Two notable Sermons, made the third and fift Fridays in Lent last passed, before the queens highness, concerning the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the blessed Sacrament: & also the Mass, which is the sacrifice of the new Testament. By Thomas Watson, Doctor of Divinity.   
Roma. 12. 
¶ Obsecro vos fratres per misericordiam Dei, ut exhibeatis corpora vestra hostiam vivam, sanctam, Deo placentem. etc.  
IF S. Paul writing to the Phylyppians the third chapter was not ashamed too say, 
Philip. 3  To write one thing diverse times to you, is not pain or sloth to me, but profitable and necessary for you, much less ought Ito be ashamed for that I propound to you at this time that lesson again, which before I have twice entreated, seeing I intend by God's grace to speak nothing, but that I have learned, either of Saint Paul himself, or of such I think was endued with the same spirit Saint Paul was, & this I do not for lack of good matter, but for lack of better matter in my judgement, and more necessary to be learned of us all at this present. For what is better worthier, and more needful to be taught and learned of all sorts of men in these evil days, and corrupt time, then how to offer up ourselves to God a living, holy, and pleasing sacrifice, to overcome and repress our naughty will and affections, to mortify our earthly membres and conversation, and so to banish sin, that it reign not in our mortal bodies? the largeness of which matter is so great, and doth extend itself in so many parts, causes, and circumstances, that although the whole matter doth pertain & hath respect to one end: yet the entreating of it being long, must needs be various, & for that reason can not be tedious to him, that loveth to learn to live well, and please almighty God.  
The end of this my matter is, to destroy the kingdom of sin, for which purpose God's son was incarnate, to bring which thing to pass in us, was all the life, the example, the passion, the resurrection of Christ, and all the doctrine & Sacraments of Christ. Like as contrary to erect and establish this kingdom of sin, is all the travail and temptation of the devil, now fawning like a serpent, transforming himself into an angel of light, to entrap & seduce the simple and unware: now raging like a lion to overthrow the feeble and fearful, and not only is it his travail, but also it is the whole labour & practise of all his children by imitation, as Infideles, Jews, heretics, schismatics, false brethren, counterseyte christians, both in living and learning labouring night and day with all wit and will to destroy the faith of Christ, the Sacraments of Christ the sacrifice of Christ, asmuch as in them lieth▪ which three be special means to destroy the kingdom of sin, which they with all their power set up and maintain.  
The practice of the devil & his ministers in this point I have partly touched, and by God's grace and your patience shall now proceed further. I have opened the decay of faith, good works, & penance, which be remedies against sin. One other remedy there is, that lieth in much decay, which will lie still, except good men (accorcording to their bounden duties) put to their help 〈◊〉 ●andes. I mean the sacrifice of the church, the sacrifice of the new testament, the sacrifice of our reconciliation in the body and blood of our Lord jesus Christ, which he hath instituted in his last supper, and so (as Ireneus sayeth) Novi testamenti novam docuit oblationem, 
Ireneus lib. 4. ca 35.  quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens in universo mundo offert Deo. Christ confessing the cup to be his blood, hath taught the new sacrifice of the new testament, which sacrifice the church receiving of the apostles, doth offer to God throughout the whole world.  
There is nothing so ancient, so profitable, necessary & so wholesome, as this sacrifice is that hath been of some men, & that of late, so assaulted, reviled, rejected, blasphemed, oppressed, persecuted, and with such reproach and indignation banished and exiled, without cause or any good ground why they should so have done, but that they knew sin should decay, if that were used. And therefore intending to establish the kingdom of sin laboured with all violence to subvert this enemy, and remedy against sin▪ which (as Saint Cyprian doth say) ad totius hominis vitam salutemque proficit, 
Cyprianus sir▪ de caen● Domi●●.  simul medicamen tum & holocaustum ad sanandas infirmitates & purgandas iniquitates existens, which doth profit to the life & salvation of the whole man, being both a medicine to heal infirmities, and a sacrifice to purge iniquities.  
This little time that I have now, I intend (God willing) to bestow in this matter to reduce into your remembrance the foundation and commodity of this sacrifice of the church, and to repel such bolts, as the foolishness of some, and the malice of other have shot against it, that knowing the necessity and goodness of it, we may follow the counsel of saint barnard which said: 
Bernard. hom. 3. super Mis●us est.  Discamus eius humilitatem, imitemur mansuetudinem, amplectamu● dilectionem, communicemus passionibus, lavemur in sanguine eius: ipsum offeramus propitiationem pro peccatis nostris, quo niam ad hoc ipse natus & datus est nobis. Ipsum oculis patris, ipsum offeramus & suis, quia & pater proprio filio suo non pepercit, sed pro nobis tradidit illum etc. Let us learn his humility, let us follow his meekness and gentleness, let us embrace his love, let us communicate in his passions by suffering with him, let us be washed in his blood, let us offer him the propitiation or a sacrifice propitiatory for our sins, for to this end was he borne, and given to us: let us offer him to his father's eyes: let us offer him to his own eyes: for the father hath not spared his own son, but hath given him for us, and so forth.  
And also as the same bernard more plainly writeth in an other place, 
Bernar. Ser. 1. de Epiph.  saying thus. Pauperes sumus, parum dare possumus, attamen reconciliari possumus pro parvo illo, si volumus: totum quod dare possum; miserum corpus istud est, illud si dedero, satis est: si quo minus, addo & corpus ipsius, nam illud de meo est, & meum est: paruulus enim natus est nobis, & filius datus est nobis. De te Domine suppleo, quod minus habeo in me. O dulcissima reconciliatio. We are poor, and little can we give, yet for that little we may be reconciled to GOD, if we will. All that I am able to give is this wretched body of mine if I give that, it is sufficient, if it be not, I add also Christ's body, for that is mine and of mine: for a little one is borne to us, and the son is given unto us. O Lord, that lacketh in me, I supply of thee. O most sweateste reconciliation.  
See how saint bernard joineth the offering of our bodies and of Christ's body together, that if the oblation of our bodies be imperfect & suffice not, the oblation of christes body may fulfil and supply, that lacketh in us? And to what end? that we might be reconciled, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that it reign not in our bodies.  ¶ Here the Prayer was made. 
NOw entering to speak of the sacrifice of the church, I pray suppose one thing, which is the foundation of the same, to be most certainly and constantly beloved of all us, that be here present: which is, that in the most blessed Sacrament of the aultare is present the true body and blood of our Saviour Christ, the price of our redemption, not in figure only, but in truth and very deed, which the learned men call really and essentially, that is to say, that thing, that substance, that was upon the cross, is now verily present in the blessed Sacrament, before we receive it: the cause of which real presence is the omnipotent power and will of God, assisting the due administration of the Priest, the which body and blood we christian men receive by the service of our bodies and senses, though not by the judgement of our senses, but only by the judgement of faith, because it is given not in the outward form of the self same body and blood, as it was slain & shed upon the cross, but in the forms of our daily and special nutrimentes of bread and wine, and that for sundry weighty, and necessary causes foreseen by our saviour Christ.  
For▪ seeing the substance of our sacrifice of the new Testament, is the very real and natural body of Christ, as may be proved by many authorities. saint Cyprian sayeth: In sacrificio quòd Christus est, 
Cyprianus. lib. 2 epist. 3.  non nisi Christus sequendus est. In that sacrifice that is Christ no man is to be followed but Christ. Here he sayeth, that Christ is that sacrifice that we offer to almighty God. Also saint basil writeth in his form of Mass: 
Basilius in Missa.  Tu es qui offers, & offerris, & qui suscipis, et impartis christ Deus noster. O Christ our God, thou art he that both dost offer, & is offered, that both givest the offering and receiveth.  
Saint Basyl by this meaneth, that the sacrifice, which the church offered to GOD, is Christ himself, who in that he is the head of his body the church, is one offerer with the church, and so is both offerer and offered, as basil sayeth.  
Likewise saint Ambrose writing of the invention of the bodies of two glorious martyrs Geruasius and Prothasius, 
Ambros. lib. 10. epi 85.  and of the burying of them under the aultare, sayeth thus: Succedant victimae triumphales in locum, ubi Christus hostia est, sed ille super altare qui pro omnibus passus est, ●sti sub altari, qui illius redempti sunt passione. Let these triumphing sacrifices (meaning the bodies of the martyrs) go into that place where Christ is a sacrifice. But Christ is a sacrifice above the aultare, who suffered for all men, these two under the aultare, that were redeemed by his passion.  
Of this place I note my purpose, which is, that the sacrifice of the Church and new Testament, is the very real body and blood of our Saviour Christ, which is also testified by Chrysostom in his homely he writeth of the praise of GOD in these words. 
Chrysost.▪ hom. de laud dei  Vereamini mensam quaue desuper victima illa jacet Christus scilicet qui nostri causa occisus est. fear and reverence that table, above that which lieth that sacrifice (that is to say Christ) which for our cause was slain.  
By which words Chrysostom declareth his faith, that the sacrifice of the church is Christ, and also that christ is not only in heaven, as some men damnably beareth you in hand, but is placed lying above the table of the aultare as the substance of our sacrifice.  
And in an other homely he writeth. 
Idem hom de Encenijs.  Mensa mysterijs instructa est, et agnus dei pro te immolatur. The table is furnished with mysteries, and the lamb of god for the is offered: teaching us that the holy mysteries wherewith the table of our aultare is furnished be the body & blood of Christ (that is to say) the lamb of god, which is also then offered for us.  
Saint augustine is full of such sayings: 
August. lib. 9 Confess. ca 12.  as writing of his mother's death, how that he wept nothing for her all the time the Mass was said for her soul, which he expresseth by these words. Cum offerr●tur pro ea sacrificium praecij nostri. When the sacrifice of our price was offered for her.  
I leave out all the rest of the sentence contented to allege only this, that proveth the sacrifice, which is offered by the priest for the dead to be our price, which is and can be nothing else, but the body & blood of Christ, which he gave upon the cross, as the price of our redemption.  
But plainest of all he writeth in a book entitled. Liber Sententiarum Prosperi. 
August. li. Senten. Prosp.  which book is alleged of Gratian in the decrees in these words. Hoc est quod dicimus, quòd modis omnibus approbare contendimus sacrificium Ecclesiae duobus confici, duobus constare, visibili elementorum specie, & invisibili Domini nostri jesu Christi corpore & sanguine, & Sacramento, & re Sacramenti, id est, corpore Christi. This is that we say, that we labour to prove by all means, that the sacrifice of the church is made and consisteth of two things, of the visible form of the elements and of the invisible body & blood of our Lord jesus Christ both the outward Sacrament and the thing or substance of the Sacrament, that is the body of Christ. These words need no declaring but pointing: and for that cause, why should I tarry in this point any longer, seeing that our books be full of such like authorities?  
Therefore as I began seeing the substance of our sacrifice of the new Testament, is the very real and natural body of Christ, if this body be not present in the Sacrament, as the enemies of Christ's cross & the destroyers of our faith falsely pretend: then be we christian men left all together desolate without any sacrifice private unto us, for both the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross, and also the inward sacrifice of man's heart be not private but common to us & to all faithful men from the beginning of the world to the last end.  
And furthermore seeing a sacrifice is an outward protestation of our inward faith & devotion, if we christian men now have no sacrifice private unto us: then be we the most miserable men that ever were, being without any kind of religion. For take away our sacrifice, and take away our religion, as S. Cyprian confuting the carnal thoughts of the Capernaites, 
Cypria. Ser. de Caena.  that thought they should have eaten Christ's flesh either roasted or sod, and so should have consumed it to nothing: writeth thus. Cum illius personae caro si in frusta partiretur non omni humano generi posset sufficere, qua semel consumpta videretur religio interisse, cui ne quaquàm ulte rius victima superesset. Seeing that if the flesh of his person were divided into pieces, it could not suffice all mankind to eat upon, which flesh after it were once clean wasted▪ & consumed, our religion might like wise seem to perish and be destroyed, which had no more any sacrifice remaining.  
Whereupon I conclude, that if we have not Christ's body and blood present in the Sacrament for our external sacrifice, whereby we may mitigate and please almighty God, and obtain remission of sin & spiritual grace & gifts: then should we be no better than the Turks, seeing all nations from the beginning of the world, both gentiles and jews, have had one kind of outward sacrifice, to declare and express their inward devotion and religion, either to the true God of heaven, or to such as they fantasied or feigned to be gods, saving only the Turks, (as Petrus Cluniacensis writeth. Whereby it appeareth, that this sect that denieth and destroyeth the Mass, which is the sacrifice of the Church, is verily the sect of Mahumette, preparing a way for the Turk to overrun all Christendom, as he hath done a great piece already.  
For what could the Turk do more against our faith, if he did overcome us, beside our thraldom and tyrannical oppression, but as these men do now to take away our Sacraments and sacrifice, and to leave us nothing▪ but the bare name of Christ, and if there be any good man, that hath true religion in his heart, to compel him to keep it within him, that he shall not express it outward lie? and in very deed diverse notable and godly writers at this day, call this heresy against the sacrifice of the church which Luther first began and most maintained, by this name Secta Mahumetica. the sect of mahomet.  
But for the avoiding of these absurdities and for such causes as I shall God willing declare hereafter, I presuppose this foundation of christes body, to be really present in the blessed sacrament, to be steadfastly believed of us all, upon the which I build all that remaineth now to be said.  
Which foundation, although it hath been undermined of many men and many ways, & therefore requireth a full and perfect treatise to be made of it alone: yet as I intend not to occupy all this time in that, so I may not well so sclenderlye leave it, that hath been so much and often assaulted, but shall declare the sum of that moveth me to continue still in that truth I was borne in, to keep still that faith I was baptised in and put on Christ, which faith seeing it is universal, if I should leave it, I should forsake Christ, and be an heretic, not following that form of doctrine I received of my fathers, and they of theirs from the beginning, but choosing myself a new way and new masters that please me, being so condemned by mine own conscience & judgement, which is the very property and definition of an heretic.  
There be three things, that hold me●● this faith: the manifest and plain scripture, the uniform authorities of holy men, and the consent of the universal church. These three be the arguments, that a christian man may stick unto, and never be deceived, specially if they be knit and joined together, concerning one matter, but if they be separate, than some of them be but weak staffs to lean unto. As for example. The scripture without the consent of the church is a weapon as meet for an heretic, as for a catholic, for Arius, Nestorius, & such other heretics did allege the scripture for their opinions, as the catholics did, but their alleging was but the abusing of the letter, which is indifferent to good and evil, & depraving of the true sense, which is only known by the tradition and consent of the catholic church: so that the one without the other is not a direction, but a seduction to a simple man, because the very scripture in deed, is not the bare letter, as it lieth to be taken of every man, but the true sense, as it is delivered by the universal consent of Christ's church.  
Likewise the writings and sayings of the fathers, if they be but the mind of one man without the consent of other, were he never so well learned and virtuous, otherwise yet his writings I say in that point be not a confirmation for an ignorant man to hold him in the truth, but a temptation to seduce him, & pull him from the truth.  
The consent of the church is always a sure staff, the very pillar of truth, whether it be in things expressed in the letter of the scripture, or in things delivered unto us by tradition of the Apostles. He that holdeth him by this staff ca● not fall in faith, but stand in truth.  
Now concerning this matter of the present, I am able by God's help to show all these three things, joined and knit together so, that we can not be deceived in this point, except we will deceive our selves as many wilfully do.  
The scripture by plain & manifest words, against the which hell gates shall never prevail, doth testify & confirm our faith in many places, but specially in the words of our saviour Christ himself in his last supper, saying to his Disciples: 
Mat. 26.  Take, eat this is my body, which is given for you. This is my blood of the new Testament, which is shed for many and for you in remission of sins: which most plain scriptures many have gone about to delude, & to reduce them to a base understanding by figurative speeches, contending, these words, This is my body, This is my blood to be spoken figuratively, and not as the words purport: because other like sayings in the scripture be taken figuratively, as these: I am the way, I am the door, The stone is Christ and such other, wherein they have declared their devilish and detestable sophistry too their own damnation & the subversion of a great many other.  
They profess themselves to be learned men, but who heard ever tell of any such kind of learning, as to prove one singular by an other, as if one should reason thus: Thomas is an honest man, ergo john is an honest man: The swan is white, ergo the crow is white.  
Which arguments be like this: I am the way, is a figurative speech, ergo likewise, This is my body, is a figurative speech. With such fond follies and sophisms is the truth assaulted against all good learning, and the rules of all true reasoning. GOD open their eyes to see, and follow his heavenly wisdom.  
But if we will consider the circumstancies of the text, who was the speaker, for what intent, what time, and such other: it shall plainly appear that the literal sense, as the words purport, is the true sense, that the holy Ghost did principally intend. As for example. first it appeareth evidently, the speaker to be jesus Christ our Lord, God's son, equal and omnipotent God with the father, & that these his words be not words of a bare narration & teaching, but words whereby a sacrament is instituted. And for that reason we must consider, that it is otherwise with Christ, then with us, for in man the word is true, when the thing is true, whereof it is spoken: In God the thing is true, when the word is spoken of the thing. Man's word declareth the thing to be as it is before, God's word maketh the thing to be, as it was not before.  
In man the truth of his word dependeth of the truth of the thing. Contrary in God the truth of the thing dependeth upon the speaking of the word, as the Psalm sayeth: 
psal. 148.  Ipse dixit & facta sunt He spoke the word, & the things were made. And this thing the devil knew well enough, being sure that if jesus were Christ and God, he could with his word both create new things, and also change the nature and substance of any thing: & therefore said unto him tempting him, whether he was God's son or no: 
Mat. 4.  if thou be God's son, speak the word, that these stones may be made bread. Wherbi we may learn that although in man's speech it is not true to say, these stones be bread: yet if GOD should say so, it should be true, the inferior nature of creatures giving place to the omnipotent power of God the creator.  
After which sort Ireneus reasoneth against those heretics, that denied jesus Christ to be God's son, using that most constantly believed truth of the sacrament, that we hold now grounded upon Christ's words, for an argument to convince jesus the speaker to be God's son. His words be these. Quomodo autem constabit eyes, 
Ireneus lib. 4. ca 34.  eum panem in quo gratiae actae sunt corpus esse domini sui, & calicem sanguinis eius si non ipsum fabricatoris mundi filium dicant? How shall it be certain unto them, that that bread upon which thanks are given (that is to say the Eucharistical bread) is the body of their Lord, and the cup of his blood, if they say not that he is the son of him that made the world? as though he should reason thus: These words which jesus spoke of the blessed bread, saying: This is my body, This is the cup of my blood, be either true or false. If the speaker of them be pure man and not god as they say, then can they not be true: for man's word changeth not the nature of things, as it is here. But if the words be true, as they certainly believe, than the speaker of them must needs be gods son, of infinite power, able to make the things to be as he sayeth they be. And also in his. 57 Chapter the fame. 
Ireneus li. 4. ca 57  4. book, he maketh the like argument in these words. Quomodò just Dominus si alte rius patris existit huius conditionis quae est secundum nos, accipiens panem suum corpus confitebatu●, & temperamentum calicis, sui sanguinem confirmavit? If our Lord be a pure man, of that nature & condition, that we be of, the son of an other father than God: How did he justly and truly taking bread into his hand, confess & say it to be his body, and confirm that mixture of wine and water, that was in the chalice, to be his own blood?  
By these two places of Ireneus that lived within. 150. years of Christ, we are taught not to fly to our figures of grammar to make these words of Christ true, which in deed we must needs do, or else say they be false, if Christ the speaker be but only man and not God: but we be taught by him to be leave them to be most true, and for that reason to believe also, that Christ the speaker is God's son, by whose almighty power the things be changed and made as he speaketh: so that we may justly, after the mind of Ireneus & diverse other old auctors, which were long to rehearse now, conceive this opinion of these men, that say these words of christ can not be true, except they be understanded by a figurative speech: that they either believe not themselves, that Christ is God's son, or else give occasion to other, to revive that old damnable heresy of Arius, that denied Christ's godhead, thexperience whereof we have had of late days, of some that from Sacramentaries by necessary consequence of that heresy, became Arianes.  
The second circumstance I spoke o●, was ●o consider to what purpose & intent Christ spoke these words, & I said they were words not of a bare narration teaching some doctrine, but the words of th'institution of a Sacrament of the new Testament. And then it followeth, that if they be the form of a Sacrament, as they be in deed: then must they needs be that instrument whereby Gods almighty power assisting the dew ministration of his priest, worketh that grace inwardly, that the words purport outwardlye. For so it is in all other Sacraments. In Baptism, these words, Ego baptizote, I baptize thee, and so forth, like as outwardly to the ears, of the hearer they signify a washing so almighty God assisting the due pronouncing of them, doth inwardly work the grace of washing the soul of him, to whom the words be spoken if there be no stop or impediment of his party.  
And likewise in penance as the words of the Priest saying: Ego absoluo te ab omni bus peccatis tuis in nomine Patris, & filii, & spiritus sancti, I absolve thee from all thy sins in the name of the father, and the son, and the holy ghost, do signify forgiveness, so God doth inwardly forgive if the party be truly penitent.  
Likewise in marriage that knot the man knitteth with the woman in taking her to his wife, & she him to her husband, God also inwardly doth knit the same, which man can not louse: and so forth of all other Sacraments.  
Now to our purpose: The grace which is included in these words, This is my body, This is my blood, is not only accidental grace as in the other, but the body of Christ to be our Sacrament, which is the substance of grace, the author, fountain, and well of all grace, as S. bernard saith Dicitur Eucharistia per excellentiam. 
Bernard. Ser. de Caena.  In hoc enim Sacramento non solum quaelibet gratia, sed ille à quo est omnis gratia sumitur. This Sacrament is called Eucharistia, for some excellency above all other, for in this sacrament is received not only any other grace, but he of whom proceedeth all grace.  
Then it followeth, that whereas the grace of this sacrament, which the words purport to the outward ears of all men, is the essential grace of Christ's body and blood to be there present, it followeth, I say that Christ by these words, as by a convenient instrument, worketh inwardly, in that he gave to his disciples the real presence of his own body and blood, 
Emesenus orat. de corpore & sanguine Christi  as Eusebius Emesenus saith: Fide aestimandi non specie, nec exterioris censenda est visu, sed interioris hominis affectu. To be esteemed by faith, & not by the outward form, and not to be judged by the sight of the outward man, but by the affection of the inward man.  
Thirdly we may consider, that these words be the performance of a former promise, where Christ (as it is written in the .6. Chapter of S. john) promised to give us the same flesh to eat, that he would give to the death for the life of the world, saying: Panis quem ego dabo caro mea est, 
john. 6.  quam ego dabo pro mundi vita. The bread which I shall give unto you, is my flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world.  
Which promise we never read, that Christ which is the very truth and can not lie, did ever at any time perform but in his last supper, when he gave his body and blood to his disciples: and to promise his flesh, & to give bare bread and not his flesh, is no performing, but a breaking of his promise, and a deluding of them, to whom he made the promise: for as for the interpretation, which some men make of Christ's words, that he will give his flesh to us to be eaten spiritually by saith is but a vain and feigned gloze for that text.  
And although Christ do so give it to be eaten by faith, yet we may not exclude one truth by an other truth, as sophisters do. For Christ gave his flesh to us to be eaten spiritually by faith, ever from the beginning of the world, & also at that present, when he spoke those words, so that it were a very vain thing for Christ to promise to give a thing, which he ever before, & also at that present, and ever after continually doth give.  
But it was never so taken of any good ancient author which all with one consent do expound this text of Saint john, of the giving of his flesh in his last supper under the form of bread, and therefore Cirillus writeth, 
Cirillus in joan. lib 4 cap. 14.  that our saviour Christ did not expound and make plain the manner of the mystery, and the performance of this his promise, to them that asked the unfaithful question. How, without faith, but to his disciples that believed him and asked no such question of him, he declared the manner of it in his last supper.  
Wherefore we may well conclude upon this circumstance, that Christ's flesh is verily present in the Sacrament to be given unto us, because he promised before, that he would give us the same flesh for our food, that he would give on the cross for our redemption.  
The time also is to be considered, that he spoke these words the night before he suffered death, at which time and the next day after he ended and fulfilled all figures saying on the cross: Consummatum est. All figures & shadows be ended and expired, which was no time, then to institute and begin new figures.  
It is likely or probable, that our Saviour Christ then entering into his agony and beginning his passion, accustoming commonly before to teach his disciples in plain words, without parables or figurative speeches: would then so lightly behave himself as to delude his choysen and intierlye beloved disciples, in calling those things his body, that is given for them, & his blood, that is shed for them, which were neither his body nor his blood, but bare bread and wine?  
Or is there any religion in our christian faith in nycknanaming things, or calling them otherwise, than they be?  
If any man think himself able to answer that, because Christ said he was a vine, he was a door, being neither vine nor door: that man seemeth to me not substantially to way the words & speeches of scripture.  
For let him considre throughout all the Scripture, wheresoever he shall find, that Christ spoke any thing of himself by words of our common speech (for the godhead and the properties of the god head be ineffable, and can not be expressed to our capacity, but by words and names of worldly and natural things here among us.) He shall always find, that Christ was a better and more singular thing than the word did properly signify, that was attribute unto him, and to make this matter more plain by examples.  
Where Christ said, I am the way, he meant not, that he was the way, that leadeth to the city, or to some other place but that he was a more excellent way: A way that leadeth to the father, to heaven, to everlasting life.  
When he said, he was the door, he meant not, 
john. 10  that he was the door of the sheepfold here in earth, but a far better door, the door of the church, the spiritual sheepfold, by the which door who soever entereth, shall be saved.  
Also calling himself a vine he meant that he was the spiritual vine, 
john. 15  whereof all christian men be branches, & better than such a vine, as groweth in the fields.  
And likewise by that he calleth himself the light, we understand, that he was not the sensible light of this world but the heavenly light▪ that neither by course is changed, nor by shadow is darkened.  
So that it may be observed for a rule, when Christ doth attribute the name of any sensible creature to himself, ever the understanding exceedeth and excelleth the word in dignity.  
And if this be true in all kind of teaching and doctrine shall we now in the high mysteries and sacraments of God, come from the hall to the kitchen, from the better to the worst? that where Christ sayeth, This is my body, we shall understand, that it is bread a worse thing, than his body, This is my blood, that is to say, wine a worse thing than his blood? These be fond & false gloss, neither true, nor likely, nor yet tolerable.  
Wherefore leaving out a great many other circumstances, that would serve very well, to set forth the truth of this doctrine, I shall conclude thus, seeing S. Matthew saith in plain terms, 
Mat. 26.  it is my body, it is my blood: 
Mar. 14.  S. Mark saith, it is my body: 
Luke. 22  S. Luke saith, it is my body: S. Paul saith, it is my body: 
1. cor. 11.  S. john sayeth, it is my flesh, 
john. 6.  shall we now fifteen hundredth year after them, handle the matter so finely, and way the scripture so substantially, that we shall affirm the contradictory to be the true sense, saying this is not my body, this is not my blood, but a figure & a sign of my body & blood? These evident scriptures move me to continue still steadfast in that faith I was borne in, & not to be moved with vain words and reasons without probability against all rule and form of true reasoning.  
Moreover the nature of a sacrament doth move me very much to believe still, as I do. For whereas every sacrament of the new Testament, is a visible form of an invisible grace, as S. augustine saith it can not be a sacrament of the new Testament, except it have a promise of some, such grace to be given to the worthy receiver, as is signified by the outward form of the sacrament. As in baptism the water, which is the outward form, signifieth the grace of salvation and remission of sins, which grace is both given to the worthy receiver, & is also promised in scripture to be given, 
Mar. 1●.  by the mouth of christ saying: Qui crediderit & baptizatus fuerit, saluus erit: He that believeth and is baptised, shallbe saved.  
Even so the outward element of this sacrament, which is bread and wine, do●h signify the grace of the unity of Christ's mystical body, that like as one bread is made of many grains, one wine is pressed out of many grapes: so one mystical body of Christ is compact & united of the multitude of all Christian people, as S. Cyprian sayeth. 
Cyprian. li. 1. epi. 6   
Now if our sacrament be bread and wine, as they say, then shall they find the promise of this grace, or of some other in the scriptures made to the receiver of bread and wine. And if there be no promise in all the scriptures made to the receiving of bread and wine, then be they no sacraments: But if they will look in the sixth chapter of S. john, they shall find this grace of the mystical unity promised, 
john. 6,  not to the receiving of bread and wine, but to the worthy receiving of Christ's body and blood: where Christ sayeth, he that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, he abideth in me, and I in him, and so is joined and incorporate into one mystical body with him.  
Our sacrament therefore, that hath the promise annexed unto it, is not bread & wine, be they never so much appointed to signify heavenly things (as they say) but the very body and blood of our Lord jesus Christ, the bread that came from heaven.  
Luther and such as be of his sect, as take his dreams for the ground of their faith, were much pressed with this argument deduced of the property of the sacrament, and saw plainly, that it could not be a sacrament of the new testament, except it had a promise annexed to the worthy using of it. And yet for all that, he would not condescend to say as the Church sayeth, that res Sacramenti: the thing of the sacrament signified, and not contained, which is the unity of the mystical body, were that grace which by Christ in S. john was promised to the worthy receiver of it: but went and sought about for an other promise, and after much pooringe at last he brought forth a promise (as he thought) meet and convenient, which is the words of christ. Quod pro vobis tradetur. 
●. cor. 11,  which shallbe given for you. And in this point he showed, with what violence he handled other matters of our faith, that in this great matter so much overshot himself.  
first with what face could he call, that a promise which hath no appearance of any promise, but that the words in Latin be spoken in the future tense, which in Greek be written in the present tense, both in Saint Paul, and in S. Luke: Quod pro vobis datur, which is given for you. And if they were spoken in the future tense, as they were not yet they be words not promising a thing to be done, but declaring what shallbe done.  
And further if we should grant them to be words of a promise, yet they promise not the grace of the sacrament, which is to be given to the worthy receiver▪ For the passion of Christ, or the giving of Christ's body upon the cross, is not a grace given by the sacrament to the receiver, but it is that work, that hath deserved grace to be given by the sacrament, for all our sacraments take their virtue of the passion of Christ, and do not promise the passion of Christ.  
This may suffice for this short time to show unto you the folly of these men, that neither wot nor care what they affirm in these weighty matters. I could say more in it, but that I have more necessary matter behind to be said.  

August. in joan. Tract. 4. In Psal. 138  S. augustine in diverse places, & other ancient authors have this doctrine in their books. E latere Christi fluxerunt duo Sacramenta: Two Sacraments did issue forth of christes side, and in those places he teacheth us by comparing the creation of Eve, the wife of Adam the first man, and of the church the spouse of christ the second man. Like as god casting Adam into a sleep, took forth a bone out of his side, and thereof builded and created him a wife: even so when Christ did sleep by death upon the cross, upon water and blood that came forth of his side, when it was opened with a spear, God did form and build the church the spouse of Christ, in that by water we be regenerate, by blood we be redeemed and nourished.  
Now concerning our purpose, if two sacraments came out of Christ's side, we are sure there came out no wine, except ye will say the wine of the true vine, which christ shall never drink with us any more, but after anew sort in the glory and kingdom of his father. Therefore it must needs be, that our sacrament is Christ's blood and not wine.  
Beside these circumstances and arguments deduced upon the scripture, there be also other of no less strength than these, able to confirm any true Christian man in the faith of the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the blessed sacrament.  
And these be the effects of the sacrament expressed in the scripture, which be so great, so glorious, so excellent and heavenly, that it were great blasphemy to ascribe the same to bread and wine, which be only the works and effects of almighty GOD, and of such creatures only, as god's son hath taken and united to himself in unity of person which be the body and blood of our Saviour Christ.  
The first effect is, that our Sacrament is the confirmation of the new Testament, as S. matthew and S. Mark also do write: 
Mat. 26. Mar. 14.  Hic est sanguis meus novi Testamenti, This is my blood of the new Testament, that is to say: which confirmeth the new Testament, as all holy writers do expound. Like as the blood of calves did confirm the old Testament, as the book of Exodus doth declare: so the blood of Christ our priest, 
Exo. 24.  & sacrifice doth confirm the new Testament, which Testament because it is eternal and shall never have end, is confirmed by the eternal blood of the lamb of God, that ever is received and never consumed, and not by any corruptible blood, or any other creature▪ of less value and efficacy.  
In the old law, and also in S. Paul it is said. 
Exo. 24. Heb. 9  Hic est sanguis Testamenti, quod vobis cum pepigit Deus, This is the blood of the Testament, that god hath covenant with you: he sayeth not, This is the blood of the new Testament. But if these words (This is my blood of the new Testament) the Evangelist had meant, that it had been the figure of the blood of the new Testament, what had he said more than Moses said before: for the blood of calves & goats was the figure of this blood of Christ. And then were the jews and the old law of more dignity, than we christian men of the new law, because beside we both 〈◊〉 but under figures (as these men say) yet their figure was of more estimation, 〈◊〉 ours is, being (as they say) but ●are bread and wine: wherefore seeing these words of Christ. (this is my blood) be y ● ●rme of our Sacrament, the effect whereof is the confirmation of the new Testament, it followeth well, that the cause must be of like or more dignity, & so by no means can be the material creature of wine, but must needs be the innocent and precious blood of our immaculate and undefiled lamb of God jesus Christ.  
another effect of this Sacrament is taught us in S. Luke, 
Luke. 24  the .24. chapter of his Gospel, where our saviour Christ sat down with his two Disciples that went to Emaus, and taking bread, blessed it, and broke it, & gave it to them, and then their eyes were opened, and they knew him.  
S. augustine in his book De consensu Euangelistarum teacheth us to understand this place of the blessed bread, 
August. de consensu Euangelistarum. lib. 3. ca 25.  which is the sacrament of the aultare, & saith: the effect of it is to open our eyes, that we may know god.  
And Theophilactus upon this place of saint Luke writeth this. 
Theophilact. in Lucam. ca 24.  Insinuatur et aliud quiddam, nempe quòd oculi eorum qui benedictum panem assumunt, aperiuntur, ut agnoscant illum, magnam enim & indicibilem uim habet caro Domini. By this scripture an other thing is given us to understand, that the eyes of them which receive this blessed bread, be opened, that they might know him: for the flesh of our Lord hath a great & unspeakable virtue.  
Here we may perceive both by the scripture, and also by the holy Doctors and Fathers, that the effect of this Sacrament is the opening of our eyes to know God, and that the cause of that is the flesh of Christ, which is our sacrament, and in no wise can be either bread or wine.  
another effect is the immortality of our bodies and souls the resurrection of our flesh to everlasting life, to have life eternal dwelling in us.  
This effect is declared in the sixth of S. john: He that eateth me, 
john. 6,  shall live for me, he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood▪ hath everlasting life, and I shall raise him up in the last day.  
Upon this place Cirillus saith: Ego enin dixit, 
Cirillus libr. 4. cap. 15.  id est corpus meum quod comedetur resuscitabo eum: ego igitur inquit qui homo factus sum per meam carnem in novissimo die comedentes resuscitabo. Christ saith I (that is to say) my body which shallbe eaten, shall raise him up, I that am made man by my flesh shall raise up them that eat it in the last day.  
And in his. 10. book he sayeth more plainly: 
Cyrillus in joan. lib. 10▪ ca 13.  Non potest aliter corruptibilis haec natura corporis ad incorruptibili tatem & vitam traduci, nisi naturalis vitae corpus ei coni●ngeretur. This corruptible nature of our bodies can not otherwise be brought to immortality and life, except the body of natural life be joined to it.  
By these authorities we learn, that the effect of Christ's body in the sacrament, is the raising up of our bodies to eternal life. And also we learn, that the eating of Christ's body is not only spiritually by faith (as the sacramentaries say) but also corporally by the service of our bodies, when Christ's body in the sacrament is eaten and received of our bodies, as our spiritual food: and because it is of infinite power, it is not converted into the substance of our flesh, as other corruptible meats be, but it doth change & convert our flesh into his property, making it of mortal and dead, immortal and lively.  
As the same Cyrillus writeth in his .4. book: 
Cirillus libr. 4. cap. 14.  Recordare quamuis naturaliter aqua frigidior sit, adventu tamen ignis frigiditatis suae oblita aestuat: Hoc sanè modo etiam nos, quamuis propter naturam carnis corruptibiles sumus participatione tamen vitae ab imbecillitate nostra revocati, ad proprietatem illius ad vitam reformamur. Oportuit enim certe, ut non solum anima per spiritum sanctum in beatam vitam ascenderet. verum etiam ut rude atque terrestre hoc corpus cognato sibi gustu, tactu & cibo ad immortalitatem reduceretur. The English is this. Remember how water although it be cold by nature, yet by reason of fire put to it, it forgetteth the cold, & waxeth hot: even so do we, although we be corruptible by reason of the nature of our flesh, yet by participation of (Christ's flesh which is) life, we are brought from our weakness, and reformed to his propriety, that is to say, to life for it is necessary that not only our soul should ascend to an happy (and spiritual) life, by receiving the holy ghost, but also that this rude & earthly body should be reduced to immortality by ta●ynge, touching, and corporal meat like to itself.  
This place is very plain declaring unto us, that like as our souls are revived from the death of sin to the life of grace and glory by the receiving of God's spirit the holy ghost in baptism: even so our bodies being corruptible by nature, and dead by reason of the general sentence of death, are restored again to life eternal and celestial, by the receiving of Christ's lively flesh into them after the manner of meat in this sacrament of the aultare.  
And in his eleventh book he saith, 
Cyrillus lib. 11. ca 27.  that it is not possible for the corruptible nature of man to ascend to immortality: except the immortal nature of Christ do reform and promote it from mortality to life eternal by participation of his immortal flesh.  
Here perchance some men will stumble, considering that we believe the bodies of young innocentes shall rise to everlasting life, which we know never received Christ's flesh in the sacrament.  
But their doubt in this point may soon be resolved, if they consider that scripture and the old fathers, speak after the ordinary working of GOD, making no prejudice to the absolute power of God, who oftentimes giveth the proper grace of the sacraments before the outward receiving of the same. As for example. Without baptism in water and the holy ghost, no man can enter into the kingdom of heaven, as S. John writeth. 
john. ●.  Yet we read, that the the●e on the right hand of Christ was saved and never baptized, and many converted suddenly to our faith were made martyrs before they could come to baptism in water.  
And saint Ambrose thinketh V●lentinian the Emperor to be saved, which died in his journey before saint Ambrose which he sent for, could come unto him.  
And therefore though baptism be necessary, and the ordinary door to salvation, yet the proper grace of baptism is sometimes given by God's extraordinary and absolute power to such, as without contempt of the sacrament by their will and earnest desire receive the sacrament of baptism, though not in deed: even so they that be baptised, and have an earnest desire and longing to receive Christ's body and blood in the sacrament and by some violence or impediment are letted to receive it in deed: or such children as by baptism have faith infused into their hearts, and are prevented by death before they can prove and try themselves, 
●. cor. 11.  which probation saint Paul seemeth too require before the receipt o● Christ's body having no contempt nor refusal of the same, but depart in the faith of christ: These I say receive the grace of the sacrament, which is the immortality of their bodies and life eternal by Gods extraordinary working, without the receipt of the sacrament in deed. By this little ye may perceive, what may be further said to this objection, if the time and my principal matter would suffer me.  
This effect is commonly taught of many ancient authors with one consent. For Ignatius one of the oldest calleth this sacrament medicamentum immortalitatis, 
Ignatius ad Ephesos.  antidotum non moriendi, a medicine of immortality, a preservative against death.  
And the great general counsel at Nice, 
Concilium Nicenum de Eucharistia.  writeth that they believed these sacraments of the body and blood of Christ to be Symbola resurrectionis nostrae, the pledges or causes of our resurrection.  
And Athanasius who was one of the chief men in that counsel, 
Athanasius de peccato in spiritum sanctum.  calleth it Conseruatorium ad immortalitatem vitae aeternae A conserve or a thing that preserveth our bodies to the immortality of eternal life.  
Ireneus that was a great deal older writing against the heretics, 
Ireneus lib. 4. ca 34.  that denied the resurrection of the flesh, proveth it and confuteth them by the effect of this sacrament saying thus: Quomodò dicunt carnem in corruptionem devenire, quae à corpore & sanguine Domini alitur? By what reason do they say, that our flesh goeth wholly to corruption, seeing that it is nourished with the body and blood of our Lord? and in his fift book he sayeth: Quomodò carnem negant capacem esse donationis Dei, 
Ireneus lib. 5.  quae est vita aeterna, quae sanguine & corpore Christi nutritur? How do they deny our flesh to be able to receive the gift of god which is eternal life, which is nourished with the body and blood of Christ?  
The greatest argument that Ireneus could bring to prove the resurrection of our flesh to life eternal, was to allege the cause of that resurrection, which was the nourishing of our flesh with the lyue●ye flesh of Christ in the sacrament not to this temperal life as other earthly meats do, but to eternal life, as only Christ's flesh doth, and this cause was believed and confessed of all men at that time, both catholics & heretics. insomuch that these heretics of our time, that deny this cause, that is to say, Christ's flesh to be really given in the sacrament, & eaten of our flesh, do give occasion, yea I am afraid do give more than occasion for us to think of them, that they deny also the resurrection of our flesh, which is the proper effect of it, although as yet they dare not impudently burst out with it in plain words, though they express the same evidently to all men's eyes in their carnal & beastly lives.  
To prove this effect further I could bring in many more authorities, 
Hilariu● de trinit. lib. 8.  as the saying of Hilalarius. Haec vero vitae nostrae causa est, quòd in nobis carnalibus manentem per carnem Christum habemus This is the very cause of our life, that we have Christ by his flesh dwelling in our flesh.  
But I will not in so plain a matter, through my curiosity seem to mistrust the credit of you, that be faithful men. Therefore to conclude, knowing the greatness and thexcellency of this effect, shall we ascribe it to so base creatures as be bread & wine, which be not able to work such an effect? God forbid.  
The principal effect of all is to make us one body with Christ, which is declared in saint Paul, in these words: Panis quem frangimus, 
1. cor. 10,  nun communicatio corporis Christi est? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of Christ's body (that is to say) doth it not join & knit us in the unity of one body of Christ?  
Upon the which place of saint Paul Chrysostom noteth, 
Chrysost. in Paul. 1. Cor. 10  that he said not (it is the participation) but it is the communion of one body. Declaring thereby the highest and greatest conjunction that can be, saving the unity of person: for the bread which we break, that is to say, the natural body of Christ under the form of bread, which we break and divide amongs us, not taking every man a sundry part, but every man taking the whole and the same: And as cyril saith, 
Cyrillus libr 12. ca, 32.  God's son going into every man, as it were by division of himself, yet remaineth whole without any division in every man: this bread (I say) is the communion of Christ's body, that is to say, maketh us that be diverse in our own substance to be all one mystical body in Christ, endued all with one holy spirit, whereby the influence of Christ's grace, that is our head, is derived and deduced unto us, that be membres of his body, flesh of his flesh, & bones of his bones.  
Thus doth Chrysostom expound the words of S. Paul. 
Chrysost. in Paul. 1. Cor. 10  Quid enim appello (inquit) communicationem? idem ipsum corpus sumus: quidnam est panis? corpus Christi: quid autem fiunt, qui accipiunt corpus Christi? non multa sed unum corpus. What meaneth S. Paul, when he sayeth (the communion) he meaneth that we be all one body: What meaneth he by this word (bread) the body of christ What are they made, that receive the body of Christ? they are made not many bodies, but one body. And therefore S. Paul sayeth by & by after, unus panis unum corpus multi sumus, omnes enim de uno pane participamus. We that be many, are made one bread one body, forbecause all we do receive and eat of one bread.  
Here he telleth plain, why we that be many in numbered, are all made one bread, one mystical body, because (sayeth he) all we eat of one bread, which is one natural body. And this word (bread) here must needs be taken for Christ's natural body, and not for material bread (as the heretics say) for it can not be conceived, neither by reason, nor by faith, how that all we christian folks that live now, and have lived since Christ's time, and shall live till domesdaye, can eat all of one & the same bread, and eat also at sundry times all of the same one bread being one bread in numbered, & not one bread in kind (as some would make cavillation) seeing we be not fed cum generibus & speciebus, with kinds of bread (as the Logityanes' say) but with singular bread: except we understand by this one bread the bread of life, that came from heaven, the bread of Christ's natural body in the sacrament, which he promised to give unto us all, whereof (as S. Cyprian sayeth, 
Cyprian. de caena Domin●.  Aequa omnibus portio datur, in teger erogatur, distributus non dimembratur, incorporatur non iniu●iatur, and so forth▪ whereof equal portion is given to all, this delivered whole, and being distributed, is not dismembered, and being incorporate in to us, is not injuried, and being received, is not included, and dwelling with those that be weak, is not made weak.  
And the reason why all we should be made one body, that receive one body, is declared in cyril, the Latin is long▪ 
Cyrillus de Trini. lib. 1.  but the english is this: We men being all diverse in our own proper substance, according to the which one man is Peter, an other is Thomas, an other matthew: yet are we all made one body in Christ, because we be fed with one flesh, & are sealed in unity with one holy spirit: and because Christ's body is not able to be divided, therefore being of infinite power, and received of all our diverse bodies, maketh all us one body with himself.  
Which unity of body S. Chrysostom expressth by a similitude of dough and Levine, that we are made one body, 
Chrysost in Matt. 〈◊〉. 83  as meal of many grains and water, when it is knedde, are made one dough or levyne: his words be these. Veniat tibi in mentem, quo sis honore honoratus, qua mensa fruaris: ea namque re nos alimur, quam angeli videntes tremunt, nec absque pavore propter fulgorem, qui in de resilit aspicere possunt, et nos in unam cum illo massam reducimur▪ Christi corpus unum & caro una. etc. Remember with what honour thou art honoured, of what table thou eatest: for we are fed with that thing, at which the angels looking upon, do tremble and quake, & without great fear be not able to behold it for the brightness, that cometh from it, and we are brought into one heap of levine with him, being one body of Christ and one flesh, for by this mystery he joineth himself to all the faithful & those children, whom he hath brought forth, he doth not commit them to be nourished of an other, but he himself most diligently and lovingly doth feed them with himself.  
Let my masters of the new learning tell me, how that these words can be any ways applied and verified of bread and wine with all their figurative speeches and hyperbolyes.  
This conjunction also of us with CHRIST, cyril expresseth by a similitude of two waxes melted and mingled together. 
Cyrillus lib. 10. ca 17. & lib. 4. ca 17.  Quemadmodum si quis igne liquefactam ceram aliae cerae similiter liquefactae ita miscuerit, ut unum quid ex utrisque factum videatur: sic communicatione corporis & sanguinis Christi ipse in nobis est, & nos in ipso etc. Like as if a man mingle one wax, melted with an other wax melted, so that one whole thing of them both be seen to be made: even so by the communion & receiving of Christ's body and blood, he is in us and we in him, for otherwise the corruptible nature of our bodies could not be brought to incorruption, except the body of natural life were joined to it.  
Hilarius also the great learned and godly bishop sayeth: per communionem sancti corporis, 
Hilarius in psa. 6●  in communionem deinceps sancti corporis collocamur. By the communion of his holy body, we are afterward placed and brought into the communion of his holy body,  
In such a plain matter as this is, what need I to heap places one above another, all the fathers be full of it. Wherefore seeing the effect of this sacrament is to be made one mystical body with Christ, flesh of his flesh, and bones of his bones, 
Ephes. 5. Cyrillus libr 10. ca, 13. Hilarius de Trini. lib. 8  as saint Paul saith: which union (as cyril sayeth) is not only by will, affection, faith, and charity, but also carnal & natural (as Hilarye saith) by Christ's flesh mingled with our flesh by the way of meat: I can not see, but that it is great wickedness and plain blasphemy to ascribe this glorious effect to the needy elements of this world, as to bread and wine, but only to the body and blood of our saviour Christ, as to the only substance of the blessed sacrament of the aultare.  
Beside these effects gathered out of the new Testament, there be also other mentioned in the Psalms. Whereof one is, that this sacrament is an armour and defence against the temptations of our ghostly enemy the devil, as it is written in the .22. Psalm. Parasti in conspectu meo mensam adversus eos qui tribulant me. 
Psal▪ 22.  Thou haste prepared in my sight a table against them that trouble me.  

Chrysost In Psal. 22.  By this table (sayeth Chrysostom upon this place) is understanded that thing that is consecrated upon the aultare of our Lord: 
Euthymi in Psa. 22  & Euthymius a greek author sayeth so also: Per hanc mensam intelligit altaris mensam, in qua coena mystica illa jacet: by this table he understandeth the table of the aultare, upon which lieth the mystical supper of Christ, which doth arm and defend us against the devil, which some times craftily layeth in wait for us, sometimes fiercely and cruelly assaulteth us, that be fed at Christ's table.  
S. Cyprian teacheth us the same lesson, saying: Quos excitamus & exhortamur ad praelium non inermes & nudos relinquamus, 
Cyprianus. lib. ● epist. ●.  sed protection● sanguinis & corporis Christi muniamus: Those persons whom we provoke & exhort to fight against their enemies (be it either the devils our ghostly enemies, or the devils limbs the persecutors of Christ's Church) let us not leave them naked and unarmed, but let us harness and defend them with the protection of Christ's body and blood.  
And a little after he saith: Cùm ad hoc fiat Eucharistia, ut possit accipientibus esse tutela, quos tutos esse contra adversarium volumus, munimento dominicae saturitatis armemus. Seeing this Sacrament is ordained for this purpose, that it should be a defence to the receivers, let us arm them with the shield and harness of our lords meat, whom we would should be safe against their adversary.  
This is that food, that maketh a man meet, and prepareth him too martyrdom. This blood of Christ is drunken daily of us, 
Cyprianus. lib. 4 epist. 6 Cryprian libro. 2. epist. 3,  that we might in his quarrel shed our blood again: and as he writeth in an other place: how can we shed our blood for Christ, that be ashamed to drink Christ's blood?  

Chrysost in 10 an. hom. 45  This blood being received of us (as Chrysostom sayeth) driveth the devils away, 
Chrysost. ad Neophitoes.  and doth allure the angels & the Lord of angels unto us: for after the meat of our Lord received, he forsaketh us, and flieth away swifter, than any wind, and dare not approach near, because all entrance for his temptations is shut up. As S. Ambrose writeth. Cùm hospitium tuum adversarius viderit occupatum coelestis fulgore praesentiae, 
Ambrose in Psalm. 118. Ser. 8  intelligens locum tentamentis suis interclusum esse per Christum, fugiet acrecedet. etc. When thy adversary shall see thy house and lodging (of body and soul) occupied with the brightness of Christ's heavenly presence perceiving every place to be shut up from his temptations: he wylll fly and run away  
Wherefore as Gregory Nazianzene writeth: 
Nazian. in julianum orat, 2.  Mensa haec praeparatur contra tribulantes me, qua omnem passionum rebellionem sedo. This table is prapared of God against them that vex and trouble me, by the which I quench and pacify all rebellion of my naughty affections.  
And (as cyril sayeth) Non mortem solum, 
Cirillus libr. 4. cap. 17.  sed etiam morbos omnes depellit, sed at saevientem membrorum legem, pietatem corroborat, perturbationes animi extinguit, nec in quibus sumus peccatis considerate, aegrotos curate, collisos redintegrat, abomni nos casu erigit. It driveth away not only death, but also all sickness, it stilleth and pacifyeth the raging law of our membres, it strengtheneth devotion, it quencheth the froward affections of the mind, and those small sins we be in, it regardeth not, it healeth the sick, it restoreth the brussed, and from all falling it lifteth us up.  
O what wonderful effects be these, which by this blessed Sacrament be wrought in the worthy receiver, against the devil and his temptations, against the flesh and her illusions against the vicious affections of our corrupt mind? What conscience had these men, our late teachers & pastors, destroyers of Christ's flock, to rob us of this treasure, which is the cause of so great benefits, and in the place of that, to plant amongs us a bare ceremony of bread and wine to put us in remembrance of Christ in heaven (as they said) which neither by their own nature, nor yet by any institution either of God or man, be able to bring to pass in us these effects I have spoken of? What meant they that took away this armour of Christ's flesh and blood from us, but to leave us naked and unarmed against the devil, that he should prevail against us in all temptations, and that the kingdom of sin should be erected, and the kingdom of grace destroyed? & to teach that this blessed Sacrament is nothing else, but bread and wine, what is it else but to take away this armour and harness of Christ's flesh and blood from us: For bread be it never so much appointed to signify things absent, is not able to defend us from the devil. Well: one other effect I shall note unto you, & make an end of that matter.  
This effect is written in the next verse of the same Psalm. 
psal. 22.  Et calix tuus inebrians quàm praeclarus est: & thy chalice or cup that maketh us drunk, how goodly and excellent is it? There be two cups, one worldly of wine, the other heavenly of Christ's blood: both make men drunken, but after diverse sorts, the one is sometimes the instrument of sin, the other at all times the instrument of grace, forasmuch as pertaineth to his own nature.  
Of this writeth saint Cyprian. Sed quia ebrietas dominici calicis & sanguinis non est talis, 
Cyprian libro. 2. epist. 3.  qualis est ebrietas vini secularis, cùm diceret spiritus sanctus in Psalmo. Calix tuus inebrians, addidit perquàm optimus: quòd scilicet calix dominicus sic bibentes inebriat, ut sobrios faciat, ut mentes ad spiritalem sapientiam redigat, ut à sopore isto seculari, ad intellectum Dei unus quisque resipiscat. But because the drunkenness of our lords cup and blood is not such, as is the drunkenness of worldly wine: when the holy ghost in the Psalm said. Thy cup that maketh men drunk, (he added) is very godly and excellent, because the cup of our Lord doth so make the drinkers drunk, that it maketh them sober, that it bringeth their minds to spiritual wisdom, that every man may bring himself from this drowsiness of the world to the understanding & knowledge of God.  
To this intent saint Ambrose writeth in diverse places, 
Ambrose in Psal, 1.  as upon the first Psalm. At verò Dominus jesus aquam de petra effudit, & omnes biberunt, and so forth, The place is long & for avoiding of tediousness I shall faithfully rehearse it in english. But our Lord jesus brought water out of the stone, and all drank of it. They that drank in figure, were satiate, they that drunk in truth, were made drunk: the drunkenness is good, which bringeth in mirth and no confusion, that drunkenness is good, that stayeth in soberness the motions of the mind.  
And he speaketh more play ner in these words. 
Ambrose in psa. 118 Ser. 15.  Eat the meat of the Apostles preaching before, that thou mayst afterward come to the meat of Christ, to the meat of our lords body, to the dainties of the sacrament, to that cup wherewithal the affection of the faithful is made drunk, that it might conceive gladness for remission of sin, and put away the thoughts of this world, the fear of death, and all troublesome carefulness: for by this drunkenness the body doth not stumble and fall but riseth (to grace and glory) the soul is not confounded, but is consecrate and made holy.  
These scriptures and these effects brought out of the scriptures, and confirmed by many manifest authorities of the holy fathers do prove evidently to any man that hath but common wit, and any sparkle of grace, and is not forsaken of almighty god, that the substance of this sacrament is neither bread nor wine, but only the body and blood of our Lord jesus Christ, united to god's son in unity of person, which is a sufficient cause, able to work in the worthy receiver these heavenly and glorious effects, which I have spoken of already.  
Whereby appeareth, what moveth me to continue still in that faith, which is so expressly taught in holy scripture: which scripture also draweth and pulleth me from the contrary false opinion.  
In diverse places it moveth me and all christian men to beware & take heed of false prophets▪ 
Mat. 7.  that come in the apparel of sheep, but within they be ravenous wolves: that in their mouths have the word of god, the truth, the gospel, and such gay words, but the pit and effect of their teaching is old rotten heresies, confuted and condemned of all Christendom before, and not God's word, the name whereof they abuse to the maintenance of all vice, error, beastly living, adultery, disobedience, sacrilege, and open conspiracy, to the subversion of them selves, & of that state under which they live.  
The scripture crieth, 
1. Io. 4.  Nolite omni spiritui credere, believe not every spirit, but try and prove the spirits, if they be of God or no, for many false Prophets are abroad in the world. One way to try them, is to mark the end of their conversation▪ and the example and fruit of their lives, as S. Paul sayeth: 
Heb. 13.  Quorum exitum conversationis intuentes, eorum imitamini fidem: follow their faith, the end of whose conversation ye have seen.  
We have seen, what is the end of this new teaching, carnal and detestable living, conspiracy and treason.  
The other fathers of whom we learned our faith, were men whom the corrupt world was not worthy to have: these authors of this new opinion were men that were not worthy to have and enjoy the world: of whom saint Peter writeth, Magistri mendaces, 
2. Pe. 2.  and so forth. Lying masters that bring in sects of perdition, and deny that Lord that bought them (as they do in this matter of the sacrament) bringing upon them a speedy perdition: and many shall follow their ways, through whom the way of truth shall be slandered and blasphemed, and in covetousness by feigned words they shall make merchandise of you, to whom judgement ceaseth not, and their destruction sleepeth not.  
We be also warned by S. john of this matter, 
●. Io, 1  saying: he that remaineth and abideth in the doctrine (that the Apostles taught) he hath the father and the son. If any come to you not bringing this doctrine, do not receive him into your houses.  
Here he doth teach us to avoid them, that profess any other doctrine than such, as all faithful men universally throughout the world have received and profess, which is not the doctrine, that the Sacramentaries preach.  
Finally considering the promises of Christ to his church, that he will be with them too the worlds end, 
Mat. 28.  and that the holy ghost shall lead them into all truth, 
john. 16  then may we justly say, that if this our faith be an error, it hath prevailed universally not one hundredth year, but two, three, four, yea a thousand year, & more than that, even to the ascension of Christ, as appeareth by the testimonies of all holy writers, and then may we say Lord if we be deceived, thou hast deceived us, we have believed thy word, we have followed the tradition of the universal church, we have obeyed the determinations & teachings of those bishops and pastors, whom thou hast placed in the Church to stay us in unity of faith, that we be not carried away with every wind of false doctrine. Therefore if we be deceived it cometh of thee O Lord, our error is invincible.  
But good people, we are sure, God deceiveth no man, let us all beware we do not deceive ourselves, as S. james sayeth.  
Thus having spoken something of the scriptures, as this short time would permit, there remaineth also the second thing, which I said moved me to continue in this faith, which is the authorities of ancient fathers, that have flourished in the preaching of God's truth in all ages with authorities. I think verily in no age have been so curiously sought, so diligently found out, & so substantially weighed, as in this our time.  
And all this is, because the oppugnation of the truth in this matter, hath extend itself not only to the scriptures but also to the doctors and to every particle and title of the doctors, whose writings have been so scanned and tried, that if any thing could have been gathered and piked out of their books, either by liberal writing before this mystery came in contention, or by misconstruction of their words, or by depravation of their meaning, that could seem too make against our faith herein, it was not omitted of some, but stoutly alleged, amplified, enforced, and set forth to the utter most that their wits could conceive, which if god hath not infatuat, leaving them to speak so, as neither faith nor reason could allow: like as they have with their vanities seduced a great sort the more pity, so they should have undermined and subverted the faith of a great many more, that were doubting & falling, but not clean ovetrhrowen, thanks be to almighty god.  
Of these authorities, although with a little study and less labour, I could at this time allege a great numbered: yet considering the shortness of the time, which is almost spent, I shall be content to pick out a few▪ which do not only declare the mind of the author, but also contain an argument to prove & convince the truth of our faith, & such an argument, as neither figurative speech nor depravation of the words or meaning can delude. And first I shall begin with the weakest, that is with the suspicion of the gentiles. Tertullian in his apology teacheth, 
Tertul. apo. ca 7.  how the gentiles did accuse the Christian men for killing of young children, & eating of their flesh, he sayeth thus: Dicimur sceleratissimi de Sacramento infanticidij & pabulo inde. We are reported & accused as most mischievous and wicked men, for the sacrament of killing of children, & eating their flesh, and drinking their blood.  
Eusebius also in his story of the church, writeth of one Attalus a martyr, 
Historia ecclesiast lib. 5. ca 3  who being roasted in an iron cradle with fire put underneath, when the savour of his burnt flesh came to the smelling of the people that looked on: he cried with a loud voice to the people. Lo, this is to eat men which you do, which fault ye make inquisition of, as secretly done of us, which you commit openly in the mid day.  
By this accusation we may understand, that our Sacraments and mysteries in the beginning of the church were kept very secret, both from the sight and knowledge of the pagans that mocked and scorned them, and also of those that were Catechumeni, learners of our faith and not yet baptised, for many great causes which I shall not need to rehearse now. And yet for all the secret keeping of them, being so many Christian men & women as there was, they could not be kept so secret, but that some ynkeling of them came to the ears of those that were infidels & unchristened, insomuch that where as in deed and very truth by the rules of our religion, we did eat the flesh of jesus Christ our Lord, and drink his blood ministered unto us in the sacrament, the gentiles as they were curious to know new things, so they came to knowledge of the rumour of our doings, and either by the bewrayinge of some false brethren, or else by the simplicity of other, that of zeal without knowledge would have converted the unfaithful too our faith, heard secretly, that we Christian men in our mysteries did eat man's flesh & drink man's blood, which they for lack of faith, and further instruction began to compass in their wits, how it was possible so to do, and therefore some of them blinded by their own foolish suspicion conceived and published amongs other, as it was most likely unto them, that we in our secret mysteries did kill young children, eating their flesh, and drinking their blood, & thereupon accused certain before the magistrates of this heinous crime, which they could never try out to be true, as they did accuse.  
But for our purpose it appeareth plainly, that we would never have kept our mysteries so secret, if they had been but ceremonies of eating of bread & wine, nor they would never have accused us of such beastly and unnatural crimes being men of such reason, learning, and equity, as they were, if there had not been some truth in their accusation, which in deed was true for the substance of that they alleged, but not for the manner of the thing: for it was & is true, that we in our mysteries eat flesh & drink blood, but yet we do not kill and murdre young children, and eat their flesh and drink their blood. And therefore I allege the sayings of Tertullian and Eusebius, the which is also in Origen the .6. book contra Celsum, to declare the accusation of the gentiles against us, concerning the eating of flesh, and drinking of blood, which could never have commed into their heads so too have done, if there had not been a truth in that matter, which they by their reason could never see otherwise, than they alleged, which we by our faith do plainly see and know as it was ordained by Christ our Lord. And for that cause tertullian did cast in a vain word, saying: that we were accused of the sacrament of killing of children, which word (Sacrament) standeth there for no purpose, but to declare unto us, that this their accusation did rise for lack of the true & precise knowledge of our Sacrament, which is true, concerning the eating of flesh & drinking of blood, but not true concerning the killing and murdering of children.  
And yet afterward our mysteries as they came in more knowledge amongs the gentiles, so they came into more contempt: for when the multitude of Christian men were so increased, that they cared not who did look upon them in the time of their mysteries, being out of fear of any external violence and persecution: then the gentiles seeing them knock, and kneel, & make adoration to the Sacraments, not knowing them to be any thing else, but as their eyes, senses, and reason did judge, that is to say, bread & wine, as our Sacramentaries do now, being blinded now with heresy, as they before were with infidelity: then I say, they said, that we did not worship and adore one God, as we pretended, but many gods, as they were accustomed: for they said (as saint augustine writeth) that we did worship Ceres and Bacchus, 
August. con. faust lib. 20. cap. 13.  the gods of corn and wine, taking our Sacraments to be nothing else, but bare bread & wine, as the Sacramentaries do and not to be Christ our Lord & God, his flesh and his blood, as all true faithful men do, which appeareth by the adoration of them: the which adoration we learn, that it was done to the Sacraments from the beginning, as is proved by the testimonies of our enemies the gentiles, as S. A●gustyne reporteth: And also by their adoration we learn, that the things whyeh they did adore, were not simple creatures, but Christ's body and his blood, united to the second person in Trinity.  
S. basil being asked, with what fear, persuasion, faith, 
Basilius in reg. in terro 172  and affection we should come & communicate the body and blood of Christ, answereth thus: Concerning the fear, we have the saying of the apostle, He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh his judgement and damnation.  
What faith we should have, the words of our Lord do teach, who said: This is my bo●y, which is given for you, do this in my remembrance. And Hesichius sayeth likewise: Sermo qui prolatus est in dominicum mysterium, 
Hesichius lib. 6. ca, 22.  ipse liberat nos ab ignorantia, The words of Christ, which were spoken upon our lords mystery, they deliver us from ignorance, that is to say, they teach us, what faith, what estimation we should have of them. Now except they be taken as they sound to every man, although he be unlearned and not instructed in our faith before, they could not teach us, what faith we should have, concerning the Sacraments, and therefore in that they be words, whereupon we must learn our faith, which deliver us from ignorance, what the things be, that be delivered, for that cause they must be taken, as they sound, that is to say, that the sacraments delivered be the very body & blood of Christ, that gave them.  
Chrysostom saith: Quod sacerdos de manu sua dat, 
Chrysost. hom. 17. in Matth  non solum sanctificatum est, sed etiam sanctificatio est. That thing that the priest doth give out of his hand, is not only a thing sanctified, but it is sanctification itself.  
Therefore our Sacrament must not only be an holy thing as they said, holy bread, and holy wine: but it must be the substance of holiness, making all other things holy.  
And here I think it worthy to be noted, and to be opened somewhat unto you, with what sophistry and unlearned folly they deluded the sanctification and consecration of this Sacrament. Children at the university can tell, that it is a deceitful way of reasoning, by a general description to exclude and drive away a special and singular definition, as they did in this case. For they said, that the consecration of the sacrament was no more, but an appointing of bread & wine to an holy use, which use they said was to signify unto us Christ's body that is in heaven: and therefore some said, that the bread was consecrate, when the parish clerk did bring it to the church, and set it upon the table, and these were no small men, but our greatest bishops, God forgive it them: other said it was not consecrate, till the words of Christ were spoken, but yet they noted, that the Priest should not look at the bread in the time of the pronouncing, for this end be like, that they should not be deceived, and that God should work no more, than it pleased than, that their doctrine might some way be true.  
And therefore they said, every man and woman might consecrate & speak the words as well as a priest: but they never red what Arnobius sayeth: 
Arnobius in Psalm. 139.  Quid tam magnificum quam Sacramenta divina conficere? et quid tam perniciosum, quam si ea is conficiat, qui nullum sacerdotij gradum accepit? what is so excellent, then to consecrate the sacraments of God? and what is so pernicio use, then if he do consecrate, that hath received no ordre and degree of priesthood? And as they erred in the time and person, so they erred in the nature of the consecration, making this of the same sort that all other consecrations be, receiving the general description, and denying the degrees and specialties of sanctification, which be many: for some things be holy, not for any holiness that is in them, but for that they be brought to the church, and dedicate to some holy use, as is the temple of God, the vestures about the aultare, and other things used in God's service, which things too steal and convey is sacrilege: and amongs those things there be degrees of holiness, 
August. de peccat merit. & remiss lib 2. ca 26.  as saint augustine sayeth: Quod accipiunt Catechumeni, quamuis non sit corpus Christi, sanctum est tamen, & sanctius quàm cibi quibus alimur. Holy bread which those that be learners receive, although it be not the body of Christ, yet it is holy, and more holy than the meat, with which we are fed daily, which also is sanctified by the word & prayer.  
There is also holiness a quality, a virtue, and gift of God, making him in whom it is, acceptable in the sight of god. The soul of man is likewise sanctified and holy, because it is that substance and subject wherein holiness consisteth and dwelleth, being a vessel created to god's image, and prepared to receive gods gift of sanctification and holiness.  
And the body of a godly man is also sanctified and holy, because it is the member of Christ, the temple of the holy ghost, and the house and tabernacle of the soul, replenished with god's grace and sanctification, and for this reason we have in reverence and estimation the relics and bodies of holy martyrs and confessors, which being members of Christ, were also pleasing sacrifices to almighty god, either for austerity of life, or for suffering of undeserved death, for the faith or in the quarrel of jesus Christ our Lord.  
The sacraments of God's church be justly called holy, because they be the instruments, whereby God doth work holiness in the soul of man, and be as causes of the same by Christ's own ordinance and institution. But above all other this Sacrament of the aultare is holy, being as Chrysostom said, not only a thing sanctified, but the very sanctification itself: for in that it is the body of Christ by consecration, whereunto is annexed the godhead by unity of person, it must needs be holiness itself not in quality, but in substance seeing whatsoever thing is in God, is also God, who for his simplicity receiveth no quality into himself, but is the author and principal cause of all good qualities and graces given to man. Wherefore this place of Chrysostom, that calleth it sanctification itself▪ can not be avoided by no figurative speeches, nor such like cavillations.  
The same Chrysostom in his epistle to Innocentius bishop of Rome writeth of the manner of the persecution in his time, 
Chrysost. epist ad Innocentium.  not unlike to this of ours. Name & sanctuarium ingressi sunt milites, quorum aliquos scimus nullis initiatos mysterijs, & viderunt omnia quae intus erant: quin & sanctissimus Christi sa●guis (sicut in tali tumultu contingit) in praedictorum militum vestes eflusus est, The soldiers came violently into the holy place, of whom we know that some were not baptised, and there they saw all things that were within, and the most holy blood of Christ (as chauncheth often in such a tumult) was shed upon the garments of those soldiers.  
Here I mark that he saith not the figure or sign of Christ's blood, but the most holy blood, an other inferior creature can not be most holy. Also I mark that this most holy blood was reserved there in the holy temple, and was not only in heaven to be received by faith of the faithful, but also was in the temple and violently handled of the unfaithful, being there contemned, abused, and spilled upon their garments. Doth not this barbarical violence, and external situation of the most holy blood of Christ, prove a real presence of the same in the Sacrament?  
Gregory Nazianzene speaketh after the like manner, 
Nazianze. orat. ad Arianos▪  how that the Arianes would not suffer the Catholics to pray in their temples, but troubled them, and killed them, and mingled Christ's mystical blood, with the blood of the catholic priests, which they slew, and so forth: whereby we understand a real presence of Christ's blood by that violence, that was showed unto it of the heretics part, though Christ were there after that sort, that he could suffer no violence of his part.  
We read in saint Hyerome and in diverse other: 
Hieronimus ad hedibiam.  Ipse conviva & conuivium, comedens et qui comeditur: that Christ is both the eater of the feast, and the feast itself, both the eater and the meat that is eaten. Whereby we understand, that Christ giving his body and his blood to his disciples, did receive the same himself before.  
And as Chrysostom writeth, that lest his disciples should have been troubled and offended, 
Chrysost. in Matth hom. 83.  hearing him say, This is my blood, 
Euthymius in Mat cap. 64.  drink ye all of this, as the Caparnaites were before▪ and so should abhor to have drunk of the same. Christ did first drink of the same cup before them, that he might by his example induce his disciples to drink likewise.  
And Hesichius sayeth: 
Hesichius in levit. lib. 2 ca 8  Ipse dominus primus in coena mystica intelligibilem accepit sanguinem, atque deinde calicem Apostolis dedit: Our Lord himself in the mystical supper, first drank his own blood, that was not seen, but understanded, & then gave the cup to his apostles.  
By this fact of Christ we may learn, that in the cup was verily and really Christ's own blood: for if christ did eat his body, & drank his blood but in figure, than he did eat and drink it before after that manner in the typical and legal supper, & then how can this mystical supper be the truth, and the other the figure, if this be but a figure likewise? And then why should the Apostle be afraid to do that now, they were wont to do always before. It was no new thing, worthy the new Testament, to eat & drink Christ in a figure: and therefore it is certain, that Christ in his mystical supper did not eat and drink his body and blood only figuratively. And if ye will say, that he eat it and drank it spiritually only, than ye must say, that christ did eat it by faith, for spiritual eating is believing. And if ye say, Christ did believe, than it followeth that Christ was not God. Who hath perfit knowledge of all things by sight, and not unperfect knowledge by faith, as we have, seeing as through a glass in a dark riddle. And surely they harp much upon this string: for this heresy against the presence of Christ in the sacrament, is an high way, leading to the other heresy, that Christ is not God, as is proved by diverse ways and arguments, into which pit diverse be falling by this means, if God do not put under his hand to stay them betimes: for if they continue long in this, they will fall into the other, no remedy, whereof we have already seen experience.  
Then if Christ did eat his body, & drink his blood in the mystical supper, neither figuratively, as he did in the paschal lamb nor yet spiritually as we do by faith: than it is certain, that he eat it only sacramentally, which is not only in sign (as the sacramentaries expound the word) but in truth under a sacrament, whereof the substance is the real and natural body and blood of Christ our lord.  
After this sort writeth Chrysostom of David, saying thus: Non contigit david gustare talem hostiam, neque particeps fuerat sanguinis dominici, sed legibus imperfectioribus educatus, neque tale quicquam exigentibus: tamen ad evangelicae philosophiae fastigium pervenit animi moderatione. It never chanced to David to taste of such a sacrifice, nor he was not receiver and partaker of our lords blood, but being brought up under laws not so perfect, and requiring no such thing, yet by the moderation and temperance of his own mind he came to the height of all evangelical divinity.  
Here is plain, that David did never taste and receive Christ's blood, 
Chrysost. hom. de David 〈◊〉 Saul.  as we do in the gospel, and yet David did receive Christ's blood figuratively, being partaker of the sacrifices of the old law, which were figures of Christ's blood and also he did drink of the same blood spiritually as we do, whose faith was as good or rather greater than ours. Therefore there remaineth one other way that we drink of it, which was not granted unto him, that is to say, verily and really in the sacrament.  
To avoid this place well, they must have moo solutions than they have invented yet, for neither figurativelye nor spiritually will serve, it were best for them to yield to the truth, and confess that it is there really, the very same substance of his blood, that was shed upon the cross, though not in that form, for the relief of our weak nature, which else could not sustain it.  
And further than this S. augustine sayeth: Si dixerimus Catechumeno, credis in Christo? 
August, in Ioann● tract. 11  respondit, credo, et signat se cruce Christi, portat in front, & non erubescit de cruce domini sui: ecce credit in nomine eius. Interrogemus eum, manducas carnem filii hominis, & bibis sanguinem filii hominis? nescit quid dicimus, quia lesus non se credidit ei. If we shall say to one the learneth & professeth our faith, being yet not baptised: dost thou believe in Christ? he answereth, I believe, and he doth sign himself with the cross of Christ, he beareth it in his forehead, and is not ashamed of the cross of his Lord: Loo be believeth in his name. But let us ask him, dost thou eat the flesh of the son of man, and drink the blood of the son of man? he can not tell what we say, for jesus hath not believed & committed himself to him. Beside other things that may be fruitfully gathered of this place for our erudition, I note but this one, that a man believing in Christ, professing the faith of Christ with his word and work, and for that cause eateth Christ's flesh & drinketh his blood spiritually, yet he wot not what the eating of Christ's flesh meaneth, whereof Christ spoke in the .6. of saint john. But we that be baptised, & are admitted to our lords table: we know by our experience, what it is to eat Christ's flesh and to drink his blood, for to us Christ doth trust & give himself, to the other that believe as well as we, he doth not commit himself.  
Whereby I conclude beside the spiritual eating of Christ by faith, there is also a real eating of him in the sacrament, by the service of our bodies, to the confirmation in grace, and sanctification both of our bodies and souls.  
And concerning the drinking of Christ's blood really▪ S. Cyprian writeth an other argument, 
Cyprian. Ser. de coena.  which I think can not be avoided by any figurative speeches, he sayeth thus: Nova est huius Sacramenti doctrina, & scholae evangelicae hoc primum magisterium protulerunt, & doctore christo primum haec mundo innotuit disciplina, ut biberent sanguinem Christiani, cuius esum legis antiquae authoritas districtissimè interdicit. Lex quip esum sanguinis prohibet, evangelium praecipit ut bibatur. etc. Origen also writeth this same thing very plainly upon Numeri. 
Origen in Numeros hom. 16  hom. 16. The english is this of Cyprian. The doctrine of this Sacrament is new, and the evangelical school, taught this lesson first of all, this discipline was never known to the world before our master Christ, who was the first teacher of it, that Christian men should drink blood, the eating of which blood the authority of the old law doth most straightly forbid: for the law forbiddeth the eating of blood, the gospel commandeth blood to be drunken. etc.  
Now this is most certain, that the law did never forbid the drinking of Christ's blood figuratively, but did command drink offerings, which were figures of this blood, and the jews drank of the water that came forth of the stone, which was a figure of the blood that came forth of Christ's side, which blood as Chrysostom saith, is in our chalice: 
Chrysost, ●n. 1. Cor. hom. 24.  Id est in chalice quod fluxit è latere, & illius no● sumus participes: the same thing is in the chalice, that slowed out of Christ's side, and we are partakers of the same. Nor the law did never forbid the drinking of Christ's blood spiritually by faith, but set forth the faith of Christ, being a schoolmaster, to Christ pointing, to him, in whom they should believe and receive all grace.  
But to make short, the law forbade the external and real drinking of blood, which the gospel commandeth saying: except ye eat the flesh of the son of man, 
john. 6.  and drink his blood, ye shall not have life in you, and drink ye all of this, This is my blood of the new Testament. Therefore it followeth necessarily, that the drinking of this blood is not figuratively, nor yet only spiritually, but really by the service of our bodies▪ as Chrysostom sayeth Si viderit inimicus non postibus impositum sanguinem typi, 
Chrysost. ad Neophitoes.  sed fidelium ore lucentem sanguinem veritatis Christi templi postibus dedicatum, multo magis se subtrahit. If our enemy the devil shall see not the blood of the figurative lamb sprinkled upon the posts, but the blood of Christ, the truth shining in the mouth of the faithful, much more he will run away. There is a place of the proverbs, 
Proverb. ●3.  which as diverse authors do expound, maketh much for the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Sacrament: the place is this after the greek, which these authors followed. Cùm sederis ad mensam potentis, sapienter intellige quae apponuntur, & mitte manum tuam, sciens quia talia te oportet praeparare When thou sytteste at the table of a great man, understand wisely what things are set before thee, and put to thy hand, knowing that thou must prepare such like things again. 
August. in ●oan. tract. 47 48. Chrysost, in Psalm▪ 23.  S. augustine upon saint john, and Chrysostom upon the Psalm, and Hesichius, and other moo, whose words it were to long to rehearse in Latin: 
Hesichius lib. 6. ca, 22.  do expound this place of the proverbs thus. Who is this great man but jesus Christ our lord gods son? and what is the table of this great man, but where is received his body and his blood that hath given his life for us? And what is to sit at that table, but to come to it humbly and devoutly? & what is to consider and understand wisely, what things be set before thee, but to discern the body & blood of Christ to be set there verily in truth, and to know the grace, virtue, and dignity of them, and the danger for the misusing of them? and what is to put to thy hand, knowing that thou must prepare such like again, but to eat of them, knowing that christian men in the cause of Christ, and defence of the truth are bounden to shed their blood, and spend their lives for their brethren, as christ hath done the same for us before, that like as we have received at Christ's table his body and his blood, so ought we to give for our brethren our bodies and blood.  
This comparison of taking & giving the like again, avoideth all the trifling cavillations of these figurative speeches, that the simple people's heads be cumbered withal. Here is no place for eating only by faith, for the martyrs did not only believe in Christ, but also in very deed gave their bodies and shed their blood really for Christ.  
I need not stand longer in so plain a matter, although I could allege much more out of all the ancient fathers, yea & more plainer than these I have touched, if any can be plainer. If I did but tell the bare names of the Sacrament, which the authors give it: I should prove manifestly, that it were the very body and blood of Christ, & not bread and wine. Ignatius calleth it Medicamentum immortacitatis, antidotum non moriendi, 
Ignatius ad Ephe●sios.  a medicine of immortality, a preservative against death. Dionysius Ariopagita S. Paul's scholar calleth it hostia salutaris, 
Dionisiu● Hier. eccle. cap. ●  the sacrifice of our salvation. justinus martyr sayeth, 
justinus apollo.  it is caro & sanguis incarnati jesu, the flesh & blood of jesus incarnate, which names be given to it of the scripture and all other writers. Origen calleth it Panis vitae, dapes salvatoris, 
Origen in Luc. hom 38. in Mat hom. 5.  epulum incorruptum. Dominus, the bread of life, the dainties of our saviour, the meat that is never corrupted, yea our Lord himself. Cyprian calleth it Sanctum domini, 
Cyprianus de lapsis de coena.  the holy one of God, gratia salutaris, the saving grace, Cibus inconsumptibilis, the meat that can never be consumed, Alimonia immortalitatis, the food of immortality, Portio vitae aeternae, the portion of eternal life, Sacrificium perpes, holocaustum permanens, a continual sacrifice, an offering always remaining, Christus yea he calleth it Christ The great general counsel at Nice calleth it Agnus Dei qui tollit ●eccatum mundi, 
Concilium Nicenum  the lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world.  
Optatus an old author giveth it diverse names, 
Optatus lib, 6.  as in this sentence. Quid tam sacrilegum quàm altaria Dei frangere, radere, removere, in quibus vota populi & membra Christi portata sunt, unde à multis pignus salutis aeternae tutela fidei, & spes resurrectionis accepta est? What is more sacrilege, then to break the altars of God (as the Donatists did) or to scrape them, or to remove them, upon the which altars the vows of the people, that is to say, the members of Christ are borne, from which altars also the pledge of eternal salvation, the defence and buckler of faith, and the hope of resurrection be received.  
Hilarius calleth it cibus dominicus, our lords meat, verbum caro, 
Hilarius. lib. 8.  the word made flesh. S. basil in his Mass calleth them sancta, 
Basilius in Missa,  divina, impolluta, immortalia, supercelestia, & vivifica sacramenta. Holy Sacraments, godly, pure, undefiled, immortal, heavenly, and giving life. What wyttelesse and ungodly man would give these names to bread and wine? S. Ambrose calleth it gratia dei, 
Ambrose de obitu fratris  the grace of God, not an accidental grace received of God into man's soul, but the very real Sacrament he calleth the grace of God, the which his brother Satyrus being upon the sea, and his ship broken, seeking for none other aid but only the remedy of faith, and the defence of that Sacrament, took this grace of God of the priests, and caused it to be bound in a stole, which he tied about his neck, and so trusting in that, committed himself to the waters, by virtue whereof he escaped drowning, and afterward of a catholic bishop he received that same grace of God with his mouth.  
Chrysostom O with what eloquence doth he utter this matter: hear but this one place. 
Chrysost. 1, Cor. 10.  Ipsa namque mensa animae nostrae vis est, nerui mentis, fiduciae vinculum, fundamentum, spes, salus, lux, vita nostra. The very table sayeth he (meaning the meat of the table) is the strength of our soul, the sinews of our mind, the knot of our trust, the foundation, our hope, our health, our light, and our life. What names, what effects be these? and in an other Homely he calleth it Rex coeli, 
Ad Ephe. Ser. 3.  Deus, Christus, The king of heaven, God himself, Christ, which he saith goeth into us, by these gates & doors of our mouths. Cyrillus calleth it sanctificatio vivifica, 
Cirillus libr. 4. cap. 17.  The very sanctification that giveth life. And S. augustine calleth it Praetium nostrum, 
August. epist. 163  The price of our redemption, which judas received. What should I trouble you any longer in so plain a matter? Why should these holy fathers deceive us by calling this Sacrament with so glorious and high names, if they meant not so, but that it was but bread and wine? they lacked no grace that had so much grace as to shed their blood for christes faith, they lacked no wit nor eloquence to express what they meant. Thus did they wi●h one consent, after one manner always speak and write, by whose plain preaching and writing, the whole world of Christendom hath been persuaded and established in this faith of the real presence these fifteen hundredth years.  
If they have seduced us meaning otherwise then they wrote, then may we justly say, that they were not martyrs & confessors in deed, but very devils, erring themselves, and bringing other also in error.  
But good people the truth is, they erred not, but taught us as they believed the very truth, confirming and testifying that faith which their blood that they had taught with their mouth. And if there be any error, it is in us, that for the unlearned talking, and witless sophistical reasoning of a few men, will headlings destroy our souls: forsaking & not continuing in that faith, which was taught by the mouth of christ▪ sealed with his blood, testified by the blood of martyrs, and hath prevailed from the beginning, against the which hell gates can not prevail. Now there remaineth some thing to be said, concerning the third part which is the consent of the catholic church in this point: but I am sorry, the time is so past, that I can not now say any thing of it, in my next day god willing I shall touch it, & also proceed in the matter of the sacrifice, which I hope to god to make so plain, that it shall appear to them that will see & be not blinded forsaken of god, to be a thing most evident most profitable to be used & frequented in christes church, and that such slanders and blasphemies as be shot against it, shall rebound (I hope) upon their onwe heads, that shot them to the glory of almighty GOD, who by his heavenly providence can so dispose the malice of a few, that it turn to the stay and commodity of the whole, that the elect by such conflicts may be awaked from their sleep, may be more confirmed in all truth, and may be more vigilant and aware in learning and observing the law of God, to whom be all glory and praise world without end.  
Amen.   

¶ The second Sermon.  Roma. 12. 
¶ Obsecro vos fratres per misericordiam Dei, ut exhibeatis corpora vestra hostiam sanctam, etc.  
amongs other things the last time I was admitted to speak in this place I brought forth this sentence of S. bernard written in a sermon de Epiphania, 
Bernar. Ser. 1. de Epiph.  Pauperes sumus, parum dare possumus. etc. The english is this. We be poor, little may we give, yet for that little we may be reconciled if we will. All that ever I am able to give is this wretched body of mine, if I give that, it is sufficient: if not then I add his body, for that is mine and of mine own: for a little one is borne unto us▪ and the son is given to us. O Lord that lacketh in me, I supply in thee, O most sweetest reconciliation.  
Here I noted a great benefit of the oblation of Christ's body, to consist in supplying that lacketh in the oblation of our bodies: that whereas we be exhorted of saint Paul to offer up our bodies a sacrifice to almighty God, and also do understand by other scriptures, that it is our duties so to do: which may be done three ways: By voluntary suffering the death for Christ's faith, if case so require, by painful and penal works, as by abstinence and other corporal exercises, for the castigation and mortifying of the outward man, or else by the service of righteousness, in that we use the membres & parts of our body, as instruments of all virtue and godliness, considering again how there is great imperfection in all our works, and that the best of us all cometh short of that mark, which is prefixed of God to serve him with all our heart, with all our strength, & that either in the work itself or in th'intent, or in the cause or time, or in some other degree & circumstance: for this cause and consideration saint bernard doth himself and moveth us to join the oblation of Christ's body with ours, wherewithal we are sure god is well pleased, saying: This is my son, 
Mat. 17.  in whom I am well pleased, by whose merits our oblation and other works do please God, and not otherwise.  
And therefore I purposed to make one sermon of the sacrifice of Christ, not of the which he himself made upon the cross for our redemption, but of that which the church his spouse maketh upon the aultare, which purpose being also before promised remaineth now to be fulfilled.  
And entering the last time to speak of it, I ●ayde this foundation, that is to say, the verity of the blessed Sacrament, the body & blood of our saviour Christ to be verily & really present in it by the omnipotent power of almighty God, and the operation of his holy spirit assisting the due administration of the priest, & so to be there not only as our meat, which God giveth unto us to nourish us in spiritual life, but also as our sacrifice, which we give and offer unto God to please him, and purge us from such things, as may destroy or hinder that spiritual life, seeing that Christ himself is the substance of the sacrifice of the new Testament, as I have partly showed before, and beside him we have none, that is only proper to us Christian men.  
This foundation of the real presence I presupposed to have been believed of us all, & yet I did not so rawly leave it, but declared unto you such reasons, as moved me to continue still in that faith I was borne in, which were the evident and plain scriptures of God, opened with the circumstances of the places in such wise, as the vain cavillations of the Sacramentaries can not delude them, and also the effects of this Sacrament, which be so great and so wonderful, that they can be ascribe to no other cause, but only to almighty God, and to such creatures, as god's son hath joined unto him in unity of person, as be the body & blood of our saviour Christ.  
I alleged also the sayings of the holy fathers, not in such numbered as I would have done, but choosed out a few, which not only declared the author's faith, but contained a necessary argument to prove our conmon faith in this matter. Concerning the third point, which is the consent of the catholic church, neither the time then suffered to speak as behoved, nor yet suffereth now, if I should perform my promise, as I intend GOD willing. And for that cause I shall but move you to consydre certain things, whereby the consent may appear.  
first the possession of the church in this doctrine so many years in such quietness without contradiction, that no reason, nor yet injunction, nor no new device that the devil or his darlings can invent to the contrary, either can or ought to remove us out of possession, except we will wilfully lose our own right and claim, seeing that we that live now universally throughout all Christendom have received this faith of our fathers, and they of theirs, and so forth even to the apostles and our saviour Christ himself, by whose mouth this doctrine (as S. Cyprian sayeth) was first taught to the world, 
Cyprian. Ser. de coena.  that Christian men in the new law be commanded to drink blood, which the jews in the old law were forbid to do.  
And so from him and his apostles it hath been by succession deduced and brought throughout all ages, even to this our time, and believed as God's word, which can not be changed, & not as man's word, subject to alteration, as probability can persuade.  
secondly this consent in this matter may aypeare by that the holy fathers and pastors of Christ's Church have written of it, whom God hath placed and planted in his church for the building and upholding of it in truth, that his flock be not seduced and carried about with every blast of new doctrine by the craftiness of men, to the destruction of their souls. Of this I have spoken something already.  
Thirdly we may know the consent of the church by the determination of the general counsels, where the presidents of God's churches, & the rulers and learned priests of christendom, assembled in the name of our lord jesus christ, representing the holy church of God militant, being led not with private affection, but by God's holy spirit to his glory, instant in prayer, fervent in devotion, purely, diligently, and freely have entreated & determined those things, that pertain to the faith of Christ, and the purging of his church, to whose determination as to God's ordinances we are bound to obey. Wherein appeareth manifestly the consent of the church.  
The first general council both for the calling, and also for the cause, was holden at Nice in Bithynia, by .318. bishops in the time of Constantinus Magnus, twelve hundredth and thirty years ago, 
Concilium Nicenum  where it was determined and published to the world in these words. Exal altata mente fide consideremus situm esse in sancta illa mensa agnum Dei qui tollit peccatum mundi, qui à sacerdotibus sacrificatur sine cruoris effusione, et nos verè preciosum illius corpus & sanguinem sumentes credere haec esse resurrectionis nostrae symbola. etc.▪ Let us lift up our minds, understanding and considering by faith, that the lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world is situate and lieth upon that holy table, which is offered of the priests without the shedding of blood, & that we receiving verily his precious body & blood, do believe them to be the pledges or causes of our resurrection.  
This authority serveth me very well to declare the consent of the church both in the matter of the real presence, & also of the sacrifice, which we have in hand. For the words be couched marvelously, every one serving to express the truth, and to avoid all doubts.  
For first he biddeth us, lift up our minds, and consider by faith, willing us not to stick only to our senses, thinking nothing else to be there, but that we see outwardly, teaching us that the judgement of this matter pertaineth not to our senses, but to our faith only, & as Eusebius Emesenus sayeth, 
Emesenus orat. de corpore Christi  Verè unica & perfecta hostia fide aestimanda non specie nec exterioris censenda est visu hominis, sed interioris affectu. This host and sacrifice is verily one and perfect, to be esteemed by faith, and not by form and appearance, to be judged not by the sight of the outward man, but with the affection and persuasion of the inward man: for to faith only and not to senses pertaineth the knowledge and judgement of God's mysteries and sacraments.  
Then the council declareth what faith teacheth, that is to say, that the lamb of GOD, not material bread & wine, nor the figure of the lamb, but the lamb that taketh away the sin of the world, is placed lying upon the holy table of the altar, which external situation proveth a real presence of Christ to be there before we receive it, and not a fantastical or an intellectual receiving of Christ by faith in the time of the receiving only, as these men contend.  
Further it teacheth, that this lamb of God is offered to almighty God by the priests, which is a distinct offering from that Christ made upon the cross, for there he offered himself by shedding his blood, which he did but ones, and never shall do it again any more.  
Here is he offered of the priests, not by shedding of blood, but as the council sayeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not after a bloody manner, which is not a new killing of Christ, but a solemn representation of his death, as himself hath ordained.  
After this it declareth the receiving of it saying, that we verily receive his precious body and blood, which word (verily) is as much as that we call (really) and declareth the use of the sacrament in the receipt of it with the service of our mouth, as Christ commanded saying: Take, eat, which is a corporal eating, 
Mat. 19  not a spiritual believing.  
And last of all it showeth the effect of the sacrament, which is the resurrection of our bodies to eternal life, for because Christ's body being the body of very life, is joined to our bodies as our food: it bringeth our bodies that be dead by sentence of death to his property which is life, whereof in my last sermon I spoke more at large.  
O Lord what hard hearts have these men to doubt themselves, or to deny, or to bring in question that manifest open truth in so high and necessary a matter, which in most plain words hath been taught of our saviour Christ, his apostles and evangelists, & declared so to be understand by the holy ghost out of the mouths of all these holy fathers, whom the holy ghost did assemble and inspire with the spirit of truth to the confusion of the great heretic Arius, that troubled the world then, and also did inspire their hearts to declare so plainly the mystery of this blessed sacrament, which then was without all contention, believed of all Christian men, only to prevent these heretics the arise and spring up now in these latter days, that the world may see, how they strive against the known truth, their own conscience, and the determination of the whole church, being enemies of God, breaking his peace, & dividing themselves from the church, whose end is eternal confusion.  
Likewise the next general council holden at Ephesus, in the time of Theodosius the Emperor, eleven hundredth and twenty years ago, doth determine this truth likewise in these words. 
Council Ephesi. epi ad Nestorium  Necessario igitur & hoc adijcimus. Annunciantes enim sicut secundum carnem mortem unigeniti filii Dei, id est, jesu Christi & resurrrectionem cius, & in coelis ascensionem pariter confitentes, incruentum celebramus in Ecclesijs sacrificij cultum, sic etiam ad mysticas benedictiones accedimus, & sanctificamur participes sancti corporis et preciosi sanguinis Christi omnium nostrum redemptoris effecti, non ut communem carnem percipientes (quod absit), nec ut viri sanctificati & verbo coniuncti secundum dignitatis unitatem, aut sicut divinam possidentis habitationem, sed verè vivificatricem & ipsius verbi propriam factam. We add this also necessarily: We showing and declaring the corporal death of Gods only begotten son jesus Christ, and likewise confessing his resurrection and ascension unto heaven do celebrate the unbloody oblation and sacrifice in our churches, for so we come to the mystical benedictions, & are sanctified being made partakers of the holy body and precious blood of Christ, all our redeemer not receiving it as common flesh (God forbid) nor as the flesh of an holy man, & joined to the word of God by unity of dignity, nor as the flesh of him in whom God dwelleth, but as the flesh only proper to god's son & verily giving life to the receiver.  
By this determination of this general council we learn, that in the mystical benediction (by which word is meant this blessed Sacrament) we receive Christ's own proper flesh, and of it we receive sanctification and life, before the receipt whereof we celebrate the unbloody sacrifice of the same in our churches, declaring our lords death, resurrection, and ascension, and by this place we plainly perceive that the doings and words which be used daily in our Mass, were also used in the time of this council much above a thousand years ago.  
This doctrine also was determined in the general council holden at Constantinople in the time of justyniane the Emperor, 
Concilium constanti. in trullo cap. 102.  the year of our Lord 552. where be written these words. Omni sensibili creaturae supereminet is qui salutari passione, coelestem nactus digni tatem, edens & bibens Christum, ad vitam aeternam perpetuo coniungitur, & anima & corpore divinae participatione gratiae sanctificatur. and so forth.  
He far excelleth every sensible creature, that by the passion of our saviour obtaining heavenly dignity, eating and drinking Christ, is continually joined to eternal life, and is sanctified both in soul and body by participation of the heavenly grace.  
This place is notable, declaring the dignity of him that eateth Christ, and the effect of that eating to be everlasting life and sanctification, both of body and soul.  
Likewise the general council called Lateranense, 
Concilium Lateranense  holden at Rome the year of our Lord 1215. determined this matter in the same terms, that we express it now. una est fidelium universalis Ecclesia, extra quam nullus omnino saluatur, in qua idem ipse sacerdos & sacrificium jesus Christus, cuius corpus & sanguis in Sacramento altaris sub speciebus panis & vini veraciter continentur, tran substantiatis pane in corpus, & vino in sanguinem potestate divina. There is one universal church of all faithful people, without the which no man is saved at any time, in the which jesus Christ himself is both the priest and the sacrifice, whose body and blood be truly contained in the sacrament of the aultare under the form of bread and wine, the bread being transubstantiate into his body, & the wine into his blood by the power of God.  
This form of doctrine after this sort, & in these terms hath been taught, professed, & believed throughout the whole catholic Church ever sense that time, howsoever some he retikes forsaking their faith, proceeding from God's omnipotent word and the unity of his church, and leaning to their sensuality and blind reason against faith have repined and barked against the same. But I put no doubts but by God's grace, if the time would suffer me▪ to make this matter o● transubstantiation as plain as the other of the real presence.  
The general council also of Constance, 
Concilium constantiense.  holden of latter days, the year of our Lord, 1415. doth agree and testify the same, in that they condemned john Wyclefe the heretic & all his errors against this blessed Sacrament.  
Thus have I showed you the consent of the church by the determinations of the general counsels. It shall not be needful to rehearse any particular and provincial counsels, which all in this doctrine agree with the other general.  
Furthermore the consent of the church appeareth by the condemnation of the heretics of all ages, which hold any false opinion in any point against the verity and the institution of Christ, concerning this blessed Sacrament.  
The first heretic that ever we read of in this matter, & father to all the Sacramentaries that live now, was one in the time of Ignatius by and by after the apostles, whose name we know not, but what he and his sect that followed him did Theodoretus in his third dialogue maketh mention, 
Theodoretus. dialogo. 3 Ignatius ad Smyrnenses.  saying that Ignatius (who lived within one hundredth year of Christ (writeth in an epistle ad Smyrnenses in these words. Eucharistias & oblationes non admittunt, eoque non confiteantur Eucharistiam esse carnem seruatoris nostri jesu Christi, quae pro pec●atis nostris passa est, & quam pater sua benignitate suscitavit.  
They do not allow and admit our Sacrament & offerings, because they do not confess the Sacrament (called Eucharistia) to be the flesh of our saviour jesus Christ, which flesh suffered for our sins, and which the father's goodness did raise from death again.  
By this we learn, what was the faith in the primitive church, both that the Sacrament was the very flesh of Christ, which suffered for us, & also that it was offered for us by the priests, which things those heretics denied then, as their scholars now springing up upon their ashes deny now, & that they were condemned as heretics by the primitive church then, as these most worthily be condemned by the catholic Church now.  
And where as the due matter, wherein this blessed Sacrament is consecrated, ought to be unleavened bread, of wheat and wine mixed with water, according to the scriptures & the example of christ: there were one sort of heretics called Artotoritae, (of whom speaketh Epiphanius contra Quintillianos) which were so called for that they used not in their sacrifices the necessary and due matter, 
Epiphanius contra Quintillianos.  but in their mysteries did consecrated, and offer bread and cheese.  
another sort of heretics were called Fermentarij, because they did consecrate in leavened bread, as our men of late did command to be done▪ who were condemned by the general council at basil. 
Concilium Basiliense   
Other were called Aquarij or Hydroparastae, for that they pretending sobriety did consecrate in water only without wine, against whom writ saint Cyprian, 
Cyprian libro. 2. epist. 3. Chrysost. in Matth hom. 83.  Chrysostom, & other, who also were condemned by the general council of Constantinople in trullo. cap. 32.  
Other were called Armenij who in their sacrifices consecrated and offered wine only without water, against whom writeth Theophilactus. All these held false opinion against the necessary and due matter of the Sacrament. 
Theophilactus in joan. ca 19  There were other heretics, that denied the effect of the Sacrament, as Messaliani, who (as it is written by Theodoretus) said that the heavenly food whereof our lord spoke, 
Historia triparti● lib. 7. cap 11.  he that eateh my flesh & drinketh my blood, shall live ever more, did neither profit nor hurt any man.  
Nestorius also the pernicious heretic and archbishop of Constantinople destroyed the virtue of the sacrament, (as Theophilactus writeth) for that he granting Christ's very flesh to be really and truly present in the Sacrament, 
Theophilactus. ca 10. ad Hebreos.  denied that flesh being received in to our bodies, to be the proper flesh of god's son, and therefore to have no virtue to give life to our mortal bodies: & this heresy was condemned by the generalcouncel, holden at Ephesus.  
And where as this sacrament can not be consecrated but by a priest, there was an heretic called Zacheus, condemned, (as Epiphanius writeth) because he would pray with no man, 
Epiphanius anacephaleosi.  but alone, and therefore without reverence and authority did handle the holy mysteries and being a lay man, did impudently ordre and use them.  
Also certain heretics called Anthropomorphitae denied the reservation of the sacrament saying that Christ's body remained there no longer than it was in receiving, of whom Cyrillus writeth thus.  
Dicunt mysticam benedictionem si ex e a remanserint in sequentem diem reliquiae ad sanctificationem inutilem esse: 
Cyrillus ad Calosyrium.  sed in saniunt haec dicentes, non enim mutatur Christus, neque sanctum eius corpus discedit, sed benedictionis virtus, et vivifica gratia continuo manet in illis.  
They say that the mystical benediction (which is the sacrament) is not profitable to the sanctification of the receiver, if there remain any thing of the sacrament to the next day. But they be stark mad that say so, for Christ is not changed, nor yet his holy body doth not depart away, but the virtue of the benediction, and the grace of giving life, do continually abide and remain in that that leaveth.  
This heresy is new revived again by Martin Luther and his sect, but it can not stand, being condemned of old time, and now also by the catholic church.  
Many moo heresies there be condemned, concerning the sacrament, beside the heresy of Berengarius that twice did recant it in two provincial counsels, and at his death took great penance for his damnable opinion as the stories tell: and also beside the condemnation of john Wycleffe in the general council at Constance, but I will not hinder my purpose with a long rehearsal of them.  
These be sufficient to show the consent of the church by the condemnation of heretics, he that would know more arguments to prove the consent in this or any other matter, let him read a book called Vincentius Lirinensis contra prophanas haeresum novitates, he may buy it for less than six pence, & find there a great treasure of good learning. Now to our purpose of the sacrifice.  ¶ Here thy prayer was made. 
Against the blessed Mass which is the sacrifice of the church many words of many men have been said, but sufficient reproof of it hath not yet been heard.  
Scripture never one was yet alleged against it, saving one out of the epistle to the Hebrews, where S. Paul writeth, 
Heb. 9  that Christ entered into heaven by his own blood ones, and afterward he saith: Christ was once offered up to take away the sins of many: and all the argument consisteth in this word (once), which I shall (God willing) discuss hereafter.  
But in very deed that same scripture that they bring against the Mass to no purpose, is the very foundation of the Mass, whereupon the Mass is builded & established, after what sort I shall declare as time will serve.  
Like as there is one God the father, 
Ephe. 4.  one Christ our redeemer, one body and church which is redeemed: so there is but one only sacrifice, 
Heb. 7.9.10.  whereby we be redeemed, which was once & never but ones made upon the aultare of the cross for the sins of all men.  
This sacrifice is propitiatory, and a sufficient price, & ransom of the whole world, as S. john. sayeth, he is the propitiation for our sins, & not for our sins only, 
1. Io. 2  but for the sins of the whole world, and in his Gospel he writeth, 
john. 1.  Behold the lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world.  
The virtue of this sacrifice began, when God promised that the seed of Adam should brusse and break the serpent's head, 
Gen. 3.  without the merit of this sacrifice there is no salvation, 
2. cor. 5.  for God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself.  
This sacrifice is common to both the testaments, where of both take their effect, whose virtue is extended from the beginning of the world to the last end, for the lamb was slain from the beginning of the world, 
Apo. 13.  as S. john saith.  
It is also a bloody and passable sacrifice, extending to the death of him that offered himself, & it was promised to the fathers, 
Galat. 3.  and performed in the fullness of time, 
Galat. 4.  the merits whereof receiveth no augmentation, because it is perfect, nor yet diminution, because it is eternal. And although this sacrifice be sufficient to save all men, yet it is not effectual to the salvation of all men: it is able to save all, but yet all be not saved: for what doth it profit the Turks, Saracenes, unfaithful gentiles, & counterfeit Christians? The fault is no● in god, being merciful to all his works, who created us without us: but the fault is in ourselves.  
Therefore that this sacrifice of Christ, as it is sufficient for all, so it may be effectual and profitable for all.  
God hath ordained certain means, whereby we may be made able to receive the merit of it▪ and whereby the virtue of it is brought and applied unto us in the new Testament, after his passion, as it was to the fathers in the old testament before his passion.  
Of these means some be inward, some be outward: the inward be common to both the testaments, of which the first & principal is faith, for without faith it is not possible to please God, 
Heb. 11  and as S. john sayeth, 
john. 3  he that believeth not, is now already judged: to him therefore that is an infidel, Christ hath died in vain.  
Charity also is a mean, for he that loveth not, 
1. Io. 3.  remaineth in death, 
1. Io. 2,  he that hateth his brother, is in darkness, & walketh in darkness, and can not tell whether he goeth: and if I have all faith, 
1. cor. 13.  and have no charity, I am nothing.  
He is not therefore partaker of Christ's merits in the remission of sin, that lacketh charity. And so may we say of hope, without the which no man receiveth mercy at Christ's hand.  
amongs the inward means there be other spiritual sacrifices, as the sacrifice of a contrite heart, 
Psal, 50.  which GOD doth much regard, the sacrifice of our lips, 
Osee. 14  which is prayer & praise of God, whereby we attain remission of sin having a plain promise, 
Luke. 11  that whatsoever we ask of god in the name of Christ, we shall obtain it. 
Mat. 7.  And the sacrifices of almose & benevolence, which Saint Paul would not have us to forget▪ 
Heb. 13  because God is gotten and won by such sacrifices.  
All these and other such like do not fully deserve grace and remission of sin, but be means, that the virtue and merit of christes passion may be derived and applied unto us, as he hath ordained.  
There be also other outward means▪ as sacraments and sacrifices. Of Sacraments some be proper to the old Testament, some proper to the new, without the which ordinarily there is no remission of sin, nor collation of grace.  
As circumcision was to the fathers, so baptism is to us, without the which this bloody sacrifice taketh not away original sin, not because it can not, but because God hath so ordained. For as it is said in the old Testament, 
Gen. 17.  whose flesh is not circumcised, his soul shall be put away from the people: so it is said in the new Testament, except a man be borne again of the water and the holy Ghost, he can not see the kingdom of God: 
john. 3  
john. 6.  and except ye eat the flesh of the son of man, and drink his blood, ye shall not have life in you: and except ye do penance, ye shall all likewise perish. 
Luke. 13   
And so must we think of all other Sacraments of both the testaments, that they be means ordained of God to attain that grace they signify, which grace is fully purchased and deserved by the passion of Christ, whereof only they take their effect: for the old sacraments have their virtue and strength ex opere operando (as the school men say) that is to say, of the work that is to be wrought upon the cross by Christ, in whom only they believed: the new Sacraments have their virtue ex opere operato, of the work of Christ, that is already wrought upon the cross, & not of any worthiness of the priest the minister, by the merit of which work upon the cross, they have virtue and efficacy appropried unto them to give that grace they signify to such as worthily receive them, or at least that have no impediment, nor put no stop, but that the grace may be received.  
Beside the Sacraments there be sacrifices instituted of GOD, as means whereby the passion of Christ, the true sacrifice is signified, represented & applied, 
Exo. 12.19. Levi. 1.4 5.7. levit. 3.  as the paschal lamb, the continual sacrifice for sin, a sacrifice for giving thanks, for the sins of the priest, and of the people, for infirmity & omission, for peace, for any benefit to be attained, for chastity, and such other which had strength not by their own nature, but by the virtue of Christ's passion which they signified.  
And as these were sacrifices proper to the old Testament, so Christ hath instituted a new external sacrifice proper to the new Testament, by his passion abrogating the other which were shadows signifying, and stablishing this which is the truth representing, for this intent, that the virtue and sufficiency of his bloody and saving sacrifice may be without iteration of itself continually transferred unto us. For saying there is but one God, author of both the Testaments, one body, one faith of Christ to us both, though they believed in Christ to come, we in Christ all ready commed: it followeth consequently, that we of the new Testament may not lack this mean of sacrifice so necessary and expedient for us: for so should we (as I have partly touched in my last sermon) be without all kind of religion, having now no sacrifice remaining proper unto ourselves.  
Like as to the unperfect law there succeeded a perfit law, and to the figurative sacraments there succeeded perfit and effectual working sacraments: even so to the figurative and typical sacrifices, there succeedeth one true and perfit sacrifice of Christ, one in substance, but diverse in manner.  
Law, sacrifice, priesthood, and aultare be (as the Logicians say) relativa, that is to say, one hanging and depending upon an other, as saint Paul sayeth. Translato facer dotio necesse est, 
Heb. 7  ut legis translatio fiat. If the priesthood be translate, than the law must needs be translate likewise.  
And then like as if there be a father, there is a son, if there be a master, there is a servant: so if there be a new law of the new Testament, there is also a priesthood, a sacrifice, and an aultare properly belonging to the new Testament.  
A perfit and continual law requireth a perfit sacrifice of like continuance: the new law of it should lack a priesthood and sacrifice private to itself, it should either be imperfect, or else utterly destroyed.  
For this cause our saviour Christ in his last supper, did institute the sacrament of his body and blood commending unto us two several uses of it, the one that it should be received of us, as our heavenly food to nourish us in spiritual life till we come to be perfit men in Christ, saying: take eat this is my body. 
1. cor. 11   
The other use, that it should be offered in the remembrance of his passion, the ministration of which offering he hath committed to his apostles, as to priests of the new law, saying, do this in my remembrance, for the which function they and their successors be specially priests.  
This is the doctrine of christes catholic church which I have as yet but simply declared, not evidently proved, which is sufficient to persuade an obedient catholic man that followeth the church, but not sufficient to convince an obstinate heretic, that denieth the Church, impugning the doctrine and determination of the Church.  
But to our purpose▪ that the oblation of Christ's body and blood in the Mass is the sacrifice of the Church, and proper to the new Testament I shall prove it you by the best arguments that we have in our school of divinity, that is to say, first by the institution of our Saviour Christ, then by the prophecy of Malachi the Prophet, thirdly by the figure of Melchisedech in the old law, and this shall I do not expounding the scriptures after mine own head, but as they have been taken from the beginning of the most ancient & Catholic fathers in all ages.  
This sacrifice was instituted by the commandment of CHRIST saying to his Apostles, 
1. cor. 11  do this in my remembrance.  
Our new men laugh at us where we say, that this commandment of Christ doth prove the oblation of the Sacrament. But we pity them, that set so light by that they are bounden to believe, & can not disprove, seeming evidently not to regard & way the fact of Christ, and their obedience to his commandment.  
When Christ said, Do this: by this word (this) must needs be understand all that he did, concerning the institution of this Sacrament. Let us now see what Christ did.  
First he did consecrate his precious body and blood by blessing the bread, saying, this is my body, this is my blood, for if this consecration be not comprehended under this word (Hoc, this) then have we no commandment nor authority to consecrate this sacrament, and so should we be usurpers to do that thing we have no warrant to show for us in holy scripture. But without doubt, this is so plain, that we need say no more of it, except we should utterly deny this sacrament, and the whole ministration of it, which (I think) no man doth.  
secondarily Christ did offer▪ that he did consecrate, which appeareth by these his words: This is my body, which is given for you. And although this oblation may be proved sufficiently otherwise, yet to my simple judgement there seemeth to be no little argument in this word (datur is given): for seeing the scripture sayeth, it is given for us, and not to us, as Zwinglius and our great archbishop his disciple would have it, we must needs understand by (given for us) offered for us, so that in this place and many other, to give, is to offer.  
And although it be true, that Christ was given & offered for us to the father upon the cross the next day following, yet because the word (datur) is in greek in all the Evangelists, where it is expressed in the present tense, and also every sentence is true for the time it is pronounced: therefore me think I may certainly conclude, because Christ sayeth, datur pro vobis, is given for you, that even then in the supper time he offered his body for us to his father.  
Thirdly Christ did deliver to his disciples to be eaten & drunken, that he had before consecrated and offered, and this appeareth by his words, Take, eat, 
Mat. 26.  and drink ye all of this. The first and third which be the consecration & receiving, be out of all controversy confessed of all men.  
The second which is the oblation, is of late brought in question, which I have partly proved by the plain words of scripture, as it seemeth to me, so that I may well reason thus: Christ's action is our instruction (I except his wonderful works and miracles) specially when his commandment is joined unto it. But Christ in his supper offered himself verily and really under the forms of bread and wine after an impassable manner, and commanded us to do the same, till his second coming: me think therefore, that in the Mass we do and aught to do sacrifice, and offer Christ unto his father, which oblation is the external sacrifice of the Church, & proper to the new Testament.  
And for further prove that Christ offered himself in his last supper, I shall allege unto you the authority of the Church, and the consent of the fathers in this point, which ought to suffice any Christian man.  
Ireneus writeth in his fourth book, 
Ireneus lib. 4.  that Christ taking the creature of bread and giving thanks said, This is my body, and likewise confessing the cup to be of his blood. Novi testamenti novam docuit oblationem, quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens in universo mundo offert Deo, de quo in duodecim Prophetis Malachias sic praesignificavit, Non est mihi voluntas in vobis. etc.  
He taught the new oblation of the new testament, which oblation the Church receiving of the apostles, doth offer to GOD throughout the whole world, whereof malachi one of the twelve Prophets did prophecy. I have no will & pleasure in you. etc.  
What can be more plain, then that Christ in his last supper in the ministration of the blessed sacrament did teach his Apostles the new oblation of the new Testament, and his Apostles taught the Church the same that they received, and the Church doth continually use to offer the same to GOD in every place?  
This authority the words being so manifest, and the author so ancient and substantial, can not be avoided with all their cavillations.  
S. Cyprian also the blessed Martyr writeth thus. 
Cyprian. li. 2. epi. 3  Si Christus summus sacerdos sacrificium Deo patri ipse primus obtulit, & hoc fieri in sui commemorationem praecepit, utique ille sacerdos uice Christi verè fungitur, qui id quod Christus fecit imitatur If Christ the high priest did first himself offer a sacrifice to God his father, and commanded the same to be done in his remembrance, verily that priest doth truly occupy the office of Christ, that by imitation doth the same thing that Christ did.  
This holy martyr teacheth us, that Christ did first offer himself to his father in his supper, and also commanded us to do the same. Why should any man doubt of that, that in the beginning of the church the holy martyrs did, and taught without all doubt.  
Hesichius also that flourished in the time of Gratiane the Emperor writeth thus. 
Hesichius lib. 2. ca, 8.  Prius figuratam ovem coenans cum Apostolis, postea suum obtulit sacrificium, & deinde sicut ovem semetipsum occidit. Christ in his supper did first eat the figurative lamb with his apostles, than he offered his own sacrifice, and after that he killed himself like a lamb.  
By this saying that christ killed himself, is meant, that christ vountarily did offer himself to the death, suffering the jews to kill him whom he might have withstanded: but to our purpose. It is plain, that beside the bloody oblation upon the cross, and also beside the figurative oblation of himself in the pascal lamb, he also did offer himself mystically in the celebration of the sacrament, which is the very point that we go about to prove, & is manifestly proved by this ancient author.  
Damascen sayeth: In nocte in qua seipsum obtulit, 
Damascus nus, lib. 4▪ cap. 14.  testamentum nowm disposuit. In that night when he offered himself, he did ordain and institute the new testament. Mark that he saith, he offered himself in the night: the oblation upon the cross was in the mid day, which is a distinct offering from that in the night. And Theophilactus saith: 
Theophilactus in Math. ca 28.  Tunc immolavit seipsum ex quo tradidit discipulis corpus suum. It is manifest that then he offered himself, when he delivered too his disciples his body: teaching us, that christ in his mystical supper offered himself too his father. To this saint augustine beareth witness, writing thus. 
August, de baptismo. li. 3▪ ca 19  unde ipse dominus etiam quos mundavit a lepra, ad eadem sacramenta misit, ut offerrent pro se Sacrificium Sacerdotibus, quia nondum eyes successerat sacrificium quod ipse post in Ecclesia voluit celebrari pro omnibus illis▪ For which cause our lord himself sent them whom he had made clean from their leper to the same sacraments (of the old Testament) that they should offer to the priests a sacrifice for themselves, because as yet that sacrifice did not succeed to them, which Christ would have celebrated in his church in stead of all them▪ Way these words well, & ye shall perceive, that they can not be understand of the sacrifice of christ upon the cross, which was but ones offered, and can not be continual celebrate and used of the church, nor yet of the sacrifice of thanksgiving, which succeedeth not the other, but was before and with the other: and therefore they prove plainly, that this one sacrifice of the new testament that succeedeth the multitude of the old sacrifices, is only the sacrifice of Christ's body and blood in the blessed Mass which he hath ordained to be daily frequented in his church to the worlds end.  
What should I allege moo authors? Will ye yet hear one of the eldest, I mean Dionysius Areopagita S. Paul's scholar, and bishop of Athens, he writeth thus: 
Dionysius Areop. Specul. cap. 3  Quocirca reverenter simul & ex pontificali officio post sacras divinorum operum laudes, quod hostiam salutarem (quae supra ipsum est) litet, se excusat, ad ipsum primo decenter exclamans, tu dixisti, hoc facite in meam commemorationem. Wherefore the bishop reverently and according to his pastoral office, after the praise and commendation of God's works and benefits, he doth excuse himself, that he doth take upon him to offer that sacrifice of our saviour, which is far above his degree and dignity, crying first unto him decently.  
Lord thou diddest command, saying: Do this in my remembrance. If there were no more but this one authority, it were sufficient to prove, that the priest doth offer the body of Christ, which is the sacrifice of our Saviour in the Mass, and that he offereth it by the express commandment of Christ, saying Do this in my remembrance, & that he offereth that thing, which is far exceeding his degree, which can be nothing else but the body of Christ.  
Therefore leaving for shortness of time all other authorities, which with little labour I could bring in for this purpose, me think I may well conclude, that the oblation of Christ's body & blood in the Mass is the very sacrifice of the Church, both by the institution of Christ, declared by his express commandment, which we are all bounden to obey, and also by his own example in offering himself under the forms of bread and wine, which we priests are bounden to follow, as the scripture which I have alleged, doth evidently prove▪ the true sense whereof is as is recited not private, proceeding from mine own brain, but catholic, confirmed by the consent of the church able to reprove and convince any one man, that hath nothing to say to the contrary, but his bare nay.  
Beside the institution which were sufficient for this matter, saying in the doctrine of faith, the proof dependeth upon the weight of one place, & not upon the numbered of many: yet I shall allege unto you the prophecy of Malachy, where it is prophesied before, that God would refuse and reject the sacrifices of the jews, & that he would call unto his grace and mercy the gentiles in whose Church there should be one pure and clean sacrifice, succeeding all the other, & offered in every place, which can be none other but this one pure sacrifice of Christ's body in the Mass. The place is this. 
Malachi as .1.  Non est mihi voluntas in vobis, & munus non suscipiam de manu vestra: ab ortuenim solis usque ad occasum magnum▪ est nomen meum in gentibus, & in omni loco sacrificabitur & offeretur nomini meo oblatio munda. I have no will and pleasure in you, and I will receive no offering or reward of your hand. For from the rising of the sun to the setting, my name is great amongs the gentiles, and in every place there shallbe sacrifice done, and a pure and cle●●● oblation shall be offered to my name.  
This place is very plain for the detesting of the jews▪ the rejecting of their sacrifices, for the vocation of the gentiles▪ and for the pure and one singular sacrifice, that amongs them shall be offered to almighty God in every place in stead of the other. This must needs be the sacrifice of the Mass, or else let them that say nay, show of what other the place is meant. And in very deed some have bestowed all their wit and learning, writing and racking this place to make it serve to some other sacrifice beside the Mass, but it will not be, the truth hath ever prevailed. Some have drawn it to the spiritual inward sacrifices of good men's hearts: but in the understanding they be overthrown, for the place speaketh precisely of one sacrifice, & the ot●er spiritual sacrifices be many, & so many as there be hearts of good men to offer them. And it speaketh also of one pure and clean sacrifice▪ but all the righteousness of man is unperfect, unpure, unclean and compared to a filthy cloth of a sick woman, and it speaketh of such one pure sacrifice as shall succeed and follow in the place of the other sacrifices of the jews, which god rejecteth and abrogateth. But the inward spiritual sacrifices of good men have been offered & used before the law, in the law, & after the law, from the time of Adam till the worlds end. Wherefore it is not possible, that this place should be directly & only understanded of the spiritual sacrifices.  
There be other also that wrest it, & would have it mean only of the bloody sacrifice of christ upon the cross. But that can not be, the words be so plain to the contrary. For although that be one and pure sacrifice, yet it was not offered in every place, as Malachi sayeth, it shall, and also it was offered only among the jews upon the mount of Calvary, where the Prophet sayeth, this sacrifice he speaketh of, shall be offered in every place among the gentiles.  
Therefore to conclude, this is a plain prophecy, declaring the will of God to have all the sacrifices of the jews to cease, and in the church of his new people the gentiles, to have this one pure sacrifice of Christ's body and blood in the Mass to be frequented in every place, wherewith he is well pleased and contented.  
And in this sense Irenaeus taketh it, 
Irenaeus lib. 4. ca▪ 32.  whose words in latin I alleged a little before that Christ confessing the cup to be of his blood, did teach the new oblation of the new testament, which the church receiving of the Apostles, offereth to God throughout the world, of the which malachi one of the twelve Prophets did speak before, I have no will nor pleasure in you, and so forth. As I have recited before, manifestly declaring that the old people should cease to offer to God, and that the new people shall offer unto him one pure sacrifice in every place.  

Chrysost. in Psal. 95  Chrysostom also sayeth, Et in omni loco sacrificium offeretur nomini meo, et sacrifium purum▪ Vide quàm lucul●̄ter quamque dilucidè mysticam interpretatus est mensam, quae est incruenta hostla. And in every place a sacrifice shall be offered to my name, & that a pure sacrifice. See how evidently & how plainly he doth interpret the mystical table, which is the unbloody sacrifice. I need not to open this place any more, being so plain as it is.  
saint augustine writing against the jews sayeth thus. 
August. contra judaeosca. 9  Aperite oculos tandem aliquando, & videte ab oriente sole usque ad occidentem non in uno loco ut vobis fuit constitutum, sed in omni loco offerri sacrificium Christianorum, non cuilibet Deo, sed ei qui ista prae dixit Deo Israel. Open your eyes at last you jews, & see from the rising of the sun to the setting, not in one place as it was ordained amongs you, but in every place to be offered the sacrifice of Christian men, not to every God, but to him that prophesied these before the GOD of Israel.  
The like sayings he hath writing upon the .106. Psalm, and in his book contra adversarium legis. lib. 1. ca 20. which I omit, lest I should be tedious to you, and to curious in so plain a matter.  
Ye have heard the thing proved by the Gospel, by the Prophet, now hear the proof of the figure taken out of the law. The Psalm sayeth. Tu es sacerdos in aeternum, 
psal, 109.  secundum ordinem Melchisedech. Thou art (meaning Christ) a priest after the order of Melchisedech.  
Melchisedech was a priest of the most highest God, as appeareth both by his words and facts, in that he blessed Abraham, and also received tithes of him, whose oblation was bread and wine, which he offered to God, meeting with Abraham coming from the spoil of the kings. 
Gen. 14.   
As for such fond cavillations, as some make for that the book sayeth, non obtulit ●ed protulit, I let pass, as things nothing furthering their purpose, nor yet hindering ours.  
This is plain by Saint Paul, 
Heb. ●  that every bishop and priest is ordained to offer sacrifice. If Christ our saviour be a priest, and that after the order of Melchisedech, as the Psalm, and S. Paul do witness, 
psal. 109  than it must needs follow, that Christ had some thing to offer, which is nothing but himself, and to no creature but to god, which he was himself, saying every sacrifice is that honour that is due only to God. And that he offered himself after the order of Melchisedech which must be under the forms of bread and wine. For that was the order and manner of Melchisedech. Which kind of offering he never made, except it were in his last supper, and for that cause and reason we may conclude, that Christ in his supper did offer himself to his father for us, not by shedding of his blood by death, which was the order & manner of Aaron's offering, but without shedding of his blood under the forms of bread and wine, which was the order of Melchisedech.  
And that this is not my private collection, but the mind of all the ancient fathers, I shall with your patience recite their sentences.  
saint Cyprian sayeth, 
Cyprian libro. 2. epist. 3,  Qui magis Sacerdos Dei summi, quam Dominus noster jesus Christus qui sacrificium Deo patri obtulit, & obtulit hoc idem quod Melchisedech, id est, panem & vinum, suum scilicet corpus & sanguinem. Who is more the Priest of the highest GOD then our Lord jesus Christ who offered a sacrifice to GOD the father, and offered the same that Melchisedech did, that is to say, bread and wine, that is to say, his body and blood.  
And a ly●le after he sayeth: qui est plenitudo veritatem prae figuratae imaginis adimplevit. Christ which is the fullness fulfilled the truth of this image that was figurate before.  
By these places of Cyprian we learn▪ that Melchisedech & his offering were figures of Christ, and his offering in his supper, and like as Melchisedech offered bread and wine, so Christ being the truth offered his body and blood under the forms of bread and wine, And lest any man should be offended with that Cyprian sayeth, hoc idem quod Melchisedech, the same that Melchisedech. Hear what S. Jerome sayeth more plainly. 
Hieron in psal. 109.  Quomodo Melchisedech obtulit panem & vinum, sic & tu offeres corpus tuum & sanguinem, verum panem & verum vinum  
Like as Melchisedech offered bread and wine: so thou shalt offer thy body & blood, the true bread & the true wine.  
The other was the figurative bread and wine, this is the true bread and wine, the truth of that figure, not the same in substance, but the same in mystery.  
The same S. Jerome among his epistles hath an epistle of the godly matron Paula ad Marcellam, wherein be these words. Recurre ad Genesim & Melchisedech regem Salem. 
Paula ep● ad Marcellam.  Huius principem invenies civitatis, qui iam tunc in typo Christi panem & vinum obtulit, et mysterium Christianum in salvatoris sanguine & corpore dedicavit. Return (sayeth Paula) to the book of Genesis & to Melchisedech the king of Salem, & thou shalt find the prince of that city, which even then in the figure of Christ offered bread and wine, and did dedicate the mystery or sacrament of the Christians in the blood and body of our saviour.  
Mark in this most manifest place the oblation of the figure▪ which is bread and wine, and the oblation of the truth, which is the mystery of us Christian men, the body and blood of our saviour Christ.  
And it is to be noted, what is meant by this word (ordre) which S. Jerome expoundeth thus.  
Mysterium nostrum in verbo ordinis significavit, 
Hieron▪ quest in Genesim  nequaquam per Aaron irrationabilibus victimis immolandis, sed oblato pane & vino i corpore et sanguine Domini Iesu.  
By this word (ordre) he did signify and express our mystery, not by offering of unreasonable and brute beasts as Aaron did, but by the oblation of bread and wine, that is to say, the body and blood of our Lord jesus.  
After this father's mind order is taken for the manner of offering, not by shedding of blood, but unbloudelye, as we offer Christ's body and blood in our mystery. For Christ's offering, concerning the substance of it was but one, but concerning the order and manner, it was diverse, upon the cross after the ordre Aaron, in the supper after the order of Melchisedech. For so S. augustine sayeth: 
August. in psal. 33  Coram regno patris sui, id est, judaeorum mutavit vultum suum, quia erat ibi sacrificium secundum ordinem Aaron, & postea ipse de corpore & sanguine suo institu it sacrificium secundum ordinem Melchisedech▪ Before the kingdom of his father, that is to say the jews, he changed his countenance, for there he was a sacrifice after the order of Aaron, and afterward he did institute a sacrifice of his body and blood, after the order of Melchisedech.  
Mark the diversity and distinction of these two offerings of Christ, not in substance but in order, that is to say, the manner, and that christ did institute the sacrifice of his body and blood to be offered of us after the order of Melchisedech, which thing he expresseth more plainly in an other book, expounding a place of Ecclesiastes.  
Non est bonum homini nisi quod manducabit & bibet, 
August. de civit. dei. li. 17. cap. 20.  saying thus. Quid credibilius dicere intelligitur, quàm quodad parti cipationem mensae huius pertinet, quam & sacerdos ipse media tor novi Testamenti exhibet secundum ordinem Melchisedech de corpore & sanguine suo? Id enim sacrificium successit omni bus illis sacrificijs veteris testamenti, quae immolabantur in umbra futuri. What is more credible we should think he meant by those words, then that pertaineth to the participation of this table, which Christ himself a priest and mediator of the new Testament doth exhibit after the order of Melchisedech of his body & blood? For that sacrifice did succeed all the other sacrifices of the old Testament, which were offered in the shadow of this to come.  
What can be plainer than this, to show the figure of our mystery to be abrogated, and the truth which is our sacrifice in the body and blood of Christ in form of bread and wine to succeed?  
But to end this matter, hear one place plainest of all, which O●cumenius hath upon this place of saint Paul. Tues sacerdos inaeternum. etc. 
O●cumenius in ca ad Hebraeos.  in these words. Significat sir more, quod non solum Christus obtulit incruentam hostiam (siquidem suum ipsius corpus obtulit) verum etiam qui ab ipso fungentur sacerdotio, quorum Deus pontifex esse diguntus est sine sanguinis effusione offerent. Nam hoc significat (inaeternum). Neque enim de ea quae semel à deo facta est oblatio, & hostia dixisset inaeternum, sed respiciens ad praesentes sacrificos, per quos medios Christus sacrificat & sacrificatur, qui etiam in mystica coena modum illis tradidit huiusmodi sacrificij. The word meaneth, that not only Christ offered an unbloody sacrifice, for he offered his own body, but also that they which under him use the function of a priest (whose Bishop he doth vouchsafe to be) shall offer without shedding of blood. For that signifieth the word (evermore). For concerning that oblation and sacrifice, which was once made of God, he would never say (evermore). But having an eye to those priests, that be now, by whose mediation Christ doth sacrifice and is sacrificed, who also in his mystical supper did by tradition teach them the manner of such a sacrifice.  
This authority if it were any thing doubtful, I would stand in it to open such points, as were contained therein, but being so manifest as it is, it needeth no more, but to desire the hearer or reader to weigh it, & he shall see this matter we go about to prove, fully resolved, both by the institution of christ in his last supper, and also by the figure of Melchisedech in the old law. This authorities although there be many moo, yet I think them sufficient, and I think thereby the matter sufficiently proved. Other Scriptures there be though not so plain, yet they contain an argument to prove the same as this of Saint Paul. Non potestis participes esse mensae do mini et mensae daemoniorum. 
1. cor. 10.  ye can not be partakers of our lords table and the table of devils. The word (table) here is taken for the meat of the table. For men be not partakers of the material board, but of the meat that is ministered upon the board. Now the table of devils is taken for that meat that is offered to Idols in which devils did reign, and therefore that meat was called in greek Idolothyton. meat offered to Idols. Now this is certain by all good learning that in every comparison there must needs be a proportion & similitude, wherein the things compared must agree▪ then whereas these two tables be compared in offering and eating, it must needs follow, that if the table of devils be a very sacrifice made to devils in deed, the table of our lord likewise must be a sacrifice, offered to our lord in deed. And if our lords table be a very sacrifice made to him by us, then have we our purpose proved and confessed.  
The like argument may be made of the word (aultare) in S. Paul. Habemus altare de quo edere non habent potesta tem, 
Heb. 13  qui tabernaculo deseruiunt. We have an aultare, of which they may not eat, that serve the tabernacle.  
If aultare and sacrifice be ●o annexed together, that the one can not be without the other, then when saint Paul sayeth, we have an aultare, speaking also of the eating of that aultare, he must needs mean the sacrifice made upon the aultare: so that our Sacrament before we eat it, is also a sacrifice.  
For so doth Theophilactus take this place. 
Theophilactus. ca▪ 13. ad Hebreos.  Et nos inquit obseruationem habemus, haud tamen in esculentis hisce, fed in ara sive in hostia illa incruenta et cor pori vitam elargiente. And we also have an observation, yet not in these common meats, but in our aultare or unbloody sacrifice, which giveth life to our bodies.  
Here we may see, that he meaneth by the aultare the unbloody sacrifice of Christ's body, which being eaten of us corporally in the Sacrament giveth life to our bodies.  
Moreover if time would serve me, I could make an argument of daniel's prophecy of the coming of Antichrist▪ 
Dan, 12.  because he saith, that in that time the continual sacrifice shall be by Antechriste taken away, per tempus, tempora, & dimidium temporis, by the space of three years and an half as many take it.  
Whether this shall be done all Christendom over at one time, or in every particular region at diverse times▪ it is not certainly known to us, and therefore I will not certainly determine it. But this is certain, that Antechriste can not take away the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross▪ which was but ones made, & shall never be iterate nor frustrate. Nor he can not take away the inward spiritual sacrifice of man's heart, which then shall flourish most of all i● the elect. For why should they then fly to the mountains▪ (as the book sayeth) but that for the vehemency of the persecution, they might more fervently do spiritual sacrifice to almighty God.  
Therefore it followeth, that the sacrifice of Christian men is such an one, as may be taken away by Antichrist, which in my judgement can be nothing else, but the sacrifice of the Mass, or else let them tell, what other sacrifice it is beside the Mass.  
Ye see now, what Scriptures I have brought to prove the oblation of Christ's body in the Mass to be the sacrifice of the Church and new Testament, which hath been assaulted many ways of many men. But to the oppugnation of it they never yet to this hour alleged any one direct scripture nor doctor, nor good reason. They have gone about it, and by tyranny in some places they have prevailed for a time, but always truth the daughter of time hath overcomed.  
Some scriptures they abuse, what they be, ye shall hear, They allege saint Paul to the Hebrews. 
He. 9.10  Semel oblatus est ad multorum exhaurienda peccata. Christ was once offered to take away the sins of many. unica oblatione consummavit inaeternum sanctificatos. With one oblation he hath perfected for evermore all that be sanctified. These be the Scriptures they allege against the Mass, & they say, Christ's oblation is perfit, no man can offer Christ but himself, which he did but ones, and never but ones, as though we should say, that Christ was crucified twice or often times.  
To this objection of theirs we answer, that Christ was never offered to the death for our redemption but ones, and yet otherwise was he offered many times, both of himself and of his creatures.  
We read in the Prophet Daniel, 
Dan. 7.  that Angels offered him in the sight of his father. And also that the blessed virgin his mother offered him at her purification, 
Luc. 3.  of which offering S. Bernard saith, Ista oblatio fratres satis delicata videtur, 
Bernard. Ser. 3. de purificatione.  ubi tantum sistitur domino, redimitur avibus & ilico reportatur. This oblation brethren is very delicate, where he is only presented to our Lord, redeemed with birds, and by and by brought home again.  
And therefore we answer them, that their argument is of no strength, to confute one truth by an other, when both may be true, as to reason, christ was but ones offered upon the cross, ergo he was not offered in the sacrament. And we tell them, that they do not considre, how Christ is offered three ways of himself, and also three ways of man.  
First he offered himself upon the cross really and corporally, as Isaias sayeth, 
Isai. ●●.  oblatus est quia voluit. This is manifest enough. And here their exclamations of one's ones hath very good place.  
Secondly he offered himself figuratyvelye in the paschal lamb. For the scripture saith, the lamb was slain from the beginning of the world, 
Apo. 1●.  and the fathers in the old law in all their sacrifices did offer Christ not in substance, but in figure, and so Christ offering the paschal lamb at his supper, offered himself in figure.  
Thirdly Christ offereth himself in heaven really and so continually, as the same chapter which they bring against the Mass doth testify, Non in manufacta sancta jesus intro ivit, 
Heb. 9  exemplaria verorum, sed in ipsum coelum ut appareat nunc vultui Dei pro nobis. jesus entered not into a temple made with man's hand a figure of the truth, but into heaven, that he might appear now to the countenance of God for us.  
What is this appearing in the sight of GOD for us, but an offering of himself for us to pacify the anger of god with us, to represent his wounds and all that he suffered for us, that we might be reconciled to God by him?  
This is the true and perpetual oblation of Christ in comparison of this in heaven, the bloody oblation upon the cross is but an image, as S. Ambrose sayeth: Hic umbra, 
Ambros. offi. lib. 1. ca 48.  hic imago, illic veritas, umbra in lege: imago in evangelio, veritas in coelestibus: antè agnus offerebatur, vitulus, nunc Christus of fertur: sed offertur quasi homo, quasi recipiens passionem, & offered se ipse quasi Sacerdos ut peccata nostra dimittat, hic in imagine, ibi in veritate, ubi apud patrem pro nobis quasi advocatus interuenit.  
Here (in this world) there is a shadow, here there is an image, there (in heaven) is truth, the shadow in the law the image in the gospel, the truth in heaven. Before a lamb and calf were offered, now Christ is offered, but he is offered as man, and receiving passion, and he offereth himself as being a priest to take our sins away, here in image, there in truth, where with the father as an advocate he maketh intercession for us,  
The same thing he writeth also upon the .38. Psalm So that it is very plain without all controversy, that Christ doth offer himself now moste perfectly in heaven for us, being our advocate to the father face to face, and as S. john sayeth. 
1. Io. 2.  Ipse est propitiatio pro peccatis nostris, He is a sacrifice propitiatory for our sins, he saith not he was, but is, and after the most perfytest manner that can be, in respect whereof the very true and real oblation for our redemption upon the cross, is an image.  
So that by this we see by the plain scripture, that Christ offered himself three ways, beside the oblation of himself in his supper, which is the point we be about to declare.  
And even so is he offered of man three ways likewise. first fygurativelye, in the oblation of the old Testament.  
When Abraham being about to offer his own dear son, and by GOD'S provision offered in his stead a ram, and when Melchisedech offered bread and wine, and the jews the paschal lamb and their burnt offerings: what did they offer but Christ in figure, whose passion those offerings did signify? Which offerings did of themself work nothing inwardly, and therefore were called justitia carnis the righteousness of the flesh▪ but by them they did protest their sin, and declared their faith, of whom they looked to have remission.  
Secondly we offer Christ mystically in our daily sacrifice of the Mass, where Christ is by his omnipotent power presented to us in the Sacrament, and of us again represented to his and our father, and his passion renewed, not by suffering of death again, but after an unbloody manner, not for this end, that we should thereby deserve remission of our sins, but that by our faith, devotion, and this representation of his passion we most humbly pray almighty GOD to apply unto us by Christ that remission, which was purchased and deserved by his passion before.  
The host of these two sacrifices upon the cross and upon the aultare, is all one in substance, but the manner is divers, and the end is diverse, that by this means (as christ himself hath instituted) we might celebrate and make commemoration of his passion. This is only the sacrifice of the priest by public ministration, but verily and in affection it is the sacrifice of the whole church, which every member of the Church doth use and frequent, and no man doth impugn it, but he that professeth open war against the church.  
thirdly christ is offered by man spiritually only by the meditation of our mind, when we think and remember his passion, and in our devout prayer beseech god to show us mercy for it.  
Thus every Christian man and woman, in all places and times upon the aultare of his own heart ought to offer Christ too the father, after which sort of spiritual oblation we be all both men and women, Priests and kings, being as saint Peter sayeth, 
1. Pet. ●  Sacerdotium sanctum, offerentes spirituales hostias acceptabiles Deo per jesum Christum. An holy Priesthood offering spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by jesus Christ.  
Now considering these three ways, shall it be a good argument, to inculcate one way, and to reject the rest? To allege one member of a division, to the rejection of the other? This is the peculiar manner of the heretics the enemies of Christ, as they did in the matter of the Sacrament, by the spiritual eating of Christ, to confute & reject the real and corporal eating of christes body in the Sacrament.  
Such shifts and fond arguments they have to seduce the unlearned withal, which when they be espied and detected they appear as they be devilish and pernicious sophistry.  
Furthermore if any man as yet doth stand in doubt whether men lawfully offer Christ to the father or no: let him call to remembrance what I have said before out of Dionysius Areopagita, where the bishop (as he saith) doth excuse himself that he offereth the host of our salvation, 
Dionysius Areopa. Speculat. ca 3  alleging that Christ did so command to be done, saying do this in my remembrance.  
Let him also remember the saying of the counsel at Nice. 
Concilium Niceness▪  That the lamb of god that taketh away the sins of the world, is offered of the priests not after a bloody manner.  
saint Augustine saith: Per hoc sacrificium (in forma servi) et sacerilos est, 
August. de civit. libro. 10. cap. 20.  ipse offerens, ipse et oblatio, cuius rei sacramentum quotidianum esse voluit ecclesiae sacrificium, cum ipsius coporis ipse sit caput, et ipsius capitis ipsa sit corpus, tam ipsa per ipsum quam ipse per ipsam suetus offerri. By this sacrifice (in the form of a servant) Christ is a priest, being himself both the offerer and the oblation, of which oblation he would the daily sacrifice of the church should be a sacrament, and saying he is the head of that body, and the church is the body of that head, aswell the church by Christ, as Christ by the church is accustomed to be offered.  
A notable place resolving divers doubts, declaring that the daily sacrifice of the church which is the mass, is a sacrament of Christ's passion representing the same, and further that Christ offering himself upon the cross did also in himself offer his mystical body the church, and thirdly that the church Christ's body not only once or twice, but is accustomed to offer Christ her head to god in her daily sacrifice.  
Hear yet a place of S. Augustine as plain as this. 
August. contra. Faustum lib. 20. Capi. 18.  Hebr●i in victimis pecorum prophetiam celebrabant futurae victimae quam Christus obtuli● unde iam Christiani peracti eiusdem sacrificij, memoriam celebrant, sacro sancta oblatione & perticipatione corporis & sanguinis Christi. The jews in their sacrifices of beasts, did celebrate the prophecy of the sacrifice to come which Christ offered. The christian men now do celebrate the memory of the same sacrifice of Christ that is past, by the most holy oblation and participation of Christ's body and blood.  
Mark how that he sayeth christian men celebrate the memory of Christ's passion, wherewithal? even by the offering of the same body that suffered passion. I need say no more for this point, that men do and did use from the beninninge, to offer Christ to the father.  
They say the sacrifice of the mass diminisheth and taketh away the glory of Christ, they say so, but prove it not.  
But in very deed, nothing doth more set forth the glory of Christ, & his true honour: the honour of god is considered two ways, inwardly by faith, outwardly by external adoration▪ Latria which in English signifieth the honour that is due only to God, and to no creature, is the work of faith, and sacrifice is a kind (Latriae) of godly honour as Saint Augustine sayeth: Ad hunc cultum latriae pertinet oblatio sacrificij. 
August. contra. Faustum. libro. 20. Capil. 21.  etc. To this godly honour called Latria, the oblation of sacrifice doth pertain, and for that cause it is called idolatry if any sacrifice be done to Idols, & therefore we do sacrifice neither to martyr nor yet to an angel, but only to god.  
Faith ought to be unfeigned and lively and then it is true honour. For he that erreth in faith, or feigneth to have faith, doth not exhibit honour and reverence due to God.  
Again he that hath true faith, but yet dead for lack of charity, he giveth reverence to god, but not perfit, and therefore not pleasant to god, because he honoureth god with his understanding but not with his affection.  
He that hath true and lively faith, honoureth & worshippeth god in spirit and truth.  
The external and outward honour proceedeth from the inward honour, and is the protestation practise and use of it, the work of faith outwardly declared, And whereas sacrifice is the special and chiefest adoration that can be, therefore this sacrifice of Christ's own body & blood in the mass being institute of Christ by his own express commandment (as I have showed already) doth not only not diminish the glory of God, but is the very highest honour of God that man can give.  
They say it is a derogation to the passion of Christ, but it is not so good people, for the sacrifice of the mass▪ doth ascribe altogether to Christ, for it is the passion of Christ.  
understand well what I say & judge not till ye hear what I mean.  
saint Cyprian sayeth: Passio domini sacrificium est quod offerimus. 
Cyprian. lib. 2. Epist. 3.  That sacrifice which we offer is the passion of Christ. A strange saying, but yet S. Augustine declareth more plainly what is meant by it, in these words. Vocatur ipsa immolatio carnis quae sacerdotis manibus fit, 
August. libro sententiarum prosperi.  Christi passio mors crucifixio, nonrei veritate, sed significant mysterio. The oblation of Christ's flesh which is made in the hands of the priest, is called Christ's passion, death and crucifienge, not by the truth of the thing, but by the mystery signifying. As though he should say, it is called Christ's passion, not for that Christ in very deed suffereth passion again, but for that in mystery, it reneweth representeth, and signifieth his passion again.  
For while that we have no worthy thing of our selves nor in ourselves to render to god for all his benefits, & as the Psalm sayeth: Quid retribuam domino pro omnibus quae retribuit mihi. 
Ps. 115.  What shall I give to God again, for all that he have given to me? we maid o even as the psalm doth answer. Calicem salutaris accipiam & nomen domini invocabo. I shall take the cup of our saviour and call upon the name of our Lord. I shall take his passion representing to God the father the work of our redemption, that we thereby being partakers of his bloody sacrifice once made upon the cross, & now by this our commemoration renewed again may be replenished with the fruit of his passion & death.  
For S. Augustine sayeth: Ex ipsis reliquijs cogitationis, 
August. in. psal. 75.  id est, ex ipsa memoria quotidie sic nobis immolatur, quasi quotidie nos movet, qui prima sua gratia nos innovauit. Of the leavings of our cogitation, that is to say, of this very memory and commemoration, Christ is so daily offered of us, as he doth make us new men daily, which by his first grace (in baptism) did once make us new.  
See how we offer Christ daily in commemoration and what benefit of innovation we receive thereby.  
Chrisostome also sayeth: Non aquam de hoc nobis font largitur, 
Chrisost. in Mat. Hom. 7.  sed sanguinum uiuum qui quamque ad mortis dominicae testimonium sumitur nobis tamen causa fit vitae. Christ out of this fountain (of the chalice) giveth unto us not water, but lively blood, which although it be received for the testimony of Christ's death, yet to us it is made a cause of life.  
Is not this to have fruit of Christ's passion applied unto us, when we receive life by receiving of that which is offered in commemoration of Christ's death▪  
S. Gregory sayeth, Quoties ei hostiam suae passìonis offerimus, 
Grego. Hom. 37  toties nobis ad absolutionem nostram passionem illius reparamus. As often as we offer to him the host or sacrifice of his passion, so often we renew and repair his passion to us for our absolution and perfection. And in another place he sayeth. Haec victima singulariter ab aeterno interitu animam saluat, 
Grego. dialogo. lib. 4. capi. 58.  quae illam nobis mortem unigeniti per mysterium reparat. This sacrifice doth singularelye save the soul from eternal destruction, which by mystery reneweth to us the death of gods only begotten son. By these authorities ye see, that the sacrifice of the mass doth nothing derogate from the passion of Christ, but most of all doth exalt it, repairing and renewing it for us in the sight of the father, that we thereby may be renewed in grace, and receive life, perfection, and salvation.  
Furthermore they say we make our own works (meaning the mass) a saviour beside Christ, which is nothing so, but by this sacrifice of the mass, we declare, that we believe there is no saviour but only Christ,  
For what do we in the mass? We confess our sins our unworthiness, our unkindness, our manifold transgressions of his eternal law, we grant that we be not able to satisfy for the least offence we have done, therefore we run to his passion, which (after this sort as he hath ordained) we renew and represent. We beseech our most merciful father, to look upon Christ's merits, and to pardon our offences, to look up on Christ's passion, and to relieve our affliction.  
We knowledge that what so ever we have done is unparsite and unpure, and as it is our work, doth more offend his majesty then please him therefore we offer unto him his well-beloved son jesus, in whom we know 〈◊〉 is well pleased, most humbly praying him to accept him, for us in whom only we trust▪ accounting him all our righteousness, by whom only we conceive hope of salvation. And therefore in the end of the canon of the mass we say thus.  
Non aestimator meriti sed veniae quaesumus largitor admit, per Christum dominum nostrum. O Lord we beseech thee to admit us into the company of thy saints not weighing our merits but granting us pardon by Christ our Lord.  
Also whatsoever thing we lack▪ all plagues all misfortunes, all adversity both ghostly and temporal, we require to be released of them not through our worthiness▪ but for the merits of Christ's passion.  
Consider all this good people and see whether in this doing we make our works a new saviour beside Christ or no? We believe also that our prayer is of more efficacy and strength in the presence of Christ in the time of the sacrifice, then at any other tyme. For so sayeth S. Cyprian. In huius corporis presentia non superuacue mendicant lachrimae veniam, 
Cyprian. de cena.  nec unquam patitur contriti cordis holocaustum repulsam▪ In the presence of this body, the tears of a man doth not beg forgiveness in vain, nor the sacrifice of a contrite heart doth never suffer repulse. And as Chrisostome sayeth, 
Chrisost. in act. hom. 3.  In illa horadum mors illa perficitur, et horrendum sacrificium, quasi sedente rege, quaecumque volueris perficies. In that hour whiles that Christ's death is celebrate and his fearful sacrifice, even as the king were sitting upon his mercy seat what soever thou wilt thou shalt bring to pass. Stante siquidem uniurso populo, manus in celum extendente, caetu item sacerdotali, 
Chrisost. ad philip Hom. 3.  verendoque posito sacrificio, quomodo deum non placaremus pro istis orantes? For when all the people standeth holding up their hands to heaven, and the company of the priests like wise, and the fearful and honourable sacrifice is upon the altar, how shall not we mitigate god praying for them? And therefore specially then in the mass time, we pray for the whole church, for all princes and high powers, for all bishops and pastors, for ourselves, our friends, and all that be present, for peace, for plenty, for all that we have need upon, as Chrisostome writeth: In manibus est hostia, adsunt angeli, 
Chrisost. in acta, Hom. 21,  adsunt archangeli, adest filius dei, cum tanto horrore astent omnes, astent illi clamantes omnibus silentibus, putas temere hec fieri? ergo et alia temere & quae pro ecclesia pro sacerdotibus offeruntur, & quae pro plenitu dine acubertate absit. The host of our sacrifice is in the priests hands, the angels be present, the archangel's be present, the son of God is present. When all men stand with such trembling, when the angels stand crying the other holding their peace, dost thou think these things are done in vain? Then the other also be done in vain both that be offered for the church, for the priests, and also for plenty and abundance: god forbid.  
One notable place of Chrisostome I think yet expedient to rehearse unto you concerning this matter. Vt homines ramos olearum ge rents movere reges consueve runt, 
Chrisost. de incom. deinatu.  eoque arboris genere miseri cordiam commemorant & humanitatem: sic angeli tunc pro ramis oleaginis corpus domini ipsum protendentes, rogant pro genere humano, quasi dicant, pro his domine rogamus quos tu adeo dilexisti, ut pro eorum salute mortem obires, animam cruce efflares, pro his supplicamus pro quibus ipse tuum largitus es sanguinem, pro his oramus pro quibus corpus hoc immolasti. Like as men bearing branches of olive trees are wont to move kings to compassion, and with that kind oftre do put them in remembrance of mercy and pity: even so the angels then (in the sacrifice time) in stead of Olive branches, holding forth the body of Christ pray for mankind, as saying thus: Lord we pray for them whom thou hast so loved, that for their salvation thou hast suffered death and spent thy life upon the cross we make supplication for them for whom thou haste given thy blood, for them we pray, for whom thou hast offered this same very body.  
Now considering this fellowship with angels, this humility of man, this pacifiing of God, this efficacy of prayer for the sacrifice sake, this knowledging of our unworthiness, this our only trust in the passion of Christ: can any man justly burden us that we make our works a new saviour beside Christ?  
Furthermore, beside praying for those things we lack, we also by this sacrifice give thanks for our redemption, for the hope of our health and salvation, & for all gods gifts, not only in our words, but also in dead? the very oblation itself is a real giving of thanks to god, as Chrisostome sayeth. Quod erat apud eum omnibus preciosius, 
Chrisost. in Mat. HoM, 26  unigenitum pro nobis filium dedit, & cum essemus inimici, nec dedit solum, sed et nostram mensam fecit illum, omnia faciens ipse pro nobis, & donando videlicet & gratiarum actores ipsa donorum suorum ubertate faciendo. etc. That thing that was with him most precious of all, his only son he hath given for us, even when we were his enemies, and not only hath given him for us, but also hath made him our table, doing himself all things for us, both rewarding us, and also with the plenty of his gifts making us givers of thanks, and because man in many things is unthankful to God, he in all things taketh upon him our person, & supplieth that we ought to do, and even by the very nature of the sacrifice which is his body, stirreth us to continual giving of thanks for all his benefits, so that our sacrifice, being Christ's body is both a singular gift of God, and also is a real giving of thanks for all his other gifts.  
By this it evidently appeareth that nothing doth more exercise our faith in the knowledge of ourselves & god, nothing doth more increase our charity & hope in the mercy of God, than the mass. Where (as job was wont to do for his children) the church of god our mother, being careful for all her children lest any of them by negligence, infirmity or wilfulness, have offended, daily prayeth and maketh sacrifice for them, & by that most acceptable sacrifice of her husbands body & blood doth mitigate almighty god, doth multiply & distributeth unite  
Nothing more setteth forth the benefit of Christ, because in this sacrifice of the mass, we protest to have all things by Christ, redemption, remission, sanctification and salvation, and do ask and beg of God all goodness by Christ, knowledging that we have nothing to set against the wrath of God but the passion of Christ, which after this manner, by this solemn representation as Christ hath instituted, we daily renew, that it might be continually celebrate by mystery that once was offered for our ransom, that because the effect of man's redemption ceaseth not, but is to every one in his time applied by continual succession, so also that the sacrifice of this redemption should never cease, but be always to all men present in grace, and always live in perpetual memory.  
The other objections I will but shortly touch, for they be of no strength nor authority, one is this. There is no mention nor no one word of any oblation in the supper, ergo Christ made no oblation there, a goodly reason, So there is no mention made neither of Christ's own mouth nor of any the evangelists concerning the oblation of the paschal lamb, yet we know most certainly by the old testament that the paschal lamb was never eaten but it was offered before, which we are sure Christ did observe literallye, till the truth of that figure were established. And also what is more sure than that Christ offered himself upon the cross, and yet neither Christ's own words, nor any of the four evangelists writing the story of the passion, make any mention in plain and express terms of oblation or offering. Though we know it by other scripture sufficiently. But their collection is all false, they should have concluded thus, ergo if there any oblation, it is real & not vocalle, & so it is in deed, & therefore Christ said: Hoc facite. do this, 
L●c. 22.  as ye see me do. But in the form of our mass, there be express words of offering, for the rude & ignorant, & for the evidence of the truth. unde & memores nos domine etc. wherefore we thy servants & people being mindful of thy son Christ our lord, of his blessed passion resurrection & glorious ascension, do offer to thy most excellent majesty of thy rewards & gifts, this pure sacrifice, this holy & undefiled sacrifice, the holy bread of everlasting life, & the cup of perpetual salvation.  
There be also other words of oblation following these words S. basil hath them, Chrisostome, S. Ambrose, the general counsel holden at Ephesus, the latest of these was. M.CCC. years ago, that it might appear that it is not newly brought in, as they would slander it, but the most ancient thing in all the mass. They reason also thus. It is a commemoration, ergo no sacrifice, as who say the paschaliambe being the figure of this, was not both a commemoration & a sacrifice, for the lamb was instituted to be offered for a memory of the deliverance of the jews from the sword of the angel that smote the first be gotten of the Egyptians, & therefore the Jews kept this word of offering the lamb, for a statute for them & their children for evermore. Even so this lamb of God that lieth upon the table of our altar is a sacrifice offered of us in commemoration of our deliverance from the devil by the death of Christ. In the old testament the first lamb offered before their delivery, and the lamb which was offered every year after in memory of the same delivery, were very real lambs in deed of one nature and condition: even so the lamb of god being Christ, which Christ himself offered in his supper, there instituting before his death, what we should continually do after his death, and the lamb of God, which we offer now in memory of our deliverance, be very real lambs of god in deed, & yet not divers in numbered as the other were, but all one in numbered, nature, condition and dignity.  
As Chrisostome saith: we offer daily in commemoration of his death, 
Chrisost, hom. 17. ●d Hebre.  & the sacrifice is one, not many. Nor we do not offer one lamb now, to morrow another, but always the very same, or else because it is offered in many places, is there many Christ's? No forsooth, but one Christ every where. here full Christ, and there full Christ, one body. And so forth  
The like argument they make against the real presence It is a sign, ergo not the thing whereof it is a sign. The foolishness of this reason every baker can tell, who setteth one loof upon his stall to signify there is bread to sell within his house. Which loaf is both a sign of bread to be sold, and also is very bread to be sold itself of the same baking the other is. Even so the body of Christ in the Sacrament is Christ's very body in deed, and also a sign of the same body, as saint augustine sayeth. Carne & sanguine utroque invisibili, 
August. lib. Sent, Prosperi.  spiritu all, intelligibili, signatur visibile Domini nostri jesu Christi corpus & palpabile, plenum gratia omnium virtutum & divina maiestate. By the flesh and blood of our Lord jesus Christ, both being (in the sacrament) invisible, spiritual, & intelligible, is signified the visible body of Christ, and palpable, full of the grace of all virtues, and of the godly majesty. And even so likewise very Christ is offered in the mystery in sign and commemoration of himself offered upon the cross, as S. augustine saith Christiani iam peracti sacrificij memoriam celebrant sacrosancta oblatione & perticipatione corporis & sanguinis Christi. 
Augusty. contra Faustum. li. 20. cap, 18.  Christian men now do celebrate a memory of Christ's sacrifice already passed by the most holy oblation and partitipation of Christ's body and blood. The like saying hath S. Gregory & diverse authors which I omit to rehearse, 
Gregorius hom. 22.  because the time is paste.  
They say, that neither the Apostles nor none in their time did offer Christ's body in sacrifice. And yet I have showed you before, that Dionysius Areopagita S. Paul's disciple (of whom mention is made in the .17. chapter of the Acts of the Apostles) did offer the sacrifice of Christ's body alleging Christ's commandment for his warrant.  
Ireneus that lived within fifty year of saint john the Evangelist, and Polycarpus scholar doth make mention of this offering saying. Ecclesiae oblatio quam Dominus docuit offerri in universo mundo, 
Ireneus li. 4. cap. 34.  purum sacrifi●ium reputatum est apud Deum, & acceptum est e●. The oblation of the Church which our Lord taught to be offered in the whole world, is reputed of God a pure sacrifice and acceptable to him.  
And in the same chapter confuting them that denied the immortality of the flesh, by this reason that our flesh was nourished with Christ's flesh to eternal life, concludeth thus, Aut sententiam mutent, aut abstine ant offerendo quae praedicta sunt, Either let them change their opinion, or else abstain from offering the same body and blood of Christ we spoke of.  
Also the general council of Constantinople saith, 
Concilium Constantinopolitanun in trul lo. ca 32.  that saint james did write the form of a Mass. I omit the Latin, the words in english be thus faithfully translate. Saint james brother to Christ our God according to the flesh, to whom the church of Jerusalem was first committed, & Basilius which was bishop of Caesarea, whose fame is known throughout the world▪ which delivered in writing the mystical celebration of the sacrifices, have declared that the cup in our holy ministry ought to be of water and wine mingled.  
And the holy fathers that were assembled at Carthage, have thus left in writing, that in the sacrifices nothing else be offered, but the body & blood of our Lord, as our Lord himself hath ordained & so forth. I never red S. james his book myself, nor I think, it be not now to be had, but I tell you so much, as I know, that S. james did write the form of a Mass, as S. basil did (which we have in greek now). If this great and learned general council doth truly report, as I believe doth. Let no man therefore believe them that say, the Apostles did not sacrifice themselves, nor none in their time, except they can prove the negative, which they shall never do.  
There be other some, that will grant the sacrifice, but deny that it is propitiatory for the sins of the quick and the dead. And therefore they disallow the last sentence of the Mass. Where the priest sayeth, grant good lord, that this sacrifice which I have offered to thy divine majesty, be propitiable or a mean to obtain mercy, to me, & to all, for whom I have offered it. And surely these be most foolish of all, for if it be a sacrifice, it must needs be a propitiatory sacrifice taking (propitiatory) as it ought to be taken, not confoundyng the meaning of it by sophistry, but understanding the diverse acception of the word: but these men dally, & seduce the people with amphibologies and doubtful sayings. Distinctions they admit none nor can not abide to have the matter opened, and with a confuse general saying slander the church.  
This is their private sophistry, and yet they call other men sophisters, that detect & open their collusions, that divyde the sentence, that men might see, how it is true, and how it is false. For example. They cry out of this, that we say, the Mass is a sacrifice propitiatory. By the word (Mass) may be understanded two things, the thing itself that is offered, and the act of the priest in offering of it. If ye take it for the thing offered, which is the body of Christ, who can justly deny, but that the body of Christ is a sacrifice propitiatory, seeing saint john sayeth, he is the propitiation for our sins, ever was and ever shall be, and never cease so to be, till our sins be ended, and death the last enemy be overcomed in us his mystical body? and as Oecumenius sayeth: Caro Christi est propitiatorium nostrar●̄ iniquitatum. 
Oecume●nius in cap. 3. ad Romanos  The flesh of christ is the propitiation for our iniquities.  
But if by the word (Mass) be understanded the act of the priest, and the use of the sacrament (as they would have it) than it is not propitiatory in that degree of propitiation, as Christ's body is, but after an other sort. And therefore I must divide the word (propitiatory) which is taken two ways also. First for that that worthily deserveth mercy at God's hand, and so the act of the priest in offering, is not propitiatory, of itself deserving mercy, as Christ doth.  
next for that provoketh God to give mercy and remission, already deserved by Christ. And so the oblation of the priest is propitiatory, moving and provoking God to apply his mercy unto us. So Prayer is a sacrifice for sins, as saint james sayeth, Oratio fidei saluabit infirmum, 
jac. 5.  & fi in peccatis sit, remittentur ei. The Prayer of faith shall save the sick, and if he be in sin, they shallbe remitted unto him. And christ taught us to pray thus, forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trepase against us. 
Mat. 6.7  And also promised to give us, that we ask in CHRIST'S name,  
Than ye see, that prayer being a sacrifice, is a provocation of GOD, and a mean to attain remission of our sins, and therefore may be well called propitiatory.  
So is a contrite heart a sacrifice propitiatory and almose, 
Psal, 50,  as appeared by the story of the Ninivites & of Daniel. For all good works that we do, both fasting, prayer, almose, forgiving of my neyg●bour● is done for this end, to mitigate God's anger against our sins. and to provoke him to have mercy of us for Christ's merits.  
Even so the Moss (taking it for the act of thee, priest) is a sacrifice propitiatori for sin. Which I shall prove unto you by the holy fathers. Origen writeth thus. 
Origen. in levit. 〈◊〉. 13.  Si referantur haec ad mysterij magnitudinem, inveni es commemorationem istam habere ingentem repropitiationis effectum. Si redeas ad illum panem propitiationis, quem propo suit Deus propitiationem per fi dem in sanguine eius: & si respi c●as ad illam commemorationem de qua dicit Dominus hoc facit● in meam commemorationem, invenies quod ista est commemoratio sola quae propitium faci at Deum. If these be referred to the greatness of our mystery, thou shalt find that this commemoration hath a great effect of propitiation. If ye return to that bread of propitiation, which God hath set for a propitiation by faith in his blood: and if ye look to that commemoration, of which our Lord said, Do this in commemoration of me: thou shalt find, that this is the only commemoration that maketh God merciful.  
Doth not saint Cyprian call the sacrament holocaustum 
Cyprian▪ Ser de coena.  ad purgandas iniquitates, A sacrifice to purge iniquity? in what respect is it called so, but for that it is offered, to that end? And so is it called a medicine to heal infirmities, for this respect that it is received to this end.  
Saint augustine sayeth likewise. 
Augusty. Ser. 11. de sanctis.  Nemo melius praeter martyres meruit ibi requiescere, ubi & hostia Christus est & sacerdos scilicet, ut propitiationem de oblatioue hostiae consequantur. No man hath deserved better than the martyrs too rest (& be buried) there where Christ is both the host and the priest, (that is to say under the aultare), for this end that they might attain propitiation by the oblation of the host. Mark the purpose I bring in this for, which is to attain propitiation by the oblation of the sacrifice: and as he saith in an other book. 
August. Manuale. cap. 11  Sacrificium illud mirabile & coeleste quod tu instituisti & offerri praecepistiin commemorationem tuae charitatis mortis scilicet & passionis, pro salute nostra, pro quotidiana fragilitatis nostrae reparatione. That marvelous and heavenly sacrifice, which thou haste instituted and commanded to be offered in remembrance of thy charity, that is to say of thy death and passion, for our health and salvation, for the daily reparation of our frail weakness. Doth he not here show the end of the oblation, to save us, and to repair our frailty. Saint Jerome writeth Si laicis imperatur, ut propter orationem abstineant ab uxori bus, 
Hieron. in cap▪ ●. ad▪ Titum  quid de Episcopo sentiendum est, qui quotidie pro suis populique peccatis illibatas deo oblaturus est victimas. If it be commanded to the lay men, that for prayers cause they should abstain from their wives, what should we think of a bishop that must offer daily pure sacrifices for his own sins▪ & the people's.  
Of this place though I might prove you the chaste life of a bishop: yet I bring it in now only to show, that the office of a bishop is to offer daily pure sacrifices for his own sins and the people's sins, as saint Basyll saith in the book of his Mass. Da Domine ut pro nostris peccatis & populi ignorantijs acceptum sit sacrificium nostrum. 
Basilius in Miss●▪  Grant o Lord that for our sin, and the ignorance of the people our sacrifice may be accepted of thee.  
Thus ye perceive, that I have showed you, and proved that the oblation of the priest in the Mass is a sacrifice propitiatory for the sins of them that be alive, that is to say, moving and provoking god to pardonne the sins of the priest and of the people. A little is to be said, concerning them that be departed and then an end of that matter.  
Tertullian sayeth, Oblationes pro defunctis pro natalitijs annua die facimus▪ 
Tertull. coron. mi lit.  We make every year oblations for the dead, and for the birth days of martyrs, which be the days they suffered their martyrdom.  
Athanasius sayeth. Intelligimus animas peccatorum participare aliqua beneficentia ab exangui immolatione. 
Athanasius ad Antiochum. quest. 34.  We understand, that the souls of sinners, do receive some benefit of the unbloody oblation, and of almose, done for them, as he only hath ordained and commanded, that hath power both of quick and dead. Our god.  
And Saint Ambrose exhorteth the people to pray for the soul of Ualentiniane the emperor, 
Ambros. de obitis Valenti.  for whom he did offer the sacrifice of Christ's body. Chrisostom saith▪  
Non frustra sancitum est ab apostolis, 
Chrysost. hom. 3. ad Philip penses.  ut in celebratione venerandorum mysteriorum memoria fiat eorum, qui hinc discesseruut: noverunt illis multum hinc emolumen ti fieri. etc.  
It was not in vain ordained of the Apostles, that in the celebration of the honourable mysteries, there should memory be made of them that were departed hence. For they knew much profit, much commodity to come to them thereby.  
And in an other homely he sayeth in this manner in English. 
Chrysost. hom. 41. in. 1. cor. 15.  A sinner is departed: surely it becometh us, to be glad that his sins be stopped & not increased, and to labour as much as we can to release him not with weeping, 
In Act. hom, 21.  but with prayer, supplications, almose and sacrifices. For that was not ordained in vain, nor we do not in vain in our holy mysteries celebrate the memory of the dead, and make intercession for them to the lamb that lieth there, which taketh away the sins of the world, but that some comfort may thereby come to them. Is not this very plain? and that it is not a thing new invented, but a doctrine taught and used in the church ever sense Christ, and ordained so to be done by the Apostles themselves.  
S. augustine saith in his book of confessions, 
Augusty. confess. libro. 4. cap. 11.  that the sacrifice of our price, which is Christ's own natural body was offered for his mother's soul after she was dead  
And he sayeth also. 
De curae pro mortuis. ca 1.  In Machabeorum libris legimus oblatum pro mortuis sacrificium. Sed & si nunquam in scriptures veteribus omnino legeretur, non parva hac consuetudine claret authoritas ubi in praecibus Sacerdotis, quae Domino Deo a● eius altare funduntur, locum su 'em habet etiam commendatio mortuorum, In the books of the Maccabees we read, that there was sacrifice offered for the dead. But although in the old scriptures there were no such thing red, yet there appeareth no small authority in this custom, that amongs the prayers of the priest, which are made to our Lord God at his aultare, the commendation & prayer for the dead hath also his place.  
Mark well that he saith, it was an old custom in the Church for Priests in their Mass to pray for the dead, in his time which is above eleven hundredth and thirty year ago. And that the custom of the Church in this point is of sufficient authority too prove this matter, though there were no scripture for it at all, and yet he himself allegeth the book of machabees for it, the place is known well enough.  
He teacheth us the same thing writing upon saint john. 
Augusty. in joan. tract, 84  Ideo ad ipsam mensam non sic eos commemoramus quemadmodum alios qui in pace requiescunt ut etiam pro eis oremus, sed magis ut orent ipsi pro nobis, ut eorum vestigijs inhaereamus. etc. talia enim suis fratribus exhibuerunt, qualia de Domini mensa acceperunt.  
Therefore at the very table (of the aultare) we do not so remember (the martyrs) as we do other, other that rest in peace that we pray for them. But rather that they should pray for us, that we might follow their footsteps. For they have given such things for their brethren, as they have received from our lords table. Here is both prayer to saints, and for the dead in the Mass.  
Thus ye see, how Christ's body is offered for the dead, after what manner it availeth them.  
Saint augustine also teacheth, saying thus. 
Augusty. Enchirid. cap, 110.  When the sacrifices either of the aultare, or of any almose be offered for the dead that were baptized, for the very good men, they be giving of thanks, for not very evil men, they be propitiations, for very evil men, although they be no relief of the dead, yet they be certain comforts of them that be alive. And to them they profit, they profit to this end, either that they should have full remission, or at least that they should have more tolerable damnation.  
In this authority is expressed the plain word of propitiatory, how that the sacrifice of the aultare is a propitiation for such souls, as be not very evil or very good toward thattaining of full remission, or of more tolerable damnation▪ If I should recite as much as I could bring in for this point at large: it is not one or two hours that would suffice to the rehearsal of the places.  
By this little I have said, ye may perceive. after what sort it is true, that the Mass is a sacrifice propitiatory for sin, both for the quick & for the dead.  
Some think it a great blasphemy, that we should say, the priest applieth the effect of Christ's passion, to whom he lysteth, or for whom he maketh his oblation. Good people believe them not, they slander us in this, for we say not so, nor do not apply the merits and effect of Christ's passion, to whom we list▪ we do but apply our prayer and our intent of oblation, beseeching almighty GOD to apply the effect of his sons passion, which is his grace and remission of sin to them, for whom we pray. Only God applieth to us remission of sin, we but pray for it, and by the commemoration of his sons passion provoke him to apply, so that all that we do, is but by petition and intercession, not by authority as God doth.  
They say, we make oblation for messeled swine, for sick horses, for murrain of cattle, and thus with these vile and odious words they go about to bring the Mass in hatred with the simple people, that can not tell nor judge, what it is, saying we have certain peculiar Masses for all those things in our Mass book.  
The matter of this accusation is true, but not the manner. For there be not in our books peculiar Masses for these things, but in certain Masses there be some peculiar prayers for these and such like things, and that by good reason.  
For in the presence of Christ's body, when our prayers be most effectual, than we pray for the attaining of all goodness of soul and body, and the outward felicity of this world is as expedient for us, according to the will of GOD, and also we pray for the turning away of all evils of body and soul, and wordly goods, always referring ourselves to his will, as he our father thinketh meet for us.  
Chrysostom telleth, how the priest in his Mass prayeth for the whole world, 
Chrysost. de sacerdotio. li. 6  for the whole city, for the sins of all men both quick and dead, for the ceasing of war, for the pacifying of sedition, for peace, and the prosperous estate of things, for the avoiding ofall evils that hang over us. For the fruits of the earth and of the sea, and such other.  
saint augustine in his book De civitate Dei telleth a story of a gentleman called Hesperius, 
Augusty. civitat. li. 22. cap. ●  who having an house and grounds about it in the country, where his servants and beasts were much vexed with evil spirits, for remedy thereof came to saint augustine's house, and he being absent, desired his priests, that one of them would go to the place, and pray, that this calamity might cease. One of them went, and offered there the sacrifice of Christ's body, praying as much as he could, that the vexation by the evil spirits might cease, and by and by through the mercy of GOD it ceased.  
Is not this as much, yea and more too, than we do now? Let not us therefore fear their vile and slanderous words, nor let not us cease to do well, because they speak evil. We may not cease to do as the holy Saints have done, because the membres of the devil rail against us, as though we did nought.  
Now a little of private Mass, and then make an end. Many there be, that can well away with the Mass, but not with private Masses.  
These men be deceived in their own imagination: for there is no Mass private, but every Mass is public. It is called in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a public ministry.  
saint Thomas calleth it sometimes a private Mass, but not in that respect▪ as it is contrary to public, but as it is contrary too solemn.  
Every Mass is public, concerning the matter and ministry, but not solemn concerning the place and other rites and circumstances.  
Therefore these men speak against that they know not what. They have a new understanding of private.  
They call it a private Mass, when the priest receiveth the Sacrament alone. And this they say is against the institution of Christ.  
They say so sine fine, and never make an end, but they never prove it.  
I shall show you that it is not against the institution of Christ.  
The institution of Christ concerning this sacrament containeth three things which he himself did, & by his commandment gave authority to the church to do the same. The consecration, the oblation, and the participation,  
To the due consecration four things be required▪ the matter, form, minister & intent.  
The necessary matter is bread of wheat, which is due as it ought to be, if it be pure, sweet and unleavened. But our new masters that cry out so fast of Christ's institution, did ordain it should not be ministered in unleavened bread, but in common bread, and the worse the better with them, some said horsbread was to good. Well, there was more villainy showed herein, than I will express at this tyme.  
And for the other kind, whereas the due matter is wine mixed with water, they notwithstanding the institution and example of our saviour Christ, commanded no water to be put in, raising up again the pernicious rotten and extincted heresies which Fermentarii and Armeni● did maintain. The form of the sacrament is the words of our saviour Christ, saying. This is my body. This is my blood, duly & perfectly pronounced upon the bread, & wine.  
Our new masters that still cry upon the institution of Christ, some said it was a sacrament or ever the words were spoken assoon as it was brought to the church for the use of the communion, some would have the words said, but as one should read a Lesson or tell a tale, not directed to the bread and wine, but that the Minister should look away from the bread and wine in the time of the pronuncing. Fearing belike the words should have moor strength than they would they should have.  
And thus howsoever now they pretend a zeal to maintain the institution of Christ, than they utterly destroyed the institution of Christ either denying or defraudinge the necessary consecration of the sacrament.  
The minister ought only to be a priest duly consecrated and ordereed after the rite of the Catholic church, whose ministration god only doth assist. These men did not only maintain that it was lawful, but also did appoint and permit mere lay men to minister, yea and lay women sometimes, as some said, without any lawful vocation or ordering at all, not regarding what Arnobius writeth Quid tam magnificum quàm sacramenta dei conficere? 
Arnobius in ps. 139.  et quid tam perniciosum, quàm si is ea conficiat qu● nulum sacerdotij gradum accipit. What is so excellent than to consecrate the sacraments of god? & what is so pernicious, than if he consecrate them, that hath received no degree of priesthood? The intent also to do that the church doth without mocking dissimulation or contrary purpose is required. For although the priest in the consecration may have his thoughts distract to some other thing, & so lack attention, which is a great negligence in the work of God, & deadly sin to the minister: yet if he lack intention not intending to do that God commandeth and the church doth: there is no consecration nor no sacrament at all. And for this point what intention shall we think these men had of late that utterly dinied to consecrate or receive Christ's body and blood under the forms of bread and wine, but only to receive the creatures of bread and wine, & thereby to be partakers of Christ's body and blood? For in the book of their last communion, these were the words of the invocation. Good lord grant us that we receiving these thy creatures of bread and wine, according to thy sons institution, may be partakers of his body and blood▪  
Was there ever heard of any such institution? Look throughout all the scripture and show me where ever Christ did institute, that by eating of bread & wine, men should be partakers of his body and blood. And if it can not be showed, as I am sure it can not: than it was a plain forged lie bearing men in hand that Christ instituted that he never thought, whereby appeareth that they had not this intention which is required to the due consecration: & also that they in words pretending to have a zeal to maintain Christ's institution, in their deeds showed themselves enemies & adversaries to the same▪ And as they used themselves in consecration: so they did in the oblation, which they did not corrupt as the other, but utterly took away, denying any such thing to be, as I have proved it is, in so much that in all their new communion, they could not scarcely abide the name or word of oblation, but pulled it out of the book, so much did they favour the instituton of Christ which they now pretend.  
Now when they have taken away the due matter, as sweet unleavened bread, the meixture of the chalice, & perverted the form by leaving out the principal verb (est) in the words of Christ, as it was in the last book in the first printing, how it came in again I can not tell, and neglected the due ordering of the minister, suffering them to usurp the office of a priest that never received that authority, neither of God nor man, & in that they did (which was very bad) never intended to do as the church doth, and wholly did abrogate as much as laid in them the oblation of Christ's body in remembrance of his passion, and at length would have nothing to remain, but a bare communion, what face have they to cry upon Christ's institution, institution, which they have in so many points broken and violated as I have showed? and yet that they would have is no part of Christ's institution.  
For the use of the sacrament is that it should be received and eaten, & therefore in diverse counsels it was decreed that whoso ever took the sacrament at the priests hand & did not eat it, 
Concilium toletanun prim. ca 14. Co●ci▪ cesar. aug. Capi. 3.  for the which end Christ did ordain it, was holden accursed and excommunicate. Thus far extendeth the institution of Christ concerning this point, because he said Accipite, manducate et bibite. Take, eat, drink, and also that all should eat, and drink of it, that could prove themselves (after S. Paul's admonition).  
But such things as pertain to the ceremony of the eating, as, how many in one place together, what time, place, manner, order and such like, be things pertaining to the ordinance and direction of the church, and not to the institution of Christ, as necessary upon pain of damnation to be observed of every christian man.  
For else if all the rites that Christ used at his supper were of necessity and pertaining to his institution: then there must needs be thirteen together at the communion and neither moo nor fewer.  
And it must be celebrated after supper, and in the night, after the washing of the feet, and in a parlour or chamber, and all that receive must be priests and no women. For all these things were observed of Christ & his apostles at his last supper.  
But for our instruction to declare that they be not fixed by the institution of Christ, but left to the disposition of the church, the church hath taken an other order in these things, willing that all shall communicate that be worthy and disposed. So that the numbered whether theridamas be many or few, or but one in one place that receive, maketh not the ministration of the priest for that thing unlawful.  
And it hath ordered that it shallbe celebrated in the morning, & received fasting before all other meats, & in the church, except necessity other wise require. And therefore S. Augustine taught januarius. after this sort. 
Augusti epist. 118  Ideo salvator non praecepit, quo deinceps ordine sumeretur, ut apostolis per quos dispositurus erat ecclesiam seruaret hunc locum. Therefore our Saviour did not command by what order it should be received after him, but reserved that matter to the apostles by whom he would order and dispose his church▪  
By this we may conceive that the receiving of the sacrament is Christ's institution, but the manner, numbered and other rites of the receiving be not determined by Christ's institution, but ordered at the Church's disposition.  
Yet say they, Christ did not receive it alone, but did communicate with his twelve apostles, whose example we ought to follow. To this I say▪ that we be not bounden to follow this example for the numbered, but for the substance. That it should be received of us, is Christ's example necessary, but of how many, of twelve only, of more, of fewer, or of one, is not by Christ's example fixed and determined.  
Christ ministering the mystical supper of necessity, and that never but ones, for this end, by his deed to institute the thing, and to teach his disciples what they should do continually afterward in commemoration of his death, must needs have ministered it to more than himself, because in that doing he gave them authority to do the same, and so made them priests. But we ministering it not for that intent to institute the Sacrament, and to make Priests, but to receive the spiritual fruit that cometh to us thereby, are not bounden to observe that numbered, but shall ●doe well if we receive it either with other or alone.  
We read even from the beginning of the church, that lay men and women did receive it alone, and is there any religion that a lay man may do it, but not a priest? Turtuliane declareth the difficulty for a christian wife to observe her religion without offence that hath an infidel to her husband, among other things sayeth thus. Non sciet maritus quid secreto ante omnem cibum gusts? 
Tertualianus ad uxorem.  et si sciverit, panem, non illum credit esse qui dicitur.  
Will not thy husband know, what thou dost eat secretly before all other meats? And if he do know, he believeth it is bread and not him whom it is called. Of this place we gather the manner of the church in that time, shortly after Christ, that the people receiving the Sacrament at the priests hand in the Church, did carry it home with them, & kept it secretly and devoutly at home with themselves, and every morning as their devotion served them, did receive a part of it by themselves, & that secretly, lest the infideles amongs whom they dwelled should get knowledge of our mysteries. And thus of this place of tertullian, like as we may learn, that the Sacrament is not bread, as the infideles believe, if they chance to see it: but Christ as it is called, as the faithful only know, to be so: so we learn also, that men & women were wont to receive it alone without any other company assembled with than, which is sufficient for our purpose at this tyme. Saint Cyprian telleth of a woman in these words. 
Cyprian. de lapsis.  Cum quaedam arcam suam in qua domini sanctum fuit manibus indignus tentasset a●erire, igne inde surgente deterrita est, ne auderet attingere, When a certain woman went about to open her chest, wherein was the holy one of GOD with unworthy hands, she was afraid for the fire that rose from thence, that she durst not touch it. By this place appeareth the like manner of keeping it at home to receive it alone at their pleasure. And Eusebius in his story telleth, that the manner was to send the sacrament to bishops strangers, 
Eusebius histor. eccles. lib. ● cap. 22.  that chanced to come thither for this end, to know whether they were Catholic & of their faith or no, which they knew, if they would receive the sacrament which they had consecrate. And also he telleth of one that lay in extreme peril of death, 
Lib. 6, ca 34,  who had committed idolatry before, & sent to the priest for the sacrament, whereby he might be reconciled to the church, before he died, the priest was also sick & could not come, but sent it by the sick man's servant, and so forth. Here it is plain, that lay men received it alone without the priest. And what great religion is there now new found out, that the priest may not likewise receive it alone, if the people be not worthy nor disposed at all times to communicate with him.  
I leave out a great numbered of places that make for the reservation of the Sacrament, which all make for this purpose, if I would spend any time herein to declare it. Well, some will say, here be doctors upon doctors, sentences of authors enough. But what scripture have you, that the priest did or may take it alone? show me that, and then will I yield unto you.  
I shall be content to allege scripture, as it seemeth to me, let every man weigh it as he thinketh good, to me it is plain enough for this purpose, and although there were no scripture, yet in this matter which is but a ceremony, concerning the numbered of the receivers, the custom and use of Christ's church, is a sufficient rule for a Christian man to stay himself by.  
The scripture is written in the .27. chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, 
Act. 27,  where S. Paul comforting all the company, that were with him in the ship, who then were in extreme danger of drowning, promising them all their lives, and exhorting them to take meat, that had fasted fourtenne days before received the sacrament before them all alone, as I take it. The words be these. Et cùm haec dixisset, sumens panem gratias egit deo in conspectu omnium, et cùm fregisset, coepit manducare. Animaequiores autem facti omnes, & ipsi sumpserunt cibum And when he had said this, taking bread, he gave thanks to God in the sight of them all, and when he had broken it, he began to eat, and they all being much comforted, took meat also. Chrysostom expoundeth this place of the Sacrament, 
Chrysost. in Matth hom. 17.  where he hath this saying, that it is not only a thing sanctified, but sanctification itself. Here is no mention that he gave it to any other, and if it had been a thing necessary of the institution of Christ, belike he would have expressed it. Well though it be not expressed in words (say they) yet it is not a necessary argument to conclude, that no man received it with him. I grant it is not a good argument, but yet this is the comen manner of their reasoning, it is not expressed in scripture, ergo it is not to be believed. But I can say more for this place, for the scripture calleth, that saint Paul eat, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) which is a word, whereby the Sacrament is commonly expressed, and that all the other did eat (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) which signifieth comen meats, & the scripture sayeth (omnes) all the other took their meat, amongs whom there were many infideles, & it saith afterward, satiati cibo, that they were satiate & full with meat. But the blessed Sacrament non est cibus satietatis, sed sancti moniae (as Concilium Nicenum) sayeth▪ 
Concilium Nicenum  is not meat of satiety, but of sanctimony. Therefore where it saith that saint Paul did eat the bread, which is the sacrament, and that all the other did fill than with their comen meat. I may conclude, that saint Paul did receive alone, whereby is proved our purpose of the private Mass, as they term it. O Lord how would they have gloried, if they had such alike place against us▪  
Some bring in a place of Chrysostom, 
Chrysost. hom. 61. ad popul. Antioch num..  where he sayeth, frustra sacrificium quotidianum, frustra stamus ad altar, nullus qui communicet, Our daily sacrifice is in vain, we stand at the aultare in vain no man cometh to communicate.  
O Lord how they abuse this place of Chrysostom, that he sayeth to rebuke the negligence of the people that cometh not, they allege it to find fault at the diligence of the priest that cometh. It is reason, that the priest whose life is wholly dedicated to the service of God, and to pray for the people, should sin deadly, if he did join himself more & more to Christ by receiving daily the spiritual food of his body & blood, because the people that commonly occupy their life in the affairs of the world be not worthy, or not disposed daily to receive with the priest▪  
The very place itself of Chrysostom telleth, that the priests did celebrate the sacrifice daily, whether the people came or no, which they would never have done, if it had been deadly sin so to do. Therefore it is plain, that they did sacrifice, they did stand at the aultare, & cried, but all in vain, Sancta sanctis Holy things to holy men, Cum timore & charitate d●i accedite. Come up to receive with the fear of God and charity, and yet no man came. Therefore all this his homely was too reprove the slackness of the people, that deceived the expectation of the priest.  
I put the case (as I have seen it chance) that when the priest had consecrate, and one or two were commed up to the aultare, & kneeled down to communicate with the priest after the priest had received, they both departed & went away, not receiving either of contempt, or for that some sudden disease or passion came upon them that they could not receive: is God so unmerciful as to condemn the priest for the casualty of an other man which lieth not in his power to avoid? Our salvation were a very tykle thing, if one man should commit deadly sin against his will intending to serve God, & so be condemned for the chance of an other man which he could not stop or amend, & was no cause of it. Yea but (say they) Chrisostom saith. Non es hostia dignus nec communione, igitur nec oratione.  
If a man make his excuse, that he is not worthy the sacrifice, nor to communicate, then is he not worthy to be present there at the prayer. He sayeth so in deed. But what is this, to that the priest should not receive alone? nothing at all. And yet it serveth us to declare, that Chrysostom intended nothing else, but to reprove the negligence of them, that stood in the place of the worthy receivers, and would not come to receive.  
We must consider in the greek church, how there was certain degrees of the placing of the people, the priest stood at the aultare▪ the clerks within the chancel, the worthy receivers, in a distinct place beside the priests, the penitentes in a lower place, the Catechumeni which were men, learning our faith, and not yet Christened sat lowest of all, but they were put out of the Church, when the sermon and teaching was done, and were not suffered to be present at the mysteries. Now the lack that men do not understand the distinction of these several places, maketh them too take Chrysostom wrong▪ For in deed he that is in the higher place of the communicantes, and being there thinketh himself for his unclean life not worthy to communicate, and so deceiveth the expectation of the priest that prepareth for him: is likewise not worthy to communicate in only prayer, as being in that place, & yet hath most need of all to communicate in prayer, because prayer is an humility of the mind and a cause & degree to make a man worthy to communicate in the sacrament. And therefore by Chrysostom he is not forbid to communicate in prayer, but not in that place, but lower among the penitentes. For so Chrysostom saith by & by after. Quot quot estis in poenitentia, omnes orate. All you that be penitentes, occupy yourselves in prayer. And it was a decree of the whole catholic church, that certain men which were not suffered to communicate in the sacrament, should during their penance communicate only in prayer. These be the words of the general council at Nice in english. 
Concilium Nicenun● cap. 12.  Concerning them that had committed idolatry & were in penance not yet reconciled, and now be departing out of their bodies, let the old canon be observed, that he that is departing, be not defrauded of the necessary victual of life, but if any such after he have received the communion, do recover and amend, let them remain among them that communicate only in prayer. We may see by this, that the meaning of Chrysostom is, as I have declared. Other make an argument of the word Communio that the sacrament is called a communion, because many received it. But this argument is unlearned, proceeding of ignorance. For it is so called, not for that many communicate together in one place, but for the effect of the sacrament, because it maketh many diverse men one mystical body of Christ.  
So doth Chrysostom expound it, writing upon the 10. chapter to the Corinthians And also Dionysius Areopagita saith, unde merito sacerdotalis sacrosancta prudentia ex rerum effectu proprium illi verumque (communicationis) cognomen invenit. 
Dionysius Areop. eccles. hierar. cap. 3  Therefore the holy wisdom of the priests hath worthily invented to this sacrament a proper & true name of communion, for the effect of it, because it gathereth our life's that be divided a sunder many ways, into that one state, whereby we are joined to god & among our selves in one body, and so forth.  
And in very deed we do not communicate alone. For considering gods church is but one house, as Cyprian saith, una est domus ecclesiae, in qua agnus editur. 
Cyprian. de cena.  There is one house of the church, wherein the lamb is eaten: whosoever doth eat this lamb worthily, doth communicate with all christian men in every place & country that be in this house & do the like.  
If the pryest receive one part of the sacrament in the church, & afterward carry the rest two or three miles to a sick man, doth he not communicate with another? and yet that other is not together with him in one place, standing at his elbow. Even so the priest that sayeth mass alone, doth communicate with all them that celebrate in other churches, or in other realms. This argument of Communion was never ●eard of in the world before Martyne Luther, who was the first father of it, and the first man that ever wrote against private masses as he calleth them▪  
And where learned Luther that lesson? even of the devil not because all evil cometh by the suggestion of the devil, but I mean that Luther had a vision of the devil and saw him with his corporal eye being waking, of whom he learned all that he hath pestilently spoken against the holy mass. And lest men should say I lied upon Luther, here is his own book, Ex orete judico, serve nequam. We may judge him by his own mouth and his own hand writing. The title of his book is of private mass. I shall read you a piece of it that the truth of my saying may appear. These be his very words.  
I shall make confession before all you revende and holy fathers, give me I pray you a good absolution. It chanced me once about midnight suddenly to awake, than the devil Satan began with me this disputation. Hear (said he) doctor Luther, very well learned, thou knowest thou hast said private masses xv. years almost daily. What if such private masses be horrible idolatry? what if there were not present the body and blood of Christ, but thou hadst honoured only bread and wine, & hadst caused other to honour it? to whom I answered, I am an anointed priest, & have received unction & consecration of a bishop, & have done all these things by commandment & obedience of mine elders▪ Why should not I consecrated, when I have pronounced the words of Christ & have said mass in earnest? this thou knowest. All this said he is true, but the turks & gentiles do likewise all things in their temples of obedience & in earnest  
The priests of Hieroboam did all they did of a certain zeal & intent against the true priests in Jerusalem▪  
What if they ordering and consecrating were false, as the priests of the Turks and Samaritans were false and their service of god false and wicked? First (said he) thou knowest thou hadst than no knowledge of Christ, nor true faith, and for faith thou waste no better than a Turk.  
For the Turk and all the devils also believe the story of Christ, that he was borne crucified, and dead▪ etc. But the Turk and we dampened spirits do not trust to his mercy, nor have not him for a mediator and saviour, but fear him as a cruel judge.  
Such a faith and no other hadst thou, when thou receivest unction of the bishop and all other both they that did annoynct, and were annoyncted, thought so and no other wise of Christ▪ Therefore ye fled from Christ as a cruel judge to blessed Mary and the saints, they were mediators between you & Christ. Thus was Christ rob of his glory▪ This neither thou nor no other papist can deny. I would read more of this book but for troubling you. He that ly●t to know what may be said against private mass, let him learn here of the devil enough  
For here is all that hath yet been said of any other, and more to. The devils derlinges were ashamed to say half so much as their father Satan, lest they should be called blasphemous liars as he is.  
But by this book, Luther's own confession set forth in print by himself to the world, ye may know that the devil was the first that ever barked against the sacrifice of the church, which is the mass, knowing that his kingdom of sin and iniquity could not stand, if this sacrifice most adversary to it, were not defaced and destroyed.  
But what colour had Luther to publish this, shall we think he was so mad as to father that upon the devil, that he would have persauded for truth to the world? I shall tell you shortly his fond devise in this point, as it followeth five or six leaves here after.  
He sayeth he knoweth the devil is a liar, but (he saith) his lies be crafty, he useth to allege a truth which can not be denied, and with that to colour his lie which he persaudeth.  
And therefore (sayeth he) the devil lieth not when he accuseth, as that I had committed horrible Idolatry in saying private masses: but the lie is when he did afterward tempt him to despair of god's mercy. But saith Luther I will not despair as judas did, but amend that I have done amiss & never say private mass again.  
O what a cloak of mischief is this, & all grounded of lies and falsehood, He saith the devil lieth not when he accuseth. If that be true, than he said true when he said that Luther being a preacher many years, never had true faith in Christ till he fell from the mass, nor never trusted in Christ's mercy, nor never took him for a saviour but a cruel judge, Of this the devil did accuse him, whether he was a liar herein or no judge you.  
Also in his accusation he said the body and blood of Christ were not present in the sacrament, when such annoyncted priests did consecrate, and that they honoured only bread & wine, with many other damnable lies and heresies, which whoso shall read the book, may find in great plenty, and yet by Luther's principle, the devil never lieth when he accuseth. Now because the time is far passed, shortly to conclude, I shall most humbly beseech you to consider and regard the salvation of your souls, for the which Christ God's son hath shed his precious blood which salvation can not be attained without knowledge & confession of god's truth revealed to his holy church, & by her to every member of her, & child of god, whose sentence and determination is sure & certain, as proceeding from the pillar of truth & the spirit of god, by whom we be taught and assured in gods own word, that in the blessed sacrament of the altar▪ by the power of the holy ghost working with gods word, is verily & really present the body and blood of our saviour Christ, under the forms of bread & wine, which is by Christ's own commandment & example offered to almighty god in sacrifice, in commemoration of Christ's passion and death, whereby the membres of the church in whose faith it is offered, both they that be alive, and departed, perceive plenteous and abundant grace and mercy, and in all their necessities and calamities relief and succour▪  
Our most merciful father grant us to persist steadfast & constant in the true catholic faith and confession of this most blessed Sacrament and sacrifice, and with pure devotion as he hath ordained to use & frequent this holy mystery of unity & reconciliation, that we may thereby remain in him and he in us for evermore. To whom be all glory and praise with out end.  
AMEN.   

¶ Imprinted at London in Paul's church yard, at the sign of the holy Ghost, by john Cawood, printer to the queens highness. The tenth day of may. Anno domini. 1554.  
Cum privilegio Reginae Mariae.