Vinum fuit quod sanguiuem suii dixit That which Christ called his blood was wine And in the 76 Epistle d Dominus corpus suii paneÌ„ vocat de multorii granorum adunationâ— congestum The Lord called his body the bread compounded with the gathering together of many graines We have a Treatise of the two natures of Christ against Nestorius and Eutyches made by Pope Gelasius who wrote about the yeare of our Lord 495. There is this sentence to be found which vexeth and grieves mightily our Adversaries e Certe Sacramenta quae sumimus corporis sanguinis Christi divina res est propter quod per eadeÌ„ divinae effiscimur consortes naturae tameÌ„ esse non desinit substaÌ„tia panis vini Et certe image similitudo corporis et sanguinis Christi in actione mysteriorum celebraÌ„tur Certainely the Sacraments that we take of the body blood of Christ are a divine thing for which cause also by them we are made partakers of the divine nature and yet the substance or nature of the bread and wine ceaseth not to be And verily the Image and similitude of the body and blood of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries Note that hee disputed against the Eutychians who held that the substance of the body of Christ was passed and changed into the substance of the divine nature The controversy was not about the conversion of the accidents but of the Substance which Gelasius maintaineth to remaine in the body of the Lord as the substance of the bread remaineth in the Sacrament Now no man can doubt but that this Book be of Gelasius Bishop of Rome Hoc etiam eatae meâ—orie Papa Gelasius c. in co â—bro quem â—emoratus â—â—ntistes â—onscripsit â—dversus eâ—â— qui in 〈◊〉 omino Ieâ— duarum at urarum â—olunt indiâ—â—aÌ„ credere â—ritatem Quomodo â—cend t in â—â—lum nisi â—â—ia localis verus est â—mo aut â—omodo aâ—st fidelâ—â—s suiâ—â—nisi â—â—a idem â—mensus 〈◊〉 â—rus dâ—us seeing that Fulgentius who lived in Gelasius time alleadgeth it * in his Book to Feâ—randus the Deacon in the 2 proposition and attributeth it to the Pope Gelasius Fulgentius Disciple to S. Austin in his second Book to Trasimondus chap. 17. a How is Christ ascended into Heaven but because he is in a place and a man indeed Or how is he present to his Faithfull ones but because he is infinit and a God indeed Again in his Book of the Faith to Peter the Deacon chap. 19. b Cuâ— nunc id est tempore nov Testamenti cum Paâ—e et Sp Sancto cum quibs illi est una diviniâ—as sacrificium â—ais et â—â—niâ—n side et charitâ—te sancta Ecclesia Catholica per uversum orâ—â—â—â—eâ—rae offerre non cessat etc. The holy Catholick Church which is over all the world now that is to say under the New Testament ceaseth not to offer unto Christ Jesus with the Father and the holy Ghost with whom he is one and the same Godhead a Sacrifice of bread and wine in Faith and Charity For in those caâ—n ill oblations of the Old Tetestament there was a figure of Christs flesh which he was to offer for our sins being without sin But in the sacrifice of the Eucharist is made an action of thankesgiving and a remembrance of the flesh of Christ which he offered for us and of the blood that himselfe who is God hath shed for us Besides this that he calleth the Holy Supper a remembrance and a Sacrifice of bread and wine it is very remarkable that he saith that this Sacrifice of bread and wine is offered unto Christ Jesus Whereby it appeareth that this Sacrifice is not Christ himselfe for Christ is not Sacrificed unto Christ Facundus an Affrican Bishop who wrote about the yeare of our Lord 550 in the defence of three heads or points of the Councell of Chalcedon * Potest Sacramentum adoptionis adoptio nuÌ„cupari sanguâ—neÌ„ dicimus noÌ„ quod proprie corpuâ— ejus sit panis poculum sanguis sed quod in se mysterium
the things signified That this is the sense and meaning of the Fathers when they speak thus appeareth in that they call also the Eucharist Christs death As Cyprian in his 63 Epistle * Passlo est Domiâ— sacrâ—fiâ—um quod offeâ—imus The Lords Passion is the Sacrifice wee do offer And Chrysostome in the 21 Homily upon the Acts of the Apostles a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whilest this death is a perfeciting and this dreadfull Sacrifice and these ineffable mysteries And so the Canon Hoc est in the 2 Distinâ—tion of the Consecration b Vocatur ipsa immolatio câ—â—nâ—s quae Sacerâ—dotâ—s manibus sit Chrâ—sti passio mâ—rs crucafixio non râ—â— veritate sed significante mysterio The immolation of Christs flesh which is made by the hands of the Priest is called the Passion Death and Crucifixion of Christ not according to the truth but by a significant mystery Austin in his 23 Epistle to Bonifacius Was not Christ once sacrificed in himselfe and yet hee is sacrificed to the People in a sacred signe And in his 10 Book of the City of God chap 5. c Sacrificium visibile invisibilis Sacrificâ—i Sacramentumid est sacrum signâ—m The visible Sacrifice is a Sacrament that is to say a sacred signe of the invisible Sacrifice And a little after * Illud quod ab omnibus appellatur SacrificiuÌ„ est signum veri sacrificii That which men do call Sacrifice is a signe of the rue Sacr fice Note that he saith that men do call it a Sacrifice acknowledging tacitely the holy Scripture doth not call it so Wee have then in these places of S. Austin a cleare exposicion of this place wherein he calleth the Eucharist the Sacrifice of our price The sixth Book of Apostolicall Constitutions of Clemens chap. 23 a Pro sacrificio crueÌ„to rationale incruentum ac mysticum sacrificium instituit quod in mortem Domini per symbola corporis et sangumis sui celebratur The Lord instead of a bloody Sacâ—â—fice hath instituted a reasonable and unbloody and mysticall Sacrifice which is celebrated in consideration of the Lords death by the signes of his body and blood In the 4. Book of Sacraments attributed to S. Ambrose chap. 5. wee have these words of the ancient Service b Fac nobis hanc oblationem ascriptam rationabile acceptabilem quod est sigura corporis sanguinis Domini Grant that this oblation be imputed unto us as reasonable acceptable which is the FIGVRE of the body and blood of the Lord. The succeeding ages have razed out the word Figure Procopius Gazaeus upon the 49. chap. of Genesis Christ gave to his Disciples the Image or Figure and Type of his body and blood receiving no more the bloody Sacrifices of the Law Eusebius in the 10 chapter of his first Book of the Evangelicall Demonstration a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Lord having offered a Sacrifice and an excellent victime unto his Father for the salvation of us all hath appointed us to offer continually the remembrance of it instead of a Sacrifice And in the same place b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wee have received the remembrance of this Sacrifice for to celebrate it at his own table by the signes of his Body and Blood according to the institution of the New Testament In a word the Fathers are full of such places Wherefore in the Eucharist they put no difference between the Sacrament and the Sacrifice But to speak properly there is such difference between a Sacrifice and a Sacrament as between giving and receiving For in a Sacrifice we offer unto God but in a Sacrament we receive from God The Fathers do not make this distinction For by reason the Sacrament is a signe and a figure of the Sacrifice they call the Sacrament a Sacrifice This kind of speaking to call the Lords Supper a Sacrifice had its beginning from the offerings and gifts which in old time the people offered upon the sacred table afore the Communion which gifts were commonly called Sacrifices and Oblations Cyprian in his Sermon of Almes a Locuples Dives Dominicum celebrare te credis quae sorbonum non respuis quae in DominicuÌ„ sine sacrificio venis quae partâ—m de sacrificio quod pauper obâ—ulit sumis chides a rich woman that had brought no Sacrifice and yet took her part of the Sacrifices the poor had brought And in the 21 Distinction at the Canon Cleros b Hypod acon oblatioues in â—eplo Domini 〈◊〉 sideâ—bus susâ—â—pâ—â—nt Lâ—vitis superponâ— das altari buâ—dâ—serat Let the Subdeacons in the Lords Temple receive the Oblations of the Faithfull and carry them to the Levites that they may put them upon the Altars Which manner of speech remaines yet at this day in the Masse wherein the Priest before the CoÌ„secration saith Receive Lord thiâ— immaculate Host c. as is acknowledged by Bellarmin in his first Book of the Masse ch 27. And he prooves it by Ireâ—eus who in the 4 Book chap. 32. saith we offer unto God a Sacrifice of his creatures that is to say bread and wine And that even before the Consecration In that therefore the Fathers have said nothing but what is agreeable conformable unto the Faith Yet neverthelesse the abuse that hath followed thereon a longtime after is unto us an excellent example that the safest way is to cleave to the Apostles language and not to depart from the stile of the holy Scripture THE SECOND BOOK OF The Manducation of the Bodie of Christ CHAP. I. Of two sorts of manducation of Christs flesh to wit Spirituall and Corporall and which is the best MEtaphors are similies contracted and reduced to a word So wee say feeding for teaching and to flourish for to be in prosperity and we call Pride a swelling and truth a light We say of a childes tongue that it is untied and of his wit that it is displayed These Metaphors besides the ornament have some utility For they propose an Image of the things whereof wee speake and make them more intelligible by a tacite comparison Specially it is a thing very usuall and frequent to expresse the functions and qualities of the soule by tearmes borrowed from the actions and corporall qualities So we say that Envy fretteth that love burneth that Covetousnesse is a thirst of money and that hope is a tickling or soothing The holy Scripture is full of such manner of speeches wherein nothing is more frequent than to speake of good instructions as of meats and drinks and of the Graces of God as of a water that quensheth the thirst and of the desire of these graces as of a hunger and thirst So in the 9 of Proverbes the supreame Wisedome saith Come eate of my bread and drink of the wine which I have mingled And David in the 36 Psalme saith God makes us drink in the river of his pleasures
28.2 But this place is likewise alleaged falsly For Saint Matthew in the very same place saith the cleane contrary There was saith he a great Earthquake For the Angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rolled back the stone from the doore of the Sepulcher And Marke chap. 16.4 saith the same c Thom. 1. Concil Edition Golonan 1567. pag. 814. Revoluto monimenti lapide tertio die caro resurrexit Leo the first Bishop of Rome in his 95 Epistle to Leo Augustus acknowledges it saying that in the third day the flesh of the Lord arose againe the stone of the monument being rolles backe In vaine do they alleage that Chriâ—â— walked upon the waters For what iâ— that to prove that his body may be in severall places at one and the same time He that walketh upon the waters is not for that farre from himselfe If Christ by his divine power hath made the waters firme under his feete or sustained his body that it might not sinke he hath not for that placed his body in severall places nor changed the nature of his body If I keepe up and uphold with my hand a stone above the water that changes not the nature of the stone and doth not take from it its weight and heavinesse For to prove that the body of the Lord hath beene sometimes in two severall places at once they alleage the 23 chapter of the Actes verse 11. where it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the night following the Lord stoode by Paul from whence they doe inferre that Christs body being in heaven stood neverthelesse by Saint Paul on earth In speaking thus they presuppose without proofe that the Lord of whom is spoken in this place is Christ onely and not God simply without distinction of persons Yea even in reâ—â—raining this word LORD to Christs person there is nothing in that place that obliges us to understand this of the body of Christ rather then of his divine nature and vertue Might not â—he sonne of God speake and make himselfe sensible to Saint Paul by his divine vertue without a locall and bodily approach The Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 12.7 Luc. 2.9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 23.27 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof Saint Luke makes use signifieth not onely to stand by one but also to come upon him unlook'd for to relieve and succour him and make him feele his favour as may be seene Acts 12.7 Luke 2.9 Acts 23.27 In all these places the Greeke word signifieth to come upon unlooked for Now the Roman Church doth not beleeve that Christ comes unto the Sacrament but beleeves that hee is made in it CHAP. XXI Of the dignitie of Priests And that our Adversaries debase and vilisie the utilitie and efficacie oâ— Masses and make them unprofitable for the remission of sinnes And of the trafficke of Masses THe Doctors of the Roman Church do speake of the Eucharist as of the highest mystery of Christian Religion and extoll with such bigge tearmes the power of priests in making Christ with a few words that they call them Gods and Creators of their Creator having a power above the blessed Virgin Mary and above all the Angels who cannot make Christ because he is made already So saith Gabriel Biel in his 4 lesson upon the Canon of the Masse * Ad Sacerdotii authoritatem Angeli coelorum cives noÌ„ audent aspiraâ—e The Angels Citizens of Heaven dare not aspire to the authority of Priesthood And a little after †Transgrediendo perinde agmina Angetorum ad ipsam eoeli Regâ—naÌ„ mundi Dom nam veniamus Haec etsi in gratiae plâ—nitudine â—â—â—aturas supergrediatur universas Hierarchâ—s tamen cedit it commissi mysterii executione Passing by the bands of Angels let us come to the Queene of Heaven and Lady of the World The same though in pleniâ—â—de of grace shee goes beyond all the creaâ—ures yet shee yeelds to the Hierarchs of â—he Church he cals the Priests so in the â—xecution of the Mystery committed unto â—â—em And it is in the same lesson where â—e saith that Christ in incarnate and made â—â—esh in the hands of Priests as in the Virâ—ins wombe and that Priests doe create â—heir Creator and have power over the â—ody of Christ Peter de Besse in his Booke of the Royall Priesthood chapter 2. speakes thus Saint Peter addeth that all Priests are Kings in token whereof they weare the crowne And in the 3 chapter The Priesthood and the Godhead are in some things to be parallell'd and are almost of equall greatnesse since they have equall power Matth. 16. 18. Againe Seeing that the Priesthood walketh hand in hand with the Godhead that Priests are Gods it goes farre beyond the kingly authority and Priests are farre above Kings And in the same place hee calls them Masters of Kings surpassing as much in dignitie the royall office as the Soule surpasses the body Which hee hath taken out of * Baron annal An. 57. §. 31. At verò longe praestare sacerdotes regibus arâ— gumento quo utitur plane significat Et paulo post Regem sacris ministris minorem gerere ordineÌ„ certum est And shewes it by the example of S. Martin who made a Priest drinke before the Emperour at the Emperour his owne table Baronius He addes Incredible things saith he but yet true that the power of Priests is so great and their excellencie so noble that heaven depends on them Item in the same place comparing the Priests with Josuah at whose Prayer the Sunne stood still he saith Josuah stopped but the Sunne but these to wit the Priests stay Christ being in heaven in the midst of an Altar The creature obeyed to the first but the Creator obeyes to these last The Sunne to the one and God to the other as often as they pronounce the sacred words To be short he concludes that whatsoever God is in heaven the Priest is the same on earth And all that with the approbation of the Faculty of Divinity at Paris prefixed in the front of the Booke It is good to know that England having beene a long time without a Bishop subject to the Pope the English Papists complained lately they had no body to conferre them the Orders and to minister unto them the confirmation without which the Canons say that a man cannot be wholy a Christian Vnto whose desire Vrhan now raigning being willing to satisfie sent them a titular Bishop which hee hath called Bishop of Calcedon But the Jesuits tâ—at are in possession of ruling and governing among the English Papists would not receive that Bishop saying that Confirmation is not necessary and that the Baptismall Vnction may supply the want of Episcopall Crisome and that a Church may bee without a Bishop Against whom the Sorbonne of Paris did cast some Censures calling their doctrine hereticall and scandalous