was an indifferent thing and yet when he saw d Mat. 15. 2. c. the Scribes and Pharisies to put affiance of holinesse puritie in those washings so that they accounted them vncleane which omitted the same he did himselfe neglect and by his example as it séemeth moued his disciples to neglect that tradition of their Elders telling them that in vaine they did worship God teaching for doctrines the precepts of men In leauing the mixture of water we are not contraried by the e Mat 26. 2â— institution of Christ set downe in the Gospell I alleaged before f Anselm sax on Centur. Magdebur 12. cap. 9. that the Gréeke Church consecrated with wine onely and their reason because we reade not that Christ added water I shewed how Chrysostome as one edition of his g Chrysost Liturg per Leonem Tusc 〈…〉 Liturgie intendeth added water after the consecration as being no part of the institution of the Sacrament I noted that h Anselm vt supra Anselmus and i Tho. Aquin. pag. 3. qu 74. art 6. Thomas Aquinas notwithstanding the assertions of diuers auncient writers could make at the most but a probabilitie of Christs vsing water in this Sacrament And why probable because the maner of that Country is so to drinke their wine Wherof it may rightly be gathered yâ— though Christ did vse water as we do not finde that he did yet he did it but after the maner of that Country in drinking wine and not for any mysterie of the Sacrament I alleaged moreouer that k Polyd. Virgâ—l de inuent rerum li. 5. ca. 10. Polydore Virgil and l Platina in Alexan 1. Platina and m DuraÌ„d Ratio diui lib. 4. cap. de officio sacerdotis c. Durand referre this tradition to Alexander the first and so for their parts haue acquited vs from crossing the institution of Christ Also that n De consecra dist 2 caâ— sicut in glossa Doctors haue taught that water is vsed in the cup de honestate tantum namely by way of temperancie and sobrietie only and therefore not of any necessitie to the Sacrament Why would this man take vpon him to answere and yet slily passe ouer all these things with silence so directly pertaining to the point in question But to pardon his silence to take that which he doth say he breaketh out at the first dash and telleth me that if I finde the words of Chrysostome expounded as was answered before out of the Trullan Canons then I did but wrangle in alleaging them to another purpose contrary to the knowne meaning of the Authour But I wrangle not herein Whatsoeuer exposition it pleased those Fathers to make of Chrysostomes wordes thrée hundred yeares after Chrysostomes death the wordes themselues are most plaine to that purpose that I first noted them He demandeth this question o Chrysost in Mat. hom 83. Why did Christ after his resurrection drinke Not Water but VVine Where manifestly he nameth the drinking of wine and denieth water To this he answereth He would plucke vp by the rootes the pernicious heresie of them which vse Water in the Sacrament For to shew that when he deliuered this Sacrament he deliuered wine therefore did he vse wine also after his resurrection at the bare table of the Sacrament Of the fruite of the vine saith he which surely bringeth forth VVine and not VVater It is hard to suppose that Chrysostom wold say that Christ did drinke not water but wine to reproue the heresie of them which vse water in the Sacrament and yet himselfe haue intention of both wine water to be vsed in the Sacrament I cannot sée it to stand with any reason If the answere can let him follow his owne fancie As for the thing it selfe we doubt not but the Churches of God haue vsed their libertie in the practise thereof for that vppon occasion of the heresie of them that vsed onely water they in some places tooke away this ceremony as by the aforesaid place of Chrysostome the practise of the Armenians may be gathered in other places at least altered the maner of it that whereas it was wont to be added before consecration thenceforth it should be added after that it might be knowne that water was no entire part or matter of the Sacrament but vsed for other purpose indifferently as hath bene before saide The ground whereof Chrysostome as we sée maketh to be this that Christ mentioneth only the fruite of the vine which saith he bringeth forth wine and not water Now this adding of water after consecration as it appeareth by the testimonie of p Ex Ansel vt supra Nechites Patriarch of Nicomedia who affirmeth yâ— in their rites they swarued not from the auncient tradition of their Fathers and by one copie of the q Chrysost Liturg vt supra Liturgie that goeth vnder Chrysostomes name so it is further manifest by the testimonie of r Theod. Balsam Annota in concil Constant â— can â—2 Theodorus Balsamon Patriarch of Antioch in his annotations vpon that Canon of the sixth Councell whereof I now speake where he sheweth the same vse and addeth further which the aforesaid Liturgie also giueth to vnderstand that the water which they put in was hote water The reason whereof he affirmeth to haue bene this to signifie that water blood came out of the side of Christ not cold dead but warme quicke and liuely as implying vertue and power to quicken and make vs aliue spiritually to which mysterie the words of the Canon aforesaid séeme to haue relation in making mention of Chrysostomes Liturgie If water had bene taken to be any necessary matter of the Sacrament surely these men would not haue omitted to haue mingled it before consecration that so the Sacrament might be whole and perfect But hereby it is manifest that it was not so taken â— therfore by the iudgement of the auncient Churches we offend not as maiming the Sacrament of Christ in vsing wine only without mixture of water The exception which the Answ vseth against the Bishops of Armenia is false and feined For whatsoeuer he can pretend of some Armenians that did reuolt yet it is apparant that the Bishops of Armenia did approue the condemnation of Eutyches Dioscorus by their Å¿ concil chalced in episto illusttium personarum pro eod concilio Epistles written to Leo the Emperour in approbation of the Chalcedon Councell wherein they were condemned and with reproofe of that heresie for which they were condemned And that it may not be thought yâ— they did it only for that time they are found again in the t concil constant 6. act 17. 18 in subscript sixth Councell to subscribe against and condemne the heresie of Eutyches euen in that Councell which the Answ alleageth for the defence of his cause And therefore it is hereby manifest that they vsed not wine only with any such
of eating and drinking Iob. 6. are not to be vnderstood properly but by a figure sect 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 30. That the Doctours of the Romish church by the defence of Transubstantiation haue bene driuen to most impious and damnable questions and assertions sect 29. That the place of the Gospell Luc. 22. 20. which they so much cauil vpon out of the Greeke maketh nothing at all for Transubstantiation as by diuerse other reasons so by the confession Bellarmine himselfe sect 31. That the assumption of the virgin Mary is a meere fable sect 33. That the Church hath no authoritie after the Apostles to authorize any scriptures and that we seclude no other bookes from the canon of the bible then the old church did sect 34. How wickedly the Papists deale in mangling and martyring the writings of the Fathers sect 35. That our doctrine of iustification before God by faith onely is the verie trueth which both the scriptures and out of them the Fathers haue manifestly taught that it maketh nothing against good workes that the place of S. Iames cap. 2. maketh nothing against it sect 36. May it please thee gentle Reader first of all to take notice of these two places of Chrysostome Gelasius which haue bene the occasion of all this controuersie for thy better satisfaction I haue noted them both in English and Latin though otherwise to auoyd both tediousnesse of writing and vnnecessarie charges of printing I haue thought good to set downe the places alleaged onely translated into English The place of Chrysostome against the vse of water in the cup of the Lords table CVius rei gratia non aquam sed vinum post resurrectionem bibit Chrysost in Math. hom 83. Perniciosam quandam haeresin radicitùs euellere voluit eorum qui aqua in mysterijs vtuntur Ita vt ostenderet quia quando hoc mysteriuÌ„ tradidit vnum tradidit etiam post resurrectionem in nuda mysterij mensae vino vsus est Exgenimine ait vitis quae certè vinum non aquam producit In English thus But why did Christ after his resurrection drinke not Water but Wine He would plucke vp by the rootes a certaine pernicious heresie of them which vse water in the Sacrament So that to shew that when he deliuered this Sacrament he deliuered wine euen after his resurrection also he vsed wine at the bare table of the Sacrament Of the fruite of the vine saith he which surely bringeth foorth wine and not water The place of Gelasius against Transubstantiation CErtè sacramenta quae sumimus corporis sanguinis Christi diuina Gelasius cont Eutych Nestor res est propter quod per eadem diuinae efficimur consortes naturae tamen esse non desiuit substantia vel natura panis vini Et certe imago similitudo corporis sanguinis Christi in actione mysteriorum celebrantur Satis ergò nobis euidenter ostenditur hoc nohis in ipso Christo domino sentiendum quod in eius imagine profitemur celebramus et sumimus vt sicut in haenc scilicet in diuinam transeunt sancto spiritu perficiente substantiam permanent tamen in suae proprietate naturae sic illud ipsum mysterium principale cuius nobis efficientiam virtutemque veracitèr repraesentant ex quibus constat propriè permanentibus vnum Christum quia integrum verumque permaenere demon strant In English thus Verily the Sacraments which we receiue of the bodie and blood of Christ are a diuine thing by reason whereof we also by them are made partakers of the diuine nature and yet there ceaseth not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine And surely an image or esemblance of the bodie and blood of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries It is therefore euidently inough shewed vnto vs that we must thinke the same in our Lord Iesus Christ which we professe celebrate and receiue in his image that as these namely the bread and wine do by the working of the holie Ghost passe ouer into a diuine substance and yet continue in the proprietie of their owne nature so they shew that that principall mysterie the efficiencie vertue wherof these do represent vnto vs doth abide one Christ because whole and true those natures properly remaining whereof he doth consist M. Spence hauing had my bookes to peruse these places sent me in writing this answere to them SIr I right hartily thanke you for the willing minde you hauâ— towards me Truly I should be verie vnkinde if I knew mâ— selfe vnaffectioned to so much good will I am in prison and pouertie otherwise I should be some way answerable to your friendlinesse In the meane season good will shall be readie for good will Touching the words of S. Chrysostome He would plucke vp by the rootes a certaine pernicious heresie of them which vse water in the Sacrament c. Read the 32. Canon of the sixth Councell holden at Constantinople and there you shall find vpon what occasion this golden mouth did vtter these words and not only that but also mention of S. Iames and S. Basils masse or sacrifice left to the church in writing The words of the Canon begin thus Because we know that in the country of the Armenians wine onely is offered at the holie table c. The heresie therefore against which he wrote was of the a Vntruth For neither doth Chrysostome intimate any thing against the Armenians or such as vse wine only neither was it heresie in theÌ„ that did so Armenians and the Aquarians the first whereof would vse onely wine the other onely water in the holie mysteries Against which vse being so directly against both the scriptures and custome of the primitiue church he wrote the same which he saith of pernicious heresie as before I cannot doubt of your hauing the Councels or some of them Your other booke conteining the words of Gelasius I wil not yet answere being printed at Basil where we suspect many good works to be corrupted abused But if it proue so to be yet the whole faith of Christs church in that point may not be reproued against so many witnesses of scriptures and fathers b Neither scripture not Father auoucheth the contrarie auouching the contrarie Nay what words should Christ haue vsed if he had meant to make his bodie blood of the bread and wine as we say he did other then these This is my bodie which shall be giuen c. And gaine for this is my blood of the new Testament which shal be shead for many for remission of sinnes Marke well the speeches and they be most wonderfull as most true All the world and writings therein c The Gospell it selfe is sufficient to perswade him that will be perswaded â—nforming vs of a true and naturall bodie of Christ and not of a fantasticall bodie in the fashion quantitie of a wafer cake cannot
his supper But S. Cyprian in his Epistle ad Caecilium so long ago 〈…〉 〈…〉 th it sure that Christ vsed both Let that Epistle for all these points be the stickeler betweene vs who saith e Cyprians words are thus In the sacrifice which is christ none but christ is to be followed Therefore we are not to follow the church of Rome beyond or beside that which Christ did In the sacrifice which is Christ Christ is to be followed euen to this verie purpose vsing those words Against which point to alleage S. Cyprian ad Pompeium is to alleage S. Cyprian against S. Cypriaâ— But let S. Cyprian saie thus much for vs to you If it be commanded in the Gospell or be conteined in the Epistles or Acts of the Apostles to vse only wine let this traditioÌ„ then be obserued To make short wine is ex institutâ—one to put thereto water is Ex praecepto Ecclesiae which vpon your warrant being so long and so vniuersally vsed I dare not breake There arose about S. Cyprians time certaine fond innouators verie foolish fellowes who for temperance forsooth vsed no wine but all water only in the sacrifice of the Church These in the Catalogue of Heretickes written by S. Augustine Ad quod vult deum in the like Catalogue of Heretickes written by Philastrius Brixiamus Episcopus are called Aquarij Who saith he in the heauenly Sacraments offer onelie water and not that which the Catholicke and Apostolicke Church is accustomed to do The argument and drift of the afore-named Epistle of Saint Cyprian ad Caecilium lib. 2. Epist 3. is briefly set downe In the sacrifice of the Church neither water without wine nor wine without water ought to be offered The whole Epistle is for that matter notable and no doubt Saint Chrysostome meant of those Aquarij Saint Cyprian calleth it our Lords tradition and a thing ordâ—ined of God he saith our Lord both did it and also taught it The learned Fathers of the sixt Councell called it an order deliuered to the Church by God and say it was the tradition of the Apostles Clemens constitu Apost lib. 8. cap 17 saith likewise mingling of the cup with wine and water and consecrating it c. S. Iames in his Liturgie saith Likewise after he had supped taking the cup and mingling it with wine and water c. S. Basill in his Liturgie saith Likewise also taking the cup of the iuyce of the wine mixing giuing thanks c. S. Chrysostome in his Liturgie in putting wine into the Chalice said And one of the souldiers opened his side and forthwith issued blood and mingling it with water he saith And water and he that saw it hath borne witnesse and his witnesse is true Ioh. 19. S. Proclus a neare successor of his De traditione diuinae Liturgiae saith By these praiers they expected the comming of the holie Ghost that by his diuine presence he should make the bread and the wine mixed with water which were proposed for sacrifice the bodie and blood of our Sauiour Iesus Christ Theodoret Dialog 1. saith f Theodoret saith not he made it but he called it his blood That Christ made that which was mixed in the cup his blood Eusebius Emiss in ser 5. de Paschat saith that Christ himselfe by his example taught that we should consecrate the cup with wine mixed with water Concilium Carthagin 3. cap. 24. In which Austen was present saith thus That in the Sacrament of the bodie and blood of the Lord nothing else should be offered but that which the Lord deliuered that is bread and wine mixed with water Ambrosius lib de Sacramento cap. 4. lib. 5. cap. 10. affirmeth that wine and water must be put in the cup. Irenaeus lib. 5. cap. When saith he the mixed cup and the bread broken receiueth the word of God it is made the Eucharist of the bodie blood of the Lord. August tract 120. in Iohannem Isidore lib. 2. offic cap. 18. Beda in Comment Marci cap. 14. vpon those words This is the cup of my blood Anselmus in 26. Mat. Alexander neare to the Apostle saith let bread only and wine mingled with water be offered in the sacrifice of Masses There ought not to be offered in the cup of our Lord either wine only or water only but both togither mingled because both is read to haue followed out of the side of our Lord in his passion Io. 19. de Consent distinct 2. cap. in Sacramentorum Iustinus Apostol 2. Damascen lib. 4. cap. 14. Grego Nissâ—n for Catechetico as is alleaged by Euthimius in Panoplia lib. 2. titulo 21. Chrysostome homil 84. in Ioannem hom 24. in 1. Corinth Theophâ—â—ct in Iâ—annem cap. 9. See Bellarminus lib. 4. de Sacramento Eucharistiae cap. 1. 11. beside many other testimonies of all ages in both Greeke and Latin Church R. Abbot 2. AS touching this first point of mixture of water with wine in the Sacrament I shewed before that our Churches haue accounted it as a meere indifferent thing where it is vsed with that simplicitie wherwith it was first begun The maner of Countries where their wines are verie strong is to delaie them with water Christians would not neglect that commendable shew of sobrietie in their mysticall banquet whereof Heathen men had regard at their ordinary tables Therefore according to the maner of their countries they mingled water with their wine taking wine to be the institution of Christ but whether méere wine or delaied wine they knew it made no difference Albeit some there were that in regard of this sobrietie and temperancie went too far leauing Christes institution of wine and vsing only water in the Sacrament as a Cypr. lib. 2. epist 3. Cyprian intimateth of some of his predecessours To this mixture was added at length some signification either in Cyprians time or perhaps before As for that of b Epist 1. Concil tomo â— Alexander the first to that purpose that Epistle of his and the rest of them are sufficiently knowne to be counterfeit and bastard stuffe But thus this vsage and custome ranne his course till at length it sell with the rest into the maine Ocean of Popish corruptions and superstitions where the fathers errours were turned into pestilent heresies and those things that arose of the simplicitie of men for c August epist 119. ad exhortationem vitae melioris profitable admonition and exhortation only as they intended them were made matters of true deuotion and of the worship of God Our Churches therefore séeing this mixture abused in the church of Rome and accounted as a necessary mysterie of Christian religion without any warrant of the word of God thought conuenient vtterly to relinquish the same though otherwise occasion requiring it they haue estéemed it an indifferent thing And herein they haue followed the example of our Lorde and maister Iesus Christ who knew well inough that the washing of handes and cuppes
iustly and well perswade a Christian to beléeue the contrary in my opinion S. Mathew Mark Luke and Paul all writing This is my bodie whereas writing otherwise of one thing one saith If I in the finger of God cast out diuels c. Another If I in the spirit of God c. So that in d Vntrue as appeareth by the coÌ„ference of these places Mat. 5. 29. with Mar. 9. 3. Mar. 5. 39. with Luc. 6. 29. Mat. 20. 23. Mar. 10. 39. Mat. 21. 21. Mar. 11. 23. which are not taken literally and yet difler not in phrase of speech any matter where moe then one speak of the same thing euerie one hath more of the same thing to giue more light then another But in the matter of the Sacrament no whit so but in the verie substantiall point e Vntrue for they varie as touching the cup there is the same reason of the one part of the Sacrament as of the other See the reply Concil constanti 6. can 32 all deliuer the selfe same effectuall words Sir once againe thankes for your good Chrysostome and so I beséech to recall them that erre into the way of truth and euerlasting saluation A reply against the former answere to the places of Chrysostome and Gelasius THe willingnesse I haue to doe you good M. Spence I wish might take such effect with you as that God might be glorified by reuealing vnto you the knowledge of his truth I doubt not but it shall be so if you séeke it as you ought and where you ought Concerning the place of Chrysostome of vsing water in the Sacrament I finde it expounded as you answere me in Concil Constantinopol 6. ca. 32. of them that vsed water onely and no wine Albeit the wordes séeme to me plainly to enforce vpon the Reader another vnderstanding neither find I any reason why the Bishops of Armenia being a thousand vnder one Metropolitane may not be thought as méete iudges of Chrysostomes meaning as the Bishops of this Councell especially séeing it is not certaine either what time or by whom those Canons were made and appeare to be falsly fathered vpon the sixth generall Councell as Surius in his admonition Surius in admoniâ— ad Lector de can 6. synodi concil to 2. concerning those Canons giueth to vnderstand Yea and they are in diuers points reiected by your selues as is plaine also by Surius both in the same Preface and by some notes added to some of the Canons But I contend not of that point and as I condemne not in that respect the Churches which either haue vsed or doe vse that mixture only without opinion of superstition and necessitie so neither do I find reason why those Churches are to be condemned that rather follow as most assured the simplicitie of the institution of Iesus Christ where we finde mention of the fruite of the vine but nothing as touching water If you say as the Canon saith that this is to innouate those things which haue bene deliuered by tradition Cypri epist ad Pompeium I must answer you with Cyprians words Whence is this tradition Whether descending from the authoritie of the Lord and of the Gospell or comming from the Commandements and Epistles of the Apostles for that those things which are written must be done God testifieth c. If therefore either it be commanded in the Gospell or conteined in the Epistles and Acts of the Apostles let this tradition be kept as holie Now séeing there is no testimony of the holie scripture to approue the necessitie of water I take your wordes directly contrary to the scriptures to be vnderstood rather of those which vse water only contrarie to the text then wine only according to the expresse mention of the text Your glose of the Canon De consecra dist 2. cap. sicut in glossa law doth tell that Doctors haue said that water is to be mingled in the cup only for honestie or decencie and therefore not of necessitie to the Sacrament And that amoÌ„gst others Thomas Aquinas granteth Polydore Virgil referreth the fist institution thereof to Alexander Plati in Alexander 1. Durand Rati diuin lib. 4. rubri de officio sacerdotis c. Thom. Aquin. pa 3. q. 7â— art 3 the first Bishop of Rome Pâ—atina séemeth to agrée with him So Durand saith Water is mingled in the cup with the wine by the institution of Pope Alexander the first And as touching Christes vsing of water Thomas Aquinas maketh it but a probabilitie and no certaine truth It is probably beleeued that our Lord instituted this Sacrament in wine mingled with water according to the manner of that country Your Councell of Trent saith no more It is supposed that our Lord did so And in a conference betwixt Anselmus a Bishop of Saxome and Nechâ—tes Patriarch of Nicomedia Anno domini Centur. Magdebur cap. 12. 1138. Neâ—hites obiecting that Christ our Sauiour did not vse water in the consecration Anselmus answereth by likelihood that he did so because in Palestina the maner is to mingle water with their wine Now if it were done according to the maner of that country then it was done to abate the strength of the wine and not for any such mysterie as some haue imagined In manie Countries where their wines are verie strong temperate sober men vse to qualifie and delaie the heate thereof by mingling water least it should cause any distemperature to the bodie And this the Gréeke Churches may séeme to haue respected who consecrated with méere wine as appeareth by Nâ—chites his spéech in the conference aboue-named as also by some editions of Chrysostomes Liturgie and afterwardes put in water when it was to be administred to the receiuers The reason which they vsed for not adding water before was this because Christ is not read to haue added water which accordeth with the words of Chrysostome alleaged by me But as I said before I stand not vpon this point Only I pray you to consider an argument of Bertram in his booke de corpo sangui domini ad Carol imperat taking Bertram de corpo sang domini his ground from this mixture Water saith he in the Sacrament beareth the image of the people Therefore if the wine sanctified by the seruice of the Ministers be bodily turned into the blood of Christ then the water also which is mingled withall must needs be bodily or substantially turned into the blood of the beleeuing people For where there is one sanctification there is consequently one working or effect and where there is the like reason there followeth also the like mysterie But we see in the water there is nothing turned bodily Consequently therefore in the wine there is nothing bodily shewed It is taken spiritually whatsoeuer is signified in the water as touching the bodie of the people It must needes therefore be taken spiritually whatsoeuer is signified in the wine concerning the blood of Christ
might more presume of his learning and reading as indéed he doth being as it séemeth far in loue with himselfe thinking nothing to be learned but that that he liketh of sitting vpon the circle of his owne braines and calling the scriptures and Doctors before him and charming them that whatsoeuer they speake or howsoeuer plainly yet they shall meane no otherwise then he will haue them to meane And straunge it is to sée what madde and vnreasonable meanings he fathereth vpon them whilest he séeketh to shift off their cleare and euident testimonies Which I perswade my selfe doe for the most part beare that sway in his conscience that he cannot extinguish the light thereof nor satisfie himselfe that he hath truly answered vnto them Whosoeuer he is I wish both him and you to remember that which S. Austen saith to Petilian the Donatist c August cont lite Petil. lib. 3. cap. 30. There is nothing more wretched or vnhappie then for a man not to yeeld to the truth wherewith he is so shut in that he cannot finde any way out Now if this matter had by your good dealing rested in priuate betwixt you me M. Spence as my intentioÌ„ was it should I wold not haue brought either your name or mine owne into this open light censure of men But sithence I perceiued both by your selfe and also otherwise that you had communicated the matter to your fellows who are wont to brag greatly both in corners and abroad if any thing of theirs remaine vnanswered truly howsoeuer you would be willing that I should sit downe as a conquered aduersary and so yéeld you some what wherof to triumph in secret amongst your disciples and followers and to be a means to subuert the faith of others I haue against this mischiefe thought it necessarie to publish this whole matter that though it be no good to you yet it may be good to them whom you séeke to hurt as Bernard saith d Bernard in Canti Ser. 6â— though the hereticke arise not from his filth yet the Church may be confirmed in the faith To come to your words you thank me for wishing you good I would you had accepted of the good that I wished you and then I would haue accepted of your thankes But you differ from me in iudgement what is good If I iudge of good one way and you another way who shall be iudge betwixt vs. Not your part for I say they are partiall for you Not our part for you say they are partiall for mée I must answere you with Optatus his words against the Donatists e Optat. cont Parmen Donat. lib. 5. No iudgement of this matter can be found in the earth we must require a iudge from heauen But why knocke we at heauen when we haue here the testament of Christ in the Gospell S. Paul saith f 2. Tim. 3. 15. The scriptures are able to make a man wise vnto saluation through the faith which is in Christ Iesus If your iudgement did entierly depend vpon the scriptures you I should not differ in iudgement But whilest you set one foote in the scriptures another foote beside the scriptures and g Hilar. de Trinit lib. 1. take not your vnderstanding from the sayings of the scriptures as Hilary saith you should but labor to draw the scriptures to those fond opinions which you haue presumed without the scriptures I maruell not that you go lame and halting in your iudgemeÌ„t and I cannot yéeld to iudge with you because you iudge without God Tertullian of olde said but I would not haue you thinke he spake it of the Papists h Tertul. de resurr carniâ— Take from hereticks their Heathenish conceits that they may decide their questions only by the scriptures and they cannot stand As for your regard of truth how great it is appeareth by your froward and wilfull answeres wherewith you shut your eyes against the cleare sun-light rather séeking shifts to cast a mist before it then framing your selfe to walke in the comfortable light thereof But to let that passe I will now leaue you to be a looker on in this matter and will henceforth apply my selfe to him that hath taken vpon him to be the Answerer for you P. Spence Sect. 2. IF ye finde S. Chrysostomes place so expounded as I haue set downe then is it but a I alleage it to no other purpose then the words theÌ„selues do manifestly yeeld See the answer wrangling to alleage it to the ende you do contrarie to Chrysostomes minde that is to vrge words contrary to the authors knowne meaning not caring for truth but to cauill If your thousand Bishops of Armenâ—a because of the b I opposed nuÌ„ber against number neither to be followed for their multitude but for their reason and proofe number do in this point which without them you fauour otherwise beare such a swaie with you why shall not the number of Bishops in other matters do the like if partialitie of iudgement would permit you would you haue a reason why your thousand of Armenian Bishops yea if they were ten thousand were not herein meete iudges theÌ„ woâ—e ye well they did wrangle as you do vpon Christes wordes against their owne consciences wresâ—ing words sillables to serue their sorie turne Why so Because the Armenians forsooke both the Latine and Greeke Church Anno dom 5 27. for that they condemned Eutyches and Dioscorus in the Calcedon Councell for denying the two natures of Christ and superstitiouslie they c But how or where doâ—h it appeare that they began to hold this point vpon that occasion held this point of wine alone fearing least the water mixed therewith should signifie Christs two natures as in the Greeke Latin Church it doth So that if your thousand Armenian Bishops moue you so you must be an Eutychian and for that cause must you forbeare water in the wine and then tell mee why your thousand Armenians must not moue you to hold with them that â—o childe is christened with water alone but with water and oyle as they hereticallie held besides many other d VVherof the Church of Rome hath verie great store toyish and most childish vanities I stand not vpon the validitio of the Trullane Canons of the sixt Councell but it is inough that besides their testimonie not de iure but de facto of the Churches mingling water with wine the sâ—me is otherwise by infinit testimonies proued to be vsed You condemne not you say the Churches that vse water and wine for that point but for their superstitious standing in it and shall not we condemne more iustly the superstitious contradicting humor of those that make a religion and a superstition to vse it with wine conteining so auncient and so vniuersall and so well witnessed a custome You dare not flatly denie it but you would haue it seeme only probable that Christ put water to the wine at
intentioÌ„ as he shiftingly pretendeth Nay it is further manifest by this for that the Iberians the neere neighbours of the Armenians and inhabiting that part which was called Armenia interior as u Sozomen hist eccl li. 2. cap. 6. Sozomen reporteth did vse no water at all in the Sacrament being notwithstanding sound in all points of faith and religion Thus doth Theodore Balsamon testifie of them w Theodor. Balsam in concil constanâ—i 6. can 32. The Iberians do put no water into the sacred cup albeit they be otherwise verie sound in the faith Moreouer the heresie of Eutyches conteined no such matter He denied two-natures in Christ but the Answ cannot shewe that in regard of his heresie he denied the mixture of water or that this mixture was in those times taken for a mysterie of two natures in Christ or that the Fathers vsed any argument from thence for the proofe of two natures That long afterwards it was drawne to that signification I wote well as it appeareth by x Theod. Balsam vt supra Balsamon y Nicepho hist lib. 18. cap. 5â— Nicephorus and z Theophy in Ioh. 19. Theophylact but that construction being long after serueth not to preiudice them who liued long before there was any such mysterie intended by that mixture The Councell intimateth no such thing intended by it and who wil beléeue that those Fathers would note a defect in ceremonie and so lightly passe ouer without any mention at all the errour of doctrine whence that defect should begin Chrysostome in the time of his banishment liued amongst the a Sozomen hist eccl li. 8. cap. 27. Armenians and was greatly beloued and honoured of them I doubt not but his practise amoÌ„gst them was according to the words which they alleaged from him and that their maner both had â—ene before and afterwards continued the same that the Iberians was to consecrate the cup of the Sacrament without any water howsoeuer in times long after succéeding by meanes of a new signification fancied of the mixture of water it was forborne of some vpon a wrong and hereticall meaning As for numbers and multitudes of men how farre I estéeme them the Ans shall then perceiue when occasion is giuen by any matter to make him answere Though I â—rged multitude against multitude for the exposition of the words of a man yet I make not the assertion of any multitude a certaine argument of the truth of God He that doth what would he haue said when the b Hieron aduersus Luceferianos whole world groned vnder the burthen of Arianisme which contented c Vincentius Lyrinens adu haereses not it selfe with some few parts or portions of the Church as other heresies for the most part but as a pestilent infection spred it selfe through the whole so that Constantius yâ— Emperour by reason of the â—ewnesse of them that held with Athanasius in defence of the truth tooke occasion to d Theod. hist eccl li. 2. ca. 16. obiect vnto Liberius Bishop of Rome that he was the only man in the world that tooke part with that wicked man as he wickedly termed him To whom Liberius answered verie â—itly The word of faith is no whit diminished by my standing alone in defence of it though afterwards e Hieron in â—atalo eccles script in fortunatiano he became fainthearted and subscribed that heresie which he had before worthily resisted The ground of faith is the certaine and vndoubted word of God not receiued from the thoughts and opinions of men but from the Oracle of the holie scriptures He that speaketh from hence though he speak alone is to be beléeued but without this warrant in matters of faith thousandes of thousandes are not to be regarded He noteth the Armenians of many toyish and childish vanities But the vanities of the Armenians were neither so many nor so toyish and ridiculous as are the Iewish Heathenish ceremonies of Poperie and therefore Papists may not reproue them in that respect Let Durandus his Rationale diuinorum nay let the apish and vice-like fooleries of the Masse it selfe beare witnesse hereof Whereas he saith that the mixture of water and wine in the Gréeke and Latin Church be tokeneth the two natures of Christ it séemeth that the matter hath not bene well agreed vpon for that f Theophyl â—â— Ioh. 19. Theophylact maketh the wine to betoken the humanitie and the water the diuinitie of Christ Durand contrariwise g Duâ—and Ratio diui lib. 4. cap. 30. de oblatione c. affirmeth that the water betokeneth the humanitie and the wine the diuinitie But the more auncient Fathers knew not this vncertaine mysterie at all and therefore neither do we care to be acquainted with it Now hauing vrged verie egerly the aforesaid Canon and fearing belike that that might be turned to his preiudice he telleth me at length that he wil not stand vpon the validitie of those Trullan Canons And no maruell For he knoweth that by whomsoeuer they were made they diuersly h Can. 13. 36. 52. 55. crosse the dealings of the Church of Rome and plucke vp by the rootes the best floure in that garden the pretended supremacie of the Pope Yea saith he but they beside infinit other testimonies proue the Churches vse as touching the point in question An vnnecessarie proofe of that which no man denieth But let him conclude hereof that it is certain that Christ instituted the Sacrament with water or that it is a necessary part of the Sacrament and his owne fellowes will checke him for his rashnesse i Thom. Aqui. par 3. quae 74. art 6. 7. who neither dare aâ—ouch that Christ vsed water simplie confesse that there is no necessitie of water to make the Sacrament And this latter k Tom. 2 cont 3. lib. 4. cap. â—1 Bellarmine the Iesuit confesseth to be the iudgement of the Catholicke Church and dareth not deny but that it is the cup of the Lord though water be wanting whereof it followeth that neither was water instituted by our Sauiour Christ for then it should be holden as a thing simply necessary neither do we in leâ—â—ing out water â—aile of any thing that of necessitie belongeth to the Sacrament Which being true and no certaine proofe alleaged yâ— Christ vsed any water we list not to follow any vncertainties for truthes We take yâ— which we are sure Christ ordeined They who haue not contented theÌ„selues herewith into what varietie are they runne Some put in water before consecration some after some hot water some cold some wil haue the mixture of them a memoriall of water blood issuing out of Christs side at his passion some a token of the natures of Christ and of them some will haue the water to signifie the manhood the wine the Godhead others the wine to signifie the manhood the water the Godhead some againe will haue the wine to signifie Christ and
the water to signifie the people as appeareth by those things that haue bene alleaged before Thus there is no certaintie or setled resolution when men will make mysteries without the warrant of the word of God Which things coÌ„sidered it hath not bene any superstitious contradicting humour but sober and aduised iudgement that hath moued vs to refuse this howsoeuer long and generally receiued custome But the Answ comming at length to set downe his conceit of the point in question is in a mammering cannot frame his wits to resolue any thing thereof For charging me first that I dare not deny flatly but would haue it séeme only propable that Christ added water with the wine whereas I alleaged therein but the opinion and words of his owne Doctours he calleth for S. Cyprian to be stickler betwéene vs in this point affirming it to be the institution of Christ and straightwaies as hauing forgotten himselfe he confesseth that the wine only is of the institution of Christ and the water of the ordinance of the Church and then again as vncertaine where â—o rest himselfe he runneth to Cyprian and others crauing their helpe and warrant to proue that it was appointed by our Sauiour Christ But truth is one and â—litteth not in this sort from one ground to another Concerning the Epistle of l cypria lib. 2. Epist 3. Cyprian to Cecilius which is that whereunto he referreth himselfe he telleth me m Sect. 16. afterwards that euery word thereof is a sword to cut my throate and maruelleth that I would for shame alleage it But this is but a Popish brag seruing to set a good shew vpon a bad cause and when truth faileth to outface the matter with Thrasonical words A man of meane discretion with indifferency of iudgement will easily conceiue that that Epistle maketh far more déeply against the Church of Romes doings then against any thing that we do It contrarieth vs in a smal matter of ceremony which we take to be no great matter whether it be vsed or not vsed as hath bene said but it conuinceth the Roomish harlot of capital and deadly wickednesse and damnable Apostasie from the Gospell of Iesus Christ For first he requireth water in the Sacrament togither with wine the one importing the people the other Christ to signifie that the people are vnited ioyned vnto Christ in being partakers of the Lords cup. And so n Thom. Aquin par 3. quae 74. art 7. Thomas Aquinas resolueth that water is no otherwise of the necessitie of the Sacrament but to signifie the peoples being partakers thereof What wisedome is it then in the Answ and his fellowes to vrge Cyprian for their defence of the mixture of water and yet vtterly to barre the people from being partakers of the Lordes cup which Cyprian intendeth by the same mixture o Mat. 23. 24 They straine out a Gnat and swallow a Camell contending with vs for an vncertaine and vnnecessary ceremony and themselues frowardly departing from that which I say not Cyprian in his Epistle but Iesus Christ in his Gospell hath manifestly and expresly commanded vnto them Secondly Cyprian giueth in the same Epistle diuers lessons which we desire to haue them bound vnto In the sacrifice which is Christ none but Christ is tâ— be followed And againe If only Christ be to be harkened vnto we are not to regard what any man hath done before vs but what Christ did first who is before all For we must not follow the custome of men but the truth of God And againe It is not lawfull to infringe those things that pertaine to the Sacrament of our redemption or by humane tradition to chaunge them to anie thing else then is appointed of God And againe We ought to do nothing but that which Christ did And againe That which it is certaine the Lord did let vs do By all which spéeches we are tyed to the institution of Iesus Christ and bounde to do nothing in the forme of this mysterie but that which we are assured he did first To which what the church of Rome can honestly answere I cannot tell in that she hath by her detractions from Christes institution committed sacriledge and by her additions made a mockery of his Sacrament setting the priest at the altar as a Squirrell at his bels to kéepe note and time in his duckings and turnings and kissings and crossings and listing vp and lotting downe and holding fore-finger and thumbe togither and ioyning togither both the hands and putting to the right eye and then to the left and a number such doltish and absurd toyes But for our selues we learne of Cyprian by those rules that vnlesse we can warrant our selues as we cannot that Christ instituted the Sacrament with water we may not admit it aâ— any part or matter of the Sacrament And to this purpose the words that I alleaged before out of the Epistle ad Pompeium are verie fit Being vrged with tradition he thus answereth p cypria epist ad Pompeium Whence is this tradition Descendeth it from the authoritie of the Lord or of the Gospell or commeth it from the precepts and Epistles of the Apostles For God testifieth that those things which are written must be done c. If therefore either it be commanded in the Gospell or be conteined in the Acts and Epistles of the Apostle let this tradition be obserued as holie importing that if it cannot be approued from thence it is not to be obserued But the Answ ful wisely and clerk like turneth the words of Cyprian to speake for him against vs. If saith he it be commanded in the Gospell to vse onely wine let this tradition be obserued By which reason he giueth to the Armenians whom he condemned before as good a proofe for vsing water and oyle in Baptisme as to himselfe for wine and water in the Lords supper For they might haue said for the one as he doth for the other that it is now here commanded to vse onely water and therefore that their adding of â—yle was not to be condemned But S. Cyprians words if he wold vse his reason to conceiue them wold teach him to reason thus We read in the Gospel of water for Baptisme of oyle we reade nothing therfore water only and not oyle is to be obserued So likewise we reade of wine for the Lords supper of water we reade nothing therefore wine onely and not water is to be enioyned For the condition of the words of God is this q Pro. 30. 6. Put nothing to his wordes least he reproue thee and thou be found a liar Now if Cyprian hauing laid this good foundation built any thing amisse thereon as in the matter of rebaptizing it is manifest that he did whilest he tooke that to be the sense of yâ— scripture which indéed is not that impeacheth not any whit the certaintie of that rule which he knew well inough was alwaies to stand good for the triall
and determination of the truth And therefore in these cases to alleage Cyprian against Cyprian is I hope no more hainous a matter then to appeale from Philip ouercome with sléepe to the same Philip throughly a waked out of sléepe The drift and purpose of that Epistle to Cecilius is to proue the necessitie of wine in the Sacrament against the heresie of those that vsed onely water without wine He referreth them herein to the institution of Christ set downe in the Gospell from which he telleth them they ought not to depart therefore that they ought to vse wine in the Lords cup as it is mentioned in the Gospell that Christ did And to this purpose are all those spéeches which he vseth of our Lords tradition of his doing and teaching Which manifestly appeareth as by the very scope of the whole Epistle so by that place namely where alleaging the words of Christ I will drinke no more of this fruite of the vine c. He inferreth thus Wherby we finde that the cup was mixed which the Lord offered c. Yet we finde not in this place any mixture of the cup we find only the fruite of the vine and this is the marke at which he aimeth in all that he vrgeth of Christes institution Of water he speaketh ioyntly I confesse and supposing I doubt not but it was vsed by Christ But he supposeth it only he proueth it not his suppose is no sufficient warrant Nay although he by the way admit and require the mixture of water in the Lords cuppe yet séeing he there referreth vs to the â—oote and originall of Christs institution in the Gospel and we find not there that Christ either ordeined or vsed any such mixture we hold our selues sufficiently warranted euen by Cyprian himselfe to do that we do in vsing wine only without any water But what meaneth the Answ to vrge Cyprian at all to prooue that Christ mingled water when he himselfe dare not vpon Cyprians word affirme so much For thus he maketh short the matter as he saith Wine is of the institution of Christ water is of the precept of the church If he can iustifie no more as indéed he cannot it is but folly and trifling to alleage any mans words that say any more And therfore all his other testimonies are superfluous They which say that Christ vsed water say more then he or the most of his dare say They which testifie the vse thereof in the primitiue Church proue a thing not denied or condemned where occasion requireth it for such reason and in such maner as hath bene before shewed Albeit they are partly forgeries as those out of Alexander out of Clemens Iames his Liturgie of which shall be spoken after partly vncertaine and doubtfull as those out of Chrysostomes and Basils Liturgies partly such as the Answ himselfe will not stand vpon the validitie thereof as that out of the sixth Councell partly manifest and wilfull falsifications as those out of Chrysostome in Ioh. hom 84. and 1. Cor. hom 24. the former only shewing that by water and blood issuing out of Christs side were imported both the Sacraments of the Church the other that out of Christes side flowed fountaines of water blood that should be healthfull to the whole world And what is that to the matter now in hand He referreth me ouer for further proofe of this matter to Bellarmine But Bellarmine saith nothing that néedeth further answere then I haue alreadie giuen Only let me tell him that I take Bellarmine for a Iesuit that is to say a man of a hard and vncircumcised forehead desperatly bent for the vpholding of the Pope to make shipwracke of his owne conscience Whose impudency appeareth herein that for the better colouring of his mixture of water r Bellarm. tom 2. cont 3. lib. 4. cap. 10. hée saith that it appeareth no more by the Gospell that Christ instituted the Sacrament with wine then with ale or béere or water only And therefore he denieth those words I will drinke no more of the fruite of the vine c. Å¿ Ibid. lib. 1. cap. 11. to be vnderstood of the cup of the Sacrament contrarie to the generall consent of the auncient Fathers t Clemens Alex in paeda lib 2. cap. 2. Clemens Alexandrinus u Cypr. lib. 2. epist 3. Cyprian w Chrysost in Maâ— hom 83. Chrysostome x August de consensu Euang li. 3. ca. 1. Austen y Hilar. in Mat. cano 30. Hilary z Theophyl in Mat. 26. Theophylact and others Yet to cloake the matter the better he would fain make a iarre betwixt the Fathers and saith that Hierome and Theophylact expound it not of the cup of the Lordes table but of the cup of the passeouer whereas in the places by him cited there is not a word tending to that purpose It is plain by the two Euangelists Mathew and Marke that our Sauior spake of the cup of the new Testament The difference that séemeth to be betwixt them and S. Luke was reconciled long ago by S. Austen as followeth after to be declared But hereby we may coniecture the honestie and truth of the Iesuit in other matters P. Spence Sect. 3. COncerning Bertrame there was in Carolus Magnus sonnes daies such a one suspected for one point especially in the Sacrament contra identitatem corporis or de duplici corpore Christi but this booke vnder his name is much worse Great learned men are out of doubt that it is a counterfeit booke wrong fathered and misbegotten not Bertrams but of Oecolampadius coyning So Caluins Catechisme in Greeke in the Preface is made an auncient booke newly founde againe So is a booke foysted in Roffensis name written by Bucer de certitudine salutis diuina misericordia besides many other such forged counterfeits See Bibliothecam Sixti Senensis Besides this counterfeit Bertrams reasoÌ„ is of no force for two causâ—s First how knoweth he for ought he can shew out of the a And how appeareth it â—y the new Testament thâ—t there should be any water vâ—ed at all new TestameÌ„t that the water with the wine is not chaunged in substance Or what necessitie is there for ought he knoweth or sheweth in this his reasonlesse reason that because the wine is chaunged therefore the water to for all his quia admixta est and for all his necesse est But by the way he b A need esse idle proofe proueth if he were not partus Supposititius the mixing of water so long ago as Ludouicus Charles sonne R. Abbot 3. AS touching Bertram whereas the Answ saith that he was suspected coÌ„cerning the Sacrament he doth leaudly vnconscionably slaunder him neither can he iustifie it by any shew of the storie of that time It is not probable that the Emperour would haue sought for his resolution vnlesse he had bene taken for a learned man of sound iudgement But he is dealt with
he hath set vs frée who were otherwise prisoners of hell and bondslaues to the diuell and so according to the wordes of Cyprian he hath turned our captiuitie wherewith we were taken of old by the transgression of our father Adam and hath dispatched from vs the tormentes of hell whereunto wee were enthralled Nowe to what purpose did the Answe alleage these words of Cyprian or what aduantage doth hée dreame he hath in them He would finde his Limbus patrum here but it will not be For Cyprian speaketh expressely of deliuerance from hell torments whereof there are none in Limbo patrum as his maisters e Rhem. An not Luc. 16. 26 of Rhemes doe instruct him Now hauing vsed this péeuish and impertinent talk of thinges making nothing at all for his purpose yet as a man in a dreame he breaketh out into this fond presumption that the fathers are all theirs and that I should heare but that he is not disposed to oppose I haue not to do with maister Spence I perceiue but with a man wel séene in all the fathers But the fathers are his as they were his that said Ego f Dioscorus the hereticke Concil Chalcedo Act. 1. cum patribus eijcior The fathers and I are cast out both togither And that appeareth in the words of Cyprian now to be handled g Cyprian de vnct chris Our Lord saith hée at the table where he kept his last supper with his Apostles gaue with his owne handes bread and wine but vpon the crosse hee yeelded his body to the Souldiours hands to be wounded that syncere trueth and true synceritie being secretly imprinted in his Apostles might declare to the nations how bread and wine are his flesh and bloud and how causes agree to the effects and diuers names or kindes are reduced to one essence or substance and the thinges signifying and the things signified are counted by the same names Where it is plainly auouched that Christ at his last supper gaue bread wine What néedeth any more Yea but did Christ giue bare bread and wine saith the Answ absurdly and frowardly No say I for this bread and wine is the flesh and bloud of Christ as I before alleaged out of Cyprian according to the which S. Paule saith h 1. cor 10. 16. The bread which we breake is the communion of the body of Christ The cup of blessing is the communion of the bloud of Christ Therefore S. Austen calleth this bread i August de consecr dist 2. cap. Hoc est heauenly bread and Theodoret k Theodoret. dial 2. the bread of life and the same Cyprian saith that l Cypria de resurrect chri that which is seene namely the visible element of bread is accounted both in name and vertue the body of Christ namely because it conteineth sacramentally the whole vertue and benefite of the passion and death of our Lord Iesus Christ as before I shewed But let him remember that Cyprian saith it is bread and wine which is the flesh bloud of Christ whereas by his defence there is in the Sacrament neyther bread nor wine But Cyprian saith that diuerse names and kindes are reduced to one substance Doe you heare substance saith the Answ Help that sore if you can with all your cunning surely small cunning will serue to heale a sore where neither flesh nor skinne is broken or brused This is in trueth a verie ignorant and blind opposition The visible elements that are in substance bread and wine are in mysterie and signification the bodie and bloud of Christ and are so called as Cyprian before setteth downâ— When therefore bread being one substance is called not onely according to his substance bread but also by waie of Sacrament and mysterie the body of Christ when the wine being one substance is called not onely as it is Wine but also as it signifieth the bloud of Christ diuerse names or kindes are reduced to one substance And this Cyprian declareth when he addeth The signes and the things signified are called by the same names The bodie of Christ it selfe and the signe héereof which is bread are both called the body The bloud of Christ and the signe hereof which is wine are both called his bloud The body and bloud it selfe are so called indéed and trueth but the signes in their maner not in the trueth of the thing but in a signifying mysterie yet so one substance is called by diuers names as the wordes before do specifie Nowe the place of Cyprian being as cléere as the sunne-light against transubstantiation as euerie eye may perceiue yet the Answ sendeth me to their learned treatises to sée what is there said of this and other places And what shall I finde there but such wretched and miserable cauils and shiftes as he himselfe hath borrowed from them And héere maister Spence as in your name he excuseth himselfe of his simplenesse and that he is no doctour which accordeth not with his vaunt before that hée could shew me this and that out of the fathers And I maruell that he should make excuse thus of his learning to a minister of our church so meane as I am séeing it is so péeuishly bragged amongst you commonly that there is litle learning to be found amongst the best of vs. Wheresoeuer he be I wish that his conscience and truth towardes God were but euen as much as his learning is P. Spence Sect. 16. THe same Cyprian you say lib. 2. Epistola 3. which is the famous Epistle ad Caecilium so much condemning you in so manie points about the sacrifice of the Church and of mixing of water which he said assuredly Christ did but I maruell you would for shame euer auouch it or point me to it for a A Popish bâ—agge See the aunswer to sect 2. euerie line of it is a knife to cut your throate You say that heere S. Cyprian saith that it was wine which Christ called his bloud Much to your purpose maister Abbot Who doubteth yet but that he tooke wine and not ale beere sydar metheglin or such like matter S. Cyprians meaning is most plaine against the Aquarios that it was b Did Christ call wine his bloud and yet dâ—d he meane that it was not wine wine mingled with water as in this Epistle he prooueth notably and not bare water as those Aquarij would haue it that he called his bloud that is to say he tooke wine and not bare water to make the Sacrament of and what is this to your purpose such testimonies are the fathers scrappes parings and crummes and not their sound testimonies R. Abbot 16. THe famous Epistle of Cyprian to Cecilius saith plainly Wee a Cypr. lib. 2. Epist 3. find that it was wine which Christ called his bloud as he saith twise beside in the same Epistle that by wine is represented the bloud of Christ Yea saith the Answ he meaneth that it was wine at the
forsooth Gelasius must forget what he hath to proue and must say for you that the Sacrament is nothing but a signe and then howe serueth it for an argument against Eutyches if it be but bare brad in one nature onely whereas if you looke vpon the whole testimonie of Gelasius as I set it downe largely to you you shall see yea with halfe an eye that the meaning of these wordes An image and similitude of the body and bloud of the Lord is performed in the celebration of the mysteries is no other but this that his being in the Sacrament both in a diuine substance as himselfe tolde you and also ioyned with the naturall properties of bread is a figure and resemblance of his two natures remaining in heauen vnconfused Thus you care not howe foolishly you make the authour to speake so he affoord you wordes and sillables to make a shew Looke vpon Gelasius and bethinke your selfe I haue answered him at large Looke a in the end and there you shall find it because it was written before yours came to my hand I was loth to write it againe in his orderly place for that writing is somwhat painfull to my weake head and yeares Wherefore I craue you to beare with me in that matter R. Abbot 19. THe wordes of Gelasius are these An a Gelas cont Euty Nestor image or resemblance of the bodie and bloud of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries or sacraments Héereby Gelasius giueth to vnderstand that the sacrament is not the verie bodie of Christ but the image and resemblance of his body It is more plaine by that which he addeth We must therfore think the same of Christ himselfe which we professe in his image that is to say in the Sacrament Marke how he distinguisheth Christ himselfe and the image of Christ The Sacrament therefore which is the image of Christ is not Christ himselfe Thus the wordes themselues doe manifestly giue that for which I alleaged them But the Answ telleth me that I alleage Gelasius héere contrarie to his owne meaning euen by mine own confession How may that be Forsooth I would before haue Gelasius his drift to be that as Christ is in heaueÌ„ in two natures so héere vpon the earth in the sacrament is bread with the body and so both in heauen and héere would haue two seuerall natures but nowe in this place I would haue the Sacrament to be nothing but a signe and bare bread in one nature onely But hée knoweth that he speaketh vntrueth both in the one and in the other Of the former he himselfe hath acquited me before saying b Sect. 9. you would haue the Sacrament a memorie of Christ as though hee were absent Then belike I would not haue the bodie of Christ really present héere vpon the earth in the Sacrament Of the other I acquited my selfe in that very place which he taketh vpon him to answer For I added immediately vpon the alleaging of those words thus Yet are not the Sacraments naked bare signes as you are wont hereupon to cauill but substantiall and effectuall signs or seales rather assuring our faith of the things sealed therby and deliuering as it were into our hands and possession the whole fruite benefit of the death and passion of Iesus Christ To answere him to both in a word thus I say that as the water of Baptisme doth sacramentally imply the blood of Christ though the blood of Christ be in heauen so likewise the bread and wine in the Lordes Supper do sacramentally imply the bodie and blood of Christ though the same bodie and blood be in heauen and not vpon the earth And therefore neither did I before say nor do now that the Sacrament consisteth of two natures really being vpon earth but of bread and wine being on earth and the bodie and blood of Christ being in heauen the one receiued by the hand of the bodie the other only by the hand of the soule which only reacheth vnto heauen Againe as water in Baptisme is not therefore bare water because the blood of Christ is not there really present so no more is the bread of the Lords table bare bread although there be no reall presence of the bodie but it doth most effectually offer and yéelde vnto the beléeuing soule the assurance of the grace of God and of the forgiuenesse of sinnes That which he further addeth as touching the drift and purpose of Gelasius how lewdly it peruerteth his wordes and maketh them to serue fully for the heresie of Eutyches against which Gelasius writeth I haue declared before and so well haue I bethought my selfe héereof as that I doubt I may in that behalfe charge the Answ conscience with voluntarie and wilfull falshood and desperate fighting against God Pet. Spence Sect. 20. YOur terme of Seales applied to the Sacraments is done to an ill purpose to make the Sacramentes no better then the Iewes Sacramentes were To handle that matter would require a greater discourse which willingly I let passe But yet I must tel you that the said opinion is verie derogatorie to the a Vntrueth for the passioÌ„ of christ hath had his effect from the beginning of the world effect of Christes passion of the which the Sacraments of Christes Church take a farre more effectuall vertue then the Iewes Sacraments did Read our treatises of that matter for I list not to runne into that disputation R. Abbot 20. HE disliketh that I call the Sacramentes Seales Yet héere his owne conscience could tell him that we make not the Sacrament bare bread and wine as he and his fellows maliciously cauill Though waxe of it selfe bâ— but waxe yet when â—◠〈◊〉 with the Princes signeâ— it is treason to offer despight vnto it So whatsoeuer the bread and wine be of themselues yet when they are by the word of God as it were stamped and printed to be Sacramentes and seales it is the perill of the soule to abuse them or to come vnreuerently vnto them But why is not the terme of sâ—ales to be approoued in our sacraments Surely S. Austen calleth them visible a August lib. de catechâ—z â—ud ca. 26. hom 50. de v. Tit. poenâ—t Seales and why then is it amisse in vs Forsooth because it maketh our sacraments no better then the sacraments of the Iewes Indéede our Sacramentes are in number sewer for obseruation more easie in vse more cleane in signification more plaine and through the manifest reuelation of the Gospell more méete to excite and stirre vp our faith and in these respects they are better then the sacraments of the Iewes but as touching inward and spirituall grace they are both the same neither is there in that respect any reason to affirme our sacramentes to be better then theirs For they did b 1 Cor. 10. â— eate the same spirituall meate and drinke the same spirituall drinke that we doe The same I say that we