MISSALE ROMANUM VINDICATUM. OR, The MASS Vindicated from D. Daniel Brevents calumnious and Scandalous Tract.  S. Augustine lib. 2. contra Julianum Pelagium. cap. 10. 
The Catholic Fathers and Doctors have held what they found in the Church, have taught what they learned, and delivered to their Sons what they received from their Fathers: as yet we did not deal with you before these Judges; and our cause is judged by them: neither we, nor you, were known to them, yet we recite their sentences, or Judgements made against you.  
Printed in the Year, 1674   

TO THE Right Worshipful, Grave, and Reverend Doctors of the Famous University of OXFORD, Health and Salvation.  
THe whole Universe worthily admires the Oxonian Academy for its Antiquity, and Learning, for the great multitude of famous Doctors, which have flourished in its bosom, Structures in its Colleges, rare Library, completely stored with books of all sorts; but principally Manuscripts, which if not diminished by the destiny of Funus Scoti et Scotistarum, would have far exceeded most of Christendom; and now may contend for equality, except only the Vatican: It's present glory is in no mean way augmented, by that magnificent Theatre; which the late Archbishop of Canterbury, to his eternal Glory has erected; wherein all may depredicate his Munificence, and other Universities envy Oxford's Glory. This indeed is sheldon's Trophy, and Triumph.  
Upon reflection of this unparaleld Theatre, I cannot but deplore, that such an excellent, and so magnificent a structure should be abused, and defiled by such an unseemly Imp, as the late Doctor Daniel Brevent has hatched under its roof; I mean his Missale Romanum Printed in that Theatre without any licence or approbation, wherein there is very little appears which may beseem a Doctor of Oxford.  
He gins indeed very briskly, acknowledging the Roman Church to have been a true Church, in the first five hundred years after Christ; but afterwards to have decayed; principally, for that from that time, the Church allowed and approved the holy sacrifice of the Mass, which he chief labours to reject, by Railleries', scoffs and swagger; amongst others he grounds himself on two manifestly false impositions: the first is, that Roman Priests do sacrifice their God, imitating the primitive Infidels, who imputed it to the Christians, that they did eat their God, whereas our faith teaches us, that Christ's body and blood is sacrificed to God: The second is, that the Priests at the Altar, do work all the Miracles which are wrought in the Eucharist; which Miracles by Catholics are attributed to Christ himself who instituted the holy Sacrament. To make his raillery more complete, he spares not to call all Roman Catholics, Adulterers, Adorers of vile creatures, Idol-worshipers, invaders of sacred offices, sacrilegiously reproaching them of untruths, impieties, fearful and barbarous cruelty; Priesthood a most sacrilegious function; which in plain terms he admits for almost twelve hundred years, the whole Christian world were no better than Idolaters; nay, as he says worse than all Pagans and Infidels.  
So that the whole Church, all Christian Emperors, Kings and Princes, all Christian Empires, Kingdoms, Nations, and Provinces were enslaved to Idolatry, all Popes, Primats, Archbishops, Bishops, and Clergymen; were liable to his censures. No Church either universal or particular, truly Christian, no Conversion of any Nation, in particular England, to the true faith of Christ, for those, who were converted in those times, were most unhappy, for they were always taught, believed and exercised the sacrifice of the Mass. All the Modern Churches, as besides the Latin, the Grecian, Oriental, African and Indians; in all places of the world (except only some of our pretended Reformers, in a little Corner thereof,) have the same: and the schoolmen whom he so frequently citys, were all Idolaters, for they all held, maintained and defended the sacrifice of the Mass, against all Infidels and heretics, and for the most part were sacrificing Priests.  
Moreover, the Glory of your famous University, is much impeached, by this his Calumny; for your Doctors and Professors, your Churches, Chapels, and Schools; your Colleges and Chairs were all infected with this pretended Idolatry; for within their walls no other doctrine was taught, heard, or used, until these last times, the several Comments, made on the Master of the sentences, on S. Thomas Scotus and other Schoolmen, testifies the same; nothing can excuse them, but gross ignorance: but what shall we say of those famous Doctors, who have so learnedly written against Wickliff, even on the same score; and what of those Reverend and learned Bishops, who in Oxford condemned him, as an heretic, and who were so careful (as is manifest in Provinciali veteri reprinted at Oxford in the year 1669.) of the Celebration of Mass. The Doctor bespatters them all with Idolatry, sacrilege, and blindness, ignorance and blasphemy.  
But he might have considered, if malice or Ignorance had not blinded him; that under the name of the Roman Church, for so many hundred of years, he impugns Christ's Church within the five hundred years after Christ; even as it was established by Christ and his apostles; for the Catholic Church was never without Mass, in that time; and what Masses or Liturgies were used in succeeding times, were delivered from those times; as the Roman or Latin Church challenges that of S. Peter, as it was declared by S. Clement; those of Jerusalem, and some other parts that of S. James; those of Affirica, that of S. Mark or S. Philip: The Grecians that of S. Basil who as S. Proclus testifies, did not add to any other precedent, but contract and abreviate what was formerly used. S. chrysostom did the same to that of S. Basil; yet both these liturgies or Masses, are in use to this day, in all the Grecian Churches: if then the Mass be Idolatry, and so fond a thing as this Doctor pretends; Christ never had a true Church upon earth: far as I shall show in this short Tract, the Catholic Church was never without the sacrifice of the Mass, if we may believe Tradition, practice, and custom of all Christian Churches, Ecclesiastical or civil histories; Councils both General and of several Provinces in the whole world; and the unanimous consent of all the holy Fathers and Doctors.  
I dare challenge Doctor Brevent, or any of his associates, to produce any one Nation, that ever roceived the Christian Faith without this sacrifice, or public Divine Service but that which we call Mass or liturgy, under the notion of a sacrifice: The Grecians, as I said before, and all those who belong to that Church, as Iberians, Sclavonians, Russians, Muscovites, and in many parts of Asia, and Africa, agree in the sacrifice of the Mass with some difference of Ceremonies. The Meridional parts, which contain the Nubians, the Abissins', and greatest parts in Egypt, Arabia, and Chaldea, under the Patriarkate of Alexandria: The Nestorians dispersed in Tartary, Persia, and the Oriental parts, and kingdoms of India: the Armenians, and Scythians: I do not say, that all these agree with the Latins in the manner or form of Mass, or in their opinions; but in the substance of a Sacrifice according to the Evangelical law, they all agree; deriving their form, rites, and ceremonies from the primitive times, that is, from the Patriarchal, Churches, founded by the Apostles, and their immediate successors: In sine, all the patriarchal Sees of Rome, Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem, together with that that of Constantinople have used, maintained, and approved the sacrifice of the Mass. It would be little less than Blasphemy, to make them all Mistresses and fomenters of Idolatry: and consequently, that the Church which Christ and his Apostles had erected, founded, and established, was Idolatrous, and the true Christian Church never appeared in any Nation of the Universe.  
But what do I insist in this manner; when I speak to learned and understanding men, who well know the truth of what I say, and to whose judgements I humbly remit what I writ; trusting they will not condemn my boldness, but attribute it to the Zeal I have of the honour of that reverend University, which I so much reverence and esteem; and for whose true glory and happy progress, I offer up my continual prayers, remaining always  
Your hearty wellwisher and Beadsman. R.F.   

Missale Romanum Vindicatum.  

CHAP. 1. Mass proved out of the Sacred Scripture.  
THe ancient and most learned Interpreter of the sacred text, S. Hierom teaches us, that the Gospel is not in the word, but in the sense; not in the bark, but in the sap, not in the leaves of the words, but in the root of the meaning; whence the 6. Council of Constantinople, can. 19 tells us, If any Controversy pertaining to the Scripture be raised, let not the preachers otherwise interpret it, then as the lights and Doctors of the Church in their writings have expounded it. Conformable to this is that Decree of the Meldelsen Council, In the expounding or preaching of holy Scriptures, let every one follow the sense of the holy Catholic and most approved Fathers, in whom, as S. Hierom says, verity of faith never fails or wavers.  
I shall not therefore follow humane sense, judgement or opinion; neither will I for the present, make use of Schoolmen, nor of the Doctors or learned men for almost twelve hundred years, which without doubt, may counterpoise whatsoever exposition, our pretended Reformers can any way claim, in a 150. years at the most; let us now wave all these, and search out the truth from the first five hundred years.  
It was a bold saying of this Doctor in his 12. Chapter, that Roman Priests, nor Roman sacrifice, have not so much as any probable ground in Scripture, this he has in the text of his Chapter, but in the body, of the proof is most weak, for he confesses, that Catholics do allege Scripture for both, the question than is, which side does best understand the true sense of the sacred text; I might allege innumerable places which the holy Fathers of that time did understand or apply to the sacrifice of the Mass; in particular that of Dan. 12. of the continual sacrifice, which S. Irenaeus, S. Hierom, and Theodoretus affirm to be no other than the sacrifice of the Mass; which shall cease to be publicly celebrated; as also S. Hippolytus teaches in the time of Antichrist: but I shall only insist on those places which the Doctor impugns, to wit, on the figures of it, as that of Melchisedech, of the prophecy of Malachy, and of the Institution of it, made by Christ himself which I shall divide into three Paragraphs.  

§. 1. Mass proved to be a Sacrifice, according to the Order of Melchisedech.  
THe holy Council of Trent, Sess. 22. c. 1. first grounds itself on the figure of Melchisedech, Gen. 14. God by the mouth of the Prophet David Psal. 109. did declare, that Christ was a priest for ever, according to the Order of Melchisedech, which also S. Paul alleages, Heb. 7. and thence proves, a translation of the Law from the translation of the Priesthood: let us now hear what the holy Fathers of those primitive times do understand by this; I might well produce Cassiodorus, Remigius and Euthemius in Psal. 109. who were not long after the fifth century, and expound it of the sacrifice of the Mass; but let us make a step higher, within that time and begin with Theodoret 430. on the same Psalm, who affirms, that Christ began his priesthood according to the order of Melchisedech, in his last supper, when the consecrated bread and wine.  
420. S. Augustin Epist. 95. add samos: Melchisedech did prefigurate the Sacrament of our Lord's supper with bread and wine, that is, the sacrifice of Melchisedech, being brought forth did know to prefigurate his eternal priesthood, and lib. 16. de civet. Dei, cap. 22. alleging. Melchisedech out of S. Paul to the Hebrews, he says, There the sacrifice which the whole Church offers now unto God did first appear, and that prefigured which was long after fulfilled in Christ, of whom the prophet said before he came to the flesh, Thou art a priest for ever after the Order of Melchisedech, lib. 17. c. 17. he repeats the same, giving the reason: because Aaron's Priesthood and Sacrifice are abolished, and now in all the world under Christ the Priest, we offer that which Melchisedech brought forth, when he blessed Abraham, and cap. 20. God has prepared the table with bread and wine, that is, the Sacrifice of Melchisedech; a little lower, The participation of that table is the beginning of life. for in Ecclesiastes, where he saith: It is good for man to eat and drink, we cannot understand it better, than of the participation of that table, which our Melchisedechian Prlest instituted for us in the New testament; the text in latin is, quam Sacerdos ipse mediator novi testamenti, exhibit secundum ordinem Melchisedech de corpore & sanguine suo; for that Sacrifice succeeded all the old testament Sacrifices, which were but shadows of the future, for his body is offered and sacrificed now instead of all other offering and Sacrifice: and in Psal. 32. he says, Christ of his body and blood instituted a Sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech: the same he has in Psal. 32. in psal. 100 and in Psal. 109. and in many other places.  
390. S. Hierom. Epist. 17. ad Marcell. Have recourse to Genesis, and thou shalt find Melchisedech King of Salem, and prince of that City, who even then in the type of Christ, offered bread and wine and dedicated the Christian Mystery in the blood and body of our Saviour. The same Father Epist. 126. ad Evagrium, so Melchisedech for that he was not a Cananite nor of the race of the Jews did go before us, as a Type of the Priest the Son of God, of whom it is said psal. 109. Thou art a priest, etc. and a little after he tells us what sacrifice he dedicated, to wit, the Sacrament of Christ in bread and wine, in a sincere and pure Sacrifice: Again in Gen. 14. Our mystery is signified in the word of Order by no means in Aaron by immolating unreasonable creatures, but in offered bread and wine that is the body and blood of our Lord Jesus: Again Aaron's priesthood had an end, but Melchisedeches, that is, Christ's and the Churches, is perpetual, both for the time past, and to come. To omit other places I will conclude with his words on Mat. 26. After Christ had fulfiled the typical pasche, and eaten the flesh of the Lamb with his Apostles, he took bread which comforts man and passing to the true Sacrament of the Pasche, that even as it was in the Prefiguration of him in Melchisedech, as a Priest of the most high God, had done, offering bread and wine; he also presented the verity of his body and blood.  
373. S. Ambrose in his Mass, Our Lord Jesus Christ thy Son has instituted the rite of Sacrificing in the New testament to be celebrated when bread and wine (which Melchisedech Priest had offered in prefiguration of the future Mystery) he transformed into the Sacrament of his body and blood: and lib. 3. de Sacram. cap. 1. we know that the figure of those Sacraments, did go before in the times of Abraham, when the holy Melchisedech did offer Sacrifice.  
370. Epiphanius her. 55. Then Melchisedech met him (that is Abraham) and set before him bread and wine prefiguring the enigmas and exemplars of the Mystery, when our Lord said, I am the living bread, and of his blood which did flow from his side.  
326. Eusebius l. 5. the Demonst: cap. 3. The issue of that Oracle is admirable to him, who contemplates in what manner our Saviour Jesus, who is anointed of God according to the rite of Melchisedech, doth perform by his Ministers, these things which belong to fulfil the priesthood among men: for as he who was a priest of the gentiles was never seen exercising any corporal Sacrifices, but only bread and wine, when he blessed Abraham, so truly first our Saviour and Lord himself, than those who come from him as priests, in all nations, do represent in performing their function according to Ecclesiastical functions the Spiritual office of priesthood, in the wine and bread the mysteries of his body and Salutary blood.  
290. Lactantius l. 14. Instit. Christ must needs have in this Church his external Priesthood, according to the order of Melchisedech; and before him his Master Arnobius in psal. 109. by the mysteries of Bread and Wine he was made a priest for ever.  
250. S. Cyprian l. 2. Epist. 3. ad Caecilium. Who is more a priest then our Lord Jesus Christ who offered a sacrifice to the Father, and offered the very same that Melchisedech did offer, that is bread and wine to wit his body and blood.  
In fine, I challenge all our Adversaries to produce any holy Father's teaching the contrary Doctrine or that ever questioned any of these Fathers cited, and desire that all good Christians will note that the Fathers here cited do speak positively according as they believed and taught, and as the Church ever since received.   

§. 2. The Sacrifice of the Mass proved out of the Prophet Malachy.  
The Prophet Malachy cap. 1. said, In every place there is sacrificing, and there is offered to my name a clean Oblation; because my name is great among the Gentiles. Which place the holy Council of Trent, Sess. 22. cap. 1. citys for the holy Sacrifice of this Mass. Let us see now what the holy Fathers of those Primitive times said of it.  
420. Let us begin with S. Augustine, who, l. 10. de civet. Dei, cap. 35. Now Malachy prophesying of the Church (which we see so happily propagated by our Saviour Christ) hath these plain words to the Jews, in the person of God: I have no pleasure in you, neither will I accept an offering at your hand, for from the rising of the Sun unto the setting, my name it great among the Gentiles; and in every place shall be Incense offered unto me, and a pure offering unto my name, for my name is great among the Gentiles; saith the Lord. This we see offered in every place by Christ's priesthood after the order of Melchisedech: sigh in every place from the rising of the Sun, unto its setting, we do see it offered unto God. These last words are omitted by our English translatours, although they be in the Latin text, lib. 19 cap. 23. it is his City whose mystery we celebrate in such oblations, as the faithful do well understand, for the ceasing of all the typical Sacrifices that were exhibited by the Jews, and the ordaining of one Sacrifice to be offered through the whole world from East to West (as now we see it is) was prophesied long before from God, by the Mouths of holy Hebrews.  
326. Eusebius de Demonst lib. 10. cap. ult. From the rising of the Sun, etc. we sacrifice to the most High, a sacrifice of praise, we sacrifice a full Sacrifice to God, yielding sweet odour and holy: we sacrifice after a new manner, a Clean host according to the new Testament. S. cyril of Alexandria, S. Hierome, Theodoret, and all other ancient Expositors of this place do expound and apply it to the Sacrifice of the Mass.  
398. S. Chysostom in Psal. 91. citing the words of Malachi, says, See how plainly and clearly he interprets the mystical table, which is the Incruentall host, but the pure Incense he calls holy prayers, which are offered with the Sacrifice, for this Incense is pleasing to God, not that which is taken from earthly roots, but what proceeds from a pure heart: thou seest that in all places, that Angelical Sacrifice is granted to be famous; ye see neither Altar nor canticle circumscribed with any bounds. In every place Incense is offered to my name, therefore the pure host, the chief indeed mystical table is the celestial and above all things honoured Sacrifice. A little after, reciting many other sacrifices of the New testament, he infers, we have the first sacrifice, that salutary gift. 2. of Martyrs; 3. of prayers. 4. of Jubilation. 5. of Righteousness; 6. of Alms. 7. of Praise. 8. of Compunction. 9 of humility. 10. of preaching or fructification.  
108. S. Jrenaeus lib. 4. cap. 32. alleging the words of Malachy, infers manifestly signifying by those that indeed the former people have ceased to offer to God, and this is a pure one, so that the name of God is glorified among the Gentiles: and chap. 33. In every place incense is offered to my name and a pure sacrifice but the Incense S. John in the Apocalypse says to be the prayers of Saints.  
150. S. Justin Martyr in Dial. Triphon: God himself is witness, who saith Mal. In every place among the Gentiles acceptable and pleasing sacrifices are offered, but God receives not sacrifices from any one but from Priests. Therefore Christ Jesus has left all sacrifices which are to be offered to his Name, in the Eucharist of the bread and Cup, which is made in all places by Christians. God using by anticipation, witnesses to be acceptable to him, those which are done by you and by your priests he reproves. Again Malachy did then speak of our sacrifices which are offered in every place, that is of the bread of the Eucharist; in like manner of the Eucharistical Cup.  
Many of our adversaries turn this pure or clean Oblation as if it were nothing but a Sacrifice of praise, but first that cannot be said properly a sacrifice of the New testament, sigh it was as proper to the law of Nature, and the written law. 2. the Prophet distinguishes between a sacrifice acceptable and unacceptable: now it is certain that a sacrifice of praise was and is always acceptable. 3. he opposes a new sacrifice to the sacrifice of the Jews, as they were external. 4. The holy Fathers very frequently do either clearly distinguish between them or make the holy Eucharist to be a sacrifice of praise, finally they plainly say that the pure sacrifice was of bread and wine and so called Eucharistical.   

§. 3. The Sacrifice of the Mass Ordained and Instituted by Christ.  
THe Roman Church as is expressed in the Council of Trent, sess. 22. cap. 1. Derives her Authority of celebrating Mass from the Command of Christ Jesus in his last supper, when he said, Do this in my Commemoration, as the Catholic Church has always understood and taught, and such I think is the opinion of the Church of England in as much as concerns the Ministry of the Eucharist; for a man might ask, by what Authority the Ministers alone do celebrate the Communion, with exclusion of the lay-people from that office, but leaving this, let us see what the holy Fathers of those primitive times did teach in this point.  
420. I shall begin with S. Augustine, in his Manual, chap. 11. where he makes this prayer: Give me I beseech thee O Christ Jesus Contrition of heart, etc. whilst I unworthy do stand at thy Altar, desiring to offer up to thee that admirable and heavenly sacrifice, becoming all reverence and devotion, which thou my Lord God Immaculate, didst institute and command to be offered for a commemoration or remembrance of thy charity, that is of thy death and passion, for our Salvation, and for the daily repairing of our infirmity. Again, Ser. 14. de Innocent. what more reverend, what more honourable, can be said, then to rest under that Altar in which sacrifice is celebrated to God; in which hosts are offered; in which our Lord is the priest, as it is written, Thou art a Priest for ever according to the Order of Melchisedech: with good reason the Souls of the just do rest under the Altar, because the body of our Lord is offered upon the Altar, the blood of the just does not undeservedly there ask for revenge, where also the blood of Christ is shed for sinners, Conveniently therefore and as it were for a certain society, the Sepulchre of Martyrs is there ordained, where the death of our Lord is daily celebrated, as he himself said, As often as ye shall do these things ye shall show my death, until I come, to wit, that those who died for his death, should rest under the Mystery of his Sacrament.  
398. S. chrysostom him. 83. in Math. For this cause with desire I have desired, saith our Lord, to eat this pasche with you: that is, to deliver to you new things and pasche whereby I may make you spiritual; he also drank of it, lest hearing these words, they should say, what do we drink blood and eat flesh? and so should be troubled: for when formerly he had made some words of those things, many only for the words were scandilized, lest then also that should happen, he first did this, that he might induce them with a quiet mind, to the communication of the Mysteries; you will say what then must we make the old Pasche? by no means, for therefore he said, do this; that he might withdraw them from the other, besides if this do work remission of sins as certainly it doth, that is altogether needless. But as in the old, so in the same manner he left for a benefit, and gathered together a memory of mysteries even thence bridling the mouths of Heretics, for when they say, whence does it appear that Christ was Immolated, besides many other things producing also these Mysteries: we shut their mouths, for if Jesus be not dead: whose symbol or sign is this sacrifice? thou seest how great care he had that we should keep in memory that he died for us; for because Martion, Valentine, Manicheus, and their followers were went to deny this dispensation, by this Mystery, he always so reduces us into the memory of his passion. Again, Hom. 17. in Epist ad Hebraeos. He is our Bishop who offered an host cleansing us, the same we offer also now, what was then offered indeed cannot be consumed, but that which we do, is done only in commemoration of that which was done, for says he, Do this in my commemoration, Not another Sacrifice, but as the Bishop we always do the same but we rather work the remembrance of the Sacrifice.  
380. S. Gregory of Nice Orat. 1. de Resurrect. He who disposes all things by his power, doth not expect the violence of the Jews as robbers, nor the wicked sentence of Pilate, that their malice might be the beginning and cause of the common Salvation of men, but he prevented by his counsel and by a secret kind of sacrifice which could not be seen by men; he offers himself an host for us and being together priest and lamb of God, immolats a victim, he that takes away the sin of the World: when did he do this? when he gave to his Disciples assembled his body to be eaten and his blood to be drunk, than he openly declared the sacrifice of the Lamb to be now perfect; wherefore when he exhibited to his Disciples his body to be eaten; and his blood to be drunk, now by a secret and invisible Mystery his body was Immolated as it pleased the power of him, who performed the Mystery.  
326. Eusebius l. 1. de Demonst: cap. 10. After all things working the salvation of us all, he offered a certain wonderful victim and a most excellent Sacrifice to his Father, and ordained that in memory thereof, we should offer the same to God for a sacrifice: After, when we have received the memory of this Sacrifice, to be celebrated by certain signs in the table and also of his body and salutary blood as an institute of the New testament.  
230. S. Cyprian Epist. 6. ad Cacilium. Know that we are admonished that in offering the Chalice the dominical Tradition is to be observed, neither are we to do any thing, but what our Lord has first done, that the Chalice which is offered in commmemoration of him, may be offered mixed with wine, and water, for when Christ said, I am the true vine, the vine verily is not the blood of Christ but the wine, neither can his blood by which we are redeemed and vivificated, be seen to be in the Chalice, when wine is wanting to the Chalice, whereby Christ's blood is declared, which is openly published by the sacrament and testimony of all the scriptures; which the Saint proves there at large. Again in the same place he says, If Jesus Christ our lord and God, he the high priest of God the Father, first offered Sacrifice to God the Father, and commanded this to be done in his commemoration: verily the priest executes in the stead of Christ, who imitates that which Christ did do and offers a true and full sacrifice in the Church to God the Father, if he goes about to offer according to that which he has seen Christ himself to have offered. Lastly in Ser. de coena Domini, which is commonly attributed to him: sigh our lord has said. Do ye this in my commemoration, this is my flesh, and this is my blood; as often as it is done with these words and this faith, that substantial bread and chalice consecrated by solemn benediction is profitable to the life, and Salvation of the whole man, being also a medicine and holocaust to heal our infirmities and purge our iniquities.  
203. Tertullian l. 5. advers. Marcionem, after having declared what Christ did in his last supper, he concludes fieri semper quod postea Jussit: he commanded the same to be done always afterward.  
180. S. Irenaeus lib. 4. cap. 32. He took bread and gave thinks, saying, this is my body: and in like manner the chalice, which he declares to be his blood, and taught the new oblation of the New testament, Which the Church receiving from the Apostles Offers to God in the whole world, and cap. 34. The oblation of the Church, which our Lord has taught to be offered in the world; is reputed before God, a pure sacrifice: and a little after, The kind of Oblation is not reproved: for Oblations were there and Oblations here, Sacrifices in the people sacrifices also in the Church: and beneath, he makes an argument against the Heretics of his time: How is it manifest to them, that bread in which thanks are given, to be the body of our Lord and the Chalice his blood, if they say not him to be the Son of the maker of the world; that is his World.  
130. S. Justin Martyr Apol. 2. ad Antonium. The Apostles in their Commentaries which are called Gospels, have so declared that Christ commanded them, taking bread and giving thanks, he said, do this in memory of me: This is my Body; and also taking the Cup, and giving thanks, he said; this is my Blood, and gave to them only.  
S. Martial Epist. ad Burdigal. He (that is Christ) having a body, both immaculate and without sin, for he was conceived by the holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, permitted himself to be immolated on the Altar of the Cross▪ but what the Jews through envy did immolate, hoping to abolish his name from the Earth; we for our Salvations sake, do set upon the sanctified Altar, knowing that by this only remedy life is to be given us and death avoided, for he our Lord commanded us to do this in his commemoration.  
100 S. Dionise Eccless Hist. cap. 3. wherefore (the venerable Bishop) reverently and according to his pontifical office, by holy praises of the divine works, excuses himself that he sacrifices the salutary host (which is above him) first in a decent manner exclaiming to him, Thou hast said, do this in my commemoration, next he asks that he may be made worthy of so great a Ministry, ordained in the imitation of God, and to become according to his forces like to Christ, and that he may devoutly consecrate the Sacraments, and purely distribute them.  
99 S. Clement l. 5. Apostol. constit. cap. 18. Our Lord being risen from death: make ye your sacrifice which by us he has Constituted, saying do this in my commemoration: and l. 6. cap. 23. for one sacerdotal tribe, he hath commanded, to choose some of the best of every Nation, to the Priesthood, not regarding the defects of body, but their religion and life; for cruental sacrifice a rational and incruental; and that mystical sacrifice of the body and blood of our Lord, which is celebrated in symbol of his death, for worship determined by circumscription of place: he hath commanded to celebrate the same with praises, from the East to the West in every place of his Dominion.  
These might suffice to show the Authority of the Catholic Church in celebrating the holy sacrifice of the Mass, and therefore I omit several other places of the holy Scripture, and I will therefore make it more clear by the continual Tradition of the Church in those first 500 years.    

CHAP. II. The sacrifice of the Mass proved by Tradition and practice of the Church, within the five hundred years after Christ.  
SAint Augustine Epist. 118. ad Januarium. cap. 5. affirms, that whatsoever the Church in all the world uses, carries with it full authority: insomuch that to dispute whether it might be done; is most insolent madness: and lib. 1. contra Cresconium c. 33. to do that, which the whole Church approves; cannot be questioned, for as the holy Scripture cannot deceive us; so he who fears to be deceived, by the obscurity of any question, let him consult of it, the Church, which without any ambiguity, the Scripture demonstrates or makes manifest.  
Let us therefore now see what hath been the Doctrine of the Church within these 500 years after Christ, whereto as I said before the Doctor appeals.  
This cannot be made more manifest than by the Tradition and practice of the Church, in her Liturgies or Masses, for what the Grecians call liturgies, that the Latin calls Missa, and we in English Mass. Now these Liturgies do come from S. Peter, S. James, S. Basil, S. chrysostom, S. Ambrose and others of those times, and within the times from five hundred years, we hardly find any forms of Masses; but what are deduced from them: I will not say but that there have been some difference in their rites or ceremonies, some diminutions and some additions, yet none of them differ in the substance or nature of a sacrifice, all agree in their forms, in as much as concerns the due celebration of the Mass. Now because the Doctor alleges the Liturgies of S. James, S. Basil, and S. chrysostom, I shall take a brief view of these in particular.  

§. 1. of S. James Liturgy.  
SAint Proclus Bishop of Constantinople, l. the Traditione divina Liturgiae, about the year 430. assures us, that amongst the Apostles, S. James did set forth a form of liturgy or Mass; which Baronius add an. 63. confirms, out of S. Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem, Catechist. 6. an. 365. who Catch. 5. explicates the most part of S. James Liturgy, as of the pax or, kiss of peace, the sursum corda; and Preface; the cherubical hymn, sanctus sanctus sanctus, prayers before the consecration; In which, says he, we pray our most benign God, that he would send his spirit on what is set before us, that he indeed would make this bread, Christ's body, and the wine Christ's blood: for what the holy Ghost teaches is altogether sanctified, and transmuted; but then when that spiritual sacrifice is made, we pray for the living and dead, etc. all which is found in S. James liturgy. S. Dionise and S. Clement have made the description of S. Peter's Mass, where are many things also like to those of S. James, and what now are in use in the Latin Church, S. Epiphanius an. 370. Haeres. 79. calls S. James the Principal leader of the Mysteries and sacrifice. For the satisfaction of the Reader I shall make a brief observation of what I find in his liturgy, as I find it in Claudius de sanctis, printed 111. years past.  
The glorious Apostle S. James composed for his people of Jerusalem his liturgy or Mass, wherein he frequently calls it a divine and supercelestial mystery; a sacred and dreadful Mystery, made at the holy Altar; a dreadful and incruental or unbloudy sacrifice, In which commemoration is made of the most holy Immaculate, our most glorious lady Mother of God and always Virgin Mary, with all the saints and Just; in another place, he has the same, concluding that by their prayers and intercession we may obtain Mercy. In another place the Priest prays; that he would grant that this our Oblation may be grateful acceptable, sanctified by the holy Ghost; for the propitiation of our sins, and for the Rest of our friends who have slept before us.  
Before; we ask of our Lord, the Angel of peace our faithful guide keeper of our souls and bodies; the Catechumen and others are dismissed: then the priest, uses Incense, saying, Receive, O Lord from our hands who are sinners this Incense as thou didst receive those things which Abel, No, Aaron and Samuel, and all thy saints have offered.  
Let all humane and mortal flesh be silent, and stand with fear and trembling, and contemplate with itself no terrene thing, for the King of kings, and Lord of lords, Christ our God comes forth to be Immolated: and given for food to the faithful.  
The consecration is the same with some little difference with that of the Roman Mass, and in the prayer following, We offer to thee, O Lord, this venerable and incruental sacrifice; and a little after, let his descending, holy and good and glorious presence, sanctify and make this bread, the holy body of thy Christ and this Chalice the precious blood of thy Christ, and when he breaks the bread he puts part into the Chalice, saying, The union of the most holy body & precious blood of our Lord and God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.  
Before Communion he has this prayer, O Lord our God, celestial bread, life of the Universe, I have sinned against heaven and before thee, and am not worthy to be made partaker of thy immaculate mysteries, but thou as a merciful God, make me worthy by thy grace, that without damnation I may be partaker of thy holy body and precious blood, unto remission of sins and life everlasting: and after; We give thee thanks O Christ our God for that thou hast vouchsafed us, to be made partakers of thy body and blood in remission of sins, and to eternal life.  
Moreover, he that peruses this Mass of S. James, may find most things which are in use in the Roman Church, as Incensing the Altar, Salutation of the people with Pax vobis, or peace be with you, at least 7. times, the oracles of the Old Testament and doctrine of the new, for which now is Epistle and Gospel, Domine miserere, or, kirye eleison, at least 15. times; the Gloria in excelsis, Creed, and our Lord's prayer: Inelination at the prayers, often signing the gifts with the sign of the Cross, and dismission of the people with benediction. I cannot omit that in the Consecration of the Chalice, the Apostle particularly declares that the wine should be mingled with water: from these we may fee what the Mass was in those Apostolical times.   

§ 2. Of the Liturgy of S. Basil.  
SAint Proclus aforesaid says, that many more divine Pastors who succeeded the Apostles and Doctors of the Church, explicating the reason of the holy Mysteries, of that divine Liturgy or Mass, have delivered and committed it in writing, and then naming S. Clement and S. James: but Great S. Basil seeing the sloth and negligence of men, and that they thought of nothing but terrene, and abject things, and that therefore they were weary of long Mass, not that he thought it to contain any superfluous thing, or overlong, but to prescind the dulness and slackness of the Prayers, and hearers: for that they spent much time therein, he gave a shorter to be recited; for after that our Saviour was assumpted into heaven, the Apostles before they were dispersed through the whole earth, assembling with conspiring minds, were converted to prayer, the whole day, and when they found much conso lation to be placed in the Mystical sacrifice of our Lord's body, they did sing the liturgy or Mass, abundantly and long prayer: Since they esteemed these divine sacred things joined together was to be preferred before all other things; and they were inflamed with a greater study and desire of divine things, and the holy sacrifice, and earnestly embraced it, which they always had in memory, the word of our Lord, saying, This is my body, and do ye this in my commemoration: and he who eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, abides in me, and I in him: wherefore also with a contrite heart they did sing many prayers, vehemently imploring the divine Majesty, etc. by these prayers they expected the coming of the holy Ghost, that by his divine presence he would make the bread and wine mixed with water, ordained for the sacrifice, the very body and blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ; which religious rite verily is observed to this very time, and shall flourish even to the end of the world. I have the more willingly rehearsed the words of this holy Bishop, highly commended by St. Cyril a Grecian, and teaching purposely of the divine liturgy or Mass, and explicating it in each particular, according to the two liturgies or Mass of S. Basil and S. chrysostom, not much more than 30. years, after S. chrysostom had composed his form of Mass.  
In this Mass of S. Basil, we find most of those things mentioned before, in that of S. James, and frequent memory of our blessed Lady, of the most holy our undesiled Lady, Mother of God, and always Virgin Mary, with all the saints; And in a prayer before the hymn, Sanctify our souls and bodies, and give us grace to serve thee in sanctity all our days, by the intercession of the holy Mother of God, and all saints, who have glorified thee from the beginning of the world.  
The Bishop in secret, prays, Reeceive us, approaching to thy holy Altar, according to the multitude of thy mercies, that we may be worthy to offer to thee, that rational and unbloudy sacrifice for our sins, and ignorance of the People.  
The Consecration is some what different, but by the action and words of our Saviour; after which, the Bishop prays in secret, Therefore O most holy Lord we also sinners and they unworthy servants, who are ordained to minister at thy Altat; not for our righteousness; for we have not done any thing good on earth; but for thy mercies and miserations, which thou hast abundantly poured on us, we confiding draw near to thy holy Altar; propounding the things consigurating the holy body and blood of thy Christ: we beseech thee, and ask thee, O holy of holies, that by thy wel-plensing benignity, thy holy spirit may comt upon us, and on these gifts which are set before us, to bless and sanctify them, and declare this bread to be the honour able body of our Lord God and Suvicur jesu Christ, and that which is in the Chalice, the very blood of our Lord God and our Saviout Jesus Christ, which is shed for the life of the world.  
Again, Make us all, partaking of one bread and Chalice to be united together, in the Communion of one holy Spirit, and receive the holy body and blood of thy Christ, etc.  
Before Communion, the Bishop said, O Lord Jesus Christ our God, behold from thy holy tabernacle, and come to sanctify us, who sittest above with the Father, and here invisibly art joined to us, vouchsafe with thy pawerful hand, to give us thy holy and undesiled body, and precious blood, and by us sinners to thy people.  
Prayer for the dead; Be mindful of all who sleep in the hope of Resurrection to eternal life: and as for Altars, Vestments, Incense, some prayers in secret; Kyrie eleison, very frequently. In like manner Pax vobis: the Epistle and Gospel; signing the bread and wine, and the people, with the sign of the Cross; turning to the people; washing of hands, elevation of the bread, to show it to the people; dismission of the people, with many other things which we now use in the Roman Mass; the like I may say of S. Chrysostom's Mass of which in the next Paragraph;   

§. 3. Of S. Chrysostom's Liturgy or Mass.  
NOt long after S. Basil, S. John chrysostom on the same reasons did abbreviate the form of Mass, which the Grecians do observe to this day, and besides the practice, many Expositors, as Proclus Bishop of Constantinople within 30. years after. S. German Bishop of the same place, in his Theory of holy things, wherein he explicates all the ceremonies and substance of the Mass. Nicolas Cabasilus Archbishop of Thessalonia, in his explication of the liturgy. The holy Martyr Maximus, in his book de Ecclesiastica Mystagogia, of the Ecclesiastical Mysteries and ceremonies: Bessarion Bishop of Nice, and afterward Cardinal; and others all agreeing in the same Mysteries, and others all agreeing in the same Mysteries, with S. chrysostom in his Liturgy. Add to this, that we may find the self same dispersed in his several works, as Clandius de sanctis, has pithily collected in the end of his book de Liturgils'; Let us briesly set down what S. chrysostom has in his.  
We find all the Ceremonies now used in the Latin Church, as all along are noted in the second part of the liturgical Discourse, particularly of Altars, Vestments, signing the bread and wine, the book of the Gospel, Incense, and People's Inclinations, adorations, some prayers in silence, prayer for the Pope, partition of the host, whereof one piece is put into the Chalice; Elevation of the holy Sacrament; Pax, benediction at the end; of offering at the Altar.  
Mention is made of the Ineruental host, and the Priest prays; We give thee thanks, O Lord God of virtues, who hast thought us worthy to assist now at thy holy Altar, and to prostrate to thy mercies, for our sins, and ignorance of the people; O Lord God receive our supplication, and make us worthy in offering prayer, and the Incruental host, to thee for all thy people. And again in another prayer, Make me anointed with the grace of Priesthood, to assist at this holy table, and consecrate thy holy body, and precious blood: A little after, Grant that these Sacraments may be offered by me a sinner, and thy unworthy servant, for thou art he that offers and is offered, the receiver, and distributer, Christ our Lord: The words of consecration are a little different from those of the former Liturgies: After the Priest says, We offer to thee this rational and Incruental duty, and we pray and supplicate and ask, that thou wouldst send thy holy Spirit upon us, and on these thy gifts, and make this bread indeed the precious body of thy Christ; and what is in the Chalice, the Preci-bloud of thy Christ: The Deacon saying, Amen, the Priest adds, Changing, by thy holy spirit.  
And after, Look down O Lord Jesus Christ our God, from thy holy Tabernacle, and from the seat of Glory of thy kingdom; and come to sanctify us, thou who sittest above with the Father, and assists us invisibly, here beneath: vouchsafe to give us by thy powerful hand, thy Immaculate body and precious blood, and by us, to all the People.  
Besides in this Liturgy, the priest frequently calls upon our Blessed Lady, craving her Intercessiion, as also of the Angels and Saints, and for the living and Dead: In sine, there is nothing in the now Roman Mass but Order and Decorum that was not in the former Mass in the primitive times: so that we may say, if the Mass was good in those times, the Roman Mass is now good; and if this the now Roman Mass be Idolatrous and sacrilegious, the Liturgies, Mass, or public prayer of the Church of those times, were so also; so that there never was a true Christian Church.    

CHAP. III. The Sacrifice of the Mass proved out of the testimony of Popes and Counsels in the first 500 years.  
NExt to this, of the practice of the Church, the authority of the holy Popes, who have been within those 500 years, aught to have a great weight and credit, wherefore I shall begin with S. Leo; 440. under whom was celebrated that famous Council of Chalcedon, admitted by the now English Church; and for his great acts, was surnamed the Great: he I say Epist. 81. to Dioscorus, Ordained, that for the necessity of the people a priest might say more than one Mass in solemn feasts: and Epist. 88 to the Bishops of Germany and France he gives a command that Coriepiscopes or Priests should not reconcile any penitent publicly in Mass.  
367. Pope Damascus Epist. 4. made the same Decree, and in his Pontifical speaking of Alexander Pope and Martyr; he says; that he did mingle our Lord's Passion in the priests prayers, when Masses were celebrated; and that Sixtus Pope and Martyr ordained that the priest beginning the action of Mass, the people should sing the hymn, holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Sabaoth.  
297. S. Marcelline Pope and Martyr. Epist. 1. The sacrifice which is used by Christians, on the holy Altars; is not only offered to God the Father, but also with common devotion to the Son.  
239. S. Fabian Pope and Martyr, declared that the sacrifice is not to be admitted from the hands of a Priest, who cannot perform the prayers or actions, or other observances of the Mass according to the rites of the Church.  
175. S. Soter Pope and martyr, determined, that when the Priests consecrated the holy Mysteries in the time of the Masses, if it happened by any accident of sickness that the Mystery began, could not be accomplished, it should be supplied by some other Priest: Again, he ordained that none should presume to celebrate Mass after meat or drink, how little soever it were, as also that none of the Priests should presume to celebrate the solemnity of Masses, without two being present to answer him.  
273. Foelix Pope and Martyr, Epist. 2. ad Episcop. Galliae. declared, that in a synod, he had commanded them, and all Churches, that Masses should be celebrated on the memory of Martyrs.  
145. S. Higgine Pope and Martyr, ordained, that all Churches should always be consecrated with Mass: Evaristus also Pope and Martyr, witness Ivo and Burchard had ordained the same.  
142. S. Telesphore Pope and Martyr, in his Epistle to all Bishops, Cap. 2. ordained three Masses to be said on Chrismass day, one at midnight.  
121. Alexander Pope and Martyr, Epist. 1. ad omnes orthod. says, Verity itself, has instructed us to offer the Chalice and bread in the Sacrament, when he said, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and gave to his Disciples, saying, take ye and eat, for this is my body, which is delivered for you; In like manner the Chalice, etc. for by these sacrifices offered to our Lord crimes and sins are blotted out; and therefore his Passion is to be remembered whereby we are redeemed, and often recited, and these offered to our Lord; our Lord is delighted and pleased with such hosts and great sins are demitted; for can there be in sacrifices a greater thing, than the body and blood of Christ? Neither can there be any Oblation better than this, for this excels all, which is to be offered to our Lord, with a pure conscience, and to be taken with a pure mind, and to be honoured by all,; and as it is better than all other; so it ought rather to be honoured and worshipped. The same Saint says, In the Oblation of the Sacraments which are offered within the solemnity of Masses, the Passion of our Lord is to be added, that the Passion of him whose body and blood is made may be celebrated; so that setting aside all superstitious opinions, Bread only and wine, mixed with water are to be offered in the sacrifice, for (as we have received from our Fathers and reason itself teaches) wine alone or water alone is not to be offered in the Chalice of our Lord but both mixed, because we read, that both did flow from his side in his Passion.  
To omit others, I shall conclude with S. Clement Pope and Martyr, l. 6. constit. Apostate 23. for a bloody sacrifice, Christ gave a rational and Incruental and that Mystical sacrifice of the body and blood of our Lord, which is celebrated as a symbol of his death.  
I know some of our adversaries will call in question some of these Decrees, but setting aside all other disputes, the practice of the Church from thence, even to our times; and the use of most of them in the liturgies, before mentioned, will sufficiently convince the truth of them, let us now see whether the holy Counsels of those times will manifest the same.  

Counsels.  
505. I Shall begin with the Agathen Council, within the fifth hundred year, which can. 14. ordains that the Altars are to be consecrated, not only with the unction of Chrism, but also by the sacerdotal benediction. Can. 21. allows Masses in private Oratories, but commands that in principal feasts, all should hear Mass in the Parochial Churches and can. 47. commands all seculars to hear Mass on Sundays.  
482. The first Council at Tours, Can. 2. forbids married or luxurious priests, to offer sacrifice to God or to minister to the people.  
420. The last Council of Carthage cap. 3. declares that it is not lawful for a priest to reconcile any one in the public Mass.  
416. The second Melevitan Council cap. 12. ordains that none should celebrate prayers, or Orisons, or Masses, or Praefations, or commendations, or Imposition of hands, which were not approved in Counsels.  
398. The fourth Council of Carthage in the first 6. Canons, plainly shows the holy Orders to have reference to the due celebration of Mass; Can. 33. Bishops or Priests, if on cause of visiting the Church, they come to the Church of another Bishop, they are to be received according to their degree, and invited to preach the Word, and consecrate the oblation, that is, the Mass. Can. 79. Penitents who have diligently performed the laws of Penance, if accidentally they die in their journey, or on the Sea, where they could not be assisted, let the memory of them be commended both in prayers and oblations, Can. 89. it is ordained, that the Bishop should prohibit none whether Gentile or Heretic, or Jew, to enter into the Church, or to hear the Word, during the Mass of the Catechumen. All such were not to stay in the Mass of the faithful.  
397. The third Council of Carthage, Can. 23. When one is at the Altar, the prayer is always to be directed to the Father: and Can. 24. Nothing more is to be offered in the Sacraments of the body and blood, but what our Lord himself has delivered, that is, bread and wine mixed with water, nor nothing more offered in the sacrifices, than of grapes and wheat.  
393. The Council held at Hippon has the same Decrees, and ordains that the Sacraments of the Altar, should be celebrated by those who are fasting.  
352. In a Roman Council: Athanasius was accused for having consecrated a Church built by the Emperor without his knowledge, and was so bold as to celebrate the synaxis therein: S. Athanasius denies the first, but grants the second, wherein he prayed for the Emperor, and was drawn to do it by the Multitude.  
324. The Gangrane Council, cap. 24. declares Anathema to those who through pride, esteeming themselves perfect, did condemn the Assemblies made in the places and Churches of the Saints, or believed the oblations which are there celebrated to be despised, and the memory of the Saints to be contemned.  
320. The ancient Council of Laodicen, cap. 58. Bishops are not to make the oblations in private houses, without Priests.  
But what makes more to our purpose, the same is gathered out of three of the first General Counsels, which the present Church of England admits, now in their Articles. In the 4. General Council of Chalcedon, Act. 3. Blessed Ischirion Martyr accused Dioscorus Bishop of Constantinople (251.) that amongst other things, he had taken away the wheat that was sent by the Emperor to the Church of Libya; for to make the Eucharist, that by that occasion the Incruent all sacrifice of the Mass, was not for long time offered: he adds moreover, that those goods which Perisopia a most noble woman, had bequeathed by Testament to Monasteries, and to the poor, to the end that the sacrifice might be offered for the health of her soul, he had given to profane persons; sure these actions were then esteemed great Crimes; or else, he durst not to have presumed to propound them in the face of so great a Council.  
431. In the great Council of Ephesus, the Epist. of Cyrill, Patriarch of Alexandria, and synod of that place to Nestorius; was read cap. 3. and highly approved, and commended, as agreeable to the Council of Nice, or containing nothing ambiguous, nothing dissentaneous, but agreeing to our settled faith, without any novelty. Now this Epistle was a profession of the Catholic faith, and to our purpose in these terms; Announcing the death of the only born Son of God, that of Jesus Christ, according to the flesh, and his Resurrection, and in like manner, confessing his ascension into the heavens; we celebrate in the Churches; the incruental verity of sacrifice; so also we come to the Mystical Benedictions, and are sanctified and made partakers of the holy body, and precious blood of Christ, redeemer of all of us; not receiving as common flesh (far be it) nor as of a sanctified man, and as of one joined to the word, according to the unity of dignity or of one possessing the divine habitation, but as truly life-giving and made proper to the word itself, being life naturally as God, for he is united to proper flesh, and has declared that to be life-giving, and therefore as he said to us, Amen, Amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the son of man, and drink his blood; yet we ought not to think that to be as a man one of us (for how can the flesh of man according to his nature be life-giving?) but truly made proper to him, who for us, both is and is called the son of man; I cannot conceive but that this was then the common belief of the whole Church, when from this Mystery of the Mass they proved the Godhead of Christ.  
325. I shall conclude with the 18. Canon of the first General Council held at Nice, where it is said, That there was brought to the holy & great Council, that in some places and Cities, the Deacons did give the Grace of holy Communion to Priests; which neither Rule, nor custom, hath delivered, that those who offer Christ's body, should receive from them who have no power to offer, also it was declared that some Deacons did touch the holy thing offered, (that is the Eucharist) before the bishops.  
These might suffice to any rational man, for a clear attestation of the holy sacrifice of the Mass, even in those primitive times; nevertheless I shall by way of addition produce the testimony and judgement of the holy Fathers and Doctors of those times.    

CHAP. IU. The testimony and judgement of the holy Fathers and Doctors, for the Sacrifice of the Mass, and that within five hundred years after Christ.  
430. I Shall begin with the foresaid S. Cyril, even in the first Council of Ephesus, in his Declaration of the 11. Anathematicisme. We celebrate in the Church, the life-giving and incruental sacrifice, believing that which is set before us, to be the body, and in like manner precious blood, not of some manlike and common, but rather we receive it, as the proper body and blood of the life-giving Word, for common flesh cannot vivificate, and our Saviour testified this, saying, the flesh, profiteth nothing, it is the spirit that quickeneth, but because it is made proper to the word, therefore it is understood, as is life-giving: as our Saviour said, As the living father sent me, and I live by the Father; and he who eats me, the same also shall live by me.  
430. Theodoret about the same time cap. 20. of the History of the holy Fathers, In the life of holy Maris, says, When divine Maris had a long time desired to sea the spiritual and mystical sacrifice to be offered, he asked, that the oblation of the divine gift might be made, I willingly yielded to him, and commanded the holy vessels to be brought, when the village was not far distant, and for an Altar used the Deacons hands, and offered the mystical divine and salutary sacrifice.  
420. S. Augustine Epist. 23. ad Benifacium, Was not Christ once immolated in himself, and yet in the sacrifice not only through all the Paschall solemnities, but every day, for the people. l. 20. oont. Faustum. c. 21. Who of the Bishops assisting, at the Altar in the place of the holy bodies, at any time said? I offer to thee Peter, or Paul, or Cyprian, but what is offered is offered to God, who crowned the Martyrs. Afterward, We most frequently sacrifice to God, in the Memory of Martyrs, only with that Rite, with which in the manifestation of the New testament, he hath commanded to be sacrificed to him, which pertains to that worship which is called Latria, and is due only to God. And a little after, The flesh and blood of this sacrifice, before the coming of Christ was promised by victims of similitudes; In the Passion was given by truth itself; and after Christ's Ascension, is celebrated by a Sacrament of memory. Ser. 91. de temp. he makes mention of some lessons which were read in the Mass, Ser. 32. cap. 1. It is not to be doubted, but that the dead receive help by the prayers of the Church; and by the salutary Sacrifice, and alms, which are given for their souls; that God may deal more mercifully with them; then their sins have deserved, for this is delivered to us by our Fathers. The whole Church observes when she prays for those who are dead in the communion of Christ's body and blood, when in their place they are remembered at the Sacrifice; Ser. 251. On Sunday let none absent themselves from the celebration of Masses; where he also complains, that some do force the Priest to abreviate their Masses, lib. 10. di civitate Dei, cap. 20. The man Christ Jesus, was made Mediator between God and man, when in form of God he takes sacrifice with the Father, with whom also he is true God, yet in form of a servant he had rather be, then take Sacrifice, by this he is both a Priest himself, the Offerer, and he himself the Oblation, the Sacrament of which he would have to be the daily sacrifice of the Church; which being the body of that head, learns to offer herself by him. The ancient sacrifices of the Saints, were manifold and various signs of this true sacrifice, when this one was figured by many, and to this high and true sacrifice all counterfeit Sacrifices did give place: and lib. 22. cap. 8. A house being haunted by evil spirits, the man of the house entreated one of our Priests to go thither, and expel them by prayer, one went and offered there the Sacrifice of Christ's body, and by God's mercy the devils did leave the place. lib. 9 confess. cap. 12. the Saint tells us, that he was present, when the Sacrifice was offered for his Mothers Soul.  
398. S. chrysostom in 2. ad Tit. 1. hom. 2. That holy oblation which Peter or Paul or a Priest of whatsoever merit he be, who doth offer, is the same which Christ gave to his Disciples, which now also Priests do make; this has no less than that: hom. 24. in 1. Cor. 10. God hath prepared here a much more admirable and more magnificent Sacrifice, and when he had changed the Saccrifice, for the slaughter of bruit beasts; he commanded himself to be offered: hom. 69. ad Populum Antioch. It was not unadvisedly ordained, by the Apostles, that commemoration of the dead, should be made, in the dreadful mysteries, for they know that from thence much gain and profit, comes to them; for when the whole people with hands stretched forth, the sacerdotal plenitude, and the dreadful Mystery is propounded, how praying for them, shall we not be heard of God? To these we may admit what the same Saint hath left to posterity, in his liturgy, of which we have spoken already, cap. 1. §. 3. and remit the Reader to Claud. de Sanctis, at the end of his book of the Liturgy who hath made a Collection out of S. Chrysostoms' works, not only in general, but also in every particular of the Mass.  
390. S. Jerome Epist. ad Theophilum applauding his book says, In thy work we have beheld the verity of the Churches that those who are ignorant may learn and be taught, by the testimony of the Scriptures, with what veneration, they ought to receive holy things, and serve in the Ministry of Christ's Altar, and to have the holy Chalice and holy veils, and other things which belong to the worship of our Lord's passion, from the participation of our Lord's body and blood. Again in cap. 1. ad Tit. If lay-men be commanded to abstain from their wives for prayer, what shall we think of a Bishop, who must daily offer immaculate sacrifices unto God, for his own sins and for the sins of the people.  
380. S. Gregory of Nice, orat. de Resurrect. Our Lord preventing the violence of the Jews, offered himself a sacrifice; being himself both priest and Lamb; but thou wilt say to me, when was this done? even then when he gave to his familiar friends, his body to eat, and his blood to drink, and what he himself did, the same he commanded his Ministers to do.  
374. S. Ambrose in his prayer before Mass, which the Church to this day uses, exclaims, O with how great confusion of heart, and fountain of tears, with how great reverence and trembling, with how great chastity of body and purity of mind; is that divine and celestial sacrifice to be celebrated, where thy flesh in verity is taken, where thy blood in verity is drunken, where lowest things are joined to highest things, earthly things to Divine: where is the presence of the holy Angels, where thou art wonderfully and ineffably Sacrifice and Priest? Again, I, O Lord, mindful of thy venerable Passion, do come to thy Altar, although a sinner, that I may offer to thee the sacrifice, which thou hast instituted, and commanded to be offered in remembrance of thee, for our Salvation. And in his Mass, he has this prayer, How can we despair of thy mercy, who receive so great a gift; that we should deserve to offer such an host to thee, to wit, the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, who delivered himself, for the redemption of the world, to that pious and venerable passion; who instituting the form of everlasting sacrifice of Salvations, first offered himself a sacrifice, and first taught it to be offered? And again, Our Lord Jesus Christ thy son hath ordained the Rite of sacrificing in the New testament, when he transformed bread and wine, which Melchisedech Priest had offered in prefiguration of the mystery to come; into the sacrament of his body and blood. and l. de officits cap. 48. Now Christ is offered as man, as receiving his passion, and he offers himself as Priest, that he may forgive our sins: And in Psal. 38. We have seen the high Priest, coming unto us, we have seen and heard him offering his blood for us; let us Priests follow him as much as we can, that we, though weak in merit, yet honourable by the Sacrifice, may offer sacrifice for the people; for although Christ is not now seen to offer, yet he is offered on earth, when the body of Christ is offered, yea, he is manifestly offered in us, his word sanctifies the sacrifice which is offered.  
370. S. Gregory Nariazene, orat. 4. makes mention of Altars, having their name from the most pure and incruental sacrifice.  
340. S. Athanasius, Ser. de Defunct. The Oblation of the unbloudy sacrifice is our propitiation.  
328. Eusebius l. 1. de demonst. cap. 10. After all things Christ working our salvation offered to his Father a certain wonderful victim, and excellent sacrifice for the salvation of us all, and ordained in memory thereof, that we ourselves should offer it to God for a sacrifice.  
318. S. cyril of Jerusalem, Catech. 5. explicates the most parts of the Mass, I will only note his words on the Consecration: We pray (says he) the most benign God, that he would send his holy spirit on the things set before us, that he may indeed make the bread, the body of Christ, and the wine the blood of Christ, for that on which the holy spirit comes upon, is altogether sanctified and transmutated, or changed from one thing to another.  
350. S. Cyprian, Epist. 63. ad Clerum. The Bishops our predecessors religiously considering, and wholsomely providing, that no brother departing this life, shall name a Clergyman to be tutor or guardian over pupils; If he doth, no offering is to be made for him, nor sacrifice celebrated for his rest; because he deserves not to be named at the Altar, in the prayer of the Priests, who would withdraw Priests and Ministers from the Altar: for which he alleges the authority of Pope Victor, and Sermone de coena Domini. This sacrifice is a perpetual, and always a permanent holocaust, no multitude consumes this bread; it becomes not old by antiquity.  
180. S. Irenaeus l. 4. cap. 34. the Churches oblation, which our Lord taught to be offered in the whole world, is reputed before God, a sacrifice pure, and acceptable to him. And again, The kind of Oblation is not reproved, for oblations were there, and also oblations are here: sacrifice in the people, and sacrifices in the Church: And after, he makes an argument against the heretics of those times: Now will it be manifest that the Bread whereon thanksgivings are made, is the body of our Lord, and Chalice his blood, if they say, Christ is not the word of the Father; see him cap. 32. above cited.  
220. S. Hippolytus Bishop and Martyr, Orat: de cansummatione Mundi: brings in Christ speaking thus, Come ye Bishops and Priests, who have daily offered my precious body and blood, and speaking of the time of antichrist, he says, The holy houses of the Churches, shall be like Cottages; and the precious body and blood of Christ shall not be extant, in those days, the liturgy or Mass, shall be abolished; the singing of psalms shall not be heard, that is, publicly: With him agrees S. Chrisostome, hom. 49. operis imperfecti, according to that of Dan. cap. 9 & 12.  
203. Tertulliam lib. de Oratione, cap. 14. speaking of the stations, very many do think that they are not to be present at the prayers of the sacrifices, because the station is to end, by taking the body of our Lord, therefore the Eucharist doth finish the devout service to God: were not thy station more solemn, if thou did also stand at God's Altar? the Body of our Lord being taken and reserved, both are safe, both participation of the sacrifice, and execution of Offices. And l. ad scapulum: We sacrifice for the health of the Emperor, but to our God, and his, but by pure prayer, as God has commanded.  
S. Martialis, Epist. ad Burdegal: cap. 3. Sacrifice is offered to God, the Creator on the Altar, not to men, nor to Angels, not only on a sanctified Altar; but every where a clean ablation is offered to God, as he has testified, whose body and blood we offer unto life everlasting, saying, Joan. 4. God is a spirit, and they that adore him must adore in verity, for he having been both immaculate aend without sin, because he was conceived of the holy Ghost, and born of the Virgin Mary, permitted himself to be immolated on the Altar of the Cross: but what the Jews through malice did immolate, thinking themselves to abolish his name from the earth; we propound in a sanctified Altar for the cause of our salvation, knowing by this only remedy, life to be given us, and death avoided, for our Lord himself hath commanded us to do it in Commemoration of him.  
171. S. Ignatius, Martyr, Epist. ad Smirnenses. It is not lawful to baptise, nor offer, nor immolate sacrifice, or celebrate Masses without the Bishop: And Epist. ad Ephesios', he condemns those who separate themselves, and come not to the the Congregation of sacrifices.  
Thus we see, that the Roman Mass used for almost twelve hundred years did not there take its beginning, but was always observed in Christ's Church even from the beginning, from Christ himself and his Apostles.   

CHAP. V Sacrifice necessary to the being of a Church.  
THere can be no visible Church without visible Religion, nor no visible Religion, without a visible Sacrifice: for as the Church is nothing but a visible congregation of all the faithful, so it is necessary that in this Assembly or Congregation, there be something, that may manifest the it murual desire and concord to worship God. Now it is certain that there never could be any agreement to any internal action, neither could there be any public act of Communion in the worship of God, unless they assembled did agree, or follow some external sign, voice, or action, such as Sacraments and sacrifices are.  
S. chrysostom well notes, hom. 60. ad Pop. Antioch. If we had been incorporeal, God would have given us plain and incorporeal gifts; but because the soul is conjoined to the body, he has given us intelligible things, in sensible; and this conformable to humane nature which depends of the senses in her operations; even in the worship of God, whereto the virtue of Religion conduces us.  
Now Religion includes four Acts: The first is, a consideration of God's infinite Majesty, on whom all things depend. 2. A reflection on our nothing, for of ourselves we are nothing have nothing, and can do nothing; but whatsoever we have or can do, comes all from God; These two acts are not elicited by the virtue of Religion, but as supposed grounds or motives, to the worship of God: the other two proper acts of Religion are interior or exterior: the first as pure, is proper only to the Angels, and Blessed souls, now separated from their bodies, or elevated by some supernatural grace; but as it is found in Men of this world, has dependence on the senses, but may be purified in its operation, and is a profound submission of heart or internal Inclination of the mind to serve and worship God: The external act of Religion, is an external profession of that interior will, made by voice, gesture, or external sign; such are public prayer, adorations, and such like, but none like to the sacrifice; which carries with it that true worship, which S. Augustin, l: 10. de civitate Dci, cap. 1: calls Latria, or, honour due to God: A little after, Religion signifies nothing so distinctly as the worship of God, by which cap. 4. we own sacrifioe to God, and thence infers, There is none dare say, a sacrifice is due, but to God alone, and who ever sacrificed but to him, whom he knew, or imagined or feigned to be God: whence I infer, That since from the first creation of Man, God had a Church, wherein there was true Religion, it necessarily follows, that according to our humane constitution, in the same Church there was and is an external sacrifice, wherein God, was and is worshipped with Latria, which is the perfect act of Religion and worship of God.  
Moreover, sacrifices seem to follow the instinct of Nature, for as Plutark, adversus Colos says, A man may find Cities without walls, houses, Kings, Laws, Coins, schools, and Theatres; but a Town without Temples, and Gods, to whom sacrifices are offered, you shall never find. Plato, before him, the leg. Dial. We can never find any Nation so barbarous, any people at all so rude, and savage, who with vows, victins, and outward sacrifices, have not acknowledged the Soveraeignty of some God or other. All Hysteries do testify, that from the beginning of the world sacrifices were in use amongst all Nations and Religion: whence S. Augustine, Epist. 49. ad Deograt, 9.34. That, it is not to be blamed in the rites of Pagans, that they builded Temples, ordained Priests, offered sacrifices (for he supposed these to be according to the law of nature) but that these were exhibited to Idols, and devils, that was to be condemned, for that they gave which was only due to God, to false Gods.  
But what makes more to our purpose, is, the continual practice of God's Church even from the beginning of using sacrifices, which S. Augustine lib. 10. the civet. Dei. cap. 4. How ancient apart of God's worship, a sacrifice is, Cain and Abel do show full proof; and all along in the law of Nature the Examples of No, Abraham, Melchisedech and Jacob▪ now the written Law had sacrifices ordained by God himself, which continued to our Saviour, to say then, that the law of Grace should have no sacrifice, is to deprive Christ's Church of the most noble act of Religion; and so make it more imperfect, than the law of Nature or Written law.  
I know some will object that of S. John Chap. 4. God is a spirit, and they that adore him; must adore in spirit and verity; whereto I answer, that this place manifests, that our sacrifices are spiritual, and true, in which they differ from all precedent sacrifices, which were carnal, and rather in figure or shadow of the sacrifice of the new law: It is certain therefore, that Christ did not reject all external worship of God, but would have them done in spirit and truth; otherwise take away all sacrifices, Sacraments, prayers, Churches, and society of men in his service. The sacrifice of the new law requires to be done in spirit (that is) in saith, hope, charity, and interior devotion; and in verity according to the institution of Christ. The Apostle S. Paul, Ephes. 6. invites us to pray at all times in spirit, that is, in mind, affection and desire, or as Vatablus terms it, In spirit, that is, with fervour of spirit, that is, with an Intimate and fervent spirit, otherwise it works no true act of Religion, whose external act requires also the internal: as has been said already.  
Our Advarsaries have sought all means possible to take away the belief of the sacrifice of the Mass, notwithstanding that Christ's Church, as I have formerly manifested, has always taught and believed it as proper to the Evangelical law. This Doctor Breven● has two or three Inventions to this purpose, which I shall endeavour to refute in the next Chapter.   

CHAP. VI Of the Doctors Invention to exclude the Sacrifice of the Mass.  
SOme of our advarsaries have said, That the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross, is the peculiar and perpetual host, in which our Priesthood, law, and Religion is constituted: and so in the new law, there is no other sacrifice remaining, the Doctor in proof of this, lays hold on the Apostles words; Heb. 7. Christ did once offer himself, cap. 9 once in the consummation of the world; and again Christ was offered once: It is needless then to frame another sacrifice. I answer by granting the Antecedent; and denying the consequence, for the sacrifice of the Cross, was both full and sufficient; nothing was wanting to the value, and sufficiency of the price; for Christ, by his passion, has purchased the sufficient price for to redeem the whole world: yea for all the sins ever committed, either before or after, for it was an expiatory, Redeeming, and satisfactory Sacrifice; for the whole world, by which the Sacrifice of the Mass is not excluded; for the Mass is only applicatory of the Redemption, and satisfaction, which Christ did work on the Cross; so that in the Mass, we do not offer a new price for our sins, but we apply the former price of the Cross, to ourselves; even as we apply the same to us, by baptism, and other Sacraments.  
Moreover, the sacrifice of the Mass, may be said to be the same with that of the Cross; in as much as it is a continual representation of the passion; whence S. Cyprian, Epist. 63. says, Our sacrifice is correspondent to the passion of Christ: and S. Augustin de fid. ad Pet. Cap. 19 Those carnal sacrifices did prefigurate the flesh of Christ which he was to offer for sins; and the blood which he was to shed; But this sacrifice, is the commemoration of the flesh of Christ which he has now given: and of the blood which he has shed: In them he was showed as to be killed, in this he is showed as killed. Again, S. Cyprian in the place before cited, says, we make mention of the Passion, in all our sacrifices (for the passion of our Lord is the sacrifice which we offer) we ought to do no other thing, but what he did, for the Scripture says; as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink this Chalice, you shall show the death of our Lord until he comes; as often therefore, as we offer the Chalice in remembrance of our Lord and of his passion, we do that which manifestly our Lord did; In fine, the sacrifice of the Mass is the same with the sacrifice of the Cross; for that in the Mass, as well as on the Cross, the same principal priest, and the same offerer, to wit, Christ, is both the same victim, and host, different only in the manner, Incruentall in the Mass, Cruentall on the Cross; but the Incruentall in the Mass signifies and represents in a mysterial manner; the cruental on the Cross.  
Christ therefore once died for all, with all sufficiency imaginable: but all do not receive the benefit thereof, only those who by grace of God, are made partakers thereof, receive the fruit of Christ's passion; and we are made participant of this all-sufficient sacrifice; by such means as Christ has lest in his Church, amongst which the chiefest are the Sacraments & sacrifice of the Eucharist, as the principal means to apply the merit of Christ's passion unto us, which Christ instituted in his last supper, according to the faith, belief, and doctrine of Christ's Church; even within these five hundred years after Christ, as is formerly declared.  
Others will admit of some sacrifices: but they must be purely spiritual, such as are the sacrifices of praise, of contrition, humility, and such like, as if they were all spiritual and celestial; but our omnipotent God, condescending to our humane nature, and for the general conservation of his worship in the hearts of men, has always ordained certain visible signs, sacraments, and rites, for to move our interior mind to such pious duties, as is manifest in all states of God's Church.  
Moreover, this is besides our question, for we require a sacrifice which is proper and peculiar to the new testament, or Law, which was ordained by Christ: such as are mentioned, are common to all laws; if you take them purely spiritual; to no law: for such belong only to celestial spirits, but if we take them as united to visible signs; then such sacrifices were found in the law of nature, as in the written laws, nay there were several sacrifices in all. The primary Intention, was to exhibit due worship to God, and in particular some were for expiation of sin, some with thanksgiving, other in praise of God; in like manner in the law of Grace there are such sacrifices, but the only true and proper sacrifice of the Evangelical law▪ is the sacrifice of the Eucharist; which as it succeeded all the sacrifices of the old law, so it hath in a more excellent manner their effect.  
Contrary to this, Doctor Brevent citys S. Augustine, lib. 10. the civet. Dei, cap. 6. Every work tending to effect our beatitude by a sincere inherence with God is a true sacrifice. To which I say, that in a general sense it is true, especially if it be taken in metaphorical sense, as 8. Augustine plainly here takes it; as it appears in the examples here alleged. A sacrifice, (says he) though offered by a man, is a divine thing, whereupon, a man consecrated wholly to God's name, to live to him, and die to the world, is a sacrifice. 2. when we chastise our body, by abstinence, it is a sacrifice. 3. works of mercy being referred to God, are true sacrifices: We Catholics do confess and acknowledge those, and such, to be metaphorical, improperly, in a general sense, true sacrifices; but Protestants will not only deny them to be proper sacrifices, but also will not believe them, to be sacrifices at all, for they will not allow the two first, to be acts of virtue, and the best word they will give them is, that they are effects, and fruits of Popery.  
Moreover, the Saint in the same place, insinnuates another sacrifice, by which the whole and holy society of the redeemed, and sanctified City is offered to God; by that great Priest, who gave up his life for us to become members of so great a head, in so mean a form, this form he offered, and herein he was offered, in this, he is our Priest, our Mediator, and our sacrifice, all in this; and after, concludes, This is the Christians sacrifice, we are one body with Christ, as the Church celebrateth, in the Sacrament of the Altar, so well known to the faithful. This alone is the proper and peculiar sacrifice, which Christ has instituted, and left in his Church; as formerly hath been declared.  
But our Doctor, to prove his conceit; cap. 11. towards the end; citys Durandus, l. 2. the sacerd. fol. 29. which is cap. 10. In fine, The Doctors words are; Durand himself is full of this (that is, to prove the only sacrifices of the Cross) for Christ, (says he) performed excellently the office of a priest; when he offered himself on the Cross, for the sins of Mankind, and performs it yet more gloriously now, when sitting at the right hand of his Father, he intercedes continually for us. We acknowledge this as Catholic doctrine, for this is true: but no way excluding the sacrifice of the Mass; but with the same Durandus in the precedent words, this Office (to wit of priest) Christ did exercise, when after supper he converted the bread and wine, into his body and blood, saying to the Apostles, Take ye, and eat this is my body. The Doctor omitted this either ignorantly or maliciously. It hardly can be believed, but that he did read the place, except he took it from others notes, and so little cared for the truth; if he did, little credit is to be given to what he says; God defend us from such Doctors.  
It is strange how the Doctor in the beginning of his 3. chapter. should acknowledge that the Mass; according to the primary Notion, as it was anciently taken, for that part of divine worship, where the elements of bread and wine were by the priest, both consecrated to God, and distributed to the People which is, the supper of our Lord in S. Paul 1 Cor. 11.20. for this he citys, Ordo Romanus made by Gelasius; and reprinted in Rome, 1591. or thereabouts; whereby is manifest, the Conformity of the Present Romans, with the Church in those primitive times for this sacrifice for which we contend, to wit, that we take it even in this Notion he assigns, and accordingly imitating the primitive Church, not inventing any new Mass, but continuing still the same. I could not but smile when for this he alleges Durandus for legitima Missa, lib. 4. cap. 1. n. 39 and interprets it the only due and lawful administration of the holy Sacrament in the old latin Church: whereas Durand interpreteth that to be a legitimate Mass, in which are Priest and respondent, offerer and communicant, as the composition of the prayers demonstrates, this by evident reason; perhaps he means the order and manner of celebrating the Mass: which Durand doth learnedly and solidly declare, in every particular particle of the Mass, which if the Doctor believes, as he does his legitima Missa, he labours in vain against the Roman Church.  
The Question in that place propounded, was, whether a Priest might celebrate Mass, when less than two were present; and after disputing pro and con, he concludes, That is a lawful Mass, which hath one present, besides the Priest at Mass, O how much is this to the Doctors purpose.  
Now the Doctor will solve all, by putting instead of the sucrifice of the Mass, Christian duties, as evidently true Evangelical Oblations, and sacrifices; which in order to public worship, were made before Communion, and which the holy Fathers commend as the general Christian sacrifice, that succeeded Jewish offerings, which he confirms by a prayer which he finds in the Roman Missal, Dom. 5. post Pentecosten. It cannot be denied, but that such Oblations were made in the time of Mass; at the offertory; as is declared in the Liturgical discourse, p. 2. sect. 2. cap. 2. which also is declared, in the 4. Canon of the Apostles; in these words, It it not lawful to offer at the Altar, besides new corn and grapes and oil for the lamps, and perfumes, that is, Incense, in the time, wherein the holy oblation is celebrated; many ancient Canons have been made, concerning these oblations; in all which we may see that these oblations were of things, which belonged to the Sacrifice, or to the things which belonged to the Altar, or to the poor, and sometimes to the Priests, by way of Alms, the present Church of England takes it in the fence of Alms, and only prays for the givers; but never thought it as an essential point of Communion, which may be distributed without alms, as alms may be given without Communion. Add to this, that such Oblations are common to the old law, and yet were never reckoned amongst the sacrifices; Deut. 16. a law is made, There shall not appear before our Lord, any empty, but every one shall offer, according to that he hath; but this was not by way of sacrificing which only did belong to Priests. In the new law S. Paul 1 Cor. 16. calls them Collections, S. Clement l. 4. constit. Apostol. cap. 7. supposes this when he advises the Priest to refuse at the Altar the Oblations which come from an ill conscience: Pope Fabian an. 239. Decreed, that on Sundays men and women should make offerings of bread and wine. S. Cyprian blames the rich misers of his time who brought nothing to this offering: saying, Dost thou who art wealthy and rich think to have part of the Mass, without vouchsafing to put any thing into the basin? Tertullian calls such Oblations pledges of piety.  
Moreover, taking the prayer of the Missal in that sense which the Doctor takes it; the most that can be gathered thence, is, that such oblations, were made in the time of Mass, for that prayer immediately follows the offertory: but it may be better expounded of the oblations, which the people do make of the sacrifice of the Mass, together with the Priest, as it is said in the first Memento of the Mass, in which, the Priest prays for all who are present, saying, for whom we offer to thee, or, who do offer to thee this sacrifice.   

CHAP. VII. Of the Doctors deceitful proceeding in his citations.  
THe Doctor to show his great Reading, in every page almost, citys schoolmen, Fathers, Liturgies, and Councils; not remembering that all those schoolmen, were members and professors of the Roman Church; all of them taught the Roman Mass; I cannot concieve any reason, why he should allege Bellarmine, and other Schoolmen for his foolish conceits; unless he had dreamt that no man would take the pains to read their works; for if they did, they should easily see his legerdemain, nay, I can scarcely believe, that the Doctor himself ever read them, in the Authors themselves, but perhaps trusted to some others notes; verily a man need not go any further, to answer all his impertinencies; then to read the places he citys; for either they were of his opinion or no; if they were not, as it is certain they were not, who can excuse his most perverse malice, who with neglect of their grounds, for the sacrifice of the Mass; and answers to all his objections: If they were not, strange madness possessed them, that they all of them should so amply, and so copiously write, preach, and teach this catholic Doctrine: Alcuinus, Ordo Romanus, Durandus, Walfridus, Honorius, Gabriel, Ceremonialt, and Pontificale Romanum, Vega, etc. whom the Doctor citys, have written whole books, believing and proving not only the substance of the Roman Mass, but also every particular circumstance, manner, and rite and ceremony thereof; all these Schoolmen were Priests or Bishops ordained in the Roman Church; yea many were Cardinals.  
But it is strange, that the Doctor should quote such men when he confesses that the Roman Church, had almost twelve hundred years been possessed of the Mass; and professed as she now doth; the most that we may expect, from his innumerable citations is, that he has scraped and culled some half sentences, some slips of words, wherein I will not excuse all, neither are we bound to defend or believe all they say, we much honour them as true Children of the Church, and as faithful Expositors of the Mysteries of our faith, with submission to their lawful Prelates.  
But I freely accuse the fraudulent dealing of taking words and sentences contrary to their own judgement; and mind; yea their own words, and absolutely contrary to their manifest and known doctrine, merely to deceive the Christian Readers: I dare say; that if the Doctor himself; or any other, would stand to their judgements, the Doctor would lose his cause; for they were constant, Champions, and defenders of the Roman faith; even in this sacrifice of the Mass.  
Now because it is not my task here; to defend or reprove what has been said, or taught in the Church, from the first five hundred years; I will let the Doctor alone in his career, and inquire, what others will say of his great impertinencies: But because he has the boldness to quote the Liturgies or Masses of S. James, S. Basil, and S. chrysostom, which were within those five hundred years; I must say, that it is an unwonted way, to take testimony of Masses, against the Mass; especially when all he has said, in every respect, is as much against the Mass, of S. James, of S. Basil, and S. chrysostom, as against the Roman Mass; for in substance of a sacrifice of the new law, they are all one: as I have formerly declared.  
Yet, I cannot but note, that the Doctor pag 20. produces a prayer used in the Liturgies; That according to our Saviour's merciful institution, God would be pleased to send down on these Sacraments, the Holy Ghost, and so sanctify them; that they may be the precious body, and the precious blood of his Son, to them who should receive worthily, etc. In the Liturgy of S. chrysostom, I find these words in Latin, Adone offerrimus tibi rationabile ac incruentum hoc obsequium & precamur, & supplicamus, & deposcimus ut mittas spiritum sanctum tuum super nos & super hoc apposita munera (the rubric is, Et orige●s se, & torrio consignans sancta munera dicit) Et fac panem istum quidem pretiosum Corpus Christi tui; & quod est in chalice isto, pretiosum sanguinem Christi tui, permutans sancto spiritu tuo. These words I have put in English, before cap. 2. §. 3. of S. Chrysostom's liturgy; and here in latin, that all may see how little conscience this Doctor shows in citing those Liturgies, which are so contrary to his drift in this his book, and how little care he has of his words; for if we should stand to the words, as he sets them down, we may gather, that the bread and wine are sanctified by the Holy Ghost, and made the body and blood of Christ: his addition which none of the Liturgies have; To them who? should receive worthily, is only a necessary condition required on our pa●●●, but makes nothing to the being of our Saviour's body▪ and blood in the Sacrament, and are not found there.  
As for the holy Fathers, he frequently quotes them, but seldom their words, at least any way contradicting the Catholic doctrine of the Mass: how much they are for it, is manifest, from what has been said before; the greatest advantage that I conceive he makes of them, is that they sometimes call the Eucharist, even after the consecration, Bread, which cannot be denied, for the Roman Church in the Mass does the same, imitating our Saviour, who affirmed that he was the bread of life, the bread which I will give is my flesh: and things are named according to the outward form, and lest any one should be mistaken, the holy Fathers, must commonly and, an explication thereto, so S. Cyprian, l. 2. Epist. 3. says, Christ offered the 〈◊〉, which Melchisedech offered, to wit, bread and wine, that is his body and blood. S. Hierome in cap. 1. Malac. We pollute the bread, that is Christ's body: when we come unworthily to the Altar; and in cap. 5. ad Hebreos, Our mystery is signified in offering bread and wine, that is, the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ is offered: so in the Roman Mass it is bread of life everlasting.   

CHAP. VIII. Of two gross Mistakes committed by the Doctor.  
THe Doctor either out of Ignorance or perverse malice in his third chap. as also so in other places, attributes to the Roman Church the sacrificing of their God; which if he believes, he shows his ignorance in a high degree, if not, what may excuse him? for he cannot but know, that the sacrifice of the Mass is no other, than that of the body & blood of Christ Jesus; and that it is offered as well to God the Son, as to God the Father, and to God the Holy Ghost: and by his raillery all alone, he seems to understand it, but in this he imitated the ancient heathens, who upbraided the Christians for that they did eat their God.  
But it is as foolish sport, that he goes about to vilify the sacrifice of the Mass, out of the Roman Missal, which, (as he ignorantly conceives) wholly destroys the essence and nature of this sacrifice: for it shows, that there may be many defects, and abuses committed in the use of the Holy Eucharist, Imagining that Christ may fall on the earth, be torn in pieces, eaten by cats and dogs, devoured by beasts, corrupted and burnt, and that he lies there as a dead man, or as one on a dunghill, with innumerable such like, frequently reiterated. It is true the Roman Missal mentions some such abuser, but by way of prevention, and to give the Doctor more scope, we will admit, that some such abuses have happened, either through casuality, or negligence of those whom it might concern, or by the perversity of men, or instigation of the devil.  
I must also tell the Doctor, that he needs not talk so much of Christ's being in so base and vile places; for I can tell him that there is no place, more vile, and base, nor more abominable and odious, none more loathsome and stinking, than the mouth or stomach of a sinner: yet such is the immense goodness of Christ Jesus, that he left this holy Sacrament to us, and permitted it to be taken by sinners, otherwise the Apostle S. Paul would never have said, 1. Cor. 11. He that eateth this bread, or drinketh the Chalice of our Lord unworthily; eateth and drinketh judgement to himself: S. Crysostome on that place, says, such an one is guilty of our Lord's death, as if he had killed our Lord, on shed his blood. and in cap. 10. by this sin the body of our Lord is trodden under foot, S. Cyprian ser. de coena Dom. Violence is offered to our Lord's body, and by their mouth and hand our Lord is offended: The Doctor need not talk of Jakes or sinks, for one shall hardly find, a more loathsome place then the stomach or belly of man. S. Crysostome in Opere imperfect. in Mat. said well, If thou comparest an ill man to beasts thou shalt sinned him worse, yea, a wicked man is worse than the devil.  
With all this, or whatsoever can be said of this kind, none can be so foolish as to think, that Christ's body or blood suffers at all; in any such abuses or defects, for all such happens, only in the species; for Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist, is as a spirit by an indivisible and secret manner; and so no more defiled than the soul of man is hurt, defiled or sullied, by whatsoever filth, ordure or excrement the body is infected; Christ's body being now glorified is impassable, immutable, and unalterable, suffers no more, proportionably then the Deity, replenishing all places of what nature soever, or how loathsome soever, whence one said not amiss, God who according to nature is no less, in the sink, then in the heavens, cannot be hurt nor defiled. The body of Christ in heaven is impassable, notwithstanding that he remains there with all his natural dimensions; but in the Eucharist it is in a sacramental and spiritual manner; without any quantitative or corporal dimension, or situation, or sensitive motion; I believe the Doctor never understood these circumstances, or if he did he makes himself a prattler, and contrary to his knowledge wilfully seeks to gull the people, who for the most part are ignorant of such mysteries.  
Moreover, if such scurrile arguments, may have place in divine things, may not the Infidel and Jews use the same against Christ himself, nay, some have done it already; saying, Can any Imagine joseph's Son to be a God? was he not subject to all mankind Miseries? he lay nine months as a prisoner in his Mother's womb, in all uncleanness, was born in a loathsome stable, and as a child might have been devoured by the wild beasts; as he might have been torn out of his mother's womb, some sow or Swine might have eaten him, some ravenous Wolf or other cruel beast might have torn him to pieces, He might have fallen into the saw-pit, ditch or pond, and so be made food for toads, frogs, or snakes, or other venomous beasts; if drowned at Sea meat for fishes, they made difficulty also in that he was subject to the devil, who earried him too and fro at his pleasure, with a thousand such like. If God then did permit his only son in person to be thus subject to so many casualties, abuses, and defects, what shall we wonder, that such may or have followed him in the Eucharist; Christ's body than was possible, and capable, yea, susceptible of all imaginable abuses, pains and cruelties of humane malice, or diabolical inventions; what wonder is it that God should leave Christ's body to such accidental and  abuses, by which it receives no damage at all.  
To conclude, the Doctor in alleging the Rubric of the Roman Missal, does little consider; that he gives no light argument against himself; for in all times since Christ, there have been such rules merely to prevent such abuses and defects, as manifestly appears in the ancient penitential Canons; also in the several Decrees of Popes, and Councils besides the great care, that no Infidels, Jews, or Heretics should be present at the Mass: the continual care that the Church has always had, that the holy blood should not fall on the Altar or ground, according to the constitution, which Pope Pius the 1. an. 158. set down in the Roman Missal, de defectibus, according to which S. chrysostom hom. 21. Operis impers: in Mat. tells us, that it is not to be given to beasts, or Infidels; and S. Augustine l. 50. Hom. 26. We observe with great care when the Body of Christ is administered to us, that nothing of it do fall out of our hands to the ground. Origen hom. 13. in Exod. Ye that are accustomed to be present at the divine Mystery, do know how when ye receive our Lord's body, ye observe with great carefulness and veneration, lest any thing of the consecrated gift should fall down; for ye believe, and that rightly that ye are guilty, if any thing do fall, through your negligence. Surely all this care and folicitude could not be, but on some motives more than natural: for if there were only pure bread and wine, they would have no more care of it, than the Protestants have in the Communion of bread and wine, but because, as I have proved before, the Church always believed, that the true body and blood of Christ Jesus was in the Eucharist, they laboured by all convenient means to avoid such abuses.   

CHAP. IX. The Doctor's Raillery concerning Miracles wrought in the Sacrifice of the Mass.  
THe Doctor very frequently scoffs and jeers at the many Miracles which are wrought in the sacrifice of the Mass, thinking thereby to diminish the credit and belief of it: whereas if they be Miracles, the multitude makes them not less to be Miracles: nay, if we will contemplate the works of God, and consider every particular, in one Miracle, we may find many Miracles, which exceed all created power. For the satisfaction of the Reader, I shall illustrate it by examples. Exodus the 4. God converted Moses his rod into a serpent, which without all doubt, was a great Miracle, which also carries with it many Miracles included therein; 1. the Rod was reduced to nothing, and 2. To the serpent then created, God gave motion, proportion, figure, and other qualities of a serpent; and in like manner turning this new created serpent, into a rod: the serpent was reduced to nothing, and the serpent was converted into a rod; which received a new being, not by any created power, but by God himself, who also gave it colour, proportion, figure, and dimension, with other properties, agreeable to the nature of a rod; so that there was a double transubstantiation or conversion from one substance to another substance; and transmutations or conversions of accidents to other accidents, independently of any natural cause or action: and here we may note, that our wonderful God afterward gave to Moses power to do the same, not by his humane virtue, or power, but by the power and gift of God, whereby alone Moses as God's Ministers, and instrument did the same.  
In like manner, God did miraculously give to the Children of Israel, Manna, Exod. 16. and in it are contained many Miracles. 1. That it was in such plenty that every day it was sufficient for three Millions. 2. That every one how much, or how little, they gathered, had as much and no more than the other. 3. Every one received nourishment thereby, equally to their condition, savour, and appetite; The holy text says, according to that which they were able to eat, 4. The Manna putrified the next day, excepting only the sabbaoth day, when it did not putrify. 5. On the sixth day the Manna was doubled, and was not to be found on the sabaoth day. 6. Solomon sap. 16. tells us, that God gave bread from heaven, without labour, having in it all delectation, and the sweetness of all tastes, serving every man's will, and was turned to what every one would. 7. God continued this Manna for 40. years and no more, 8. God preserved this Manna in the Tabernacle for many ages.  
If this Manna which as our Saviour himself John. 6. teaches, was but a figure or sign of the bread, which he was to give, to wit, his body and blood, has so many maricles accompanied it, why should any reasonable man wonder that so many Miracles should accompany the celestial and divine Manna, especially if they be necessarily annexed, to the nature of so great and so miraculous a Sacrament, wherein the body and blood of our Saviour Christ is contained. The royal Peophet Psal. 110. cries out, God hath made a memory of his miraculous works, a merciful and pitiful Lord, he hath given meat to them that fear him: which according to all Catholic Interpreters, is as much as to say, God hath left one most special and most beneficial memory of all other benefits, to wit, his body and blood, in a miraculous manner; as a memory of his Passion, and our Redemption, as the spiritual food, and substance of all souls, who rightly fear him: The greatest Miracle is the Transubstantiation or conversion of the bread, and wine into the body, and blood of Christ (of which I shall speak in place convenient) which with it carries necessarily many other Miracles, as in the next Chapter I shall fully declare.  
There remain two difficulties which manifest the Doctor's Ignorance or malice: the first is, that the Doctor attributes all these Miracles to the Priests; as if it all were done by their power, according to our belief, wherein he grievously errs; as hereafter I shall declare: for with S. Augustine, l. 10. the civet. Dei, cap. 12. All Catholics believe all Miracles done by Angels or men, truly to be done by God's power, working in them: If then there be any Miracles, as no Christian can deny in the Eucharist; it is God alone, who works them by the Ministry of the Priests: even as I said before, he did work miracles by his servant Moses, so S. Peter, Act. 3. cured the lame man at the doors of the temple, but advises the people, that they should not think, that he did it by his own power, or holiness, but in the name or power of Jesus: so, the priests do not any of those miraculous things, in the sacrifice of the Mass by any humane power; but by his ministerial power received in his Ordination, Christ himself doth effect them: so that the Doctors babbling so often of Miracles wrought by the Romish priests, is but mere raillery or most base ignorance.  
The other as ignorant folly, is his canting, with reiteration, touching the Roman priest, bringing down Christ's body from heaven, at his pleasure; as though Christ in coming to the Eucharist, did leave the right hand of his Father in heaven; which is a gross error, for Christ is no less in heaven after the Consecration than he was before the Consecration: he is sitting still at the right hand of his Father, according to the Article of our Creed; yet nevertheless he is in the Sacrament; this indeed is a Miracle wrought only by Gods omnipotent power; this made S. chrysostom, l. 3. the sacerdot. to exclaim, O Miracle: O benignity of God; he who sits above with the Father, in the same article of time, is often handled in the hands of all, and he delivers himself to those who are desirous to receive and embrace him. hom. 3. ad Ephesios, and hom. 61. ad populum Antioch; Also he says, As many of us, who communicate of the body of Christ, and taste his blood, let us consider, that we taste the body, and taste the blood of him, who sits in the celestials, and is adored by the Angels.  
Their great Master Calvin, lib. 4. Instit. cap. 17. says, In his supper he commands me to take eat and drink, under the symbols of bread and wine, his body and blood; for although it may seem incredible, that in so great a distance of places (as heaven and earth) the flesh of Christ, should penetrate to us, that it may be meat for us, we must yet remember how much above our senses, the secret power of the holy Ghost can show itself; that which our mind comprehendeth not, our faith conceives, the spirit truly joins together, things locally separated, sect. 24. Nothing mooe incredible, that things so far distant and remote within the whole space of heaven and earth, in the whole distances of places, are not only conjoined, but also united.   

CHAP. X. Concerning the Miracles which follow in the hody Sacrament of the Eucharist.  
THe Doctor much troubles himself about the Miracles which occur in the Eucharist, whereas any one who believes the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Sacrament; must needs know, that those Miracles do necessarily follow thereto: If he could disprove that one, the rest will fall; but if he cannot, all the rest he says makes nothing; for we only believe those miracles, because we believe the real presence; true it is we should believe, nay know, that they are possible to God; and so more easily believe them to be so, because God has said the word, This is my body and This is my blood: I am confident, that if the Doctor did believe this, he would make no difficulty of the others, wherefore before I speak of those miracles, it seems to me expedient, to show what was the belief of the Church for those first five hundred years.  
440. I shall begin with S. Leo l. de Jejunio, 7. men's. ser. 6. You ought so to communicate at the holy table, as to doubt nothing at all of the verity of the body and blood of Christ; for that is received by the mouth, which is believed in the heart.  
420. S. Augustine in psal. 98. Christ took earth from earth, for flesh is from the earth; and he took flesh from the flesh of Mary and did walk in flesh itself, and gave that flesh, to be eaten by us for our salvation. lib. 12. cont. Faust. cap. 10. he saith, That the faithful do receive with their mouth, the blood wherewith they were redeemed; and drink that now, which came from the side of Christ. And. lib. 2. contra advers. leg. & Prophet. cap. 9 We receive with a faithful heart, and mouth, the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, giving to us his flesh to be eaten, and blood to be drunken.  
398. S. Crysostome, hom. 83. in Mat. Because our Lord said. This is my body, let us not be entangled with any doubtfulness; but let us believe, and see it with the eyes of our understanding.  
394. S. Ambrose, l. 4. de sacram. c. 5. Our Lord Jesus Christ himself gives testimony unto us, that we take his body and blood; can we any way doubt of his fidelity, and testimony? and lib. 5. cap 4. Before the consecration, that which is offered may be called bread, when the words are pronounced, now it is not called bread, but the body: whereas before l. 4. c. 4. he said, This bread is bread before the sacramental words, yet when the consecration shall be adjoined, of bread it is made the flesh of Christ.  
390. S. Hierome in Comment: Matt. c. 26. After that the Typical pasch was fulfilled, and he had eaten the flesh of the Lamb with his Apostles; he took bread which strengthens man's heart, and so proceeded unto the true sacrament of the Pasch; that even as in his prefiguration, Melchisedech the priest of the high God had done, offering bread and wine, he also might represent the truth of his body and flesh: And Epist. ad Hedib. quaest. 2. The bread which our Lord broke, and gave to his Disciples, was the body of our Lord and saviour: And beneath, Neither did Moses give us the true bread, but our Lord Jesus; he is the true guest, Master, and the banquet, he eats, and is eaten. Gaudentius about the same time, Tract: de Exod. The Creator himself and Lord of all creatures and natures, who produces bread from the earth, because he both can, and has promised it, doth from the bread again, make his own body; and he that made wine of water, has also made his blood of wine. And a little after. Believe that which has been taught us, that which thou receivest is the body of that heavenly bread, and the blood of that sacred Vine; for when he delivered the consecrated bread and wine to his Disciples, he said, This is my body, this is my blood, let us believe him whom we have believed, truth cannot lie.  
380. S. Gregory Nissen, Orat. Catechist. cap. 36. A little leaven makes a whole lump of dough, like unto itself; so also that body which is made immortal by God, entering into our body, transposes and changes it wholly into it self; And a little after, It is conjoined with the bodies of the faithful, that by this conjunction with that which is immortal, man also may be made partaker of Immortality.  
370. S. Gregory Nazian. orat. 2. de Pasch. Without anxiety and doubt, eat the body and drinkche blood of Christ. if indeed thou be desirous of life; neither do thou doubt of the truth of these speeches, which are uttered concerning the flesh, neither be thou offended at the Rassion; be constant and firm and stable, not doubting of anything, whatsoever the advarsaries say: good council against Doctor Brevent.  
About the same time, or not long before S. Ephrem. lib. de natura Dei minine scrutanda, c. 15. gives us as good counsel, saying; Why dost thou search things unscrutable, if thou examine those things curiously, thou shalt not then be accounted a man faithful and innocent, be partaker of the immaculate body of thy Lord, with fullness of faith, assuring thyself, that thou catest the whole Lamb himself. The Mysteries of Christ are an immortal fire, do not thou rashly search them out, lest thou be consumed in the search thereof: And beneath he says, This indeed exceeds all admiration, all understanding, and all speeches, which Christ the only begotten son our Saviour, hath done for us, he has given us fire and spirit to be eaten and drunk, that is (as he himself explicates) his body and blood.  
365. S. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechist. 4. Forasmuch as Christ himself thus affirms, and speaks, concerning the bread, This is my body, who dares hereafter doubt of it? forasmuch also, as himself confirms it, and says, This is my blood, who I say can doubt of it, and say, it is not his blood? And again, so shall we be Christopheri, that is, bearers of Christ, when we have received his body and blood into our members; and we shall be made as S. Peter says, partakers of the divine nature. Thou must not consider it, as bare bread and wine, for it is the body and blood of Christ, according to our Lords own words. And again, With all assurance, let us receive the body and blood of Christ, for under the form of bread, his body is given thee; and under the form of wine, his blood is given to thee.  
355. S. Hilary, l. 8. de Tria. Whatsoever we say of the natural verity of Christ in us, we speak foolishly and impiously, unless we learn of him, for he says, my flesh is true food, and my blood is truly drink, he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood, abides in me, and I in him; there is no place of doubting left, of the verity of flesh and blood, for now both by the Profession of our Lord himself and our faith it is truly flesh and truly blood, and these being taken and drunk, do work that we are in Christ, and Christ in us; is not this the truth? It seems not to be true to them, that deny Christ to be true God.  
226. Origen hom. 5. in diversa loca Evangel. When thou receivest the holy food and incorruptible banquet, when thou dost enjoy the bread and cup of life; thou dost eat and drink the body and blood of our Lord; then our Lord enters under thy roof, thou therefore then humbling thyself, imitate the Centurion, say, Lord, I am not worthy, that thou shouldest enter under my roof.  
203. Tertullian, lib. 4. contra Marcionem. The bread which he took in his hand, he made his body, saying, This is my body: And lib. de Resurrectione carnis. The flesh feeds on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul may be replenished and filled with God.  
186. S. Jrenaus lib. 4. cap. 35. How shall it be manifest to them, that the bread, on which thanks are given, is the body of the Lord, and the Chalice of his blood; if they say, be is not the son of the Creator of the wrrld; the saint makes an argument of Christ being the Son of God, from the holy Mysteries of the Mass and Eucharist.  
150. S. Justin Martyr, in Apolog. ad Antomin. We do not take it as common bread, nor this as common drink, but as by the word of God, our Saviour Jesus Christ was incarnate, and took both flesh and blood for our Salvation, so also by the prayers of the word of God, we are taught, that the Eucharist (being made our food by him, whereby our blood and flesh may be nourished by mutation) is the flesh and blood of the same Jesus incarnate.  
71. S. Ignatius Martyr, as Theodoretus Dial. 3. in his epist. ad Sawnon. They do n t admit Eucharists and Oblations, because they do not confess the Eucharist▪ to be the flesh of our Saviour, which suffered for our sins, which the Father through his bounty raised again.  
S. Dionise about the same time I de Eccl. Hierarch. par. 3. c. 3. O most divine and holy sacrament, vouchsafe to open the cover of those significant signs, which overshadow thee, and appear plain, to us, and fill our spiritual eyes, with the singular and clear shining of thy Light.  
By these authorities of the holy Fathers the faith of the Church in those first five hundred years, is made manifest, so that none with reason, can doubt of the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist; unless he will altogether descent from Christ's Church, in those primitive times; and say, that Christ never had a true Church upon earth; in which number Doctor Brevent is not to be reckoned, for he ingeniously admits a true Church for five hundred years after Christ, which admitted the real presence, whereto the miracles, which he scoffingly rehearses, do necessarily follow, (as I said before) to the being of Christ Jesus in the Sacrament.  
To begin therefore with his first miracle, which is, that the bread is destroyed in a moment, pray cannot he who gives it a being, take it away when he pleases? did not the same God turning Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, take away, or destroy, or bring to nothing, her humane form, and nature, in a moment? was not the form of Moses ●●d nature and substance destroyed in a moment? was not the water when Christ turned it into wine, wholly destroyed? moreover this destruction follows the nature of all conversions, either partial or total; no new form is introduced, but as the former is destroyed; no total substance is produced, but when the total substance precedent is also destroyed. If then the body of Christ be by the power of the omnipotent God, introduced or produced in the place of bread (as the holy Catholic Church always taught us, according to the testimonies now alleged and this shall be more manifested in the Chapter of transubstantiation) it necessarily follows that the precedent substance be destroyed or brought to nothing: so that this decision, or not being of bread and wine; proceeds ex necessitate miraculi, from the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Blessed Sacrament, and so is no new miracle but the same with the former.  
The second miracle, which he jeers at, is, the being of the accidents of bread and wine without a subject; which is not only possible, but also is actually in the Eucharist, as is sufficiently declared in the Liturgical discourse, part. 2. sect. 3. cap. 9 whereto I may add the Authority of great S. Basil, hom. 6. Hexam. S. Gregory orat. in Diem Dominic. and Theodoret; when they affirm that the quality of light in its Creation, was without a subject, until the Sun was created; and certain it is, that accidents by the power of God may be preserved without a subject, for he that gives a being in such or such manner, can give them another, as actually he has done in the Eucharist; where quantity alone is preserved without a subject, in which all other accidents as qualities, etc. are immediately (although by the same omnipotent power, they also may be conserved without quantity) and that it is so, in the Eucharist, has always been believed in the Catholic Church, as in the precedent testimonies plainly appears: when the holy Fathers affirm that the body and blood of Christ is contained, in the species of bread and wine: whence the Council of Constance, sess. 8. condemned that proposition of Wickliff, who held, that the Accidents of the Bread did not remain, without a subject, as heretical.  
Moreover, this miracle, necessarily follows the Mystery of the real presence, inasmuch as it is a sacrament, for it would not be a sacrament, if there were not, in a visible form, the essence of a sacrament consisting in a visible sign, of some invisible thing. The Eucharist therefore being a sacrament, and containing the invisible body of Christ, necessarily requires a visible sign. S. chrysostom, hom. 60. ad Populum Antioch. and Hom. 83. in Mat. says, If thou wert incorporeal God would have given thee plain, and incorporeal gifts, themselves; but because the soul is joined to the body, he has given thee intelligible things in sensible things: and a little before, sigh the word said, This is my body, we do assent and believe, and with our intellectual eyes behold him; for Christ has given 〈◊〉 nothing sensible, but all intelligible things in●●●● in sensible things.  
It was therefore most congruous to the divine providence, most agreeable to the nature of this mystical sacrament: and most proper to our humane nature, that Christ instituted this sacrament under the form of bread, for as Christ is the true bread of life; so he gave us his body and blood under the form of bread and wine: whence S. Cyprean, Ser. de Coena Domin. The bread which he gave to his Disciples changed not in Essigies, or resemblance; but in nature is made flesh by the Omnipotency of the word; as in the person of Christ, the humane nature was seen, and the Divinity lay hid, so in the visible sacrament the divine essence diffused itself: Give me leave, (good Reader) to set down the words of Theophilact Archbishop of Bulgary, and no mean interpreter of the sacred Text: who in Mark. cap. 14. This is my body, this I say, which ye take, for the bread is not a figure or example of Christ's body, but is converted into the same body of Christ, for our Lord said, The bread which I will give, is my flesh; he said not, is the sign of my flesh, but is my flesh; And again, Unless ye eat the flesh of the son of man. And dost thou say, flesh is not seen: O man! that is done for our infirmity, because Bread and wine, are of those things, with which we are accustomed, we do not abhor them, but we should not bear, but abhor, seeing flesh and blood, set before us: Wherefore our merciful God condescending to our infirmities, conserveses the species and forms of bread and wine, but transelementates them into the virtue of flesh and blood, from whence I conclude, that as it is possible to God to conserve the accident or species without any substantial subject, for to him nothing is impossible, to the constant belief of the holy Catholic Church, in all times has been, that those species are conserved, as necessarily following that great Mystery.  
The 3. Miracle to be baited at by the Doctor; is, that the body of Christ should be contained in so little a place, or room as the Host, nay, in every parcel or part thereof. Although this be miraculous, yet it follows from the very being of our Saviour in the Eucharist; for Christ's body is not there, with his natural dimension or Circumscription of place, for so we could not eat him, nor receive him in our Mouths; nor the bread cover him; unless we should say, that of Mat. 19 a Camel might pass though the eye of a needle, which nevertheless is possible, according to what our Saviour there says, with men, this is impossible, but with God all things are possible, besides God is not tied to nature's laws, as may be seen 4. Reg. 6. Iron did forget its natural weight, and swom on the water. Exod. 14. water lost its fluxibility, and stood up as a wall; In like manner the flowing of Jordan, Josue 3. did stand and become like a mountain, 3. Reg. 17. the pot of meal failed not, and the vessel of Oil diminished not, Dan. 3. the fire lost its natural activity, Luc. 23. the Sun lost its light. It was not according to nature that a body should walk on the sea, as our Saviour did, Mat. 14. of which S. Justin Martyr in Respons. ad quaest. a gentibus; As our Lord did walk on the Sea, without a change of his body into a spirit, but by divine power, he made the Sea which cannot be passed over walking, to be passable: not only to his own body but also to that of Peter, so by his divine power be also came out of the monument, when a great Stone was put on it; and entered in to his disciples, the doors being shut. All these things are above the law of nature; and shall we deny the possibility of such like, to the God of nature.  
But to come nearer to our present purpose: Christ's body is now glorious, and is in the Eucharist in a sacramental and spiritual manner, not different from the being of a soul: which is as well in every part and parcel of the body, as in the whole body: and shall we deny that to God's power, which he wrought in our souls, which are indivisibly, and without any commensuration of place; This is confirmed by S. Epiphanius, Haeres, 64. Even as our Lord did rise from the dead, not taking another body; but the same that was, and no other from that which was; but changing that which was into a spiritual subtility, and making the whole spiritual: he entered in by the doors shut, that which could not be done here in our bodies, for grossness, and for that as yet they are not joined in a spiritual subtility. S. Cyril speaking of the same miracle of entering the doors being shut, on that place gives the reason, for sigh he is true God, he is not subject to the law of nature. S. Ambrose in c. 24. luc. Not by corporeal nature, but by a quality of a corporeal resurrection; that it was not by nature's law but by a subtility of a glorified body which has no commensuration of place: but is as the Angels in great or little place. No wonder then that the body of our Saviour, according to his Nature, and for our benefit and commodity, should be as well in the whole host as in every part thereof.  
But some will cavil, on what is said, that Christ's Body is indivisibly, as the soul is in the whole Body, and in every part thereof, how little soever; but we see by experience, that if any part be separated from the whole, the soul remains no more in it; admitting therefore that the Body of Christ, is in the whole Host, yet if any part be separated from the whole, Christ's body also shall not be in that part so separated.  
I answer, there is no proportion between the works of nature, so constituted by God, and the works of God, in his omnipotent power: whence to argue against God's works by the ordinary course of Nature, is to limitate God's power, to what he has actually done; whereas no act ad extra, can be equal to his power, no effect can fully correspond to his power. God made the world, and yet can make millions of worlds: God ordained such and such effects in nature, and can as well ordain many other, yea, different and contrary, or exceeding in the same kind. It is mere folly to think that God can do nothing but what we can conceive or under and; as if the infinite wisdom and power of God did not exceed our finite, weak, and in comparison, no faculty at all, God's power is immense and without Limit. Ipse dixit & fact a sunt: whatsoever he says is done, and can do more things than any creature can conceive or Imagine.  
Secondly, There is no comparison in these two subjects, for the part so separated from the whole, is now no more capable to retain the vital form, either vegetive or sensitive, and consequently according to Nature's law, is uncapable of any rational form; to wit, the soul which gives no longer life to it, being limited by the Author of nature. In our Case there is still the same disposition and capacity in every part as in the whole, and consequently there arises no mutation, but only a numerical difference, which nothing altars the nature of the accidents, which joint or separate, retain the species of bread or wine, which are sensible signs required in this Sacrament; as long therefore as this sensible sign or species remains, so long the thing signed or signified remains. The body of Christ has no union with the Accidents nor any reference to them but in as much as they are sacramental signs of his body and blood, so made by divine Institution; in this their is no regard to the greatness or littleness of the species or accidents, but to the Institution of Christ Jesus, who made those species to be the sacramental signs of his body and blood wheresoever we find these species after due consecration, either little or great; according to our Faith, we believe the true body and blood of Christ Jesus to be.  
We may exemplify this in a looking-Glass, where the same face is represented, in the whole Glass, and in every proportionable part thereof, because the same effect of representation is as well in every part, as in the whole: So as is said before, the species of bread and wine, either in whole or in part in great or in little, have annexed to them the nature of a sign, and no other than what Christ himself has instituted, and consequently do represent that whereof they are a sign, that is, the body and blood of Christ.  
Now whereas the Doctor makes difficulty, concerning Christ's Body being in several places, he may know that to be in a place or in many places or in no place, makes no difference of the essence or nature of any thing. The highest heavens have there essence, although they have no place; and the being in a place is a mere accidental and  thing to the substance, which of itself occupies no place at all; but by quantitative dimension, is correspondent to place, otherwise it is indifferent to this or that place, to one, and to many; he therefore that limited and determined created things, to such or such a place, can he not alter, or make it illimitated, or indetermined to place or places? even by nature one thing may have different extensions to place as is to be seen in rarefaction and condensation: and cannot God make the same thing to have extension to several places? of this we have many experiences out of the Scripture: for we read that our Saviour appeared to S. Paul Act. 9 he that appeared to them in the way; which also S. Paul relates, Act. 22. and according to the text Act. 26. Christ himself says that he appeared to him, Act. 23. S. Luke affirms, that our Lord was standing by S. Paul, if we will believe S. Paul himself, 1 Cor. 9 He had seen Christ Jesus our Lord, which also he affirms; 1 Cor. 15. Christ was seen of more than five hundred brethren together, he was seen of James, and then of all the Apostles, he was seen also by me; so that we cannot doubt but Christ appeared unto him, and yet according to our Faith, he sits still at the right hand of the Father in heaven, as it is declared, Act. 3. whence it is manifest, that he was in two places, and why not in heaven and in the Eucharist; and why not as well in many places? and why not by participation of a divine being, may the effects of the divine power to be in many places: One voice fills many places, and one sound fills many parts, without any division of itself.  
Besides this difficulty is less in regard that Christ's body is not here, in any quantitative Dimension or commensuration to place, but in a mysterial and Sacramental manner, still united to the Divinity; which is in all places with Power, to limitate the body to as many places as it pleases: as God may limit his universal presence in such manner, as his presence may be in some particular places or things, by showing his power, more in one place then in another: even as he has done in the Eucharist making his Body substantialy present in all places of the world; wherein he has manifested his Immense power and will; according as the holy Catholic Church has always believed and taught from its beginning; as it is sufficiently declared in the precedent testimonies of the holy Fathers.  
The 4th. Miracle is; that the body of Christ being but one, is communicated to many, yea thousands, yea Millions. This follows the institution of this holy Sacrament, for it was not instituted for one alone, but for many, without any limitation of time, place, or persons; it is a Sacrament that is common to all, in all ages, during this life, and therefore if the true body and blood of Christ be contained therein; as the holy Church has always believed, and that as a Sacrament it is communicable to all; and all are commanded to take and eat, this necessarily follows Christ's Institution; The holy Fathers who lived within five hundred years after Christ, believed and taught the very same which the present Church believes; Eusebius Emissenus hom. 5. de Pasch. The holy receiving of the Eucharist, consists not in the quantity, but in the virtue, that body which the Priest distributes is as great in a little host, as in a great, which when the Church of the faithful takes, as it is complete in all, so it is manifest to be entire in every one, for as he says, a little after, when they take of this bread, every one has nothing less than all; one perceives the whole, two have the whole, and many the whole, without any diminution; for the benediction, of this sacrament may be distributed, but not consumed by distribution, S. Augustin, ser. de verbis Evangelii. Christ is eaten, and eaten lives, because being slain he risen again, neither when he is eaten, do we make parts of God, as truly in the Sacrament it is done, as the faithful know, for even as every one who eats Christ's flesh, takes his part, for hence it is called parts, he is eaten by parts, and remains entire and whole in heaven; he also remains entire and whole in thy heart.  
S. Hierome ser. in Dom. 5. post Epiph. Each one receives Christ our Lord whole, and in every one particular he is whole, neither is he diminished by many singulars, but gives himself entire to every one.  
S. chrysostom hom. 17. in Epist. ad Hebraeos; This host is one, and not many; how one and not many? because it was once offered, it was offered in the holy of holies: but this sacrifice is the exemplar of that; we always offer, the self same, and therefore this sacrifice is one; for otherwise because it is offered in many places, there are many Christ's: by no means but in every place, there is one Christ; here being perfect, and there perfect one body; for even as he is in every place offered, he is one body and not many bodies; so also one sacrifice. S. Gregory of Nice in Orat. Catech. c. 37. We may consider how this is done, that when this one body is continually imparted through the whole world, to thousands, of the faithful, the whole doth pass by parts to every one, and in itself remains whole. S. Andrew's words cited by the Achaean Priest, Whose flesh after all the believing people have eaten, and drunk his blood, the lamb which is sacrificed remains whole and alive.  
What has been said here, may satisfy his four other miracles, which make no distinct Difficulties; for the same reasons serve for the species of wine, as for the species of bread, or for the body and blood of Christ: whence he might have omitted his duplicate railleries and scoffs, and have attributed all those miracles to the power of God, and not played the buffoon in attributing them, to the power of Roman Priests; his scoffs and scorns and Jeers will never bear any argument, with understanding men, much less with Catholics: who have learned of S. Augustine, Epist. 49. ad Deograt. quaest. 6. If Christian faith did fear the scorns of pagans, we should not believe in Christ himself.   

CHAP. XI. The Doctors Chief ground of his raillery.  
I Am so weary with the Doctors vain raillery, that I am willing to go no further; but that I reflected on two main grounds of his rallying, and scoffing spirit: the one is the insisting so much on humane reason and sense; and the great bugbear Transubstantiation. Of the first I shall treat in the two following Chapters, and after of the second.  
In the first place, it is a general Doctrine in God's Church, that faith has for its Object God revealing; It's formal object is the divine revelation, the material only those things which are revealed; so that we know nothing by faith, but by revelation, not by reason, much less by sense: true it is that humane reason and sense concur to the receiving of faith, but not to the procuring a divine and saving faith: nevertheless reason and sense may engender a humane faith, by hearing or reading things revealed, but never come to the certainty of them; but relying only on revelation.  
Whence the holy Fathers do commonly teach, that if reason or sense do comprehend any thing, it is no more an object of faith. S. Augustine, tract. 27. and 40. in Johanem. Faith is to believe what thou seest not, whose verity and reward, is to see that thou dost believe. Again, tract. 39 This is the praise of faith, if that which is believed be not seen, for what great thing is it, if that be believed which is seen. S. Gregory, hom. 26. in Evangelium. Faith has not merit, where humane reason gives experience. Great S. Basil, ser. de fid. confess. tells us, that Faith is an assenting approbation without any hesitation; without any parswasion of the mind, as in the truth of those things, which by God's gift are preached, and declared in the Church. And in Psal. 113. let faith be thy guide, in the holy words which are from God; and not demonstration: Faith (I say,) inviting thy soul, yea, and persuading above all rational methods; for faith relies not, on grammatical proofs, but insinnuats itself unto our minds, by the efficacious operation of the holy Ghost. S. Athanasius, tract. de advent. affirms, that faith conceived of an evident matter, cannot be called Faith.  
But let us hear, what the holy Fathers, in those primitive times, did teach and believe concerning our present subject, of the Eucharist: I shall begin with S. Cyril of Alexandria, lib. 4. in Joan. cap. 17 This thing is hard, and is to be received, rather by faith, then by any other means.  
S. Hilary, l. 3. de Trin. We are not to speak of divine things, in a humane or worldly sense, neither are we to extort or wrest, by violent and imprudent report, the celestial words, to our wit or impious understanding; it is perversity, let us read what is written; and understand what we read, than we shall perform the office of faith: for what we say of the natural body of Christ in us, we speak foolishly and impiously unless we learn of him.  
Great S. Leo, ser, 6. de Jejunio. 7. men's. Doubt ye not at all of the verity of Christ's body, and blood, for that which is taken by the mouth, is believed by faith.  
S. Cyril of Jerusalem, Since Christ himself, so affirms and says, of the bread, This is my body; who henceforward dares to deny it? and the same confirming, This is my blood who can doubt and say, that it is not his blood? he changed water into wine which is near blood, in Cana Gallilen: only by his will, and is not he worthy, that we should believe him, that he transmutates or changes, wine into blood: Beneath, let us with all certitude, take the body and blood of Christ, for under the species of bread the body is given thee, and under the species of wine blood is given thee. A little after, Do not therefore consider it, as bare bread, or bare wine, for according to the words of our Lord, it is the body and blood of our Lord, for although sense suggest it otherwise, yet faith confirms thee, do not judge the thing from the taste, but take it from faith, for most certain: so that no doubt may take place, but that the body and blood of Christ are given thee. And a little after, knowing and most certainly holding, this bread which is seen by us, not to be bread: although the taste take it for bread, but is the body of Christ: and the wine that we see, although to the sense or taste, it seems to be wine; yet it is not wine, but the blood of Christ.  
S. Crysostome, hom. 60. ad pop. Antioch. and 83. in Mat. Let us always believe in God, and not resist him; although what he says, may seem absurd, or against reason, to our senses and Imaginations; his word exceeds our sense and reason, this we ought to do in things, and especially in mysteries, not only beholding those things which are before us, but also holding his words; for we cannot be deceived by his words, but our senses are most easily deceived: those 〈…〉 be false, but this is deceived very oftentimes: since therefore he said, This is my body, let us not be detained with any ambiguity, but believe and perceive it by the eyes of our understanding.  
S. Cyprian ser. de coena Dominica, on the word of our Saviour, John 6. The flesh profiteth nothing, gives the reason, because our Master himself expounds these words are spirit and life, carnal sense does not penetrate to the understanding of so great profundity unless faith be joined.  
The Doctor's great Master, Calvin lib. 4. Instit. cap. 17. ser. 10. will teach him this lesson, In his supper he commanded me to take, eat, and drink, under the symbols of bread and wine, his body and blood: for although it may seem incredible, that in so great a distance of places (as heaven and earth) the flesh of Christ should penetrate to us, that it may be meat for us, we must yet remember how much above all our senses the secret power of the holy Ghost can show itself; that which our minds comprehends, our faith conceives the Spirit doth truly join together things locally separated; whence he says, sect. 7. Nothing remains, but that I should burst forth into admiration in this Mystery, to which neither the mind in thinking, or tongue in speaking, can be equal; and apud Hospin. in hist. Sacram. part. 2. he says, We therefore acknowledge a Miracle in the holy Supper, which exceeds or goes beyond both the grounds of nature, and the measure of our senses.  
From what hath been said, we plainly gather, that in matters of faith, we stand not to humane reason, much less to our senses; we may add, No sense or humane reason could tell us, that Christ, on earth, was God. The wise men who came from the East; according to their senses imagination, yea, or humane understanding; could conceive nothing but a little Child; yet inspired by the holy Ghost, in Faith only, they adored the little Child, not as such, but as being God and man, which no sense or humane reason could dictate to them: The Disciples Mat. 24. did not adore Christ by the rule of their senses or humane reason, but when by faith they believed him to be the Son of God, even after the Resurrection they did see Christ, some believed, others did not; many who lived, conversed, and were in his company, both simple and wise, could never be convinced by their sense or reason, that he was the Son of God; and those who were of the simple sort, sooner believed, and were we not assured by divine revelation, and testimony, we could not believe either this or any other mystery of our Faith.  
Where even according to reason, it follows that we have a more sure ground to believe God's word, than our senses; who perceive not the substance of the bread, which is not perceptible by any of our senses; whose objects are only accidents, or sensible qualities; which they have as well in the consecrated host, or unconsecrated, without any reflection on the substance: as, being out of the sphere of their objects: so that they discern not any thing of the substance, or whether they be without any substance, it is only the understanding, which gathers by such or such accidents, such or such a substance or subject and by nature's ordinary course, judgeth it to be bread; but enlightened by faith and believing that nothing is impossible to God; and that God in most express terms declared his body and blood to be in the Eucharist; the words are so clear, that without wresting the terms, none so simple but they may understand them, as clearly as Peter is a man: and those who contradict it on the ground of their senses, are as the Apostle says, 1 Cor. 2. sensual men, not perceiving those things of the spirit of God, it is foolishness to them, and they cannot, or rather will not understand, for they are sensual, measuring these heavenly mysteries, by natural reason; humane prudence, and external senses, which destroy Faith.  
I know some object, that of S. John 1. Epist. cap. 1. where he attributes much to hearing, seeing, and touching, matters of faith: but they do not consider, that the Apostles did hear, and see many things, which we believe from their testimonies; but if we had only what they saw by their senses or humane wisdom, our faith had been vain, and of no importance, for no visible thing or sensible as such, can be the object of our faith: what therefore they saw, heard, or touched, was not believed as by faith, but by experience: see Scotus in 3. quaest. 23. the Prophets and Apostles had a science which was not faith. Faith taught them that the word was incarnate, and that Christ who died, rose again and ascended into heaven, was the true Son of God; now to us who have not seen them they are objects of faith, as being only revealed unto us, whereof we have testimony from Scripture and Tradition S. Thomas indeed, believed, because he had seen Christ after his resurrection, Joan. 20. but as S. Augustine says, tract. 121. in Joan. He did see, and touch man, and confessed God whom he did not see, nor touch; but by this which he did see and touch, that he believed now, all doubt being removed, and therefore he cried out, My Lord and my God; and Jesus said unto him, because thou hast seen me, by sight, and touch, and certain knowledge that I am risen, and believed that I am true God: but blessed are those that have not touched me, and have believed.  
Moreover S. John in this place opposes two divers heresies, to wit, those who denied Christ's divinity, and those who denied his humanity, and therefore gins his Epistle, That which was from the beginning, which he had declared in the beginning of his Gospel, and for the other which we have heard by a voice from heaven, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, we testify unto you; weereby he manifestly testifies that Christ in humane nature had true flesh and blood, God and man; now because he was inspired by the holy Ghost & one of Christ's Apostles, according to the testimony of the Scriptures, we believe what he saw and heard, to be true; and receive it as a matter of faith.   

CHAP. XII. An addition to the former Chapter of the same Subject out of S. Augustine.  
OUr adversaries who stand so much, in matters of faith, on their senses, and private judgements; should do well, to consider, that they imitate the heathens, and Infidels, who had no stronger arguments against the true Catholic doctrine, than their senses and humane reason; as we find in all the holy Fathers, who have laboured to convince them; and in particular this is to be seen, in blessed S. Augustine, especially in his books de civitate Dei; from whence I shall make choice of two articles of our Faith, which are holy repugnant to humane sense, and reason; to wit, the everlasting torments of Hell fire, and the Resurrection of the flesh. Of the first he treats, in the first 8. Chapters of his 21. Book, and thus he gins the second Chapter: What then shall I say unto the unbelievers; to prove that a body Carnal, and living, may endure undissolved, both against death, and the force of eternal fire: they will not allow us, to ascribe this unto the power of God, but urge us to prove it to them by some example, saying; There is no body, that can suffer eternally, but he must perish at length; no flesh can suffer always, and never die: The Saint replies▪ Cap. 3. What is this, but to ground an assertion upon mere sense, and appearance, which he esteems absurd in matters of Faith, for (saith he) These men know no flesh but mortal, and what they have not known and seen, they hold impossible. A little after, Through our flesh as now, be such; that it can not suffer all pain without dying yet then shall it become of another nature: Whence in Cap. 4. he says, That God who endowed nature, with so many several and admirable qualities, shall as then, give the flesh a quality, whereby it shall endure pains, and burning for ever. Cap. 5. But the infidels hearing of Miracles, and such things as we cannot make apparent to their senses, do ask the reason of them; which because it surpasses our humane powers to give, they deride them as false and ridiculous: but let them give us reason, for all the wondrous things, that we have seen or may easily see hereafter (where we may note, that S. Augustine in those chapters brings instances of many several things in nature, far surpassing our humane reason) which if they cannot do, then let them not say, that there is not, nor can be, any thing, without a reason, why it should be. Beneath, O rare Disputers, you that can give reason for all miraculous things, give me the reason of those strange effects of nature beforenamed, of those few only, which if you know not, to be now visible; and not future, but present, to the view of those that will make trial; you would be more incredulous in them, then in this, which we say shall come to pass hereafter. A little after, If we had said these things shall be in the world to come, and the Infidels had bidden us give the reason why, we could freely confess we could not: the power of God in his works surpassing the weakness of human reason: and yet we know, that God did not without reason, in putting mortal men by these, past his reason: we know not his reason in many things, yet we know that what he wills, is no way impossible, who has told us, to whom we must never impute falseness, nor imperfection. The latin words are, Nos non posse confiteremur, eo quod istis, & similibus Dei miris operibas, infirma mortalium ratiocinatio vinceretur: fixam apud nos esse rationem, non sine ratione Omnipotentem facere, unde animus humanus infirmus, rationem non possit reddere: & in mult is quidem rebus incertum nobis esse, quid velit; illud tamen esse certissimum, nihil corum illi esse impossibile, quaecunque voluerit, eique nos credere praedicenti, quem neque impotentem neque mentientem possumus credere. Hi tamen fidei reprehensores exactoresque rationis; quid ad ista respondent de quibus ratio reddi ab homine non potest, & ipsi rationi naturae videtur esse contraria. Quae si futura esse diceremus, similiter ae nobis sicut eorum quae futura esse dicimus, ab infidelibus ratio posceretur: ac hoc cum in talibus operibus Dei, deficiat ratio Cordis & sermonis humani, sicut ista non ideo sunt, non ideo enim illa non erunt, quoniam ratio de utrisque ab homine non potest reddi. We confess that we cannot (to wit give a reason for it) for that in those and the like wonderful works of God the infirm raticionation of Mortals would be overcome, but we firmly believe, that the omnipotent, does nothing without reason: whereof the infirm mind of man cannot give a reason, and in many things indeed it is uncertain to us what he will; but that is most certain nothing of them which he will are impossible to him, and we believe him foretelling, whom we cannot believe either impotent or lying: yet the Reprehenders of faith, and exactours of reason: what will they answer in those things, which no reason can be given by man, and yet are? although they seem contrary to reason of nature which if we did say from ourselves, that they were to come, as we say of those things which are to come, reason should be required by infidels, and by this, sigh in such works of God, reason of humane heart and speech fails; even as therefore such things are not: so therefore also they shall not be; because no reason can be given by men for both of them: the Translator adds because beyond humane capacity and apprehension. In the sixth Chapter, having proposed many wonderful things, as also in the precedent, he concludes, If all these be possible to those, how much more, God is powerful to do those things, which are incredible to Infidels; but easily to his power: since he has created that virtue in stones, and other things, and wits of men, which the use in wonderful 〈◊〉 Angelical natures more powerful and invincible power, both of working and commanding, and wisdom of permitting and using all things as wonderfully as he created them: Our English Translator, although he omits some words both in this place and the precedent, yet he sufficiently expresses them in order to our purpose.  
In the 7. Chapter we find the Infidels to satisfy for all the wonderful effects of nature, and give this only reason: It is the force of Nature, the nature of such things is such: It is the proper efficacy of their natures. Beneath the Saint, When God is the author of all natures, why will they force us to give a stronger reason, when they will not believe that seems impossible, and to them who ask a reason to be given, we answer, this to be the will of the Omnipotent God, who truly for no other thing is called Omnipotent, but that he can or is able to do what he will. And in the end he adds, They will not give credence to us, when we say, that God Almighty will do any thing, that exceeds their capacity to conceive: The words in Latin are, quod corum experientiam sensumque transgreditur, what goes beyond their experience and sense: What better or stronger reason can be given for any thing, then to say, God Almighty will do this which he hath promised in those books (to wit the Scripture) wherein he promises as strange things, as these, which he hath performed he will do it, because he has said he will; even he who has made the incredulous heathens believe things, which they held mere Impossibilities.  
Cap. 8. They believe not the Scriptures, if they did we should not need to stand long with them on this The●m, so that we must make demonstration, how it is possible that there may be a full alteration of nature, in any one object, from the kind of being, that it had before, and yet the law of nature be kept inviolated: for how can that be against nature, which is effected by the will of God, the Lord and maker of all nature? a portent or miraculous thing therefore is not against nature, but against the most common order of Nature; Let not the faithless therefore blind themselves in the knowledge of Nature as though God's power could not alter the nature of any thing, from what it was before, unto man's knowledge. And beneath; I think it may suffice to Convince, that God is not to be bound, to any Conditions, in the allotting of a particular being, to any thing; as though he could not make an absolute alteration hereof, into an unknown quality of essence: his Latin Text, Non se inde Deo debere praeseribere, quasieam (rem) non possit in long aliud, quam cis cognita est vertere & mutare; we ought not to prescribe or limit God, as if he could not turn and change it into some far other thing, then as it is known to us; so that as God can create what he will, so can he change the nature of what he hath created at his good pleasure.  
The same S. Augustine, l. 22. de civitate Dei, cap. 11. Disputing with the Infidels, who according to the laws of Nature, did argue, that there could not be any Resurrection of the body, because it is, earthly and so could not be contained in heaven; every Element having his particular poise, and tending naturally to its proper place: his answer besides persuasive reason is, Cannot God almighty give the body of Man such a form, likewise that it may ascend and support itself in heaven? Cannot then the Almighty, maker of the whole world, take away the Ponderosity of earth, and give the quickened body, and hability to dwell in the same place, that the quickened spirit shall elect? why then may we not believe that the nature of a corruptible body may be made incorruptible, and fit for heaven? so that arguments drawn from the situation and qualities of the clements, can no way diminish the power that God Almighty hath, to make man's body of a quality fit and able to inhabit the heavens.  
Cap. 25. If they would show me a thing which God cannot do, I will tell them, he cannot lie; let us therefore believe only what he can do, and not believe what he cannot I If they do not thus believe that he can lie, let them believe that he will do what he promised: and let them believe as the world believes, which he promisea should believe, and whose belief he both produced and praised.  
Cap. 26. Why do they now cry out, that this is impossible which God hath promised, which the world hath believed, and which was promised it should believe, seeing that Plato himself is of our mind, and saith, that God can work Impossibilities, that is, such things which we conceive to be impossible.  
If any one would ponder and seriously examine the arguments and reasons, which our pretended Reformers, do oppose, against the Real Presence of Christ's Body in the Eucharist, he shall easily perceive, that they ground themselves on such humane Inventions, proceeding more on their senses, in opposition to God's Omnipotency: for the Heretics of our times, with their vain, weak, and weightless arguments; do contradict the Catholic Church in the wonderful effects, which God hath wrought in the Eucharist; principally because we cannot make them apparent to their senses, nor give them a natural reason for them, which we freely confess we cannot, yet we know that God doth do nothing without reason in putting moral men by them past reason: we know not his will, in many things, yet we know that what he will is no way impossible, and we believe what he hath declared to be his will in this subject; far be it from us to deny or, question it, which were no less then to impute falsehood or imperfection unto him. God can and will do, according to his promise; no apparent difficulty whatsoever, no law of nature, can any way impede it: Plato, as S. Augustine notes, lib. 13. the civet. Dei, said well; Gods will is beyond all other assurance. God is not bound or limited to any condition, in alloting of any particular being to any thing; as though he could not make an absolute alteration thereof, into an unknown quality of Essence: God then, as he can create what he will, so can he change or alter the nature he hath created, at his good pleasure, for his wonderful power exceeds all wonders: his wisdom permits and effects all and every particular or marvellous things; and can make the most wonderful use of all the parts of the world, which he only created. Cannot the power of God exceed them in working such things as are incredible to Infidels or heretics, but easy to his Omnipotency? God being the Author of Nature, why do they ask a stronger reason of us, when in proving what they hold to be impossible, we affirm, that it is thus by the will of Almighty God, who is therefore called Almighty because he can do whatsoever he will.  
Our Adversaries will not give credence to the Church, affirming, teaching and believing in all times the verity of such miracles, with a proud supposition, as if God Almighty could do nothing that exceeds their capacities to conceive: we know no better or stronger Reason can be given for any thing, then to say, God Almighty can, or will do this; which he hath promised in the sacred Text, wherein he hath declared as strange things as these which also he has performed: surely he will do these; because he has said he will, as he hath made the incredulous Heathens to believe things which they held to be impossible.  
Let not the faithful hoodwink themselves in the knowledge of Nature, as though God's power could not alter the nature of any thing, from what it was before, unto man's knowledge, let them not think these things to be contrary to nature; since they are effected by the will of God, the Lord and maker of Nature; they are not in themselves against Nature, but at most, against the common Order of Nature.  
These words of S. Augustin in regard of other such wonderful things, may be applied as properly to our present subject; for Catholics do confess that they cannot give any humane or naturally known reason for the Mysteries which follow the Eucharist, the most that we can ever pretend to, is, to show that there is nothing in them against the essence of natures being: our whole belief in these Mysteries depends on God's word, wherein he has manifested his will which carries with it an omnipotent power, whereto all created things are in obediential subjection aswell in their essential as accidental being; all mutable, and alterable; according to the will of God especially in all accidental qualities or dispositions, which also he may add to natures being, yea, and also give another nature: So he made Iron swim, Fire not burn, water to mount, and become passable, solid things to walk upon it: Humane bodies to ascend, to be also not consumed by perpetual fire, Things of no weight at all, as Angels called spirits, to descend even within the bowels of the earth: God by his will so disposing, yea, to be burnt with fire, I might allege many more examples of this kind, but these may suffice; to manifest that God's power is not to be limited to man's humane reason, much less to his senses; yea, not to any created Intelligence: what he can do, is known only and solely to himself; what he has done according to the ordinary course of Nature is latent to all humane understanding, for there are many things whose natures and qualities the wisest men are ignorant of: what he has done beyond the ordinary course of nature, we know by his revelation, which moves us to believe, not know: we trust in God's word, no way doubting of his omnipotency: and therefore we little esteem, of what the wit of man can think, imagine, or conceive to the contrary. The Church grounded on God's word and Tradition attested by the holy Fathers and Doctors, has always so taught us, as partly will be more manifest, in the next Chapter.   

CHAP. XIII. Transubstantiation proved in all the ages of the Church.  
THis terrible word Transubstantiation, is much baited at by this learned Doctor, even as the word homoousion, declared and determined by two General Councils, was impugned by the Arians, because it was new, and not found in the Scripture; even so this word approved by two general Councils, was railed at by heretics, when they could not disprove, what was specified thereby. I will not contend for the word, but for what is signified thereby, the Councils of Trent indeed approves the word, sess. 13. cap. 4. and explicates it to be: the Conversion of the whole substance of the bread and wine into the substance of the body and blood of Christ, so also defines it, can. 2. In this sense I shall produce Fathers and Doctors of all ages and times since Christ, and so confirm what the Doctor jeeringly, yet most ignorantly affirms, when he says, that the Mass began with Transubstantiation, as indeed it did, for the Mass was never without it, when the conversion of bread and wine is the essential part of the Mass, as it has been fully declared.  
I let pass his plain contradiction, when forgetful of what he had said before, admitting the Mass to have been in the Roman Church for near 1200. years past, he now says, that it began with Transubstantiation; which he will have to have been begun, from the Lateran Council held in the year 1215. where this matter was declared to be of Faith; not as if it was then newly invented, but as the common Faith of the Church wherein the whole Christian world agreed; for there were present besides the Pope Innocent the 3d 412 Bishops, the two Patriarches of Constantinople and Jerusalem, the Legates of Antioch and Alexandria, Archbishops, Primates, and Metropolitans 75. Abbots and Priors 800. Legates and Procurators of Bishops, and others without number. The Ambassadors of both the Emperors, Roman and Grecian, of the King of France, England, Hungary, Jerusalem, Cyprus, Arragon, and many other Princes, who all consented to this declaration in opposition to some heresies of those times.  
Now that such was the doctrine of the Roman Church before that Council, is manifest by the opposition that was made against Berengarius, who for the contrary opinion was condemned, in three several provincial Councils: several learned men of those times, did write against him, as Lanfransus Archbishop of Canterbury, I. de sacram. Eucharist. The Church spread in the whole world, acknowledges bread and wine set on the Altar, to be consecrated, and in the consecration to be changed incomprehensibly, and ineffably, into the substance of the flesh and blood of Christ. In like manner Algerus, Guitmen and Petrus Cluniacen, who lib. 1. Epist. 2. Let them see what foolish incredulity, what blind doubting it is, either not to see, or doubt, that bread is changed into the flesh of Christ and wine into his blood, by divine power: when by the same, many things are changed into another, even in the nature of things, which he proves, by many examples, and concludes, It is far more (as the holy Fathers of the Church say) to create things that have no being, than to form other, and other things of those things, which have a being; all these above a 100 years before that Council.  
But nothing more clearly convinces it, than the Recantation, which Berengarius made in a Roman synod, held, anno 1079. above a 130. years before the same Council, in this form: I Berengarius, do from my heart, believe, and by mouth profess; the bread and wine placed on the Altar, by the Mystery of prayers, and words of our Redeemer, to be substantially converted into the true, and proper, and life-giving flesh and blood of Jesus Christ our Lord; and to be the true Body which was born of the Virgin, which offered for the world's salvation, did hang on the Cross, which sits at the right hand of the Father, and Christ's true blood which did flow from his side not only by sign and virtue of the sacrament, but in propriety of Nature, and verity of substance. In this faith and belief he died.  
A little before this time lived Theophilact Archbishop of Bulgary a Grecian, in Joan. 6. Bread by the sacred words and Mystical benediction, with the coming of the holy Ghost, is transformed into our Lord's flesh: He has the same, in Marc. 14. adding, Our merciful God, condescending to our infirmity, did keep the species of bread and wine, but trans-elementated it into the virtue of flesh and blood: And in cap. 26. Mat. He said not, This is a figure, but, This is my body, for it is by an ineffable operation transformed; as bread in appearance but in very deed flesh. Of the Latins about the year 730. Venerable Bede in 6. Joan. Christ daily washes us from our sins in his blood, when the memory of his Passion is represented on the Altar, when the Creatures of bread and wine, are by the sanctification of the ineffable spirit, transformed into the sacred Meat of his flesh and blood: and about the same time the famous Grecian Father, S. John Damascene l. 4. de fide Orthod. c. 24. As the holy Ghost, working all things, whatsoever were made, so what then shall hinder, but that, of bread, he may make his body, and of wine and water, his blood: and even as whatsoever God did make, that he did by the work of the holy Ghost, in the same manner now also the operation of the holy Ghost, does that which exceeds nature, and which tannot be taken or understood, unless it be by faith only; And a little after, Verily the body is truly united to the divinity; that body which came from the holy Virgin; not that the body assumed, descends from heaven; but because the bread and wine itself, is changed into Christ's body and blood. If thou ask, how is this done? it is enough for thee, to hear, that it is done by the holy Ghost: even as from the holy Mother of God, our Lord, by the holy Ghost did make to himself, and in himself flesh: there is nothing more manifest, or perceptible to us, then that the word of God is truly efficacious and omnipotent; for the manner of it is such, that it cannot be searched or found out by any reason: A little after, Bread and wine are not figures of Christ's body (far be it) but the very body of our Lord, joined to the Divinity, for sigh our Lord himself said, this is not a sign of body, but body, nor the sign of blood, but blood: And again, If some have called the bread and wine, the figure of our Lord's body and blood, they did not say it, after the Consecration; but usurped this word before the oblation was consecrated: to be brief, In that place the Saint uses these phrases, Christ made his body of bread and wine; he made these things his body and blood, the bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of God: Bread and wine and water are turned into the body and blood of Christ.  
I cannot omit the holy Abbot Paschasius who lib. de corp. & sang. Dom. cap. 2. says, Although the figure or form of bread and wine be here, yet no other thing at all then the flesh of Christ, and the blood of Christ are to be believed after the consecration. And lib de Instit. Sacra. Christ did not say, that in this mystery there is a certain virtue or sign of my body, but plainly says, This is my body, and therefore this is what he says, and not what any one fancies: This Author lived about the year 850. well nigh four hundred years before the Lateran Council.  
Isichius in the year 601. in Levit. cap. 9 The Dispensation of Mystery, principally subsists in our Lord's word, transferring these things, which appear, into some other thing greater and intelligible.  
445. Let us now see, what the holy Fathers in the first five hundred years did teach of this subject; Prosper in lib. sentent. In the species of bread and wine, which we see; we honour invisible things, that is, flesh and blood, we do not consider these two species as we did before the Consecration, sigh we faithfully acknowledge, that before consecration the bread and wine to be what nature has framed, but after the consecration to be the flesh and blood of Christ, which benediction has consecrated.  
430. S. cyril of Alexandria, Epist. ad Coelest. God condescending to our frailty, breathes the force of life in the things which are offered, concerning them into the verity of his own flesh.  
Eusebius Emissenus about the same time Hom. 5. de Pasch. The invisible Priest, by his word and sacred Power, converts the visible creatures, into the substance of his body and blood.  
420. S. Augustine, ser. 28. de verb. Dom. I say unto you, that before the words of Christ, that which is offered is called bread, when the words of Christ are pronounced, it is not called bread but corpus a body.  
398. S. chrysostom hom. 83. in Mat. 11. hom. 60. ad populum Antioch. Those works which he did in the supper are not from humane power; he now also works, he performs it, we hold the order of Ministers, but he sanctifies and transmutates these things.  
S. Ambrose lib. 4. de Sacram. cap. 4. This bread is bread, before the Sacramental words; when the consecration comes, of bread is made the flesh of Christ: After, The word of Christ makes the Sacrament, what word of Christ? to wit, that in which all things were created, etc. and infers, I answer thee, the body of Christ was not before consecration, but after the consecration, I say to thee, that now it is the body of Christ: take therefore, as the word of Christ is wont to change all creatures, and changes the state of nature when he will; which he proves by many examples, as that, Christ was born of a Virgin; and the standing of the waters when the Israelites passed the sea, water coming out of a rock, and such like: lib. 4. de fid. cap. 5. As often as we take the Sacrament, which by the Mystery of holy prayer is transfigured into flesh and blood, we declare the death of our Lord: and lib. de iis qui initiantur, cap. 9 How many examples do we use, that we may prove this not to be what nature hath framed, but what benediction has consecrated, and the force of benediction, to be greater than that of nature, for by benediction nature itself is changed.  
369. S. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catech. 1. The bread and wine of the Eucharist, before the Invocation of the adorable Trinity, was mere bread and wine; but the Invocation being done, the bread indeed is made the body of Christ, and wine the blood of Christ. Catech. 3. The Eucharistical bread, after the Invocation of the holy Ghost, is no more humane bread, but the body of Christ. And Catech. 4. He sometimes changed water into wine, and shall not he be worthy to be believed, that transmutates or changes wine into blood.  
250. S. Cyp. Ser. de coena Dom. This bread which our Lord gave to his Disciples, changed not in form, but nature, by the Omnipotency of the word, is made flesh.  
203. Tertullian lib. 4. adversus Marci. Christ made the bread receive his body, saying, This is my body.  
226. Origen, lib. 8. contra Celsum, We eat the offered bread, now made by prayer a holy and sanctifying body.  
183. S. Irenaeus, lib. 5. cap. 2. When the mixed chalice and the broken bread, receive the word of God, the Eucharist of the blood and body of Christ is made; And cap. 34. The bread which of earth, taking the invocation of God, is now not common bread, but the Eucharist of Christ's body and blood.  
150. S. Justine Martyr, Apol. 2. ad Antonium. We take not common or usual bread, and usual drink, but even as by God's word Jesus Christ our conserver, made man, had flesh and blood for our Salvation, so for food, which by power of the word which we have received, he is consecrated; wherewith our blood and flesh by communion, are nourished, and we taken to be the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ, of him who made man. Sure S. Dionise was of that mind, when he calls the Eucharist, the sacred and most majestical Mysteries.  
In a book dedicated to the renowned Prince Henry, Prince of Wales, under the Title of Catholic Tradition made by a french Huguenot, I have these Testimonies following.  
The Ethiopian Liturgy, hath this prayer; We pray thee, O Lord, that thou wouldst show thy face on this bread, on this Altar, bless, sanctify, cleanse, and transport this bread, into thy spottless flesh; and this wine into thy precious blood: and it may be made an ardent and acceptable sacrifice; and health of our soul and body. And again, The Priest prays. That God would change the bread and wine of the Sacrament, as he changed water into wine in Cana. In another place, the same Author says, that the Abyssens in their Liturgy (which probably is the same with the former) frequently make mention of Transmutation, and it is to be noted, that these Nations do pretend to have the form of Liturgy or Mass from the Apostles.  
I cannot omit the words of the Constaminopolitan Patriarch Jeremias, in answer to the Germane Protestants, quoted by the same Author. Touching those things, we (that is, the Grecian Church) see that you in no way agree with us. The Catholic Church holds, that the bread after the sanctification, is changed into the body of Christ: and the wine into into blood by the holy Ghost: A little after, The bread is converted and changed into the body of our Lord and the wine into his blood; and again, he affirms, that there are not two things in the Sacrament, to wit, Bread and Christ's Body, but one sole, to wit, Christ's body.   

CHAP. XIV. Who are the Ministers of this Sacrifice of the Mass.  
IT may seem superfluous, to speak any more than what has been said already; for from thence it is manifest, that Christ has assumed unto himself sacred Priesthood, according to the order of Melchisedech, beginning it in his last supper; when he instituted the perpetual sacrifice of the Eucharist; wherein, he as Prince and chief Minister daily and hourly, by his Ministers offers himself to God the Father: whence S. Gregory of Nice, Orat. 1. in Resur. Christ by a secret kind of sacrifice, which could not be seen by men, offers himself an host, for us; and immolates a victim; he being both priest and Lamb of God which takes away the sins of the world; when did he this? when he gave to his Disciples assembled, his body to be eaten, and his blood to be drunken; then he declared openly that the sacrifice of the Lamb was now perfect.  
S. Augustine, l. 10. de civitate Dei, cap. 20. in the precedent Chapter, having declared, that visible sacrifices are to be offered only to God, in this Chapter, infers, Whence he is the true Mediator, as taking the form of a Servant, the Man Christ Jesus is made Mediator of God and men, whereas in the form of God, he takes sacrifices with his Father; with whom also he is one God: yet in the form of a Servant he chose rather to be, then to take sacrifice. By this he is a Priest, be offering and he the Oblation, the sacrament of which thing, he would have to be the duily sacrifice of the Church, in Psal. 33. can. 2. Christ ordained according to the order of Melchisedech a sacrifice of his body and blood. S. Ambrose, lib. 1. offic. cap. 48. Now Christ is offered, but he is offered as man, as receiving his Passion, and he as Priest offers himself. S. Crysostome, hom. de Proditione Judae. Christ is now present, who adorns this table, he himself consecrates; for it is not man, who makes the body and blood of our Lord by consecration, in the table set before us; but he who was crucified for us, Christ. The words are said by the priest's mouth, and by God's power and grace are consecrated, with these words, This is my body; the things proposed are consecrated, these once said, in all the tables (so he calls the Altars) even to this present day, and until his coming give firmness to the sacrifice.  
Whence it is that in the consecration, the Priest as Christ's Minister uses Christ's own words, as having efficacy and virtue to produce the work intended from the power of Christ, thereby acknowledging him to be the chief and sovereign Priest, and themselves only his Ministers and Instruments: But of this more amply spoken in the Liturgical Discourse, par. 2. sect. 3. cap. 11. to which place I refer my Readers; the same is also confirmed by what follows.  
Eusebius l. 1. the Demonst. c. 10. After all Christ offered for us a certain wonderful victim and excellent sacrifice, working salvation of us all to his Father, and ordained that we ourselves should offer for a sacrifice to God the memory thereof.  
S. Ambrose in Psal 138. We have seen the high Priest coming unto us, and we have heard him offering his blood, let us Priests follow, inasmuch as we can, that we may offer sacrifice; although we are infirm in merits, yet by the sacrifice we are honourable; for although Christ is not now seen to offer, yet he is offered on earth, when the body of Christ is offered, nay he is manifestly offered for us, whose word sanctifies the sacrifice, which is offered. And lib. 4. de sacram. cap. 4. When we come to make the venerable sacrament, the Priest now uses not his own words, but the words of Christ; it is therefore Christ's words, which makes this Sacrament.  
S. Hierome in cap. 1. Epist. ad Titum. What shall we think of a Bishop, who daily offers unspotted victims to God for his and the people's sins? this he does as priest, and not properly as Bishop.  
S. Crysostome in his Liturgy or Mass, in one of his prayers, has, Thou art become man, and our high Priest, thou as Lord of all hast instituted the rite of sacrifices, and delivered unto us the celebration of this solemn and immaculate sacrifice; behold me a sinner, that I may assist at this thy holy table, and consecrate thy holy and Immaculate body and precious blood; for thou art he who offers, and art offered: both the receiver, and giver Christ our God, hom. 83. in Mat. We hold the place of Ministers, it is he (that is Christ) himself who sanctifies and changes them. And a little after. Thou (O layman) when thou seest the Priest offering, do not think, that the Priest is he who does it, but the hand of Christ invisibly extended. And hom. 2. in 2. ad Timoth. Truly this oblation, which Peter or Paul, or any other Priest, of what merit soever, does offer; it is the same, which Christ gave to his Disciples, and which now also the Priests do consecrate: This has no less than that, why so? because man does not sanctify this, but Christ who before did consecrate it; for even as the words, which Christ spoke, are the same which the Priest do now also pronounce; so that is the same oblation.  
S. Cyprian, Epist. 63. ad Caecilium, Know that we are admonished, that Tradition be observed, in offering the Chalice; for we are to do no other thing, than what our Lord has done before us, that the Chalice which is offered in his remembrance may be offered with water; And again, If Jesus Christ our Lord, and our God, the high Priest of God the Father, did first offer himself a sacrifice to the Father, and command this to be done in his remembrance, verily that Priest truly undergoes the place of Christ, who imitates that which Christ did, and then offers a true and full sacrifice in his Church, if he undertakes to offer that which he has seen Christ himself to have offered.  
Moreover the holy Fathers assign the Priests principal office, to be the offering of sacrifice; according to that of S. Paul, Heb. 5. Every high Priest, taken from men, in those things that pertain to God, that he may offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. See the Annotations of the Rhemish Testament, as also the Interpreters of this place, when they largely declare the office of Priests in order to a Sacrifice; whence S. Hierom Epist. 1. ad Heliodorum, cap. 7. says, that Priests seated in the Apostolical dignity, do consecrate with their mouths Christ's body; and Epist. 85. ad Evagrium, that by their prayers the body and blood of Christ is made; And in cap. 1. Epist. ad Titum, he tells us, that, the Bishops according to their office are to offer daily unspotted victims for his and the people's sins. S. Isidore about the year 600. made a Collection in form of Common-places out of the Fathers and Councils of the precedent ages, lib. 2. de officiis, c. 7. says, Priests rule in Christ's Churches, and are comforts with Bishops in the divine operation of Christ's bedy and blood. And c. 8. putting a distinction between Priest and Deacon, he says, The one consecrates, and the other disposes or distributes; the one sanctifies, the things offered, the other distributes the things sanctified.  
S. Cyprian Epist. 54. ad Cornel. says, Priests do daily celebrate sacrifices to God; And Epist. 66. ad Furnesses, Each one honoured with divine Priesthood, and constituted in Clerical Ministry, ought only to serve the Altar and sacrifices, and attend to prayers. S. Hierome Dialogo cum Lucifer. c. 8. Hilarius a Deacon only, could not make the Eucharist, not having Bishops nor Priests, for it is not a Church which has no Priests.  
This is more manifest in the Priest's ordination, as it is expressly declared in the Florentine Council; the form whereof is, Receive the Power of offering sacrifice to God, for the living and dead: whence we may note, this is no new constitution, but a declaration to the Armenians of the Roman use, and manner of Ordination; for which the Roman Pontifical is alleged, which was long before this Council, and was in use in all the Western parts: and Ordo Romanus, made by Pope Gelasius in the year 496. which as Alcuinus notes in 2. par. de divinis officiis, has the same form: which also S. Ambrose insinuates in 1 Epist. ad Tim. c. 4. where he speaks of himself; saying, when I was ordained Priest, whereby I was designed for the work, and received Authority, that I durst in our Lord's stead to offer sacrifice to God.  
S. Clement lib. constit. Apost. cap. 24. Look down upon thy servant elected, and fill him, with the holy Ghost, that he may perform the immaculate, sacrifice for thy people; but what is more, our Saviour himself in his last Supper, ordained his Disciples in the same form, Do this in my remembrance, whereby our Saviour gave power to his Disciples to do, that is, to make or offer the same sacrifice as he had done; as I have declared in the first chapter, §. 3.  
Our Reformers have mainly endeavoured to take away the true and proper sacrifice of the Mass, and consequently to take away the Evangelicall Priesthood, which by continual succession, even from the Apostles times, yea, from Christ himself, hath always continued in the Catholic Church; and to this end the Parliament of England in the nonage of King Edward the 6. invented a new form or ordination, and commanded that none should give any Orders, but in the form prescribed; which was repealed by Queen Mary; and again renewed by Queen Elizabeth, in the 8. year of her Reign: To speak only of Priesthood, which principally makes to our present purpose, our Catholic Doctors and Controvertists did oppose against their Ordination of Priesthood; by several reasons: and first, that they had no lawful Ministers of their order, that is, no proper and true Bishops, and consequently no true ordination, which is clearly proved by Erastus signior in his Scholastical Demonstration, printed in the year 1662. which I wave and go to the second Reason.  
Which is, that the form of Ordination newly invented, is no true form, nor ever used in the Church, nor no essential part, necessarily required in the act of giving or ministering holy orders: to make this more clear, we may note, that in the Sacrament of Orders, there is required a sensible sign; which Divines call, the material part; and the application of this sensible sign, to the signification of what is signed, which is the formal part. To our purpose the Imposition of hands by the Bishop, may well be said to be the material part of the Sacrament; for of itself it is indifferent to Episcopacy, Priesthood, or Deacon-ship; nay, to other spiritual effects, as of Confirmation, yea, of remission and absolution, and is necessarily determined, and appropriated to this or that effect, by certain words, expressing the power and nature of this or that Order: In this all Catholics do agree, and some of your Learned Protestants acknowledge: M. Mason one who hath written purposely of this Subject, lib. 2. cap. 16. Impositionem manuum ut signum ordinis sensibile amplectimur, forma sensibilis sita est in verbis, quae preferuntur dum signum sensibile exhibetur: We embrace Imposition of hands, as the sensible sign of order: The essential form consists in words, which are spoken whilst the sensible sign is used; in which also those who reform the Roman Ordination, did agree, when retaining the imposition of hands, they invented a new form, never used before in God's Church, nor yet coming home to the purpose; for no words can be said to be the true form of any Sacrament which does not determine the sensible sign to its proper effect or office: In the Ordination of Priesthood, it must signify the grace and power which is given to him that receives the Order of Priesthood: so the foresaid Mr Mason, Istius modo verba quatenus de notant datam potestatem, sunt illius forma essentialis. The learned Bishop of Derry in Ireland, in his book of the Consecration and succession of Protestant Bishops; page 226. comes more home, saying; The form or words, whereby men are made Priests; must express power to consecrate or make present: Christ's body and blood, etc. for we have no difference with the Romanists, in this particular. They who are ordained priests ought to have power to consecrate the Sacraments of Christ's body and blood, that is, to make it present. Doctor Sparrow is of the same opinion as is noted in the said liturgical Discourse, part 1. cap. 26. and Doctor Thorndike in his book of Just weights and measures, cap. 21. All Ordination tends to the celebration and communion of the Eucharist, as well that of Bishops, to the end that they may ordain the other Orders, and that of Deacons that they may wait upon the celebration of it; As that of Priests, that receiving the power of the keys, to warrant the effect of it, they may therefore have power to celebrate it.  
Surely the present English Church must be of the same judgement, when only those who are ordained Priests have authority to consecrate the Eucharist, which is their peculiar proper and principal office, belonging to none other: the Power and authority to them in this cannot be from any humane authority but divine, which comes unto us by the work of the Holy Ghost in the Sacrament.  
Now in the Form of Ordination invented by order of Parliament in the time of King Edward the 6. and used since in Queen Elizabeth's time, no such power is expressed; for all the words savour more of jurisdiction or execution of what follows the nature of the order of Priesthood: without which the rest is of no Force, for without the power ex vi ordinis, no actions ex vi officii are authentical, or valuable: for as Mr Mason well says, l. 2. c. 16. Non verba quaelibet huic instituto inserviunt, sed quae ad ordinis conferendi potestatem exprimendam sunt accommodata; dum per Apostolum Tit. 1. mandavit Christus, ut crearentur Ministri; mandavit implicit, ut inter ordinandum verba adhiberentur Idonea quae dati tam ordinis potestatem complecterentur: istius modi autem verba, quatenus Datam potestatem denotant; sunt illius ordinis forma essentialis.  
If there be no form expressing or determining the power, the most essential part is wanting, and consequently no true Ordination. Doctor Bramhal well considered this defect in all the following words of their form in Ordination, and therefore he attributes the giving of this power, to the words: Accipite spiritum sanctum, receive ye the holy Ghost. In which is contained the power to consecrate; but first, these words, receive ye the holy Ghost, are as indeterminate, as the imposition of hands; And Act. 8. in order to Confirmation and no ways to Ordination, v. 17. It is said, they imposed their hands upon them; and they received the holy Ghost. Secondly the Apostles were made priests, in the last supper; without these words, and when our Saviour did use these words he specifies and determines the power which was given thereby, whose sins ye forgive shall be forgiven, etc.  
But Doctor Bramhal will still insist, that in saying, Receive ye the holy Ghost, is understood, Receive the grace of the holy Ghost, to exercise the office of Priesthood, to which thou hast been now presented. If this had been expressed, the difficulty would soon cease, but this is a mere invention of this learned Doctor, who tells rather what it ought to be, than what it is; for during well nigh a hundred years the English Bishops never made such expression.  
Some perhaps will say; the Bishops always by those words did intent, and so understand those words: It is very probable that Bishop of Bramhal did so understand it; but neither the meaning nor Intention of the Ordainer, can add any force or virtue to the sacrament, or be sufficient to produce sacramental effects, without words determining and specifying the Ordination, which is, the most essential part or form of the sacrament.  
No wonder then, that we make difficulty in their Form of Ordination; when in the late Act of Uniformity, The Clergy of the Kingdom, as supposing the precedent form of Ordination insufficient, and not satisfactory, have determined, that the true form of Ordaining Priests is, Receive the holy Ghost in the office of a Priest: which in a manner is the same with what the Grecian Church useth; which is, The divine grace which always cures the infirm, and supplies what is wanting, promote N. this venerable Deacon, to be a Priest: whose office, even according to the whole Grecian Church, is to offer sacrifice; which also in the following prayers they expressly mention. Simon Bishop of Thessalonia, in Tract. de Ordinat. affirms, that the Priests and Deacons are ordained before the Altar, where the Chalice is present: whence in the Latin Church their Ordination is admitted, because although they use not the same words, yet they have words, which in a general way express the determination of the material, signifying also the quality and nature and office of the order of Priesthood, and distinction from other Orders.  
Now admitting this Form, after so long time, made choice of, not to condemn it for a not-sufficient form, or reproving it, but only that it is different from the use of the Western Church; which always had other words in their Ordination of Priests; from whence those who were under the Patriarch of the West, ought not to differ, according to the Decree of the second Milevitan Council, cap. 12. that no ordination should be used, but what was approved by the Council; but omitting this I have two things, to say, the first, that from the first Ordination made in the time of King Edward 6. there was no true ordination of Priesthood, until this late Ordinance in the Act of Uniformity, by reason that their was no essential form used, and by consequence there was not true Priesthood; from whence also it follows, there were no true Bishops: For as Mr Mason well infers, in his Preface Cum Episcopum esse nequeatqui non fuerit Presbyter, si nos presbiteros non esse probatum dederint, De Ministerio Anglico actum est.  
The second thing is, that the now Church of England doth plainly reject, and renounce the Function or Office of Priesthood, insomuch that they have rejected the very name of Priest even in the holy Scripture, translating Elder for Presbyter, a name signifying antiquity of years, and appropriated as well to secular, as Ecclesiastical persons, in their several callings, never used by the Church, in the Dignity of Priesthood: others retain the name, but not the Office, whence Mr Mason l. 5. cap. 1. sticks not to say, If by the name of Priest, you had meant nothing else but a Minister of the Gospel, to whom is committed the dispensing of the Word and Sacraments, we would profess ourselves Priests: whence they more commonly are called Ministers: Catholics deny not the name Ministers, in regard of the exercise of those functions; for Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and other inferior Orders, may be called Ministers; so S. Paul, Act. 4. calls the office of Apparitor, which were sent to visit the Prisons, Ministers: and Rom. 15. Christ himself is called Minister of Circumcision: And again, v. 16. S. Paul styles himself Minister of Christ Jesus in the Gentiles; which rather signifies a particular office and vocation for the conversion of the Gentiles; whence he is called Doctor Gentium, then Priesthood; which by office is indifferent to Jew or Gentile, 1 Cor. 3. S. Paul calls himself and Apollo Ministers, that is, instruments of Christ Jesus; and therefore in the next Chapter he says, so let a man esteem us, as the Ministers of Christ and the Dispenser's of the Mysteries of God; that is, in the exercise or use of our function or office, which we have received by our vocation or ordination: whereby we receive power and authority to exercise our Ministry, and dispensation, in which principally consists the nature and reason of Ordination; by which, as the same Apostle says, they are made mere Ministers of the New Testament; so that all Priests are Ministers, but all Ministers are not Priests: and the word Priest, plainly signifies, him that hath power to ministrate, and may be called Minister in the time of his Ministration: The Prophet Jeremy cap. 32. v. 21. calls Gods Priests and Levites, his Ministers, Phil. 2.25. S. Paul calls Epaphroditus his brother and coadjutor, and fellow-soldier, and the Apostle and Minister of his necessities.  
M. Mason must give me leave to ask of him a question, whether he believes that Priests, have no other power then what he specifies, to wit, a Minister of the Gospel, to whom is committed the dispensing of the word and Sacraments? if he does not, his words are vain; if he does, how will this stand with what he saith in other places? as lib. 5. cap. 1. As often as we celebrate the Eucharist, so often we offer Christ in mystery, and do immolate or slay him in sacrificing, by way of commemoration or representation: if this be so, I pray let him tell me who doth do this, but the Priest? for none but such, even amongst them, have authority or power to do it: yet this is not included either in dispensing the word or the Sacraments; for to offer Christ in Mystery or immolate him, requires other authority, and that from his Ordination, or not at all.  
In the same book cap. 3. If by an unbloudy manner, you mean a mystical and Sacramental manner, I am not against it, because the shedding of Christ's blood on the Cross, was real; in the last supper only mystical and Sacrament all.  
And again, cap. 5. The holy supper may be called a sacrifice Eucharistical or mystical, in which the sacrifice of the Cross is both represented, and offered in a mystery, that is Sacramentally: who does this but a Priest? who offers this sacrifice Sacramentally; or by whom is the shedding of Christ's blood in a mystical and Sacramental manner? most of your learned men, as is said already, attribute to Ordination, or the power given to consecrate; which is more than M. Mason allows to his Priesthood.  
I know not how M. Mason will reconcile himself, lib. 4. cap. 14. where he in the name of the Protestant Church, declares: We acknowledge no proper external sacrifice of the new Testament, besides that which Christ himself in his own person, once Immolated on the Cross. Insomuch (saith he) that if a Romish Priest become a Protestant, he must renounce the power of sacrificing, redeuntes (sacerdotes) sacrificandi potestatem nostra opinione impiam & sacrilegam deponere & repudiare debere decernimus. We judge or hold that such Priests, as return from the Roman to the English Church, aught to depose and repudiate the power of sacrificing in our opinion impious and sacrilegious: What Sir, is it impious or sacrilegious to celebrate the Lords supper? to offer or immolate in sacrifice? this, if you may be believed, you often say; if the holy supper be a sacrifice, sure it is external; if Christ's blood be shed in a sacramental way, sure it is externally; for all sacraments are external signs: if all this be impious and sacrilegious; all your Ministers are impious and sacrilegious, for that they without power, do attempt to consecrate, and offer, and immolate Christ.  
Doctor Sparrow, worthily bearing the title of Bishop of Exeter: in his Rationale, pag. 309. admits this saying; According to the usual acception of the word Priest, it signifies him that offers up a Sacrifice; and proves it, because the Ministers of the Gospel have a sacrifice to offer, viz the unbloudy sacrifice, as it was anciently called, the Commemorative sacrifice of the Death of Christ: which does as really and truly show forth the death of Christ, as those sacrifices under the law did foreshow it, and in respect of the sacrifice of the Eucharist, the Ancients have usually called those that, did offer it up, Priests: who (as he says) afterward, are to offer that holy Bread and Wine, the Body and Blood of Christ. he confirms this by the Prophecies of Esay, cap. 66. v. 21. I will take of them to be Priests and Levites, saith our Lord, that is, of the Gentills; and Jeremy, cap. 33. v. 18. And of Priests and Levites there shall not fail from before my face a man to offer Holocausts, where, says the Doctor, they prophecy of the times of the Gospel, as will appear by the context and ancient exposition, to wit, of the Interpreters on those places.  
From what has been said it is manifest from the Texts of the whole Father's above-alledged, that the proper office of a Priest, is to offer sacrifice; the present Church of England hath put in the name Priest in their form of Ordination, and consequently must admit a sacrifice which he is to offer, otherwise they should take the word Priest equivocally, not properly in its right signification or sense of the Catholic Church: and consequently it follows; that they have no true Prie thood amongst them: for it is manifest, that neither he that ordains, nor he that is ordained, do intent to consecrate, or to be consecrated a sacrificing Priest: for their Intentions are directly contrary: insomuch as Mr Mason, as is said before, tells us, that such priests as return from the Roman to the English Church ought to depose and repudiate the power of sacrificing; whereas the Council of Trent Sess. 23. Can. 1. puts an Anathema on any one who should say, that in the new Testament there is no visible or extern Priesthood, or not some power of consecrating and offering the true Body and blood of our Lord, and of remitting and retaining sins, but only an office and bare Ministry of the Gospel, or those who do not preach not to be Priests at all: And Cap. 1. of the same session, sacrifice and Priesthood are so conjoined by God's ordination, that both have been in every law: when therefore the Catholic Church hath received from the first Institution in the new Testament, the holy visible sacrifice of the Eucharist, we must acknowledge to be in it a new visible and extern priesthood, into which the old Priesthood is translated, which the sacred letter doth also show, and the Tradition of the Catholic Church hath always taught, this to have been instituted by the same Lord our Saviour, and to the Apostles and their successors in Priesthood: power given to consecrate offer and minister his Body and blood, and also of remitting and retaining fins.  
The same Council Sess. 7. Can. 11. If any shall say that in the Ministers, when they make or confer the Sacraments, Intention is not required, at least, of doing what the Church does, be he Anathema. The Council of Florence, Decreto Eugenij, says, Sacraments are performed by three things, to wit, by some thing as matter, by words, as form, and by the person of a Minister conferring the Sacrament, with intention of doing what the Church doth; if any of these be wanting, the Sacrament is not perfect: Even natural reason teaching this; for as S. Thomas. 3. quaest. 64. Artic. 8. ad 1. The Minister because he is a living Instrument, aught to apply himself by Intention, whereby he intends to do, what Christ and his Church doth. It is also certain, that an ill intention vitiates a good work, and a perverse Intention altars the nature of humane actions, which also is true in Sacramental actions: for example, he that pretends to Baptise, If his intention be not to baptise, or, takes the word, baptise, only as it signifies a lotion, or washing from corporal filth; does not rightly baptise; nor do 〈◊〉 Church doth. In like manner he that says the words absolvo te a peccatis, If he intends not to absolve him: or for sins, understands, temporal debts, absolves not: The Protestants who intent not to consecrate Christ's Body by the words, This is my Body, by the word Body, which they believe in another sense, do not consecrate. Matrimony, with the same words and matter, If by the word, Wife, they both or either of them understand, Concubine, is no Matrimony.  
When then the Bishop intends not to ordain as a sacrificing priest, but intends the the contrary, his act is ineffectual; for according to the Doctrine of Christ's Church, the power of consecrating, and offering the true Body and Blood of Christ, and the remitting and retaining of sins, is so annexed to the order of Priesthood, that Priesthood cannot be without it; and therefore he that intends to give Priesthood without, gives nothing at all,  
To conclude, the Church of England has excluded Ordination out of the number of Sacraments, and withal rejected the Papal power; one may question then, what power or authority they have to give Orders, but principally, from whence they have any authority or power to give them power to execute any offices, belonging to Priesthood: It cannot be said to be from the words which are not Sacramental, and consequently being no Sacrament, have no Institution from Christ, for that end. Moreover it cannot be said to be from the Church, for the Church can give no such authority but by the Sacraments; and the Reformed Ministers have no authority from the visible Catholic Church, or Pope, or Metropolitan, which they professedly reject, and disclaim: for Ordination is a spiritual power which tends to spiritual effects. Doctor Heylin Eccles. Restit. in his Preface, Queen Elizabeth looked upon herself as the sole sountain of both Jurisdictions; and the Act. 1. Eliz. 1. declares, the King's supremacy, to use and exercise all such Jurisdictions, spiritual, and ecclesinstical; as by any spiritual and ecclesiastical power, or authority, hath heretofore been, or may lawfully be used, over the Ecclesiastical state of this Realm: yet as Doctor Bramhall well says, pag. 63. The power of the Keys was evidently given by Christ in Scripture to his Apostles, and their Successors, not to Sovereign Princes.  
Many of our Protestant Divines and learned Doctors did well consider this Difficulty, and therefore most of them do admit, that Ordination is a Sacrament, and consequently they ground their Ordination on the authority of the former Catholic Bishops, who in a Sacramental power did ordain them; who according to Dr Brevent were all Idolaters, and unlawful Ministers of the Sacraments, except only Baptism in extreme necessity: so that they have no right to any Ordination but by virtue of the Sacrament, which cannot take effect, unless it be dnely administered by lawful power, and in due form.  
From which; I infer that our Reformers in taking away, and rejecting the sacrifice of the Mass: have also rejected the Priesthood, whose principal office is to offer sacrifice; and consequently they have no true Ordination.  
In fine, no Sacrifice, no Priest; no Priest, no Sacrifice; wherefore call the Ministers Priests or what you will; if they have not the office and power to consecrate and offer sacrifice, they are no Priests properly taking the word priest, or according to the common sense and use of the Catholic Church in all ages and times; yea, among Heathens and Infidels: whence it follows, that as our Reformers have framed a new Religion, so they have invented a new priesthood never heard of before; giving no other power then to preach and dispense the Sacraments; which may be committed or done by Deacons or Laymen, as all Ecclesiastical histories do testify: on this ground and other defects in their Ordination, the present Catholic Church makes no scriple (notwithstanding their pretanded Ordination) to ordain or give Orders to those who being converted and reconciled to the said Catholic Church shall humbly desire it.  
I know some will say, that this cannot be done without Sacrilege, for even in the Doctrine of the Universal Church, Re-ordinations, as also Re-baptizations, are esteemed sacrilegious; whence frequently those who were baptised or ordained by heretical priests or Bishops, were not rebaptised nor re-ordained: In consideration hereof, the now Church of England does not re-baptize nor re-ordain priests, coming to their communion, but permits them to remain in the Order received, and approves of them in all their function and power: as if they had been ordained by Protestant Bishops.  
This Subject would require a longer Discourse than my brevity will permit: I will therefore briefly conclude this Chapter, The Catholic Church hath always detested both Rebaptisation and Reordination but never made difficulty to Baptise or Ordain some who falsely pretended to have been Baptised or Ordained, when really they were not: We have a plain Declaration of this in the Council of Nice, Can. 19 where those who were baptised by the Paulianists were absolutely to be Baptised, because they were not Baptised in the right Form of Baptism, to wit, by the Invocation of the holy Trinity.  
The Decree of the Apostles Can. 68 declares; that baptised or ordained by Heretics, were neither Baptised, nor ordained: which as Caranzen notes, is to be understood of such Heretics, who did not observe the right Form in ministering the Sacraments.  
The Church whensoever it was manifest, that the Ordainers had not lawful power, or did corrupt or alter the form of Ordination, judged, that what they had done was Null, and of no force, and did simply and plainly ordain them: But if upon due examination it were found that the heretical Bishops were formerly ordained by Catholic Bishops, who observed the true form of the sacrament, those who received orders from them, and were otherwise fitting for it, were received, without any new Ordination; only new power was given unto them for the execution of such and such Orers: for as the learned Doctor Morinus, de sacris Ordinat: par. 3. Eccercit. 5. & 6. well notes, It may be admitted that such do receive a Character even those who are ordained against the Canons; but so that the virtue of the Character is dulled or blunted, not capable, or not fit for action: the Ancients did esteem Ordination Canonically given, could never be blotted out; but that its force or virtue by deposition might be repressed or dulled, that it could not produce any other Ordination: which may be confirmed by the common Doctrine of the Church, which teaches, that a Priest notwithstanding his Character received, in some causes, cannot give either lawfully or validly absolution.  
As for that which is added, concerning the use of the now English Church, which re-ordains not priests coming to it, all men know, that according to their Opinion, it would be very Sacrilegious; for no true Protestant will deny, but that Catholic Ordination is valid, and of Real force, giving all power and virtue belonging to a Priest; which to deny, would be destructive to their pretended Hierarchy, which has no other Foundation for its succession, then that their Priests and Biships were so ordained: The true state of the Case is, the Catholic Church in such case Ordains those who were never truly ordained: if the English Church should attempt to ordain Priests, they should ordain those who were formerly, rightly, and fully ordained.   

CHAP. XV. Whether the Sacrifice of the Mass be Idolatry.  
THat the Mass hath been held and esteemed in all times a divine and holy Sacrifice, is sufficiently proved, so that to question whether it be Idolatry, is in a manner to condemn the whole Christian Church, of which that prudent and gave D. Thorndike in his book of Just weights and measures, chap. 1. They who profess the only true Christ, and therefore the only true God, do necessarily profess to detest all Idolatry which the profession of Christianity effectually rooted out of the world wheresoever it prevailed, and so doth the Church of Rome still as seriously profess; and therefore cannot easily be convinced to profess Idolatry: for without expressly renouncing this profession, they cannot expressly be Idolaters, without renouncing it by such consequence, as may convince common reason, that they contradict themselves, and renounce all of them that which all of them profess, they cannot be Idolaters by consequence. And therefore it is not easy to make it appear to common reason that they are Idolaters, because than it must appear to common reason, that so great a part of Christendom doth by their profession contradict that which themselves profess. In the margin he says, They that separate from the Church of Rome as Idolaters, are thereby Schismatics before God. The reason is clear, for the pretence of Idolatry in the Roman Church, is no sufficient ground for any one to separate himself from it. And that which Dr. Brevent attributes to Idolatry in the Mass, is merely framed in his own fancy, and it is purely a conceit, or blind ignorance or malice, that imputes Idolatry to that which all Christians have believed to have been the greatest honour that humane nature can give to God.  
If Mass be a sacrifice, as is fully proved before, it cannot be called Idolatry; for either the act or object, must make it so; sure not the act, which is approved by God's word; and to give to God all supreme honour cannot be reproved, much less the object, which is only the true God. S. Augustine said well, that the act of sacrifice, is given only to the true God, or to an imagined, or to a feigned God. So that according to the sense of the whole world, sacrifice is only given to God; the sole object of this sacrifice, is the only true God, not to any imagined or false God; both which were true Idolatry; but the sacrifice to the true God, cannot be said to be Idolatry, which according to Its Etymologies, is to give Latria or supreme and sovereign honour to an Idol, which as Saint Paul saith, is nothing but only in the esteem of the Idolater. I think that there is none, who have understanding and reason, can or dare say, that the papists in their sacrifice, do give any honour or worship, that is, Latria, or supreme honour to any false Imagined God, for they cannot but know that their constant belief is, that there is but one true God, as an absolute article of their faith: their forms of Liturgies or Masses, both in their prayers, rites, ceremonies, and public belief, are testimonies of the same; and do plainly manifest, that the whole sacrifice is directed and intended only and solely to the true God.  
The Mass, liturgy, or divine service; consisting principally in the oblation made to the true God, cannot be said Idolatrous: whence I have often admired, that men of understanding, learning, or judgement, should so imprudently call it Idolatry; when the Church of England in imitation of the Roman Church, has framed a form of Communion, which some of them have termed, with the name of Divine service, Liturgy, or sacrifice, and oblation, and has the best part of its Prayers, Prefaces, and such like.  
But some will say, that this sacrifice was not instituted by Christ, at least, has no ground in the Scripture. I answer, first, that this may be retorted against their form of Communion, which is but of late Invention; and has no more ground in Scripture. Secondly, admitting this to be true, yet the Mass cannot be said to be Idolatry, for the Church intends not thereby to give any honour to any feigned or imagined God: but only to the true God: the worst that can be said is, that the Church erred in exercising that power that she hath not, or was deceived in her decrees, but this will never reach to Idolatry. Thirdly, the Church has always believed, that Christ himself instituted this sacrifice in his last supper, as it has been clearly proved before, as also that it is grounded in the old and new Testament.  
Others object, that the Mass admits of the Adoration of the Host: which is plain Idolatry, for such Adoration cannot be said to be exhibited to God, who is not in the Eucharist; whence M. Thorndike in his book above-cited, cap. 19 makes this Demonstration. They who give the honour proper to God to his creature, are Idolaters: They that worship the Host give the honour due to God to his creature, the conclusion follows, ergo, they that worship the host are Idolaters: I answer, M. Thorndike calls it a Demonstration as it seemed to others, but not to himself: and therefore says, But will any Papist acknowledge, that he honours the Elements of the Eucharist, or, as he thinks the Accident of them, for God? will common reason charge him, to honour that which he believeth not to be there? A little after, He that worships the Host believes our Lord Christ, to be the only true God hypostatically united to our flesh and blood, which beiag present in the Eucharist, in such a manner, as it is not present every where, there is due occasion to give it that worship in the Eucharist which the Godhead in our Manhood, is to be worshipped upon all occasions. They who know that the Godhead of Christ is the reason, for which his flesh and blood is worshipped in the Eucharist, cannot take that worship for Idolatry, because his flesh and blood is not present in the Eucharist; as they who worship it there think it is, for they know that the flesh and blood of Christ is no Idol to Christians, wheresoever it is worshipped,  
If Jew's, Mahometans, Infidels; and Ethnics, and those who deny the Incarnation, should take Christians for Idolaters in wirshiping Christ in the Eucharist, I should not wonder; for they excluding the true object of such adoration, consequently do reject such adoration; for if Christ be not God, Adoration or Latria is not due to him: But Christians who believe Christ Jesus to be God and man, cannot, with any reason deny, but that he is adorable, and to be adored in the highest manner, So that all Adoration to him is not only free from Idolatry, but also is the general duty of all Christians; and therefore it is a strange madness to accuse Catholics of Idolatry, when in the Eucharist they only adore with Latria, the flesh and blood of Christ Jesus: for whatsoever our late Advarsaries have foolishly enough invented; Catholics do not so adore the Elements of Bread or wine, or species of them, presence, or circumstances, but only and solely Christ Jesus, believing firmly and without the least hesitation that he is really there present: from which belief, as a necessary sequel follows all true Adoration.  
Our pretended Reformers will not stick at this: for the first and chief beginner of this Reformation Luther, not only approved it, but also left it in practice to all his followers; for generally all Lutherans do use it in their daily practice. the Tiguran Calvinists do affirm, That if the true and natural body of Christ be in the Eucharist, why should not our Lord be adored there, if we should teach that the Natural body of Christ were truly there, with the Papists we should also truly and faithfully adore▪ It is certain the same errors do follow from Consubstantiation as from Transubstantiation, to wit, Adoration, circumgestation, inclusion, and oblation.  
Os●ander in Cont. 16. par. 12. alleges the Divines of Wittenberg, saying, If Bread in the Lord's supper be the substantial body of Christ, the sacrifice of the Mass and Adoration of the sacrament may be defended. The Divines of Geneva say to the Lutherans, that, Consubstantiation or Transubstantiation being admitted, Adoration necessarily follows. Eusebius Alckercherus affirms, That from this foundation (of the corporal and real presence and eating) we must necessarily grant, that aswell Adoration, as oblation, do follow in the sacrifice of Christ's body and blood.  
Chemnitius in his Examine Con. Trident. par. 12. plainly says, If we believe Christ God and man to be present in a peculiar manner of presence and grace in the action of the supper, so that he doth there exhibit to them who cat truly and substantially his body and blood, etc. It cannot or ought not to be done, but that faith should worship and adore Christ present in that action so Jacob, Gen. 28. Moses' Exod. 23. Elias 3. Reg. 19 Truly had no command that they should adore in those places, but because they had a general command, that they should adore God every where; and God was truly present under those extern and visible symbols, etc. Truly they adore that God whom they believed to be there present, etc. but they did not adore God as far from them, in the Imperial heaven; as remote and absent from them, etc. rightly therefore S. Augustine in Psal. 98. S. Ambrose Nazianzene in the Epitaph of his sister, from the sentence of Eusebius Emissenus, and Luther count. Lovanienses ar. 6. call the Eucharist a venerable Sacrament: whence he makes this Adoration out of all Controversies between him and the Tridentine Council.  
From these learned men of the pretended Reformation we may note, that although they opposed the Catholic Doctrine of the Church, yet they were far from condemning this Adoration, or making it Idolatry, that they plainly confess, that those who believe the Real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, do constantly affirm, that it is our duty to do it; since the real and only object of such adoration is the body and blood of Christ Jesus: whence I make this Syllogism.  

1. They who give the honour due to God, to any creatures, are Idolaters,  
But Catholics give no honour due to God, to any creatures,  
Ergo, Catholics in this are not Idolaters.   

2. To adore or worship Christ Jesus in the Eucharist, is not Idolatry.  
But Catholics only adore Christ Jesus in the Eucharist,  
Ergo, Catholics in this are not Idolaters.   

3. He that believes Christ Jesus in the Eucharist, may lawfully there adore him,  
But Catholics believe that Christ Jesus is in the Eucharist,  
Ergo, they may lawfully adore him there.   
The sequel of Adoration to our belief, is no way to be reprehended, and is admitted by most of our Reformers, and only those who deny the Real Presence, can with any reason deny it. Those who admit Consubstantiation (whereof many were of our first pretended Reformers) cannot, nor do any way exclude it; and I see not how those who believe the Real presence in what manner they please, can any more; for if Christ be there, sure he is an Object adorable.  
Our present Church of England plainly admits the Real presence, as is manifested in its Catechism before Confirmation; where it is declared, that, The outward part or sign is bread and wine, the inward part is the body and blood of Christ, which are verily and truly taken and received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper; the benefits are the strengthening and refreshing of our souls, by the body and blood of Christ; and so all ancient protestants in England did believe, and accordingly did with kneeling and adoration devoutly receive it. The additional note at the end of the form of Communion expounds it, That the kneeling is but a signification of our humble and grateful acknowledgement of the benefits of Christ given to all worthy receivers; pray, what is this but adoration? when the Minister knelt at the Lords table, sure he adores not the table, but the Eucharist which is to be offered and taken thereon.  
Nay the peculiar form ordained peculiarly for the Communion: argues some special honour to the Eucharist, and in words can signify no less, for therein, it is called the sacrament of Christ's body and blood. The spiritual food and sustenance of our Lord, the Communion of the body and blood of our saviour. Grant us gracious Lord so to eat the flesh of thy son, and to drink his blood, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and washed through his most precious blood. Again, make us partakers of his body and blood. In the Communion, The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life; and the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ which was shed for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto life everlasting: and after it is called, The spiritual food of the most precious body and blood of thy son our Saviour Jesus Christ.  
These words and many such like, according to vulgar understanding import a Real Presence, and signify no less; and moves the hearers to a devout expression of the honour they bear to the holy Sacrament; yea, to adore it, which I speak not to condemn them in it, no more than I would condemn Jacob, Gen. 28. who seeing nothing of God but by the effects, which he felt in himself, he gathered, that God in a special manner had been in that place; he adored and worshipped God. The Israelites Exod. 35. beholding the pillar of the cloud, which was but a sign of God's presence, adored God: and 2. Par. 6. the people seeing fire descending, and the glory of our Lord on the temple, falling flat on the earth upon the pavement paved with stone, they adored and praised our Lord: they adored not what they saw, nor any circumstance or apparitions of Majesty and glory; which were but external signs of some peculiar presence of God in the temple, but him who was thereby presented, and this without any show of Idolatry: and in like manner, if we adore Christ as present in the Sacramental signs, presented unto us, we cannot be said to be Idolaters; when the object of our Adoration is not the sign, or any created thing, but only Christ Jesus God and man: whence learned Erasmus lib. 9 Epist. ad Pelicanum well said, Hitherto with all Christians, I have adored Christ in the Eucharist, neither do I yet see any cause, why I ought to departed from that opinion; I can by no humane reason be withdrawn from the agreeable judgement of the whole world, which is also in the Liturgical discourse, par. 2. Sect. 3. cap. 12. and cap. 13. in the general consent of the primitive times, as is manifest in all the holy Liturgies of God's Church in those times: and proved out of S. Augustine: there also cited concludes, That not only we do not sin in adoring, but we should sin in not adoring, S. Ambrose will have us to adore Christ on the Altar in the Mysteries, that is, in the Mass. S. Prosper lib. sent. We do truly honour in the forms of Bread and wine, which we see; things invisible, that is to say, Flesh and blood. S. Augustine Epist. 120. ad Honoratum, c. 27. says, The Rich come to our Lord's table, and receive of his Body and Blood, but they adore only, and are not filled, as the poor are, yet notwithstanding they have adored, Theodoret Dial. 2. The Mystical Symbols are adored, as being the same things which they are believed to be. S. Cyril Catech. 2. showing the manner how we ought to communicate, concludes, that bowing down in manner of Adoration and Veneration, saying, Amen. Admirable was the devotion and reverence of S. Gregory Nazianzen his Sister, to the Blessed Sacrament, as that great Saint and Doctor relates, orat. 1. and how miraculously she was cured thereby from a disease humanely incurable.  
The Jews and Infidels give sufficient testimony of the Christian practice of adoring Christ Jesus in the Eucharist; as is to be seen in all Ecclesiastical Histories. Averro acknowledges it in his time; when he said: I have travelled over the world and have found divers Sects, but none so foolish as the sects of Christians; for they devour with their teeth their God whom they adore. S. Augustine, lib. 22. contr. Faust. c. 13. says, that the Heathens did esteem Christians to worship Ceres and Liber, for the Bread and Chalice, and answering, says, we are far different from Ceres and Bacchus the Pagan Gods, although in our Rite we honour the Sacrament of the Bread and Chalice, Maximus manducensis a heathen writer, in his Epistle to S. Augustine, which is extant in 43. Epist. of S. Augustine, demands of him, who is that God which Christians do challenge as proper to them, and fain to see him in secret places?  
In the Liturgical Discourse, in the place above-cited, this is more fully declared: It might suffice, that such has been the continual practice of God's Church, as is manifest in all the Liturgies or Masses, which have been since Christ's time; so that I may infer, that of all the calumnies that our Adversaries have imposed on Catholics, none more impertinent and more vain, than this of Idolatry; in regard of the Adoration to the Body and Blood of Christ Jesus in the Eucharist, unless they could prove Christ Jesus to be an Idol, or not to be adored; for as is fully declared, we in the Eucharist adore nothing but Christ Jesus.   

Conclusion.  
IN suits of Law when men come to a final trial, before the King's Judges, the lawyers or Barresters on both sides plead their Causes, with long and learned speeches, delectable to their hearers, and principally to move the Judges, to be favourable on their sides. The Judge having with attentive ear listened to their long harangues, rises up and declares his mind; that the whole difficulty depends on the lawful witnesses on either side, which being heard, he would according to law give his sentence.  
Innumerable Authors on both sides have written on this subject, concerning the Mass, but as yet little an agreement is made: wherefore omitting long discourses in this short Treatise, I seek to come to the Test, and stand to the testimony of authentical and approved witnesses, according to which I am content to have my cause stand or fall.  
Doctor Brevent has produced his witnesses against the Mass 2.1. many of the learned Schoolmen. 2. many Expositors of the Mass. 3. the Liturgies or Masses themselves. 4. the Holy Fathers of the primitive times, that is, within five hundred years after Christ. 5. the mainest point wherein he chief grounds himself is reason and Sense. 6ly. he pretends some Text of Scripture: I have no exception against any of these witnesses alleged, only I must say, that it savours of great Ignorance or no less Impudence, to take any of them as witnesses against the Mass: For first, there never was schoolman yet that wrote against it, or ever contradicted it, but such as have fallen from the Church. There books even from the Master of the sentences are extant in every Library▪ and are all expressly and positively against this Doctor; as every School boy knows. It is strange that he should make any use of them for his purpose, when he knows that all of them were members of the Roman Church; were taught, educated, and did teach, writ and expound the Mass, according to the Doctrine of the same Church: most of them were Priests, or Bishops or Cardinals in the same, and daily celebrated the sacrifice of the Mass in the same belief and Faith with the Roman Church, which by the Confession of this Doctor was in full possession of the Mass for almost twelve hundred years.  
2. No man of Judgement would allege Expositors of the Mass against the whole scope and intent of those who have written whole Volumes thereon, for to declare the true sense and meaning of every point, Article and cirenmstance of the Mass; as it is practised in the Roman Church, knowing well that if they had taught any other Doctrine contrary to the said Church; they should be liable to the censures thereof, and be noted by all the faithful Christians▪ besides, their works were approved and licenced by their lawful Superiors, and embraced and sollowed by all Roman Catholics, and followed by all scholars in the same Church.  
3. There cannot be greater insolency, then to produce Liturgies against Liturgies, or Masses against Masses: for the controversy is wholly concerning Liturgy or Mass, as they are and have been practised by the Christian Church in all times of Christianity; without any variation in Substance, in such manner as the Roman Church how at this present uses. If then in any of those Liturgies, there may be found any thing contrary to the Mass, it will condemn themselves, which cannot be imagined, unless we will lay a great blemish upon the whole Church, especially the supreme Governors thereof; with all the Bishops, and Pastors, Counsels, and Doctors, and holy Fathers, of gross Ignorance, in using such forms; as should contradict the substance of what they unanimously commended to the faithful.  
4ly It is no less strange, that the Doctor should pretend the holy Fathers and Doctors of the Church, when not only for almost twelve hundred years, even by his town confession, they all approved the Mass, but also defended it against all Contradictors and heretics; and therefore he rejecte their authorities, and pretends to stand to the judgement only of the primitive times, to wit, within five hundred years after Christ: In this Treatise, I have gone with him to those times; and have produced their testimonies from Age to Age, and dare say, that in those times he can produce no one holy Father or Doctor, that hath taught any Doctrine in any opposition or contradiction to any thing of the Roman Mased; where as I have produced most of them in opposition to whatsoever the Doctor has pretended against it: whereunto I have added the Councils, both general and Provincial, the practice of the whole Church, in those times, with the consent of all Christian Nations.  
5ly. Whereas the Doctor pretends, some Texts of the holy Scriptures for his cause, we may consider, that he follows therein his own fancy or private spirit; without any expositor or Interpreter of those times, imitating the Heretics of all Ages, who grounded all their errors on the Scriptures, misconstrued, and by a counterfeit sense of them, did delude the Ignorant Christians: Of this we have manifest experience, in these our times, for the innumerable Sectaries now extant do ground themselves on the Texts of Scripture; which they pretend for their multiplied sects. Each one affirming their sense and meaning of the holy Text, with condemnation of other judgements, and so wrest the Scriptures to their several senses, making their fancies the Rule of the sacred Text; whereas Catholics take the Scripture for the Rule of their Faith, follow the judgement and sense of the one holy Catholic Church, as on this present subject, I have followed the common Doctrine of the holy Church, even in those five hundred years after Christ, which the Doctor allows.  
Finally, the Doctors mainest argument is, from humane Reason or sense, which I have proved, no way capable to comprehend the mysteries of our Faith, which transcends above all Reason or sense; otherwise there would be no necessity of such a supernatural gift, without which there is no salvation. It is true that reason is necessary for the reception of Faith, for if we were not reasonable or rational creatures, we should not be capable to receive Faith; but, that reason should guide us in supernatural things, is preposterous, we know nothing but by our senses which can have no sensation or act of senses in spiritual or supernatural objects; such as all Faith's objects are, for the receiving thereof, only the sense of hearing, may concur, from whence the understanding frames intellectual species, representing the things which are revealed and declared unto us by the holy Church, which teaches in all times according to the holy word of God.  
In confirmation of this, S. Paul, Hebr. 11. defines Faith, The substance of things to be hoped, the argument of things not appearing to our senses, or humane reason, but of itself is an Blench Demonstration or convincing Reason: for by Faith alone, we are convinced to believe those things which are revealed; for faith only shows and demonstrates them as clearly, as if we did see them in midday: faith so works in us that we as more doubt of future or most obscure mysteries revealed, then if they were comprehended by the sight of our eyes; and are more certain in them, then by any sense, reason or Demonstration, which may deceive or be deceived; but in matters known by faith, we cannot be deceived, for God cannot deceive us. It behoves as therefore, as S. Paul 2. Cor. 10. says, to bring into captivity all understanding (much more senses) unto the Obedience of Christ. If we be true Christians, by faith we must captivate and humbly submit our will, understanding, all our reason, and all our senses, to the word of God revealed.  
S. Basil in psal. 113. said, All the Articles of our faith are principles grounded only on God revealing, and therefore we need no Inquisition or disputation by any weak reason, but firmly believe them as principles of our Faith, without any examination or Question: it suffices to all true believers, that, Dominus ipse dixit.  
The Objects of our faith are supernatural, and the subject which we treat of, is, of the Real and substantial Body and Blood of Christ Jesus being in the Eucharist, which only the understanding by Faith comprehends. I will therefore submit all I have said, to the judgement of all understanding persons, and earnestly desire them to ponder what has been pleaded fouthe equity of my cause, which is grounded on the positive Texts of holy Scripture attested and expounded by the holy Fathers and Doctors of those primitive times, and seconded by the General Practise of God's Church, aswell in those times, as in all succeeding Ages, without any notable question until our later times. God out of his infinite mercy open the Eyes of those who go astray, and grant them the Light of Faith; such is the continual prayers of him who earnestly wisheth them all health and salvation in Christ Jesus.  
FINIS.