they Sacrifice Christe you vtterly take away the Real Sacrifice of the newe Testamente Wherein being a very weighty pointe you dissent from the Catholike Churche for which you and your felowes be condēned of the Churche and holden for Heretiks This haue I auouched and sufficiently proued in myne Aunswere to this 17. Article of your Chalenge What you reply against the same here in the processe of this Reioindre by Gods grace I shal confute To make your vntrue and heretical saying appeare the more tollerable to the vnlearned you ioine vnto it a saying that in a righte construction may be admitted As the Lambe of God is slaine vnto vs say you so was the same Lambe of God slaine vnto them In deede if you meane a newe actual sleying of Christ who is the true Lambe of God he is not now in the daily Sacrifice of the Church slaine no more then he was slaine in the daily sacrifices or in the yerely Passeouer of the Iewes But for asmuch as in our daily Sacrifice we haue the true Body and Bloude of the Lambe of God Ioan. 1. that taketh away the sinnes of the worlde laid vpon the holy table which is the Aulter sacrificed of Priestes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Nicen Councel saith that is to say without killinge and bloudshed In consideration hereof you should not haue saied as we sacrifice Christ so did they sacrifice Christ. For though in our Sacrifice we sley not Christ the true Lambe of God as they slewe the Lambes which prefigured Christ yet so farre as that is true which the Fathers of the Nicen Councel reporte and as by vertue of Christes almighty wordes according to his commaundement and Institution his Body and Bloud are consecrate and really present we offer vp Christe in deede vnto God in the Sacrifice of the Church For proufe of the real presence I referre the Reader who vnderstandeth not the Latine tongue to sundry learned workes written in the Englishe tongue in our time therof In which he shal finde the mater so largely so clearely and so substantially proued that he shal confesse he seeth the same onlesse he wil as some doo wilfully blindefolde him self and say in midday it is darke night Forasmuch then as we sacrifice Christ truely bicause we haue and offer vp in our sacrifice the truth of the body and Bloude of Christ in deede present by th' almighty power of his owne worde after which sorte the Iewes had not Christ present therefore it is not true that you say that as we sacrifice Christe so did they sacrifice Christe Diuersite in the Sacramentes of both Lavves Touching the comparison you make betwen the Sacramentes of both Lawes for now soudeinly you chop from the Sacrifices into the Sacramentes in expressing Christes death then to come and nowe paste whereby you go about to proue the equal valewe of both Sacramentes notwithstanding that both do expresse or signifie though in diuers degree the death of Christ yet doth our Sacrament of the Aulter farre surmount theirs bicause in ours is conteyned the very body and bloude of Christ in theirs was nothing but a figure in theirs the shadow in ours the body The place you allege out of the booke de vtilitate Poenitentiae that you attribute to S. Augustine contrary to the censure of Erasmus serueth you to no purpose We agree vnto it no lesse then your selfe In that place the authour speaketh of the spiritual meate which the Iewes did eate the same as we do And that meate he wil both to be Christ teaching how they did eate Christe Aug. de Vtilitate Poenitentiae whom we do eate The whole processe there is to be vnderstanded of the spiritual eatinge for so he saieth Quicunque in Manna Christum intellexerunt eundem quem nos cibum spiritalem manducauerunt Quicunque autem de Manna solam saturitatem quaesierunt patres infidelium manducauerunt mortui sunt Sic etiam eundem potum Petra enim Christus Eundem ergo potum sed spiritalem id est qui fide capiebatur non qui corpore hauriebatur Who so euer in the Manna vnderstoode Christe they did eate the same spiritual meate that we eate But who so euer sought onely to fil their bellies by eating Manna being the Fathers of the vnfaithful they did eate and dyed So likewise they dranke the same drinke For the Rocke was Christe And therefore the same drinke which we drinke they dranke but spiritual that is to say whiche was receiued by faith not that whiche was taken in by the body Now what though Christe whome both the Iewes and we do eate spiritually be one spiritual meate one Christe and likewise one spiritual drinke as he is eaten and dronken with spiritual eating and drinking Shal that therefore whiche we receiue in our Sacrament by sacramental eating and drinking vnder the formes of bread and wine be no better then that which they did eate and drinke in the ceremonie of their Sacramentes Christe that was to come and Christ that now is come is one Christe thereof who doubteth And though the wordes shal come and is come be sundry yet Christe is one Christe is not sundred with diuision of times And this is al that the auctour meant wherein lyeth no controuersie betwixte vs. But that you woulde proue and can not proue and we vtterly denye is this that the thing and substance of the Sacramentes of both Lawes be not sundry but one and the same and of equal worthines We receiue Christ both sacramentally to wit his true and real body and bloude in the Sacrament of the Aulter vnder the formes of bread and wine and also spiritually that is to say by faith They receiued him only spiritually bicause in Manna they vnderstode Christ. The like is to be sayd of the water that flowed out of the Rocke which they dranke in comparison of the very bloude of Christe which we drinke not onely spiritually but also sacramentally and in deede vnder the forme of wine mingled with water which bloude is the true water of life the same that issued out of our Lordes body the true Rocke after it was striken with the Rodde Exod. 15. Aug. Tractatu de vtilitate Poenitentiae that is to say after that the Crosse came vnto it For in figure thereof the olde Rocke was striken with woodde and not with Iron quia Crux ad Christum accessit vt nobis gratiam propinaret bicause the Crosse came vnto Christ that it might * Propinaret brince his grace vnto vs as saith S. Augustine or who so euer was the author of that booke The other place that you pretende to allege out of S. Augustine M. Ievv forgeth sayinges of his ovvn fathering them vpon the Doctours In Iohannem Tractat. 26. is soone answered where so euer it be it is not there Thus to forge sayinges of your owne and to beare your Reader in hande it is S. Augustines or
really Christ him selfe For say you S. Cyprians wordes be cleare Christ offered the same thinge that Melchisedek had offered The clearer the wordes be the lesse they serue your obscure purpose If we graunted your translation to be true who haue turned hoc idem the same thing where it ought rather to be turned the same Sacrifice being referred to Sacrifice that goeth there before immediatly If we wincked at you for this I say Yet I pray you how foloweth this Argument Christ offered the same thing that Melchisedek had offered Ergo Melchisedek offered vp Christ him selfe verily and really If you would haue gonne the right way to worke thus you should haue argued Christe offered the same thing that Melchisedek had offered Melchisedek had offered bread and wine Ergo Christe offered bread and wine But bicause if you had thus rightly framed your Argument you had concluded with vs against your selfe by S. Cyprian by whose interpretation the bread and wine that Christ offered was his body and bloud rather then you would graunt so much it liked you better to vse false Logique then true Diuinitie The wordes then of S. Cyprian taken in their plaine and litteral sense Christe offered the true bread and true wine at his Supper and without any figure doo signifie that Melchisedek offered bread and wine as muche to say a bare figure and that Christe fulfilling that Figure offered also bread and wine But what bread and wine His body and bloude the true bread and the true wine Which body and bloude bicause they feede and susteine both body and soule to life euerlasting the cōmon bread and wine that Melchisedeck offered◠hauing vertue to feede only the body and that but for a final time are for good cause called the true bread and wine But perhaps you sticke to the worde hoc idē the same Sacrifice The Sacrifice of Melchisedek and the Sacrifice of Christe both diuers and the same or the same thing if you wil needes haue it so If Christe offered the same say you whereas Melchisedek offered but bread and wine how offered Christe him selfe truly and really True it is the Sacrifice of either or the thing that either of them offered is both diuers and also the same How diuers And howe the same Diuers in substance the same in Mysterie The diuersitie of substance not only S. Cyprian in the Epistle to Cecilius but also S. Hierome confesseth writing vpō the .109 Psalme Hierony in Psal. 109 Quomodo Melchisedech obtulit panem vinum sic tu offeres corpus tuum sanguinem verum panem verum vinū Like as Melchisedek offered bread and wine so thou shalt offer thy body and bloud the true bread and the true wine What difference then and diuersitie is betwen the figure and the thing forefigured that is to say betwen Melchisedeks bread and wine and the body and bloud of Christe such diuersitie of substāce is there in the thinges which they offered The Christe offered the same that Melchisedek had offered for the vnderstanding of it it may be said both in consideration of the Mysterie and of the thing it selfe in a right sense either bicause the formes of bread and wine remained after consecration or bicause it was bread and wine in dede before Christ had consecrated and offered We read in the Gospel Ioan. 2. that when our Sauiour at the Mariage had turned water into wine he commaunded the waiters to draw and bring it vnto the Vssher of the Haul They brought it and the Vssher tasted water made wine Now true it is to saye that the waiters did drawe and bring and the Vssher tasted the same thing that the waiters had filled the waterpottes withal a litle before that is water But what water Forsooth water made wine Likewise it was truely said of S. Cyprian that Christe offered the same thing that Melchisedech had offered before him that is bread and wine But what bread and wine Forsooth bread and wine made his body and bloude So the Scripture saith that Aarons Rodde deuoured the Roddes of the Enchaunters Exod. 7. What rodde was that It was the Rodde made a serpent By this it appeareth how sclender your Argument is which here you gather against the Real Sacrifice out of S. Cyprians wordes and how you seeke not so much the truth as to gainesay and ouerthwarte the Authorities that for the same I alleged Let vs examine the rest of your Replie Iewel Notvvithstanding it is certaine that the Sacrifice that Melchisedek made if it vvere graunted to be a Sacrifice yet in plaine and Common manner of speache vvas not Christe the Sonne of God but onely material Breade and VVine and other like prouision of Victualles prepared for Abraham and for his menne And therefore the Olde learned Fathers saie not Melchisedek offered the same in Sacrifice vnto God but He brought it foorth as a present as the manner vvas to refreashe them after the pursuitte and chase of their enimies And S. Hierome in his Translation turneth it not Obtulit He Sacrificed but Protulit He brought it foorthe Ioseph Antiquit lib. 1. cap. 11. Iosephus reporteth the mater thus Melchisedek milites Abrahami hospitaliter habuit nihil illis ad victum deesse Passus Simulque ipsum adhibuit Mēsae Melchisedek feasted Abrahams Souldiers and suffered them to wante nothinge that was necessary for their prouision And likewise he receiued Abraham him selfe vnto his Table Chrysost. in Gene. Homil 35. Epiph. cōt Melc lib. 2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysostome and Epiphanius say thus He brought foorthe vnto them Breade and VVine Tertullian saithe Abrahamo reuertenti de praelio obtulit Panem Vinum Melschisedek offered Breade and VVine not vnto God but vnto Abraham returninge from the fighte So S. Ambrose Occurrit Melchisedek obtulit Abrahamo Panem Vinum Melchisedek came foorth to meete and offered nor vnto God but vnto Abraham Breade and VVine By these fevve it may appeare that Melchisedek brought foorthe Bread and VVine Tertull. cōtr Iudaeos and other prouision not as a Sacrifice vnto God but as a Reliefe and Susteinance for Abraham and for his Companie Harding It is a worlde to see your doublenes What are ye not resolued whether the Sacrifice that Melchisedek made were a Sacrifice or no Sir the Sacrifice he made that is to say the thing which he offered in Sacrifice was not Christe the Sonne of God pardy Who euer said it was Wel what was it then Mary onely material bread and wine say you So say we too and that by the same the Sacrifice of Christes body and bloud vnder the forme of bread and wine VVhat vvas Melchisedeks Sacrifice by M. Iew was forefigured But was this al that Melchisedek offered Not al by you For you recken vp also the prouision of victuals that were prepared for Abraham and his men that were in number .318 Then of likelyhod this was a
interpretations and heaped phrases Once leaue your bad shifte of putting away one truth by an other truth Howe oftentimes muste we tel you the formes of bread and wine do signifie the body and bloud of Christ present not absent Againe if for proufe that these wordes which reporte Christe to be present in the blessed Sacrament of the Aulter or to be offered in the Sacrifice of the Aulter vnder the formes of bread and wine be not onely my wordes I should here also allege the place of Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus which I alleged in my Answer to the tenth Article of your Chalenge what could you reasonably replye to the contrary That auncient Father saith thus vsing the verie termes of the Scholastical Doctours Cyril Hierosol Catechisi Mystagog Christe once chaunged water into wine which is nye vnto bloude in Chana of Galiley by his onely wil and shal not he be worthy to be beleued of vs that at his last supper he chaunged wine into bloude For if being bidden to a corporal wedding he wrought a woonderous miracle shal we not much more confesse that he gaue his body and bloude vnto the children of the Spouse Wherefore with al assurednesse let vs receiue the body and bloud of Christe Hitherto reason mouing credit now folow the wordes that are specially to be noted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nam sub specie panis datur tibi corpus sub specie vini datur sanguis vt sumpto corpore sanguine Christi efficiaris ei comparticeps corporis sanguinis For vnder the forme shape shew or figure of bread the body of Christe is geuen vnto thee and vnder the shape of wine his bloud is geuen that hauing receiued the body and bloud of Christe thou maist be made coÌ„partener with him of his body and bloude Here haue you the expresse wordes teaching vs the body of Christe to be present in the SacrameÌ„t vnder the forme of bread and his bloude vnder the forme of wine which you report to be wordes of myne owne only inuention neuer vsed by any auncient Father before my tyme. Where you go about to answer to this place of S. Cyrillus in the tenth Article of your Replie to thintent the body and bloud of Christ might not be beleued to be really present in the blessed SacrameÌ„t I wish that al men saw both your weakenes and also your falshod You confesse this lerned Fathers wordes touching this point of the real presence Vvordeâ— in M. Iewels iudgemeÌ„t quicke and violent to be quicke and violent Whereby vnwares as it semeth you confesse him therein to be cleare and resolute as he is in dede To say truly violent he is not but a plaine reporter of the truth But in dede he is to quicke for dul heretikes that beleue their carnal senses rather then Christes owne most plaine wordes In the tenth Article of â—he Replie page 432. Yet he him self in plainest wise say you openeth and cleareth his owne meaning Truth it is he doth so as euery one that readeth the place as the Author reporteth it not as you haue falsified him may easily iudge Now bicause euery man hath not the booke of Cyrillus nor the booke of your Replie at hande for truthes sake and that your impudent falshod may appeare it shal be to good purpose to lay here before the Reader what you make that holy and auncient Father to say and what he saith him selfe Thus then say you falsly M. Ievvel falsifieth S. Cyrillus Hiero solym Cateches Mystagogica 4. For thus he writethâ— Ne consideres tanquam panem nuduÌ„ Panis Eucharistiae non est amplius panis simplex nudus Consider not as if it were bare bread The bread of the Sacrament is no lenger bare and simple breade Which wordes are naturally resolued thus It is bread how be it not only bare bread but bread and some other thing elles beside And there after a few wordes you conclude thus Of these wordes of Cyrillus we may wel reason thus by the way The Sacrament is not onlyâ— or bare bread therefore it is bread albeit not only bare bread And thus the same Cyrillus that is brought to testiâ—ie that there remaineth no bread in the Sacrament testifieth most plainely to the contrary that there is bread remaining in the Sacrament Caâ—echo Myst. 4. On the other side S. Cyrillus truly alleged saith thus Ne consideres tanquà m panem nudum vinum nudum corpus enim est sanguis Christi secundùm ipsius Domini verba Quamuis enim sensus hoc tibi suggesserit tamen fides te confirmet ne ex gusturem iudices quin potius habeas ex fide pro certissimo ita vt nulla subeat dubitatio esse tibi donata corpus sanguinem Doo not consider it as bare breade and bare wine for it is the body and bloude of Christe according vnto the wordes of our Lorde him selfe For although thy sense make that suggestion vnto thee yet let faith strengthen thee that thou iudge not the thing by thy taste but rather that of thy faith thou hold it as a most certaintie so as thou be void of al doubt that the body and bloud are geuen to thee These wordes being truly alleged doo clearely open the meaning of Cyrillus Your false forgeries and corruptions doo vndoubtedly declare that you seeke not the truth but intende deceit False doctrine must be mainteined by false meanes If you had meant good faith and truth you would truly and faithfully haue recited that holy Fathers woordes without such mangling and chaunging Now to vse your owne Rhetorike you haue done him great and open wrong wilfully suppressing and drowning his wordes and vncourteously commaunding him to silence in the middest of his tale Why did you not consider the force of his counsel which is that a Christen man regarde not the suggestion of his senses but stay him selfe vpon his faith not iudging of this high Mysterie what the sense of sight or tast geueth but with a simple faith beleuing the wordes that Christ spake In al S. Cyrillus you find not this order of wordes Panis Eucharistiae non est amplius panis simplex nudus The bread of the Sacrament is no lenger bare and simple breade as you turne it and ascribe it vnto S. Cyrillus By occasion of which wordes you tel vs of your natural resolution and beare vs in hande it is bread how be it not only or bare bread Which is no natural resolution gathered of S. Cyrillus wordes but a crafty collusion wroong out of your owne forged woordes to enuegle the ignorant Now S. Cyrillus wordes be these not in the fourth Catechesis as you haue quoted your booke but in the third where he speaketh of the holy Oile QuemadmoduÌ„ saith he Panis Eucharistiae In cateches 3. My stigogica post sancti spiritus inuocationem non amplius est panis communis sed est corpus Christi sic
S. Chrysostome as though he so vnderstoode Malachies Prophecie and consequently were contrary to S. Irenaeus That S. Chrysostom is to be vnderstanded of the Sacrifice of the Aulter And on the other side who is so wilfully blinde that seeth not al these properties to be agreeable vnto the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe For this is not contrary to Moyses but it is the perfection of Moyses the truth of the figure the body of the shadow the comming of this hath abolished the Iewish Sacrifices by this God is most highly praised thanked and honored and this it selfe is a worship most holyly to be celebrated In â—rat 2. contra Iudaeos This what it is most plainely by the manner of offering is declared for the Priest saith in the person of Christ as by him he is taught to do this is my body which is geuen for you Luc. 22. this is my bloud which is shed for you and for many Math. 26. This by al right is our Sacrifice in so much that if this be not ours I meane of the new Testament whereas besides this ther is none other external and real sacrifice then haue we none at al that is external and real Which if it were true then neither had we a Priesthoode nor Laweâ— and so then were we a people neither of the one Testament nor of the other To conclude this and none other but this is touching the substaÌ„ce of it the pure Sacrifice in highest and supreme degree of purenesse For what caÌ„ be thought purer then that body which was coÌ„ceiued of the holy Ghost and borne of the most pure Virgin which is the proper body of the Worde To the heape of Allegations which M. Iewel in the ende of this Diuision hath as it weâ—e with scoopes castâ— together bicause they importe litle substance and be some vntruly and al without sinceritie brought in the circumstance of the places whens they be taken out not declared the opening whereof would require many wordes which should weary rather then profite the reader I esteme a iuste and particuler Answer vtterly nedelesse specially what so euer is of any importance being already sufficiently answered The .10 Diuision The Ansvver NOw let vs heare what S. Cyprian hath written to this purpose Bicause his workes he common to be shorter I wil rehearse his woordes in Englishe If in the Sacrifice which is Christe none but Christe is to be folowed soothly it behooued vs to obey and doo that which Christe did and commaunded to be done For if Iesus Christe our Lorde and God very he him selfe be the high Priest of God the Father and him selfe first offered Sacrifice to God the Father and commaunded the same to be doone in his RemembraÌ„ce Verily that Prieste dooth occupie the office of Christe truely who dooth by imitation the same thing that Christe did And then he offereth to God the Father in the Churche a true and a perfite Sacrifice yf he beginne to offer right so as he seeth Christe him selfe to haue offered This farre S. Cyprian Howe can this Article be auouched in more plaine woordes he saith that Christe offered him selfe to his Father in his Supper and likewise commaunded vs to doo the same Here wee haue prooued that it is lawful and hath alwaies from the beginning of the Newe Testamente bene lawful for the Priestes to offer vp Christe vnto his Father by the testimonies of three holy Martyrs two Greekes and one Latine most notable in sundry respectes of antiquitie of the roume they bare in Christes Churche of Learninge of Constancie of Faith stedfastly keapte to Death suffered in places of same and knowledge at Paris at Lions at Carthage Iewel This place of S. Cyprian as it not once toucheth the real Sacrificinge of Christ vnto his Father so it vtterly condemneth the Communion vnder One Kinde the Common Praiers in a strange vnknowen tongue and briefly the vvhole disorder and abuse of M. Hardinges Masse But S. Cyprian saith In Sacrificio quod Christus est In the Sacrifice that is Christe Yf M. Harding thinke to finde great aduantage in these vvoordes August in Iohan. tract 26. it may please him to Remember that S. Augustin saith Illis Petra erat Christus Vnto the Iewes the Rocke was Christ. Verily the Sacrifice after the order of Melchisedek vvhich is the Propitiation for the Sinnes of the vvorld is onely Iesus Christ the Sonne of God vpon the Crosse. And the ministration of the Holy Mysteries in a phrase and manner of speache is also the same Sacrifice bicause it laieth foorthe the Death and bloud of Christ so plainely and so euidently before our eies So saith S. Augustine August in Psalm 20 The very Remembrance of Christes Passion sturreth vp such motions within vs as if we sawe Christ presently hauing vpon the Crosse. Vpon vvhich vvoordes the Common Glose noteth thus De Conse Dis. 2. Semel Christus immolatur id est Christi immolatio repraesentatur fit memoria passionis Christe is sacrificed that is to say The Sacrifice of Christe is represented and there is made a Remembrance of his passion So S. Cyprian saith Vinum exprimit sanguinem Cypri lib. 2. epist. 3. In Aqua populus intelligitur In Vino sanguis ostenditur Itaque passionis eius mentionem in Sacrificijs facimus Passio enim Domini est Sacrificium quod offerimus The VVine sheweth the Bloude in the VVater we vnderstande the people The Bloude is expressed in the VVine And therefore in our sacrifices we make mention of Christes passion For the Sacrifice that we offer De Conse Distinct. 2. Quid sit is the passion of Christe As the ministration of the holy CoÌ„munion is the Death and Passion of Christ euen so and in like sort and sense may the Sacrifice thereof be called Christe Therefore S. Gregorie saith Christus in seipso immortaliter viuens iterum in hoc Mysterio moritur De Cons. Dist. 2. Quid sit Eius Caro in populi SaluteÌ„ patitur Christ liuiÌ„g immortally in him selfe dieth againe in this Mysterie His Fleash suffereth in the Mysterie for the Saluation of the people I recken M. Harding vvil not say In Glosa Chryso in Acta Homil 21. that Christe Dieth in deede according to the force and sounde of these vvordes or that his Fleashe verily and in dede as tormented and suffereth in the Sacrament S. Gregorie better expoundeth him selfe in this vvise Hoc Sacramentum Passionem Vnigeniti Filij imitatur Beda expoâ—nens illudâ— Sicut Moses exalta uit c. This Sacrament expresseth or representeth the Passion of the Onely begotten Sonne And the very Barbarous Glose touching the same saith Christus Moritur Patitur id est Mors Passio Christi repraesentatur Christ Dieth and Suffereth that is to say Christes Death and Passion is represented So S. Chrysostom saith Iohan. 3. In Mysterijs mors Christi perficitur The Death of
Christian man is bounde to offer vp the Vnblouddy and Daily Sacrifice of the Nevve Testamente and that in as ful and ample sorte as is the Priest And therefore M. Hardinge him selfe saithe euen in the very Canon of his Masse Memento Domine famulorum famularumque tuarum omnium Circumstantium pro quibus tibi offerimus vel qui tibi offerunt hoc Sacrificium Laudis Remember ô Lorde thy Seruantes and al them that stande aboute for whom wee offer vnto thee or els whiche doo offer vnto the this Sacrifice of Praises Out of S. Augustines vvordes M. Hardinge in the ende concludeth thus Christe is a Prieste after the order of melchisedek Ergo The Priest hath Authoritie to offer vp the Sonne of God in Sacrifice vnto his Father It vvere harde to tel vs hovv this Antecedente and this Consequente came togeather No man hath Authoritie thus to mince his Logique but M. Harding Harding If the Sacrifice be external That this sacrifice is external it behoueth the Priesthode also be external That this Sacrifice is external it is cleare For to the making of this Sacrifice external thinges be requisite as bread and wine mixte with water for the mater the wordes of our Lorde outwardly pronouÌ„ced for the fourme a Man ordered and consecrated into a Priest for the Minister The body also and bloude of Christe it selfe which is the substance offered though it be spiritually vnderstanded and not with any outward sense of man perceiued is a real thing of it selfe consisting besides and without the soule spirite or mynde of man and may be receiued of mannes body by the office of the mouth and is not a mere spiritual thing as loue mercie faith hope ioye sorowe contrition of harte and such other thinges that haue their being onely in the mynde and spirite For proufe that it is external by witnesses no testimonie can be plainer then that of S. Gregorie Nazianzen whereof the three onely later wordes M Iewel hath three times in this Article alleged suppressing the other with crafty silence bicause he sawe they made directly against him Nazianzâ— in Apologetico Thus he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How should I be so bolde as to offer vp vnto him the external Sacrifice the whiche is the true sampler of the great Mysteries Let no man charge me with falsifying this Father by adding this worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vnto the sentence the same is in that place necessarily to be vnderstanded and there it should haue bene placed expressely by the Author but that he thought it better the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to haue relation vnto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thrise put before in the same sentence then by â—o ofte repetition of one worde as with an vnpleasant sound to offende learned eares to whose good liking in that Oration as also coÌ„monly in al his other exacte writinges folowing Polemon in his manner of writing as it is reported of him he muche attempered his stile Double Priesthod double Sacrifice in the nevve TestameÌ„t Now as touching Priesthode in the newe Testament it is double internal or spiritual and external as our Sacrifices also be double internal and mere spiritual and this the chiefe and singuler Sacrifice of the Church external The Internal Priesthode is common to al godly persons Internal Priesthod bicause they be membres of Christe the high King and Priest and the members be partakers of what good thinkes so euer the head hath God endeweth al with this Priesthode whom he washeth cleane from their sinnes in the bloude of Christe consecrating and annointing them with none other oile then with the oile of his Grace Of this Kinde of Priesthode speaketh S. Peter and S. Ihon the Apostle 2 Pet i. 2. This Pristhode as we acknowlege Apoc. 1.5 so do our Aduersaries not denie For it is neither a degree nor order nor office nor ministerie in the Churche And verely this Priesthode sometimes is worthier and of more excellencie in a woman or a childe then in a Bishop yea perhaps then in the Pope him selfe For in him it is none at al if he happe to fal into mortal sinne Whereas then al Christian persons be Priestes annointed with that Ointment 1. Ioan. 2. of whiche S. Iohn speaketh Vos vnctionem habetis à Sancto ye haue the ointment of the Holy they ought to offer vp and sacrifice somewhat vnto God soothly them selues and their bodies Rom. 12. a liuely holy and acceptable hoste to God as S. Paul admonished 1. Pet. 2. And S. Peter calleth the faithful a holy Priesthode offering spiritual and acceptable sacrifices vnto God through Iesus Christe The other Priesthode is external or owtwarde in the Churche External Priesthod which is coÌ„municated vnto certaine persons by Consecration and by Imposition of handes of Bishops Character indelebilis imprinting into the soule of him that is made a Priest a marke or Printe that can not be put out the like whereof is imprinted in them that receiue the Sacramentes of Baptisme and Confirmation Of this Priesthode so communicated by Imposition of handes and ordination of a Bishop speaketh S. Paule to Timothe â— Tim. 4. Noli negligere Gratiam quae in te est quae data est tibi per prophetiam cum impositione manuum Presbyterij Despise not the gifte whiche is in thee that was geuen thee through Prophecie with the laying on of the haÌ„des of Priesthode 2. Tim. 1. Againe to him Stirre vp the grace of God that is in thee through the laying on of my handes And in the Epistle to Tite Tit. 2. For this intent I leafte thee in Crete that thou shouldest amende the thinges that want and ordeine Priestes in euery Citie euen so as I tooke order with thee Act. 14. S. Paule also and S. Barnabas did ordeine Priestes in euery Churche in Prayer and fasting as now a daies the custome is obserued when holy orders be geuen This outward Priesthode and the ministerie of it is very necessary in the Churche militant Neither be the Priestes depriued of it if at any time they fal into mortal sinne as Wiclef helde opinion VViclef and was condemned for it in the Councel of Constantia For this Priesthode is not such a grace geuen as maketh one acceptable called of the Diuines Gratia gratum faciens It is an office a dignitie a Degree and a grace freely geuen Gratia gratis data as the Diuines terme it Neither can the prinâ—e that is imprinted in a Priest euer be put out by any mortal sinne Auctoritie to create Priestes leaste to the Churche That the Churche hath auctoritie and power to create and ordeine Priestes of the Apostles and that the Apostles receiued the same of Christe it may be proued by that Christe said at his last Supper hoc facite in meam commemorationem Luca. 22. 1. Cor. 11. Doo ye this in my remembrance For