I, A REVIEW OFTEN PVBLIKE DISPVTATIONS Or Conferences held vvithin the com- pafl'e of foure yeares, vnder K. Echoard Si S^.Maryj concerning (bme princi- pal! points in Religion, cfpeciallyof the Sacrament & (acrifice of the Altar. VV.H E R B Y, MayappearevpOH howwenl^giomdes both Cathgliks Rf%/o» VVM dunged tn En«Utid • m alfo thefoie-receumed Foxuit Martyrs did build their new opinions, and offer themfelues to the fire for the fame,vvhtcb vvm tbiefij vpon thecredttt ojtlie futd DiJputatiSni, By N. D. ^ug. lib, 1 , againft PetiliaH the Donatift* VVc are conftrayned to heare, dilcufle, and refute thele trifles of yours: leaft the Umpler and weaket fort fliould fall into your fnares. imprimed with licence Anno M. DC. iiii. The contentes of this Rcuievv- i TMe Vrefdcefloeu^ingwhAtvttlity dijputdtionnidy bring, for difcufion ef matters in controuerfj-j and hotvjarreitogeather tpith the caufes.why the reuietp of thefe ten dijpidtations is mw pubUshed. often publike dijputations, recounted by John Fox to haue byn held in England .ahout contreuerfies in Reli* gien,eJpeciaUj comer mnge the blejfed Sacrament of the Altar, within the [pace offoureyeares, at twofeuerall changes of Religion vnder K. Edward and Q.Marj-^ befidesmany other moref articular, held in Bishop con- fiftoryes and other f laces about the fame matters. Chap. I. The ft ate of the cheife qtieftionhandledinthe for- faid dijputations, concerninge the Reall prcfcnce, Tranfubftantiation, and the Sacrifice of the Mafle J with the cbeefe grounds that be on eyther fide. Chap. II. Certayne obfer nations to be noted Jor better anfwe- tinge of heretical cauiUations againft the forfaid ar- ticles. Chap. Ill* The examination of fuch arguments,as in the former difputations wne aUeaged by the Zwinglians and Cal- mmftsy againft the ReaUpe fence of Cbrifts body in th^ Sacrament. Chap. I V* What Catholikc arguments were alleaged in thefe dijputations for t he real! pre (e nee: ^ how they were anfwered or fliifted of by the Protejlants. Ch a p. V. Oftwo other articles about Tranfuhjlantiation, and the Sacrament of the Altar , what faffed in this dtjpa^ tation. Chpp, VI. T H E 5 THE PREFACE, She^inge yohat utility dijputation may bringe^for difcufiion of matters in controuerfiejsf hole fane: togeather iPlPith the caufeSj Ipyhy the rcuicvv of thefe ten dijputations is no^ pu- blished. HAT difputation is a good mcanes and profitable iii- flrumciit J to examine and try out truth euen in matters of faithj yf y t be rightly vfed_, & with due circumftances , no man can deny j for that experience in Gods Church doth teach y t, to v vittjthat great vtiiity hath often-tymes byn receaued by fuch difputations : and vveread amonge other examples, that in the tyme of Antoninm the Emperour fonne of Smerm , that died in Torke^ a little more then a hundred yeares after Chrift, the A t Mon- 4 The Preface t9 the Redder Montaniflsheicfy ^yvho were caliecl alio Cataphrigiam^oiovvm^ ftrong, ahddravvinge to it diuers pricipall rneii, and namely Tertullian, with the admiiatio of the vvhole world; dne Caius a Cath. man moft excel- Aiiiii Do; lently learned, and of rare and ver- *"'"^'^* tuous life J tookc vponhimtodi- fpute publikcly in Rome in theprc- lencc of the vvhole Church , with lieece ofZg^/>eri»«5 the Pope,againfl: a chiefe principall man of that fed: called ProduSy and fo confounded him therin^as fro that day forward the fed began greatly to decline^ of which difputatio do make mentio E«A& /. hotlrEulibm d<. S. Hierome^&C ytdid , 4. H er. much profitt that Cathohke caufe. ilu/.'in 2.. And about z.hundred ycares af- ter this againc , we read of another profitable difputation held in our countrey, by S. Gerrnanm his fcl- lo Wcsi French Bifhopps_, with the Brittiih A hut the nature of di^utat ton. f Bmti^ii Pel avians ypon theyeareof Bej. /. ^ Chrill 4x9. vvherby they were fo 2^co«^! confated.asalfo with the miracles ^/Jl^^/j wrought by S.Germartj by certaine J^.^^"/"/ r€liquesbroughtfrDmjRo»/e,as their ' hcrefie neiier profpered there after- vvardjbut was loone extinguifhed. We read in like manner of diucrs pubUke coflids Sc difputatios^ held by S.Auften with diners learned he- Fctiks of fundry feds , as namely with Fonmatm a Manichean pncik, in the citty Hippo in Africa j vpon the yearc 39i.al the clergy & people being prefent, & publike notaryes appointed to fet downe both their argumets: &: the iffue of this diipu- tatios waSjthat whe the Manichean heretike could not anfvverejie faid (fait h Pofiidonm)fe cum fim maionhm collaturum^ that he would conferre thofcdifficultyes with his betters, & then if they could not fatisfy him 6 The, Vre face to the Reader s«e the fl anim. vvherof the couJt' P'^^i^^^F^^'^ difputer was S. Auftm fr'mi himlelfe^&r of the Donatifl: Bilhops Z79. which Ihevvcth the multitude of herctiks in thoi^ parts to haue byn great, notvvithftandingethey had bin much diminifhed by Cath. Bifhops labours and wry tings: for that ly.y eares bcforc_,therc mett to- geathtragainft theCatholiks 400. Donatift Eifhopps, cxceptinge fix: this difputation was before the Conu¥iarceilinm souernour of that countrey ^ and pubhke notaryrs vvcreprefcnt to take the argumets on both fides, and all being ended the ludge pronounced this fen- Jug in tcnce I Omnium documentcrummani- fi-fl^^ ione J a Catkoluis Donatift as con^ futatos. That the Donatifts were conuinced by the Catholiks,by the iiianifeil truth of all kind of argu- ments. About the nature of difputatioti. 9 mcnts. S. Augufiinehhnklfektteth forth a breefc relation of all that meeting & difputation intituling ,yt Breuiculum . And in a ccrraync cpiftle of his teftifieth moreouer oftheeuent, that albeit thofemife- Epifi. ad rable Bifhops were notconuerted therby^ but rather made more ob- ftinate & obdurate: yet that many of their people were, & efpecially of the furious Circumcellians ^ that were ready to murder men vpon zcale of their herefie. y. I Ictt pafle another difputation which the laid Father had,(bme 10. or II. 'yeares after that, by the order of Pope Zo^mm of Rome, in the Citty of C thee VVhicL words being vttered, lulla began to Hammer^ and to change coiintcnancc_, fallingeinto jy an extafis^ and (o leefing her voyce^ 93 remained dummc vntill fhe died_^ which was {bone after, wherat two men and two vveomen that » came with her fell downe at the 3> Bifhoppsfceteaskinge pardon, and were conuerted, as were diners >y gentilLs alio by the fame miracle. 17. And this was the concliifion of that difputation and though it pleafed not aimightie God to v(e the like miracles extcrnallie in Maryes daycs^ for the rcprcllingc of thoie Ahom the mture ofdifputat'ton. .3 1 thofc iniblet vvcomcn that difpu- ted (b malepartlie^ and vrtered fo manic blalphemous (peaches a- gainft the foueraigne mifterie of Chrifts reall prefcnce in the Sacra- ment •, yet can there be no great doubt, but that invvardliche vfcd the iamc, or no lefl'eiullice vnto them^ cIpecialUcfcing hcfuffered them to go to the fire all without repentance and fo to perifhboth bodilie and ghoftlie, temporaliie ^^^^ addeternallie. And for ihatin re~ caufe cytingc their ftoryes before fettdonof" dovvne, intcndinge all breuitie [J.^*/'^ pofTible,! couldnotconucnientlie lay forth their feuerall arguments in difputation^ as neytherof thofc that were iheir maifters and in- ducers to this maddnes ; I haue thought good heerc to examine ail togeather in this Re-^ieVV, yvhercby yovv fhall fee what ijrounds The Preface to the Header grounds they had of fo great an cn- terprife,and of fo obftinate a ]:)rofe- cution therof And this fhall fuffice by way Preface : Now will wc paflb to the rccytall of the faid di- Iputations . O F OF T E N P VB LIKE D I S P V T A T I O N Recounted hy John Fox^ to haui byn held in England^ About Contrpuerfies in Religion > cfpecially concerning rheblefled Sacrament of the Altar, within thefpace of^.yeares^ at two feuerall changes of Re- ligion, vnder K hdiv^rd^ and Queene M^r^j 3ifide$ tnmy other meYipanlcular^ held in Bifhopi Cmfifioryes y and other places^ about the fdme matters. C H A 1? . I . NOW then to cottie more neete to the mmer yt fcife, we arebreefly tore- count the forAid ten difpuratibhs , or pubhke meetinges and conferences, that after the change of the butward face of Catholikc RchgLon in England, were held in our coun- trey within the fpace only of 4. or 5. yeares^ and thee(Fedsih^cenfued thereof, which ii^ great part were not vnlike to the fucceflfe of all thofedifpurations, meeting? conferences^ colloquies and other at tiempts of trial] before hieritioned, to haue ben with little profitr of te agree- 34 A ffytt0 of ten fuhliki agrccraent,madc in Gcrmany,Polony,France and other places amongft the Protcftantsof this age,iincc the beginnin g of their new gho- fpcll> the caufcs and rcafons wherof , haue in part ben touched by vs in our precedent pre-- face, and Ihall better appcare afterward by the examination of thefc ten publike difputatios, from which, as from generall (torchoufes, or head fchooles, were borrowed the armour & arguments,for thefc other lelTer bickerings of particular Foxian Martyrs, which they had with their Bilhops^Prelates & Paftors at their examinations &arraigHemet5,vpon the con- fidence & pride wherof,thcy were induced to offer themfelues moft obftinatcly & pittifully vnto the fire^as in th'examc o^uhn Tqx his Ca- lendar^ you haue fcenc aboundantly declared. FirU Dijputation. §. Tirft €(U Wherforc to recount the particulars x$ ^(^^plur^ breifcly as we may, the firft publike di(puta- UMytjr\t tion of theft ten,wherof we now are to treat, oxfird. vvasTield at Oxford again ft the reall pre fence of the bleffedbody & bloud of our Sauiour in the Sacrament of the Altar,by Teter M4rr;r an Ita- lian Apoftata friar, vpon theyeare of Chrift (as Fox fetteth it downe^i549,which was the third of K.BdfPdfd the fixt his raignc^about th^^ moncthofl«we(for he expreflTeth not the very ' day)and the cheife moderator or iudgc in this difputation, was D. Cox Chancelouratthat tymc tymcofthf. vniuetlicy, but after vnder ^E/i- suAbeth was B,of Elj , and hisafsiftents were 10x^4$. Hmj B, of Uncolne, D. Hajfnesdcmcof Hxccter-y M. Richard Mar^fen Efquier, and Chriftopht N^- Doctor o' Cyu'tll law^allcomiisionars ^laith Tox) of the Kings Maieftie, fcnt downc for this eftcd to authorize the dirputations. 3» For bclLcr yiiderlhndinge wherof yow muftnoie, thataibsit K. EdfPdrd i)adraigiied now more then full two ycarcs, and that the protedor Se/mer and fomc others of his ha- mour, would haue had change of ' doctrine eftablillied euen ar the beginningej about the point oFche bleijfed Sacrauient^yet could they not obtaync it in Parlamer, partly^for that the farrcjTreatcrpartofthcrcalrnc was y«tagainfl it, but erpecially for that it w^as not yet refol- ued by the Archbilhopp Cranma himfclfc , of whome if you remember, Uhn Vox doth com* plainein one plaCe vnder JC, Hrnr/'^ that good fo^p^g. Cranmer had n$t yet d full feelw^e of that di^rine. "^s- ^ Whervpon we fee, that in tht firft parlament of K. Edv^ards tymc 5 bcgon vpon the 4. of N^- Member &c ended vpon the i^.df December 154.7. there was an ad: made with this title. An aSl ^^^^^^^ dgamftfrichferfensMff)dllvnre(meHtlyJpeake4gdinft bookc -m' the Sdcrammt of the hod) and hUud of Chttil , OC. l^^^^'^^ VVhcrin magnificem; words are fpokea of this Sacrament and all thofc greatly reprehended, thdt in their fermons, preach'wpjeddifi^s.talkjJJ^cs, foHf^ts.fUjes.or ^efimes , did name and call yt, by fuch Vile and rnfetmdy ^>(;rt/yf faith the Statute) Chrijlidu esres did Moire to hedte yt rehear fed-^ 3'u A review of ten fuUike and this was the the firft fpiritt of that Calui- | nian humor in England, ^li(liked by Cranmer I and the reft at that tyme, but foone afteral- iox pa^. lowed well by lohn Fox in fuch of his Martyrs, as call y t womes-meAte, idoU, ihd the like, 4. And finally this party fo much prcuayled with them that gouerned , as not longe after, that is to fay^in the fecond parlament begone the 4. of Noucmber 1548. and ended the 14.. ^mined^' of March 1549. they gort their new co.mmu- 1546. * nion booke to be admitted, wherin their new do£lrinealfoagainftther^4///?r^/f;it:e wascon- tcyned, and then VeterManyr^\^YiO^ as in his ^Su^.Dt' ftory wehaue'^fliewed , wasfehttd Oxford temy. bef^j-g indifferecy, to teach what fliould be ordeyned him from higher powers in that sctDo^or parlament, hauingexpecaedall the lent long, Siund^r^ I. whilftthe parlament endured , what would lAnJif''^' be decreed about this pbint^and finding him- felfe in ftraytes , for that he was come to the; I c»r place of-y.Pthat wher- as the. firft about Tranfuhfiantiatm^ dependeth of the fecond of the reall frefence, it fliould haue byn handled in the fecond place, and not in thefirft,asheereyt isj forcleerer conceauing wherofjthe Reader muft note>that the mayne controuerlie betweenc the Sacramcntaryes & vsjis about th« reall prefence^to witt whe- ther the true body of Chrift be really and Tub- ftantially in the Sacrament after the words of confccration , which we do hould affirmati- uely, and To doth Luther alfo, & then fuppo- ling that it is fo,thcrefol!oweth a fecond que-! •ftion de modo effendl, of the manner of Chrifts being ?h«re, tpwittj whether y t be there to- 5$ A review of ten puhltke geathcr with bread, oi wuhouc bread,or whe- ther the bread beanihiiaced by the ptcfcncc of Chriftsbody,or whether yt ba turned into the very fubftance of Chrifts body^as we haue $fe the l"hewed out of :ic$tm ano Durand bcfoie, in the fhfrci^ia <^i'cufsion ofPlefu Merrfd; his I'riall- and eue- of pif(^u ry one of thefe opinions, about the mrinner of miof^^" Chrjfts bemg thcre^do prefuppofe the reallpre* with B. fenci, dcnyed by the Sacramentarycs; So as cq £MrTi»/^ difpnre firft about this particular manner of um.xpMU Chrift his being there by TrdKfubfiuntiation^ xhicccln- before yt be dirculTea vvJicther tie be really iKtdom, there or noe, ys to fete the cart before the horfe, and the foocc before the head* 6* And yet for that they do pcrliiadc tbem- fclues, thac they haue Tome more ihifts or fhewes of prohabilicy againft TratifuhJldnsiMm, then agamfl the real! pre fmeyOr can delude bet- ter our arguments ni chefimple peoples eyes, they al waycs runnc to thi3,& kaue the other: And itis^as if the c]ue Hon bcing^firft whether gold wereinapurre,& then whether yc were there alone or els togeathcr with iedd,tynne, or fomeriich bafer niertall ^ fonic wrangeler W'onid iirftdifiJUtethc fecond queRion before the tirfl jor as if r wo deniauds being propoun- ded, tirU whether in fiich a vellell(where wat- ter wasknowncto t>e before ) there be wine put in, and fccondly w hether this wine haue turned rhat water into ir fclfe or noc? or that warer & wine do remains togeatherjand that one would pretermit the ffrfr qijert!6,i:o witt, wbctjm wine k redlj &trHl/threQrn9? and cauil only I)iJpktatms,ahQUtK$li^ion. Chdf.u 5J^ only about the fecondjvv/wfcrrifcfvvxr^rt^tttr'- ^vva fjf. •eii i»fa wme,9r rmdtnt t9geawer wtth mwmt< In to cxprefle which cafes yo w lec tirlt, that this manner of the vaync dcahnge were prepofterous and impertinent ©if sL«- wranghng> but elpecially, yf thcw rangier did jJJ^^^J^^* denyexpreflely that there was any gold at all Tranfub- inthepurfc, or wineinthe veflell, forthenyt fttmiatis. Were too too much folly for him to difpute the fecondaryqueftions whether the faidgold were there alone, or with other mcttalles or whether the wuie had couerted the water in- toitfeifeorno; foryf neither gold nor wine be really there presctythcn is there no place for the fec5d difpute at all. And fo fareth it in our c5trouerfy of the redUf re fence of Chrifts body. For if the faid body be not really & fubftatially in the Sacramet at all, as the Zuinilim & Minimi do hould; then is it impertincc for them to difpute the fecond qucftion, whether it be there without bread or with brtad^or whether bread be turned into it or no by Trafuhjiaii4ti$n^ for fo much as they fuppofe it not to be there at allj onlj' Luther & Luther4ns msiy hauc cotro- ucrfy with Catholiks>about the miner how it is there, feing they bcJeeue it to be there in dced^ but Zuinglm & Caluinifis cinot^ hnt only about the firftq^^eftion^ whether it be there or noc; which queftion notwithftandiiig. for fo muchas they fly and runnc alwiycs to the fc- cond>a5 we haue ihewed notorious it i$ that they runnefro the purpofe, &4hcw thSfcluejs not only wraglers but aifo deccauers, feeldng da3;cH the eyes of the fimpie in this behalfe* C 4 '4o A revieu^ ef ten puhhkg as in this firlt difputation ac Oxfyrd, Teur Ux%^ tjt begon mtti rranrubitaiuiatioii , and was much longer therein, then in the controuerlia of che realJ prelencc. 7* And in the fecond difpuration of B. Ridlej! in Cambtfdge^twoonly qucitions being propo- fed-, tne nrft was by prepollerous order of Ty4«j«ij?4WfMri(?«,and the fecond of che Sacnpce^ yraudai€t buc tile rf Fox doth tell loxfdx^ vs in this place> that the principall difputers againft Peter MaYtn were DoBor Jrejfam, Deilor fhadfejt.znd hiaifier M«r^4W,ytt doth he nottell |, feui; vs one word what they faid againft him , nor doth he relate any one of their arguments or anlwers, but only the arguments Peter Mar^ againft them withtriumphjas who would fay , hchadgottenthcvidory without refi- ftance: but yow llhall fee in the enfuing Chap- ters, what manner of arguments Prr^r Martjfrs were> andhoweafy to be anfwcred, as no doubt but they were by them , yf Fox had ^ thought good to baue related both parts ( as he ought to haue done)or haue left both parts out. But this is his ordinary cuftome of dea- ling. Wherfore that you may vnderftad part- ly how the matter went in deed, by the rela- tion of one that was prclent , to witt D. Saun-' ders, I will fet downe breefely his words of the . adion in generall, asytpaffed. Thusthen he wry t«th about this firft Oxjord dilputation. 41 A review of ten fuhlike ^th!/k* lo* ?etmM4rtjtr{(zizhhc)&c.?ctcvMmyfyof ^ns^l'^' vvhomc many of the Settarycsprotnifcd to „ thcmfclues great matters, for that he was pu- „ blikc reader in Oxford, being challenged in thofc daycs by many of that vniuerfity,to dc- fend bis doctrine bydifputation, and namely „ by D. Rich. Smyth who had byn his prcdeceflbr in the fame cnairc,neucr durft to ycld thcrvn- to, vntill he had obtayncd that Cox a Ted*- „ ryof hisownelide, and a man of very loofc „ life lliould be fent from the court,to be modc- „ rator and iudge in the fame difputation: And „ that D.iSwir/; was called from the vniucrfity, &c. But when the faid dilputation had endii- l^.$mni9ri red for three daye$,and that Cox had fecne his HhuX^ fiterMdYtp much more prellcd thenhe loo- fputaiion ked tor, and almoft hilled out of the fchooles • by all the fchollcrs and hearers, he was forced 9> to fay that he was fent for away in all haft to 9» London, & confequcntly could no longer at- >* tend to theft difputes.Wherforehauinggiuen 99 great praifes publikely to Veter Mnvtjr, and ad- monilhed the fchollers to keep pcacc^hc brake 99 vp thofc difputations5& fb departed with in- 9P famy in the light of all men : yctPeterMdrtp 99 afterward fct forth theledifputations fraudu^ t> lently, as heretiksarc acctiftomedjind would 99 needs fcemeto hauehadrhc viftory , but by 99 the iudgment of that "v niuerfity he was twife 97 vanquilhedjfirftin that he durll not encounter 5> D. Smith, & fecondly for that he could not an^ I, fwcre the arguments of the other Cath.Do- ^ors.Thuihc.Wherby wemaypcrccaue,tlic reafoii DljputAtieni, about nelfgm. Chaf.t. 4f rcafon va htrforc Fox VYOuId not i'et downe length thep^jrticulars of this rirlt difputanon at Oxford, as he did of fomc of the others alter. Second Dij^utatton. §. i. ti. The fecond dilputation was held at Cm-- tn^/^e about the fame tyme (faith Foxjto witt rhtiecoa vpon the 20. of lune ^nm 1549. the defendant fi^o^f"\^'ia for the ProtcHant fide was D. hUdetv-^ the ep- by d,/./"^. ponents D. Glyn, li. Langdde, M. Sedgetnks.^^uc TongCy the moderator was D.Ktdle/ B. o^ Ko cbe^et^Li thattimc>burfooncafier o\ Londonby depriuation otD. Bonner^ The commiisionars fcnt from the King to afsill as ujdgcs, bcfidcs the faid Nicolas Kidley, were Th0nt4$ b.oiEl/^ Sjft lohnCheki (chooimaifter to the King.a for- ward Proteitant in thofe daics^though vnder Q^Udryh^ left them, D.M^/ a Ciuilian, and D. VVcnd4yt]xt Kings phiiition. The queftios di- fputed were two^as before hath byn faid.The fixil-^whethet there tvere any Tranfuhjlatmtm & the fecond ^whether there be my external!. & propitiatory facrifice inthemaffe. Tlie queltion of the reallpre" fence , whcrof both thete do depend, was not handled at all, for the caufes yo w muft thinkc before mentioned, and he that iliall read oner this whole difputatio, iTiall find it a very cold & trifling thing.much of the time being fpenr in ceremoniail words ofcourtefy^much in im- j!^^^}^^'^ pertinctexcurlionsfro the purpofe. outof all tio^'^of fcholafticall forme of difpining or ftrayning Mi the ckfcndantj& when any thing drew neeic ^tm: ' to 44 A miew of ten puhlike to vrge or prefle^ey ther the moderator would diuert the fame by intrudingc himfelfe,or the prodorsby their authority would interrupt yt. Heer0 (faith Fox) thepoHors cotmnaunded tlw . opponent to diuertey&c. And ^LgMnt^heere the prO" 125+. iiors commamded Langdale to gtue place to amthetm And further; heere he was cmamded to reply in th$ ^ecend matter. And yet (unhQr.heere M.Sedgewikc was commamded to ceajfe to Matjler T onge. Which yongfy hauingefcarcemade three inftances in proofe of the Sacrifice againft Ridley, ended all thedifputations with thefe words: Weill aw contented, and do mofi humbly befeech your good Lor-- P)ipp, to pardon me of my great rudenejfe & imbecility which lhaue heere fbewed, &c. Which indeed iheweth great imbecillity, yf he faid fo in deed , and that Fox hath not made him to ipeake as beft pleafeth himfelfe. 12. I could alleage diuers other fimplicityes out of this difputation^yf I would ftand vpon them, yeaon thepartofF^xand^/rf/e/thcm- felues J for in one place Fox maketh this note ypon a certayne anfw6re of Kidleyi Heere is toba ^^^^ (faith he) that feter Martyr in hit anfwere at »»s$- Oxford, did gr aunt a change in thefubfiances of bread Fox no- and vvyne, vy^hich in Cambridge by the Bisbofp DoSor diftsr^ y^idley was denyed. Behould heere the goodly jncm of agreement, that was betweene the firit foun* ^s^owne dersof Sacramentaryes doctrine in England, and how worthy to be noted by themffelues. Friar Martyr inOx ford graunted a change in the fubftanccs thcmfclues of bre^d and wyne, by . the words of confecradonj but SipJop tidUy \v\ Can^^ T>}Jputathn,ah0Ut Religien. . Ch4p. u 4,^ Cambridge denieth the famejfo great difference is there betweene Oxford ^nd Cambridge ^ the Fmr and the Bifbof fand is not he well holpen vp that hangeth his foule on thefe mens opi- nions? this then isonefimplicity of Fox, but lettvsheare another of Ridlejt rchtcd by Fox his ownepen, inhisanfwere to Matfter Sedge^ mcke, who began thus, t;. M^it VVorf^ippfuU MalfierDoSor Idoasl^ of yom hrfl of aU, whether the Greeke article (this) ^i^^jcyes / / / ' J J r J f J ^^^^ ^^^^^ hang 0} the neuter gender, he referred to the word fweringc i}:ixtzd)ortethetpQrd{hoiy) ? to the jirfip cannot be, for that it is of the mafcuUne gender, ergo to the fe- cond. This was the obiedion or demaund,lett vs heare the Billiopps fblution. Forfooth (faith fox p^^: he) that article is referred to neyther of both, hut may figntf^e ynto v$ any other kind ofthtnguXhm the Bi- lliopp. So as by this expolition, Chrift might as well fignific a ftaffe, or a ftoole, or any gar- ment or thing that lay on the table, or what- focuer els any man will diuife, as well as brcadjor his body, when he (aid of brcad^tlbi^ U my body. And is not this a BiflioppHke aun- fwere ? But of the arguments and aunfwers of this fecond difputanon , we lliali haue oc- tafion to fpeake afterwards, when thecon- trouerfies themfelueslTialbe difcuiTed in par- ticular, and fo welTiail pafle forward to re- ooumpte the other difputations that enfuc- 4^ A imm $f tin fuitikf Third Dijputation. §. 3. 14. The third difpucation was held at Cam^ bridge vpon the 23. of lune in the fame yearc 1549. as Fox recounrerh, whcrin two propo- iitions were held affirmAtiucly for the Cacho- rht ?.di- hks,by thcaforcfaidD.G/j'wdefendantito witc ;f for the reaiJ prefcnce & iacnlice of the rtiaire. h:d>eann$ fhc oppooents for thc ProteiUnts were M. mT."*^ Prr/^f , M. Gryndall B. afterwards of Londm, and Canterbury, M G/ji;/? and AI.P//i^«f^w,which laft vndcr Qj;-ltz.abeth 9,ott the BiJhopricke ot Dur- ham, ine moderator and iudgcs were the fame as in th« former difputation , to witc JitdUy and his feiJowes, and the manner and forme not muchvniike, though fomcwhat more diforderly, each one puttingc in his ver- didtoand fro at his plealure. Butyetwho- ioeuer fhall pervfe the fame with equality, will caliiy pcrccaue an eminent difference for Icarninge, cifcretion andclcrc aunfweringc bccweene the faid DoHer Glftt and his oppo- nents, which principiliy is to be attributed to the difference of his caufc from theirs • they neucr profecucing commonly one medium for abouconcor cwoinrtances ^ but leapuigpre- ftnrly to another : lb graueand fubrtantialla difpuiation was this for poore people that heard yt, or heard ofyr> and follow ed the re- /biution therin fete downs, to h;;nge rheir fcules vpon the certaynty therof, hlaijler VijputdtlomydhiUtRelipBHi. CUf.i. 4/ T5^. Uaifier Perm beginncth with a complaint, femi againft a Gl^n, that he had left TrAn^uhfimU- tSfcS^ tion & taken vpon him to defend the reall pre- poraii fence in the Sacrament, vvhemwe ienjmthinge ^^^^^"1^,"^^ lijf$ (faith he) thmhis cerforallfrefeftccor Abftnce of in the sa* bufubft4nciin thihfud. Wherby ytis euidently fccne,that ^4ifler Perne was not of Riileyes opi- nion, but held thexeall prefcnc€,though with Luther perhaps he did not beleeue Tranfubfian^ tidtion: and thiiis euidcntby his arguments which after he vfcd, nothinge in deed againft the redll fnfence, but only to proue that Chrift hisbody was togcather with bread. The like manner of impertinent dcalingc vfed RidUj^ 4 hiftrtfclfe in diuers of his argumcntsyas for ex- ample: this is ihdt bread (faith he) which cme fox^g* iowne ftom henuen , ergo, yt is mt Chri^s body , for "^7* that hiiboiy catnenotfrom kemen: which proueth alfo that yt was not bread, for that RiiUy will not fay ( I thinkc ) that the materiail bread which Chrift had in his hand, camedownc from heauen. The like argument vfeth P'llJ^in" ton thus: vvherfoeuer (faith he) Chrifl isjhere be his r^nd tr- minifiersalfojorfo he promt fedibut Chrtfids you heuld ^f'^JJ.j*^ isin the Sdirdment y ergo his minifters dre there dlfo. menu. Which were a foulc incoueniencc as you fee, if all our Enghili minifters ftiould be in the Sa- crament for the poore people to byte at. And yet this argument fecmcth fo graue vnto lohn Fox,ashe maketh this marginail note theron. fvhere Chrijl is, thm drehis mintfiers. And the poore fellow hath not fo much witt, asto feeahat thofe word* of Chrift were meant of 4? A review of ten puhUke ofhis glory in the life to come, and not of tht Sacrament which is miniltred vpon earth. t6. But to the end yo w may the better per- ceaue^how diforderly this and the former di- fpittation at CAtnhridge, was made by thctiew Proteftants to ouerbearc the Catholike caufc, I fhall fctt do wnelomeljnes of a narration of D. Langdate, Archdeacon of Chichejler, a Cant" htdge man who was prefent at the laid difpu- tacion, and confuted afterward in print the Jfaid Ri^/Z^fi determination vpon chcfedifpu- jUn^iT^i^ tuion^;. I husthen he wryteth: Vix dumjimtd w eofifut, CoUeghrum vifitAthne, &c. The Coliedges of ^'^icCkd-- Cambridge were no looncr vilited by the Kingcs Commifsionars ^ but there appeared 99 vpon all the ^Ate^ two conciufions fet vp, the f> firft^gainft Tranfubjiantution, thebthcr ^gainft » the facrifia cf themdp, and preiently the bedells 9> of the vniuerfity went about to giuc warning, » that y f any man had any thinge to fay againft » thefeconclufions, he {hould come forth the u third day after, (which was Cor p m- Chrifti d^y^) 99 todifpure , or otherwife all to be bound to 55 perpetual/ filence for euer after. The con- „ courfe of noble men,& all other degrees wa< „ great 5 and fcaffold? made for the place of di- j, fputationjthat the multitude might the better „ heare : but ail that were indifferent, did fee 5- mntersro be handled with great inequalitvj :> for that wbofbcuer fpake for the Catholike ,5 fide prffcntly his fpeach w^ and K/^f/f;' that was the Captayneof all ftcD- pinge Bl^utdtioHSy ahoHt 'Religion. Chdf. u 4$> pinge in at cucry turiie to af^irt his defendant, did eyther with chreates or fayre words^or by „ fcoiFes and bytter taunts fcekc to diuert the Cathoiikedifputers. 17. And when the firfl: dayes difputation „ I was in this manner ended, yt was denounced I to the auditory , before thedifmifsion of the „ I fchooles, that yf any man would come forth The par- and defend within a day or two , the Catho- 11^% ^ot like parte of thofe queftions, he might, but af- f^oceftats terwards it lliould not be lawful! for any man dlfpuri^ to fpeake thetof : which vnexpecleddcnun- ^i^ns* tiation being heard , one man looked vpon atiother, and ail for a tyme were filentv vntill ,^ at length a moft learned and graue man,pious ,^ and fKSiifuli, as well in knowledge of the tongues 5 as alfo in diuinity , wherof he had byn there publike reader before (towittD^?- d:or Gljn) ftept forth and offered himfelfe to the combatt, and performed yt the third day after, takinge the place of defendant without help of any moderator, but all rather againft him^ beginning his declaration, (which Cam- MW^e men call his i)(?^fi(?^) with the words of the Prophett: Crcdidi poprer quod Idcum fum. rfiim,u% And the Proteftants were fo yrged in thefe » difputations about the reall prefence , that not- withftandinge they auoyded and dilTbmbled » thatqucftionfomuch as they could, yet were theydriuento fuch l1iifts,t6 putt oftbecfeere places &authorityes of ancient Fathers about » the fame, as vva> ridiculous to heare ^ for that fometymes they faid Chrifis body was prefent ,9 D inthii A review of ten fuhlihe „ in the Sacrament by fignification, then by re- ^, prefentation, then by meditation, then by ap- „pellation5 fbmetynies by propriety, other 5, tymesbynacure, then by power, thenagainc 5> by grace, then by memory or remembrance, „ jhen by vertue & energy , and by many other ^, diuifesof deluding orlhifting of the matter. ^, All which being done, and another third day J, of difputation pafled ouer in like manner, , 1^ 'dley tooke vpon him to giue the determina- ^, tion of all, as though he had gotten the vido- ry. Thus farre out of De^or Langelands booke j wherby may be gathered how the matter pafledinthcfcdifputations. Fourth Difputation. §. 4. The4. di- t8. The fourth difputation was held alfo in i>utation Camhrtdge foone after the former, wherin, ac« bridge? cording to Fox his relation, the forftid Maijler ^549. P^rwtf was defendant for the Protcftants, and thcopp.onents for theCarhoHke part, were MalJler Parker y Matfter FoUard , Maimer VaucfaUTy fr^^^* and M4j/?^r Ttfwg^ ; the moderator :5ind iudgss w^as Maimer Ridley of Rochefter togeathcr with his fellowes aforementioned : the twoque- jftions were about Tranfuhflmiation , and the Sacrifice*^ the other of the reall pre fence was pre- termitted (accordinge to the former declared Height) though yt were the principali and the |^,round, wheron thefe other two do depend, i>i conceriieth the very fiibftance of the Zu'm- Dijputations, about Keligm. C]uf. u glim and CalmnUn fed, now newly.fet vp and authorized by thefe difpucations , and confc- quentiy lliouid firft and principally hauc byn di(culTed, yf ey ther good method or llicw of true deahnge had byn obferued. But D.Pernc the defendant beleeued the reallprefence , as in the former diiputationyow haue heard him proteft, though in thisdifputarion he fought I to expound himfelfe in thefe words : I gramt tfut Chrlft is in the Sacrament truly, wholy and verily after a certayne property and manner . I deny not his prefence, but hi$ recall, and corpor all pre fence. But this isadilFerence without a diuerfity [by liLPernes ^eaketh^^ licence) for yf Chriits body be there truly, tpho- doubtfuUy ly and verily , he muft alio be there re4l/7, as to ^^olrlt'hc euery mans common fenfe and realbn is eui- sacrameu dent - and fo MaifierTerne by this diftindioa fheweth, that he beleeued nothing at all real- ly, truiyj or verily atthat tyme, yfhis heart were according^ to his words. tp. Andalbeit,as l haue{aid5M4i7?^r P^K^^pro- The fond poundeth the queftions ofJranfiibJlamiation & tSffpa- facrifce of the map , yet when they came to tation. ioyne ilfuej their fpeach was moft of ail about the reall prefence, and I callyt a fpeach rather then difputation , for that yt had ney ther or- der, method, norfubftance inyt, but was a moft ridiculous colloquy of one to another, without vrginge or anfwcringe any one ar- gument fubrtantialiy, but aslittie beagles ly- inge togeather, one ftarteth vpandgiuech a barkeor two, and lyeth downe againe:, fo thefe difpurers, aunfwercrs, and moderator D 2 handled A revtej^ of m puhlike handled the matter- as for examplc> M. T^irJ^ef being to argue lirft, began to alleage three vayne reafons (as Fox calleth them in the margent) for thcr^/^/Zpr^p^r^, to witt^ that yc wa$ pr$phejjcd, promifcd,^nd performed as he pro- lied by diners places of ftripturcj which bciilg done lohn Fox, without tclhnge vs any^tun- fwere ac all giuen by Maijler Feme , hath thefe WordSe Beere they were forced te breake of thrQUgh\ thewmef tyme , yet Mailler Parker replyedtim TcK p^x. ^^^^^ ^ prayer againji Mai ft er Pern c ; vvegiue thee :ii6o. tbdfikes tmji holy Father , that thou haji hidden thefel things from the tvlfe and prudent , and haft reueyled them to babe$, f$r prtde is the roote of^ill hercfies iphat^ foeuer, &c. 20. Now heere I would anc broken of without hearin anyone anfwere of the defendant? But rhe are Fox his fooleryes, and thefe were the fir and moftfirme foundations of our new Cal uinianfedin Fngfand. M;^ny other particu lars might be fete downc; cfpccially of Ridleye mode Di^utathns, ahom Religion, Chdp.t. 53 moderaunge, w ho aceuery'^turne made him- fcife defendant & anfwered farre worfe then fcmehimkik^ but we iTiail haue better occa- fion to touch the fame afterward , when we fliall examine more particularly whac pafled 3ibout eucry controueriie, in each of thefe di- fputations- only F^«f'/J>'ir of ail the opponents 3,1. vw feemcth to haue fpokea belt to the purpole fi-^y com=- (asPoxrelacethhim) for that healleagedan authority of -S. Augufime in Pfalm.^^i. which Ri^ dUy, not able to ani were, ridiculoully iTiifceth of as yo w fliall fee afterwards> when y t com- jmeth in ranke to be examined, and in his pre- face he cited two fayings of Zuinglm and Oeco zmrigUwt lamfadim, of their owne doubrfuilncfle at the ^'^tpadiui j Jbeginninge, in the doctrine with they fird doubttuii ? broached again ft the redl prefme. Zuinglius ^oaJSe i his words arc: Albeit this th'mge that I meanet9 at the be- \ treat of^ deth tike me very weU • yet notwithjlandtnge s^^"^"^^* I Idfire define nQthlngs ^ htit only fioew my pore iudge- \ went abroad t-Q othcrs^Scc, OecoUmpadm his words \ are wry tinge to his brother. Peace be spkh thee. As farre as I can cenieilure out of the ancient Fathers, thefe words Qf Chrijl (this is my body) isafigura- tiue locution, &c. Thus they at the beginninge very doubtfuily, as yow^ (ee^ but afcerwardjas thofe that tel! lyes fo often , as at length they beginne to beleeue them to be true them- felues, fodid thcfemen; and yet others were fofooliili as to follow^ them in their doubtfuil fancyes, a pittifuU cafe in the caufe of our foule, WQ%iQhnVQx concludeth this whole loxp^. difputatioa with thef^ words : Hm^ endetb D 3 ( and his de- termination, yet muft euery man and woman follow their owne hncy at home, and beiudge of all that hath byn difputcd, or determyned: & this is the certainty that Proteftants haue for common people to rely vpon. 24. Thirdly y t is to be noted>that notyvith- Itanding Fox calieth this decifion, thedetemi-- nation of DoSor ^icolat Ridley B. 9f Rochejler, vpon the comlufwmaboueprejixedyyct handleth he only two quelbons in this his determination vide- licet; rr^»f«ty?^«f/Wi>w,and the Sdcripeofthe r4r,biit the hrll much more amply and aboun- dantly^prccermitcing the very cheefe & prin-» cipall quciiion in deeci, w herof ail the reft dc- pcndeth, vvhich h of the reAUprefence , which imaketh the very elTencc of Caiuiman^nd Zuin-- glfanCc&i^ wherby they do differ ^rom both Lutheransznd vs : of which abfurd impoflure yvc hau« fpoken fufficiently beforc.and fcing To much had byn faid in the former difpiua- tions about that point^though greatly agamfi: the Protcftanrs inclination , me thinketh he -ought not to hauelcft out wholy that quc- iiion in this his determination • But as I hauc often faid, their principall iliift in thofe dayes wastofteppfrom the mayne point> w hether Chrift were really in the Sacrament or no dc toleapevnto a quiddity of the manner of his being there, to wict by Tranfubftantiation. riue pre-. About which notwithftandinge> B Ki^/^' be- h^^^cs of ginnethhisrefolution with great oftentation f^i that when facrificeof MiXi(leY RtdU) had fpent moft of the time about the saafie. he had little lefc Concerning ihg facrifice of the majfe , but concluded his faid determination in very few words thus : NotP Pox pdz. f^^ better conclufion (faith he) concerning the ft- crifice, hecaufeyt depcndeth vpon tbefirjl, I wiU infeti^ ymds declare what I th'mke. Turg things do ferfuade pi^tbiLt tbifi mdufien (againft the lacrifice of the xnaffe^ Dijputatms, about Kelfghn. Chaf.u malTe) is true, that is certajne fdaces offmpure, md ccmynetefiirnonjes of the Fathers, ho heere the graue and weighty motiiies that Ridley had,to aduencure vpon fo great a change in beleefc as this was 5 after (b many yeareSj being a Prieftand Catbolike Billiopp , and offeringe facri^ce after the manner of the Catholikc Church, from the firfl day of our contreyes conuerfion,vnto th^end of K.Henryes raigne. His motiues were>as yow heare^ certajne places of the firifture, which were only taken out of the Epillle to the Hebrues,ralkinge of Chrifts uey;^^^ bioudy facrifice on the crofle, which was but one3& certayne places of the Fathers^to witr, two or three niifvnderflood out of S.Auguflme, Thcmife- andoneoutofF^/Z^mi^fi, all which notwiih- cccdingbf ftandingeprouenothinge for his purpofe, as nuuy. after yow fliall fee declared in their place, and turne. And the felfe fame Fathers haue fo ma- ny other cleere places to the contrary , as we will defire no better iudges for proofeofour Caihoiike caufe , then Ridley would remitt himfelfe to thefe two Fathers iudgements, by him cy ted againft vs^for that both of chcm do profelTethemfelues to bePriefts, and to offer externa!! facrifice, vpon the Altar as our l^riefts do now. 27. Conlidcr then how w^ile and conftant a man Ridley wzs , to leaue his ancient faith fo generally reccaued throughout all Chriften- dome in hi? dayes, and fo many yeares pracli- fed by himfelfe, vpon two fuch motiues, as ate eertdfne places of fcripture mifvnderpcd^hjhtm'^ 6o A Ycvletv df ten puhlike ' felfe,^ mdcertiijnetejtmQnyes^fVatben, thatiec- med to him to haue fomc difficulty. Which leuity was fo difpleafaunt vnto almighty Cod > as by the effcds we fee, that wheras at the beginning he feemed to doubt vpon thefe two moriucs, leauinge other men to iudge therof, he became by httle and little tobcfo obftinarejy blinded at length thcrin, as albeit fome toure or fiuc yearcs after, he were open- ly conu?<^cd in difputations ikt Oxford^ as by his anfwers yow ihall afterwards fee, yet was he content to bnrnc for rh^ fame , which was thehigheft degree of calamity that could fall vpon him, in body and foule. And thus much of him and his determination for the prelento Sixt Dijhutation. §.6. *he Cxt former difputations both at tiifputatio Oxford mACamhrldge, yow lhall find nothinge Vr^LTh ^^^^^^^^-^^^y^^^^^^^> not fo much as that he ^sLerisij. is once named in all rhefc confiifts,abourthe blelTed Sacrament. And yet yow mud remem- ber , that he was principrUl reader of diuinity in Cambridge atthistyme, as Peter M^rrj'r wms in Oxford: and therfore p.s the iirft place was giuen to the faid Peter in Oxford-^ fo yci ty of his woman , and other impediments of pouerty letted him, not knowingew^eli whi- ther to goSjas beingexpulfcd from Argentina at hiscomming to Eng}and;as ^ before we haue fhewcd in the ftory of his lift. 2(>. Wherfore refoluinge himfelfe at length to pafTe ouer this mortilication , andtogme our Engfilli Proteftants fome iatisfairion, though not in the points w^hich they defired, he thought it good after Ridleyes departure, to defend certayne other paradoxes, which Fox rccordethin thefe words : Ouer andbefidesthefe ^^^J"^^ dijputatmuhoue memioned , other dijputatiomvve 1263. hoUenin Cambridge family after fc)' Martyn Bu- cer, vfon thefe conclufwm fhllomnge : Firftj that th^ f , canonic all bookesof fcnpufe alone^ do fuffickntl} teach the regenerate ail things necefary btlongtnge to fMua- tioii. Secondly, there is no Church on earth that er-- reth not, as well in fuftK ^ manners. Third ly n^e ^, are l^}iufli fled freely of GUy that he fore our iufiifica'' The qitt- tion, ytis fume and pomketh Gods math agamftvs, ^'^-^^ what foe Iter good worke u^efeeme to do. Then being S^ui^ph, fitfyed, tve do good u^erf^, 30- Th^fe were Bucm conchifions , which well dire- dion of gencrall Councells, and other like aydesj yt is a moflabfurd paradox 5 forney- ther can we know which bookes are to be held canonical!, nor what they teach truly & fincerery, nor what may be deduced out of them-^ yf w^e remoue the former helpes • And the cafe is, as yf one of the Kings of our coun- trey goinge abroad, as fome did to Hienifalem, or other forrayne warres, and intending to be longe abfent, lliould leauc with his Councel- lors for their better gouernement cercayne lawes wrytten with hisow^ne hand, other dire- Difiutatms, dout Rellgm. Chdf. t. 6^ &xt6t\om by word of mouth how to pro- a cafereS ceed, interprett,and vfe them, commaunding ^^^^^^^^ all men to obay them, and that fonie trouble- heutiksof fomc people after many yeares continuance abom cry- in their gouernement, fliould appeale from ingc for them, to the Kings wrytten lavves only^pray- aToner^* fingc the fufHciency therof (for better colou- ringe their pretence) and fmnge that yt were a blott vnto the faid lawcs , and to the Kings wifdome that made them, to acknowledge any infufficiency at all in them for perfe 6t di- redion of the common wclth , which lawes yet, themfeiues would expound , as pleafed them beft for their ownepurpofes. jt. In this cafcj who feethnot whervnto this pracilife tendeth^ and for what caufes fo great prayfes are giuen to the fufliciency of thefc lawes, vfed to make the praifcrs iudgesofall, and to exempt them from all controlment of others? And the very fame is fcene in the other cafe of chcfcriptures, which being writ- ten by the fpiritr and tingar of God himfelfc^i and dehuered vnto vs by the Church, whafc commifsion alfo and authority in the fame fcripcures is fett downe, byndinge vs vnder ^^^tt-xf. damnation to heare her from age to age,as the ^mJT. viu pillar and firmament of truth , there ftepp vp to- Mait,i6. geather diuers forts of feitarycs in ail ages, & of this of ours , Lmheram, ZuingUans, Caluimp, Anabaptip, Tmitarians, and the like chalenged by the faid Church of dilbbedience.and do all * appeale ioyntly and feuerally from hereto on- ly fcripturesj prayfinge highly the fufHciency, and ^4 ^ review of ten puhlike and excellency cherof, and retulingeall other meanes^eycher of tradition or ancient expofi- tion^for vnderftandinge of theienfeand true meaningc. And when weaileadge the Ca- tholike Dodors and Paftors of cuery age, as fpirituall Goucrnours and Confclors vnder God in the Churchjfor e^tplaninge his diuine \viii and mcaninge in this behalfc^they refufe all, and only wiii bs interpreters and ei^poG- tors themfeliics, and this not only againft the Catho, Church , which they ought to obay> but one fed ajfo again ft another for their par- ticular opinioas, and diuerfityesj which by this meanes arc made irreconcihable, and in- determinable, as experience teacheth vs. For when, I pray yow, will Luther & Zuinglius or their followers, come to any accord cythcr with vs^oramongft chemfelues by only cano- nical! rcripi:ures,expoundcd after each partyes particular fpintt, iudgcmcnt and afFedion? The like I may askeof An2bAptifts& Arrians, Enc;!iih Proteftants and Puritans , or of any other Scct;?.ryes that yo w can name vnto me, which neuer agreed by this way, noreuer , will. And this is the nrft paradox of MartfH 'Bncer ^ that only fcriptures are fufficient to teach cuery man. 22. Thefecon iis yetworfe fvfworftmay iht frcpd to witt; that there isn& Church on earth, which M^u^n"^ eYreihvotaiweUinfdtthdimAfmers. Which vf yc -xu.er. [)e fo^i-hen errerh a^foin iasih rhe true Church of Chrift , and is a Ivinge Church , and may lead YS into error and hereue- And of this yc followsth Ht^Htatms, dhm ^.eligicn. Chap, u 6f followech agaiiiCj that wecanhaue no cer- tainty of any thinge in this life , and that al- mighty God doth damne vs very vniuftly for hcrefie, wherinco we may be brought by his true Chuichj and fpoufe, which on the other iide, he hath commaunded vs to heare, andohay Mattki$, vnder payne ofdamndtion j y t folio weth alio chat 5. P4«i did falfeiy caii the Church, ^ft^p/Z/rff/fwrf i.Tiw, pmmcnt of truth j for as much as yc may both deceauc and bedcceaued, Chriftspromileal- fo was falfc> when heaflured his Church, ffc4r Mart. he muld he with her byhk jpiritt of truth vnto the nmldsend^ and that, the gates of bell fhould not pre-" Matth.ii^ mile agalnjl her. All thefeabfurdityesjimpofsi- bihcyesandimpietyes, do follow of this (e- cond paradox , befides infinite others, w hich any meane capacity may deduce of himfelfe. 35, The third paradox alfo is no lelTc mon- ftrous to common fcnfc andreafon, then the two former, to witt, that vvhatfoeutr geodmrke The thM dnfmmdoth.ormdy feeme to daebefert iujlijicatm, ^^^r^jn^^ i6 finne , and prouoketh Gods math. Bur I would aske this new opiniatouror paradox-defcn«^ der, how he w^ould anfwcre to that of Exodus^ where yt is faidof the Egyptian mid-wyues (intideils no doubt) quia timuerunt obfietrices £^^^4, DeutHy ddi^cduit i^is domos. God gaue them a- boundant children, for that vpon feareofof- fcrtdinge almighty Cod, they difobaycd their King, Pfo^r^i? in fauingc the Hebrues children^ doth God vfe to reward finnc? or to prayfs that which prouokerh his wtath^ Againe,the Prophete IxjchieU iliewerh v$ how God did 66 A revietP of ten publike Eleeh^ zo. tcm^ovMy YQVJzrd Nabucbodomz.or and his ar- my with the fpoyle of Egypt, for that they had ferued him faithfuliy in chaftizinge of nier. in Tjm. And S. nierome vpon that place hath ^nTpT'Lo. thefe words: that Nabucbodomfor receauedtbu • El^ch. rew^r d for bi$ good worhe, we learne that gent ills alfo jf thej do any good thinge, fisaH not leefe tluir reward at Gods hands ^ and how can God be faid to re- ward that which offendcth him? The Pro- phet D4«/V//alfo to the fame Nahuchodonofer an 4. infidell, gaue this counfell, peccata tua eleemofy^ mis redime: redcemc thy (ynnes with almes^ which he would neuer haue done , yf yt had byn a fynne, & prouoked Gods wrath to giuc ahnes, or to performeanyfuch other morall vertue before iuftification, efpecially being ftyrrcd & holpen thcrvnto by Gods efpeciall help, which maybe before iunification, as Uartyn Bucer in this paradox fuppofeth . And laftly not to ftand any longer in this which is ofitfelfefoeuidentjl would aske friar M^rf;^, whether Cornelim the centurion being yet a gentile, did finne and prouoke Gods wrath in prayinge, and giuingealmes before his con- uerfion ? Yf he fay yea (as needs he muft ac- cordinge to his doctrine) the text of (cripture is againft him > for the Angell faid vnto him: I ©. Thy prayers ani almes- deedi , haue afcended vp , and haue byn called into remembrance in the fight of God. ^^dd' ^P^ri which words S.Augufiine in diuers of his jpxn^ cap, J . works , doth call the faid almes- deeds of Or- |r /ti nelitu, before he bclceued in Chrift, luflicty and the gifts of God ^ w^hich he would neuer haue done. Dijputatim, about Relipon. Chap, u 67 done,yt chey had byn (^jimti, zx\dpouo\ed Gods wrath, as this new-fangled friar hath taken vpon him to defend. 34. And this ilialbefufficient for this lixtdi- J^utation o(Mmyn Bucety which is fine tymes as much,as Fox fettcth dpwne of the fanie5for that he relateth only the time and place of the faid difpute , togeather with the concluflons afore mentioned, ^ t\\^t Sedgewkkc Jonge^ and P^r;if were opponents to Bucer therin • but all the reft hcremittcth to a larger difcourfe at another ty me , fupplyinge the breuity of this Bucerian difputation , with another difpute betweene cuftome and verity, which he cal- leth: A fiult full diahgue , gathered ont (faith Fox) Fox pdj^. ef the Tra£latms of Peter Martyr , and other authors, bj a certayne reuerend per fen of this realme, teachinge all men not to meafure Religion by cujlome , but to try cu^ome bj truths 55. And this was another diuife of thofe dayes of Innouations and noueltyes,to dazell limple mens eyes, as though Cufiomemd Veri- An alter- ty, the handmayd and mailtreiie, were fo fal- meene^" len outjthat one impugned the other^Sc could ^^ome not agree or Hand togeather any longer , and ^^"^"^ confequently cujlome and antiquity, rauft needs giue place to nouelty^ the fraud and foily of which diuife may in very few words be dif- couered, and their true frendlliipp and agree- ment eafily be declared- yea rheir infeparablc coherence to be fuch.as in our cafe of the con- trouerfie about the reall prefence ( for in this point they are made to brauleand full out) E z they 6i A untm of ten fuhlikt they cannot pofsibly be fcparaced. For yf ve- rity in this matter hauc noc antiquity and cu- dome with yt 5 yt is nouelty, andbyconfc- quence not verity at all. And on the othcrfide, cuftome in points of Chriftian faith and be- IcefC) yf yt be general!, and of iong tyme (foi othetwife yt cannot properly be called cu» 'ftome,in thefubied we handle) may not pof^ fibly be found in our Chriftian Church with- out verity , for that ocherwifc the '.vhole Church Jliould vniuerfally admitt a faifity^ & continue yt by cuftome, which to imagine were folly and madnefic , yea moft infoiem madnes, yf vve beleeue S, Augufi'tne ^ whofe ^iJtft^, words are: .Dljput are contra id, quod totaferorbm ©^wr/^^** fi^^^^^tat Ecclcjia, infolentifiws pnfinid eft . h is a moft infolenc madnes to difpute agamft that^ which the whole Church throughout the ^, world doth practice. And he addeth in the fame phce^tlmgh It be not coteinedin the fcriptures. 36. VVherfore for John Fox, and his reucrcnd maifter Nicolas Ridley, Peter Mmyr and others^ to come out now with a dialogue or brauling altercation, betwecne^«/?pjwf andrmrjraboiit ^jf the matter of the Sacrament , and to Iceke to fctt them by the eares , or make a diuorfe be- tweene them/or that cuftome had continued from the beginning of our coinierfion to that Cuftome day without verity, w^as a very fimple and ri^ And verity diculous diuife, & worthy lohn Fox his wir^ aro"ddt i'n ^nd grauity,for by this he confeflcth in cfFec^^ excepcinge Cranmer, Ridley, Lji'ymer md Rogers^Tind 1 know not yf anyocher that were commytted be- fore. And the firC point dut was handled therin > was aboi;t a certaync Caluinfan Ca- techifmc, fett forth a little before vnderthe name of that conuocation, whervnto the pro- locutor reqnire:] Tubfcription?, to teftiSe that y t was aot fctt forth by their conlcnts , mea- Dijputations, ahetit Religm. Chaf.t* jt ningCj as yt feemed, thcrby to conuince Ridlej otCrammer, or both of falfe dcalinge therin. The (econd point was of fubfcribing to the reall prefence , whervnto all the w hole houfe agreed (faith Fox) fatiinge nue or fix, to witt, Maifier Pfoi/ip5 Deane of Rochefier, Matter Haddon DczncofExceter, Maifter Fhilpott Archdeacon fiu'ifj^af oiVVinchefleYy Uaifter Cheyney Archdeacon of uocation Hereford, & Maifter Elmour Archdeacon of Stou^, fufed to" and one other whome henamcth not,and by iubfaibe. thefe were propounded all the doubts, that were there difciiflTed : and as for the firft two dayes, there was nothinge done at all , but a certaine communication. The third day came the Lord great 'tnafter y with the Earle of De- uon^Tiire and diuers other noble men , and Cfcnw^^ afterward BilTiopp of Glocefter, who M.cbmef. confeifed the reall prefence, but not Tranfubftan- tiation , prapofed lb me doubts about the fe- cond point, which we iTiali afterwards exa- mine in their place . The prolocutor appoin- ted DaSarMerm^w to aunfwcre him and the reft extemfere, wherby we may ghefle how ftibftantiall a difputation y t was , for thatthe defendant came nothinge at a!l prepared. Pl?i- /ipp^alfo propofed fomewhat about the reall prefence J Elmour mdU addon fpake little vpon M.Eimem, that day, though the nex^ day Elmour, then Chaplaineto the Duke ot Su ffo Ike y^ind after Bifhopp of London, read certayne auchorityes out of a note-booke , which he had gathered againft the reall prefence^ But of all other, the niollbufy was P/^i/- ii/.p/^s^^l E 4 ptt, 7* A revwp ten fuhUk{ f^^rr, both that day, and the other folfowinge^ vauntinge and chalenginge the whole com- i paiiy todifpure. Thenqueth Philpott (faith Fox) J vviU Jpeake pUyne English y the Sdcrament of the Al^ tar, whuhyee reckon to he all me tvith the majfe \ is 7t% Sacrament at aU, neither is Chrift any irife prefsntin j j t , and this his fayinge he offered to prone before th$ whole hcufe, yf they hjled to call him thermo, and he- lax d p^^tfcr Queem grace, and her counfeU, and before the j ms!^^'- f^^^ of fix of the he fl learned men of thehonfeof the contrary opinion , and refufednone. And yfl fhallnot be able (quoth he) tomamtayne hyGodiwerdthatl haue faid, and confound thofe fix tvhkh fnall take vpop them te withfland me , m this point , let me he bur^ tied with oi many faggotts as be in London , before the tourt-gdt€s,(^c. This was P/?i//>(?/T5 vaunt, and yet yt yee confider the poore arguments he brought forth in this conference^ which after- wards Aalbc difcuffed, togeathcr with his fond anfwers that he gaucifi his 15. ori6,fe- uerall examinations , before the Bilhopps of VVinchejler, London, Chtchefler, Bangor and others (for fo much paync was taken to faue him) i©hn*hii- y^^v will fay that his B. Gardiner rcafon, potts vaut when he held him for more then halfe madd» uocjstion^ in his Rory we haue related. Confider alfo, We. that his denying Chrift to be prcfcnt any wife in the Sacrament, is much different from that yow heard M^^^rPm^ affirme before, by ap- probation ofHaifler Ridley the moderator,thac ChrirlUbody was truly, wholy, and verily ia the Sacrament after a certayne propriety- hut thcfc m^n mull noi be taken at their words* 40fAni 40, Aijiinnally, the con jlufion of all this conference yvicli PhilpttWA's^ that the pi olo- cucor in the end, fting him out of all realbn to trouble the houfe,laycd two coniiundem^ntt^ vponhim, the iirft thache iliouM notcorno thither any more, vnleile he came in govvne and typpetc , as the others came : the (econd, that he iTiouId not fpcake but in order, and with licence as the reft did; w hofe aunfwer^s F(^A;relateth in thele words: thenqtmk?hi^f9tt VojiU{4; 1 had rather be 4b fent alt egeather ^ fo infufftrabK^ was ail order,or temperate manner of proccc- dinge to this diforderly man; andfo QJ^iarj fcnc a wryte the next day to difloiue tiic con- iiocation : Andfuchashaddljputed ( fiiith Fox) oh the cantrary part, were driuen, fowe lap, feme to rf^- ny, and [me to dye , though to moft metis iud^ements, that he^rd the dtjputationjhey bad the vffer hand.^c. Thefcare hereticall braggcsjas yow will bet- ter fee afterwards when wc come to ex.imi- ring of argumentJa And as for dyinge,none of the forlaiddifputers died, to out knowledge^ but only Vhilptt in his madd moode- Chejncy. tlmour, and Haddon gott BiiTioprick^^, & other dignitycsvnder Qji/ix.4tff/;. And fo mirchot' shis difputation in the conuocation houfe. Eighty ninth ^ md tenth Dijputatm. §. 8. 4t. Tfccfelaft threedifputations I do ?o\ne tcgeather/or thit they were held fuccefiiuelj m 74 ^ revtetp of ten puhlikf in Oxford vpon three feuerall dayes in the mo- neth of Aprill, anno 1554. with Cranmer, Ridle/, r^mzdbs' Latymer y^on the forfaid three queftions in Oxford of the reall pre fence, Tranfuhflmtimon, and the fa- cf!l»^r, ^^{/^^^ ^/ ^^^i/^- The names (faith Fox)of the Ridley and vniuerfity Do(5lors and graduates, appointed Latymer. difpute againft them vpon the faid 'que- ftions, were thefe of Oxfsrd.Doilor VVeflonprO" Jt^/'''^' locuror, Doaor Trejfm, Do£lor Cole, DoQor Ogle- thorpe, Do£lor Fje, Maijler Harpesjield,M.aifier Teckr nam. Cambridge , DoHotlonge Vice Chaun- celour, Doiior Glynn, Doctor Sem,Do£loY VVatfon, Do£lor Sedgewicke, and Doctor Atkinfon, towitt fix of each vniuerfity, all meeting at Oxford togeather to this effe^, Thusfarre Fox^ who dekribeth alfo the manner and forme of this difputation, much more reafonable^orderly Sc indifferent, then all the former difputations vnder the Proreftants, yf w^e beleeue Fox himfelfe^who faith- that in the middle of the Dodors, there 3?ox ibid, were appointed foure to be exceptor es argument torum , wryters of the arguments (to vfc his words) aiid a table fett in the middeft, and foure no^ taryes fittmge with them-^ So as by his relation there were eight indifferent men cholen to regifter whatfoeuer paffed: yec yf he relate truly, the manner of arguingc, was not fo or-» derly and fchoolelike as might haue byn, Theindif- wherby yt came to paffe, thar fcarceany ar- fcret dca- giinientwas profecuted to the end : and the hnt^e of ^ . ^ n t 111 Gath. in anfwennge was fuch, as comonly was wholy ftl^''^ t^o ^^^^ purpofc, as by diuers examplcs,yow ^uuuoa ^^j^ afterwards declared j as alfo we ihM examine Dijputations^ doiit Keligion. <:hap.u yf examine what arguments Cr^wm^r could al- Icage againft the rcdUprefeme , vpoii the fourth day ofdifputacion , to w iu the next day afrer had ended. For that D&ilor Harft^sfield anlVveringc for his degree, defended the que- ftion ofthereall prefencc, and Ma^ficr Crarmit was courreouQy inuited to the iaiddifputa- tion, and fuflcred to fay what he would or couldagainft that verity, & was fully anfwc- redj notwithftandinge Fox will needs bearc vs in hand to the contrary, as his falliion is. 42. And wheras the faid Do£lor Harpesjield in his preface 5 did much commend the diiigcnc readmge of fcripture with prayer,and confer- ring one place with another, butyetfaid that this was no fecure way or meanc > for euery particular man to refolue himfelfe of the fenfe therof, but muft rather belceue the body of the Catholike Church therin , then hisownc iudgement. Fox faith that Maifter Cranmer in J^^^^^^^ his reply reprehended that dire dion, fay inge: hentia^T wheras yojp referre the true fenfe & iudgement of the ^^^^^ ^ fcripures to the Catholike Church, as iudge therofjom foV!^'^ 4re much deceaued,&c.h^i\di Fox himfelfe addeth this marginal! note: T/ Maifler Harpesfield (when he faith tpc mujl not follow our owne heads and fenfes^ hut giue ouer our iudgement te the holy Cathohke Church) had willed vs to fuhmitt our felues to the ho j Ghofi he had faid much better. Soiohn. But I 11%^* Would aske him^ who llialbe iudge what the holy Ghoft teacheth vs ? For that is the que- ftion. For yf a particular man readinge the fcripture with prajer^ and confcrringe piace wit It 7^ A reviem of ten fuhlikf with place only, may be ]jre fumed to atwyne t!ierby the true meaninge of the holy Ghoft (which notwithftandmg cannot be ccrcayne, for chat an here tike may vfe the fame mcanes) how much more may the vniueirfall body oS: the Churchjvfing the (elfe-famc mcanes alfo> ns many of her learned members no doubt do; how much morc> I fay, may fbce be thought siiid prefumed to attaync to the true fenfe of th.^holy Ghoil, fcing that fhehathafpcciall \ promile of his infallible afsiftance to that cf- | fed, which particular men h'auc not, though hcretiks arc wont proudly to prcfumc thcrof? And fo yowiliall fee yt appearealfoin thefe difpntations, when wc come to diftufic the particulars, ! 4j. Andlicereitistobcnoted,tharpr^fent^ I ly vpon the end of this Oxford- d/jpuuuon , vn- j dcr QJiary,itw^s reportedjthat others fliould be hcid at Cmhridge bctweene the Doftors of \ lhac vniucrfity, and the rcfidue ofthePrO'* | teftant preachers that were in prifon^ wherof they being aducrtiled by the warninge of Da- j tc^ fil. Odt Ridley , as yt feemeth by FoXy and caftinga their heads togeathcr vpon the matter, dccer- I mined to refufc all difputation>cxcept it were I «o^t m1- '^^^^^^ Quecnc and priuy Councell,or be* | niftfrscx- fore thchoufesofparlamenc, to which effecSl ffUjcs^7i5^ fett forth a publike wry tinge and prote- | Jiipuu. ftation, with certayne rcalbns of excufcs mo- | uinge them thcrvnto,.fubfcribed by Hoofer, Farrar, T.iy/ay, Finlpott, Brddford, Rogers, Sdundevu aiiJ fomc others- And their chccfe excufe was. for that matters had byn determined by par- lament before they were difputed of,nor con* fideringe that in K. Erf/r^r^i dayes, the fame courfevvith farre iefle reafon was held and determined by Parlamcnt, before the Protc- flants difputations in Cambridge. 44. Thefc tendifpiitations I thought good to fctt downa ^ for that thty were held vpon the firft chaunges of Rehgion in England, within the fpace of 4.015. yeares, as before hath byn faid : diuers others I do pafTe ouer> tHc though fome of them were as follemnc as ^Hy^^^"^^^ thefejas thatofiv. llcmj i\\t 8. againftl4^/&m, with vvherin D^Mqx Cranmer difputed for the reaU frefence, and the Lord CrmireU gmc fentencc againfthim, as we haue fliewed* before in ^'^t* Lmberts (iory. That alfo which was held or ^^',^1**^ pretended in the beginninge of the raigne of Q^Eliz^akth at Wcftminfter, betw-eenenync perfons of the Catholike parte , and as many of the Proteftant preachers newly come from beyond the feas. Thofe of the Cathohkefide were fine BilTiopps , to witt DoSlor lohnVVlnt^ Bifhcpp of VVincbeJier, Dolior Barnes of Lichfield, I>o3w Scott of Chejier , DoUor OgUthorfe of Car- lieli.DQ^or V Vat fQnotLincelne,\v'nh fome other poftors ^dioyn^d ynto them. . D^d^r Cdc Of diuers other Di^utations held 7? A review of ten fuhlike Deanc of London , Doctor Langedde Kxch^t^Z A ^Tcttn- Qow o[' LemU , Do£ler Harpdjield Archdeacon of u^tolf m' ^'^'^^^''^^y' ' and Doll$r Chadfey Archdeacon of ( xhcbc^in^ Middle fex. And for the Proceiiant parte, were ^I'^ll ^o^or Scerjf 3,yi Apoftaca friar, &: DoHorC^xht- thes raigncfore mentioned, that fledd the realme vnder snn»iss9, QjsixYy , with whomc lovned M. Whitehead, M. arindM, M. "aorne, M. Sandes, M. Ghejl, Jd. E/- ntour, and M. leu^ell , all fiellily com^ from be« J ond the feas , who all , except fome one or twoj were foone after for their good deme- ritts, made Billiopps, and accommodated by thru'^inge out che other, m reward of this di- Iputation, wherin notwithftanding there was not one argument made , nor folution giuen, buconly anortentation fought to effedtuate that with fome colour, which otherwifc was - determined beforehand lacked but a pretence, for that the Qiieeneand thofe that were nea- reft about hsr , hauinge determined to make a change of Religion, thought they lliould do ytbert ,and moftiuflifiable, yf they promifed fome name of difputation, whcrin the Ca- thohks had byn fatisfied or vanquifhed • to which cad> there were fo many fhifcs, partia- litycs, and diuifts vfed, and fo many iniuryes offered to the Billiops of the Catholike party, as they thought good vpon the fecond dayes meetinge, to palfe on no fu- ther,cxrept more reafon or mdifferency were vfed towards thcixi . 4^. For ^rft, in this difputation fummoned & denounced throughout the w holerealme, by by order of the Queene and Councell, Sjr Ni- €ola6 Baconhtdy made Lord Keeper^tookQ vpon him tobeprefident, and cheefe moderator, T^e gf«a« whome all men knew to be one of thegrea- &muuy€s teft aduerfaryes to Catholikc Religion , that ^5^^^^ was m England , violent m condition, and dcddifpu- vtterly ignorant in matters ofdiuinity. Se- condly the queftions appointed to be difputed on, were not chofcn nor afsigned by the faid Billiopps, but by the fame Sjr Nicolas and his adherents in the name of the Councell, at the inftance or pleafure of the Proteftant new pretenders, wherof when the Bifliopps com- playned, thel^r^iC^^p^ranfwered: the queftions arenejther of their (to witt the Proteftants) pro- fos ^^gS pomdmge.norof yourdiuip.but offered indifferently to joti^ both. 46. The queftions were three , firft whether ^jt u^eredgainp Gods word, and the cuftome of the pri Three mitiue Church, to vfe a tongue vnknowne to the people ?o fmau* in common prayer, and admimftration of Sacramento pw^poftgr The fecond> whether euery Church had authority t9 appoint y takeatpay, and change ceremony es and Eccle- fufticall rites , fo the fame be to edification. Thirdly whetheyyt can be proued by the word of God, that there is offered vp in the maffe a facrifice propitiatory for the qukke, and the dead: Which queftwns were to be handled ( faith Fox ) m tbeprefenceofthe Queenes Fox pa^^ Councell, Nohilitj, andotherof the parlament boufe, for the better fatisfailion and enab tinge ef their tudge^ menH.to treat and conclude offuch lawes as might de- pend heerevpon, By which words you may eafily conceaue what the drift of this pretended di- {puta- 8 e> A revieur of ten ffthlikf Iputationms , r,nd how guiictully thcfcquc*^ ! Itions were chofcn, andfecr downe, yfyow ynaike their words and feiUe, e(peciaily tht former two > which only or principally were to be handled , and how impertinent thefo | queftions were to the great moment of the | whole matter and fequele, that wastoenfuc j rhero^ which was no leffe then the vniuerfall i change ol the w hole body of Cathohke RelU i gion, throughout therealme. j 47. This then was the firft hercticall fraud I in appointinge thisdifputation, and the que- rrt'-ri ftfons to be difoured, but they were many more and greater in the profecution therof- 1^' for firft the Cathohke clcargy lackinge their j cheifehead, which was the Archbilhopp of I C^wm'6«r;r lately dead, the other ArchbilTiopp of Yorke, to wittj Doctor Heath was entertay- ned with feyre words for arime^toelfeAuato with his brethren, what the Proteftant party of the Conncell iliould thinkc expedient" whcrypon he being Chancelour yet in name, though the effed of his oiTicc was giuen to Syr KkolasB^con.yndtv the little of Lord Keeper, f t was brought into the place of difputation. and fate in his roome amongft other Coun- rellours, togeather with the Duke of Nor«^ foike, & other of the-nobility as one ofthemi, and rather rigainft the BilTiopSjthen for thcmj, {though no doubt the good m?,n meant yt nor f. To) then was yt appointed to the faid Catho^ like Eiftopps by ^he Archbifli5pp Jn name of the Counccli, only two d^yes before their meeting Dt^umioHS, douf: ^etigton. Chap, tl S t Hiectingc ac the conference ( for lb complay- , neth the Biihop of LincQlne in the fecond dayes 1! n nieetinge)that both they^to witt the Billiop$, ftould begin to fay what they could for themfelues,& the Proteftant preachers iliduld anfwere them. And feeondly that the confe- rence lliould be in Enghfhand notin Latynj and thirdly , that yt Ihould not be by way of arguinge or difputinge, but only of fpeach or readmge ytout of fome bookeorpaper: All Three in- which three points feeminge indignityes to oJf^^^J^^ the Bifliopps, they complayned greeuoufly vnto the therofattheirfirft publike meetinge, which was in VVefiminfter Church vpon the laft of March t^t^^. being friday- and Blfuep VVhiteoi VVincheJit^r being the firft to fpeake for his lide> faid that they were ready to difpute & argue, but had not their wry tinge ready to be read there, but would do it at their next meeting: yet for giuinge fome fatisfadion, DoSor Cole ^,(^orii irxfmp(?r^alleaged fome breifereafons concer- ninge the former queftions orpropoficions, referuinge the reft vnto their fuller booke or Wrytinge, 48. But hc(irevpon prefently the Proteftant preachers came out with their booke,or inuc- diueagainft Latyn feruice , fraught with a Tayne.:iliew of many allegations, Scriptures, Fathers,Councells5and Conftitutions of Em- perors, founding as it might f^eme fomewhat to their party, though norhii^g at all in truth, An ofteti- yf vow examine them, as the\ ly in Fox him- ^^cProtj- felfejbut with this oftentation they fought to ftam m F gets 82 A review of ten pihlike get the applaufe of the people, Sc hccrby well declared that they had more then twodayes warninge to prepare themfeiuesj and albeit when this was done, the BiiTiops offered to refute all the fame clecrely at the next me- tinge , yet could they not be heard or permit- ted, as prefently we iTialliliew, but that this muft needs ftand for the whole refolution in the firft queftio. And Fox Hke one of his kind, fecketh to preuent the matter in thefe words: Tox pag. The fame being rentde (to witt the wry ting of the 192.3- Proteftanc party) with fome Hkeljhood as it feemed that the fame was much aUvwable to theaudience^cer- tape of the Bifbopps began te fay, contrary to their for-- mer atmfwere , that they had now much more to fay in this matter , vvher in although they might well haue hyn reprehended'^ yet for auoydinge of any more mijla-- kinge, and that they flmld vtter all they had to fay, yt wa4 ordered that vpon munday followinge.the Bifwpps fiould hringethetr mynd and reafons in vvrytwg to the^ fecond ajfertion, and to the Ufi alfo yf tbey could , and prjl read the fame, and that done the othei part fiould bring likewife theirs, fyc. 49. Loheeretheindifferency that was vfed^ the Biihoppsareaccufed of cauillation, that they offered to aunfwere in wrytinge to the Protellantslibell, which is notonly denyed thenij but yt is ordayned alfo, that after other iy!^' two dayes, they iTiouId bringe in whatfoeuer they haue to fay to the fecond and third que- ftions,and readinge yt firfljgiue their aduerft- rycs leaue to triumphein the fecond place, as they had done vpon the firft queftion the day before. before. Biic vpon niunday , when all the aG- fembly wasfett, the Biihopps ftood firmely vpon this,that they would rirft read pubhkely their owne vyrycinge , which there they brought with them vpon the fitft queftion of Latynferuice, inanfwereto thatof theProte- ftants at the lafl meeting.but in no cafe would y t be graunted them. Fox relateth the Alter- cation thus. 50. VVinchefter. lamdetermynedformyfdrt, ^hat^thm fbalbe mw read thai, which we haue to [ay of Ihl^^Bir- f0r the jirfi queftton, hops with L. Keeper. VVillyownotthenpoceed intheor- ^i^^^^H' ier a^fointedjow? Wtnchefler. VVe pmld fu^er peiudice^ yfyom femitt rsnotto treatefthefirfl queftionfirft , andf© We would come to thefecond , and I tudge all my bre-' thren are fo mynded. Biihopps, VVe are all fo determyned. L Keeper. Yotp ought to iooke what order is ap-* pintedyow to keefe, & c. Winchefter. Sph our aduerfaryes fart haue f& eonfirmed their ajfenion, we fuffer preiudiceyf yetp permtttvs not the like. Lincoln i. V Ve are not vfed indifferently , fithen jow allow vs noty to open in prefent wrytmge that, we haue to fay for declaration Oj the firflquefiion, &ic, for The rcfe^ that which Maiftcr Cole (bake in thu late alTembly, ^"[^ ^^^1, was not prepared to Jtrengtheu our cauje , but he made watfmn. hisoration9fhimfelfet:xicmpoic^&ic. VVe are al- ofLi«fs/«^^ fo euill ordered as tvuchinge the lyme , our aduerfarjes part hauinge warninge longe before, and we were war-- ned only two dayes before the Uft ajfembly in tlmplace^ §4 revieuf of ten pthlihe and with this bufines and other trouble, tvehauebyn dryuen to be occupied the whole lajl night , for we may in no cafe betray the caufe of God nor will not da , but fufleyneit to the vttermojl of our power , but heervnto we want pefently Indtffmnt vfinge, &c. L. Keeper. I am rvillinge and ready to heareyow, after the order taken for yow to reafon ther inland fur-* ther or contrary to that, l cannot deale vvtthyow. Lichfield. Let vs fujfa no diforder heerm, but be heard with indifferemy. 5t. Thus went on chat contention, wherof I omitt much forbreuitycs fake - but by this little, fo partially declared by Fox , as may be immagined, and appcareth alfo by diuers cir-^ cumftances , yow may ghelTe how the matter palled 5 and which part had more rcafon. At the length, the ArchbiiTiopof knowing belike that this ftandinge of the Bifhopps would not preuailc againft delignemencs, al- ready made by the Queene and Councell in difgrace of the Cathoiike caufe, willed the Biiliopps ro giue ouerin this matter, and to palTe to the fecond qucftion. But then began a new ftcife, which party lliould iirfi begin to fpeake in thisqueflion alfo, the Billiops alfir- minge both in refped they had begonne the other d;iy> and that the Proteftant party was piaintifeor accufant* they iTiould begin , and the Bilhopps would anfwere, but this in no cafe would be grauntcd, but that the Bilhops mufi: begin againc, and rhe other haue the laft Word as before : which indignity the BilTiop ofLichJieUhdng not well able to beare^rcque- lled Dijputatkns, dom ^ell^kn. Chap. t. S^f fted humbly the Lords there prefent^that they niJght di fpuce , ^ind try firft which party was Cacholikeandof the CathoHke Chtirch, for that therby would appeare who had right tp the firft or fecond place of fpeach , and being fomewhat carneft therin, fpake to M. Home in thefe words as Fox rclateth, 52. Lichfield. Malpr Horne,MaiJleY Horne^there are many Churches in Germany, I praj jow vvhich of vvith the thefe Churches at eye off l. Keeper. Hor ne. I am $f Chrifts Catholtke Church, L. Keepen Tojp ought not thm to runne into tvandringe talke of your owne inuentinge, Lichfield. N^ejK we mufi jirji go thm to vvor^e with them^yf we will fearch a truth : thefe men come in and pretend to be doubtfully therfore they fi^ouldpft Wtnge what thej haue to Impugney &c. Winchefter. Lett them begin , fo will we go onward • Chefter. They ^eakinge lajl would depart cutn applaufupODuSi, &cc. [urelyvve thinks yt meete that they ffmuldfor their parts giue vs place. Lichfield. Tea that they fhould and ought to do, where any Indifferency is vfed. Elmour. YVeg^iueyewplace,dowenotJ I pray jow begin. L, Keeper. Yfyommake thi^ af[embly gathered in vayne, and wiU not go to the matter Jett vs rifevp and depart . Winchefter, Contented, lettvsbegme: for we will not in this pintgtue euer. And fo finally after fome other like altercation , Bacon diffolued the affcmbly with this threat, F I lu.Ke^^ 8 ($ A revieip of ten fuhlike L. Keeper. My Lords Joy that yow vviUnot.that vvefoall hear eyotp, you may chaunce fmtly to heare of vs. So he. And chis hearinge was- that foone af^ SuvvAnno ter (faith Scow) the Btffwffs of L\nco\\Mi and Dcmmi Winchefter were fent to the Towar y andtherefi bound to make dayly y and perfonall appearance before the Councell, and not to depart the Cttty oj London and VVefi mnfler , vntill further order were taken With them for their dtfohedience and contempt. i bfthis^l- 5;. And this was the ilRie of the firft difpu- i fpatation tacion vndcr Q^Eliz^abeth , vvherof prefently Bisho t^erc was a bbuke printed and publilhed, ac- cordinge to the fafhion of the new Doftors^ giuinge the vidory to the Proteftants, and ouerthrow to the Cath. Bifliopps, whoyetj^ asyowfce, were neuer permitted topropofe any one argument, or reafon in due place andtyme. 54. And with this iTiall we endournarra- tion ofpubiike djfputations, omitting many more priuaceand particulat.as the conference Fojc pa^. Ridley,2nd Secretary Burne.DoSor Vecknamymd 2*97. others in the towar, in the beginningeo; Mi<)7^iraigne : The colloquy of the forefaid Fecknam, withtheL.^^ lane in the fame placej the particular conferences and examinations of Hooper, Farrar, Taylour, Rogers, Philpott, Smyth ^ Bradford, Tyms, Saunders, Blandford, and others of the Jearneder fort of Proteftants, but many more of crafcefmen, artificers, wcomcn , and fuch like of the ignorant fort, in the Biihopps confiHorves and other places: Out of which alfo we iliall reduce the fumme of the princi- pal! DijpHtations, ahufReligm. Cfe^p.t. 8f pall arguments or anfwers, yf yt be different from the reft, when we come afterward to their due places. 55. And now all this being (eene and con- fidercd, the reader will eafily difcerne , what ground of certainty may be drawnefrom all thefe difputations > altercations , and confe- rences 5 to found theron the fecurity of his foule in beleruing, as the Proteftants doe: yea andyeldingethemfelues to the fire foryt, as many did in Q. M^ir;^^ day es , vpon the fame The infe- and creditt of the forfaid difputations, which [hefe di^-^ yet many of them vnderftood not, noreuer flp«tados. heard or read, but moft of all were not able to refolue themfelues by them, yf they had heard, read, or vnderftood them, but only in generall they refted themfelues vpon this pointjthat the Proteftants were learned men, and had gotten the victory in difputations a- gainft the Catholiks , for thatfo yt was told them. And this they thought fufficient foi: their alTur an ce. 56. But now on the contrary fide, yfa man would oppofe to thefe ten pubhke difputa- tions before recyted,ten learned Councells of the Catholike Churchy thatdifputed, exami- ned, and condemned this herefie of theirs a- gainft the redlprefence, within the fpace of thefe laft 600. y^^res, fince Berengarim firft be- Jejfs^^exa- gan yt>as namely thofefoure named by JL/i«^:^ mined & ^^anke\ towicr, that of Rome rnder Leo the ^. thedo^^^^ andanother of Verfds vnder the fame Pope- aiine of she third at Tomars in France vnder ?ope viSor ^,}J^/ F4 fucceflbr 88 A review of ten fuhUke fuccelTor to Leo, the fourth at Home againe vn-i der ?ofe Nicolas the fecond^In all which Beren-^ Uufrane. gatm tiimfehe was prefent, and in the lalt>noc 9or,tra Qyyiy abiuf^d, But burnt his owne booke. And unimum. ^^^^^ ^^^.^^ Other CouHcclls to the fame ef- fc(5l,the Hrft ^tRome vnder Gregory the 7. where '^Z'^f'^de ^^^^i'^''^^^g^i"^^'^*"^^d, as FF4Wf«/iuefti- sZrJni. * fieth : The fecond of Lateran in Rome aifo vn- ^••z- 43. der Innocentius the third:the general! Coun- cell of Vienna:^ the fourth at -Rt?wf againe vnder To^e lohn thQ iz. the fifth ^tConJlance, and the fixt at Trent. All rhefe Councells ( I fay ) yt a man conlidcr with indiffcrency of what va- riety of learned men they conlifted , of what lingular piety and fancStity oflife, of how ma- ny nations, of what dignity in Gods Church, how great diligence they vfed to difcuflTe this matter 5 what prayer , what conferringe of icriptures , and other meanes they vfed j ^nd with how great confent of both Greekeand Latyn Church conforme to all antiquity jthey determined and refoluedagainft the opinion pf Proteftants in our dayes; he will eafilv dif- coqer, how much more reafon, and probabi- lity of fecurity there is, of aduenturinge his foule of the one fide then of the other , which yet he will better dOjby contemplation of the vanity of new Proteftants arguments and ob- ieftions, againft fo ancient founded and con- tinued a truth. Which obiedions we lhall examine in the Chapters follovvingc, Aqd fo Ijiuch for this. THE Dlj^utAtms,ahout 'Religion. Chaf.u 2^ THE STATE OFTHE ; C H I E F E E S T I O N S handled in the forfaid difputations,. ^oncerningethe reali prefcnce, Tranfubftan- tiziion and the Sacrifice of the Maflfe, with the chief e groundes that be on eyther fide. Chap. I L TM E qiieftions that were mofttreated^and vrged on both fides^at the two changes of Religion vnder K. Edward znd ^Jdary, were principally three , all concerninge the Sacra- ment of the Altar^as before hath byn fliewed: The firft about the reall prefence of Chrift in the faid Sacrament: the fecond concerninge the manner of his being there by Tranfubjlantiatlon: and the third about the fame as it is a Sacripem Which three points of Catholike dodrine being left by K. Eemyiht 8. ftandinge in vi- gour,as he had found them deliuered.and prc- ferued by all his anceftours Kings of England, from the beginninge of ourconuerfion vnto Chriftian Religion , they were all changed within two yeares after the faid Kings death, by authority of his fonne , being then fome- what lefle then a dozen yeares ould , and by force A ievictp of ten publikc forceofacertayne ad of parlament, confir- foookc of "^^^ his name intituled: AnaSl for the vnifor^ Hatutcs mity of feruice and admtnijlratien $f Sacraments, (ire. ^' VVhich ad though in Ihew y t conteyned no- things elsjbut the admifsion and approbation of a certayne new booke of Common- prayer and adminijlratm of Sacraments ^(ov fo are th% words oftheStatucejgathercd togeatherby Cranmer, I.idlejf, ^nd fome others of the fame humor^yec for that in this new communion booke, to- geathcr with many other articles ofauncient beleefc, thefe three alfo of the reaU pre fence ^ Tranfuhflantiation.znd Sacrifice w^ere altogeather altered , and a new manner of faith therin How dif- ^^"§h^> yt was giuen forth that all was efta- ©rderiy ' bliflied and fetled by Parlament: and for that RcU^^ion* ^^^^ coUedion of new articles of beleefe, paf- vvas oucr- fed, as yo w haue heard, in a bundell or fardell in'^^^fl ^l^uffl^^ vp togcathcr in haft, vnder the name ofa reformed booke of Common-payer y with- ^^y"* out any great examination or difpute about the particulars, butin general! only takinge voyces in the parlament houfe, as well of lay- men as other learned and vnlearned^whether the booke fliould palTe, or noe^ wherinthe L. Seymour Protedor and his crew, hauing the Kings authority in their hands , and gettinge Cranmer and Ridley on their fides for loue of weomen, and other preferment, eafilypre- uaylcd , as by the ftatute y t felfe may appeare: yt was thought expedient, as before hath byn noted , that prefcntly after the ftatute publi- shed , two meanes iTiould be vfed for authori- zingQ DiJpmationSy about Religion. Chap, u zingcand better credicinge the fame. The one by perfuafion otdiuers mectirhgSjConferences, and difputationsof thelearneder lore, which bctore yow haiie heard related; and the other by imprifonment Scdepriuing luch BilTiops, and other cheefe Ecclrfiafhcall perfons, as lliouid lliew themfelues moft forw ard or able to refift this courfe , which rhey L egan w^ith VVinchefler, Durham^ and London: And thus paf- fedtheyon tor thofe 4. or 5. yeares that re- mained of K. Edtpards t2iignc after this change, wherein notwithftandinge , almighty God fhewed wonderfully his hand of iudgcment and punilTiment fopne after, vpon the prmci- pall authors of this innouation both fpirituall &c temporall^as of the latcr.both the Seamours, NoYthumberlandySuffolke, and diuers of their fol- lowers; of the former Cranmer, Ridley, tooper, Latymer, & the like>as to the world is euident. 2. For vpon this followed the raigne of xhe cn» Q^Marj for other 4.or 5. yeares, who feemg fo "ancc of pittifull a breach made in the rcalme by this vnlucky alteration, (he as a zealous Catho- like Princeffe , endeauored to reftore the old faith and Religion againe^to the former vnity of the vniuerfall Church , and clofe vp the wound that ha^^ byn made , vfinge to this ef- fect the felfe fame meanes of inftrudion and correction, by arguments andpunifliments, but in di fferent manner and with farre vnhke iuftice of proceeding. For that the arguments were the very fame, which euer had byn vfed by ancient Fathers^ againft old heretiks in the 9t A review of ten fdlikf like controuerlies: and the punilhments were no other then fuch, as auncient Eccleliafticall Cannons did prefcnbe, and were vfedonly towards theni,that ey rhcr had byn cheefe au- thors of the innouations, or ftood fb obftina- tely in defence therof, as by no meanes they could be recalled. 3. Now then yt is to be confidered , which of thefe two forts of people had more ground or reafon, either thofcjthat withftood the firlt change in K. Edwards d^yts , which was from the old accuftomed Religion to a new: or thofe that refifted the fecond change or ex- change vnder Uarjf, which was nothinge els indeed but a returne from the new to th« ould againe. And heerby will appeare the ftate of the controuerfie which now vvc are to The ftate handle. For as for the firft fort , to witt Ca- tronerHc ^h^'^'^s>^'^^ hiftoricall ftate of their controucr- in three fie is manifeft, concerninge thefe three que- ^ucftioAs. ftions about the Sacrament- for that no man can deny, but that the doctrine of the firft,and third , which is the r^^fl prefence , and Sacrtpce, had byn receaued and held for true through- out England, (wherein concurred alfo the vvhole Chriftian world abroad ) from the tyme before by me prefixed of our firft con- uerfion, and more , cuen from the Apoftles dayes : neythcr could any tyme be appointed, or memory brought forth, when, how, or by whome, the laid doctrines had their begin- nings in England, or els where, Vv'hich accor- dingc to S.Augujlmci rule,and diuers particular d^moii-^ Di^utathm, about Religm. Chap, u 95 demonltrations layd downeby vs before, in ^ug.uM thetirft part of the Treatife of three Conner fom.^^ '^^f ^' ^ doth euidentl)' couuince^that they came from i^. & L% Ghrift, and his Apoftles themfelues 5 which ought to be fuffieient , though no other proofesof Scriptures, Fathers, Dodors^and Councells couid be iTiewed in particular for the fame 5 as may be aimoft infinite, and fome yow iTiall heare a httle after in this Chapter, 4. And as for the fccondqueftion o^Tranfuh-- fiantiamn, though yt be but a ccrtayne appen- dix ofchefirR, about the manner how Chrift ^ is really in the Sacrament, as before hath ^ritk^^^'' byn iliewed, & was not fo particularly decla- red, and defined by the Church in this very tearme of Tranfubflantiatm, vntill fome 400. ^f^^^tnf: yearesgone in the generall Councell of£^?fif- ran, (asneytherthedodrin€offoe?w/^jia7jorc(?w- names of fubjlantiality was^vntili jocyeareij after Chrili cofubftan- in the Councell ofNice , neyther the dignity l^othci of of ffem(?r^5,wherby the bieflfed Virgin is called God, and the Mother of God, vntill the Councell of- ftanrh^s, Epfe^/J«aboue 400. yeares after Chrift:) yet ^etermi- Wasthc fame dodlrineeuer true before from Cncmaa- the beginningej and vttered by the Fathers in n^'- other equiualent words & fjpe^chtSyofchan^es^ and Tranfmutatiom of natures , conuerftom of fub-^ fiances, and the like ; and when there had not byn fuch other euident proofes extant for the truth therof^ yet theconfentand agreement offo great and vniuerfall a Councell of Chri- ftendome, as the faid Lateran was, wl^^rin bo:h 94 ^ revien^ of ten puhlike both the Greeke and Latyn Church agreed^ and afcer great and longe fearche by readinge^ dilpucingc, prayinge , conferringc of Scri- ptures and Fathers , and other fuch meanes, conckided this dodrine to be truth : Yfthete hadbyn (I fay] nothinge elsfor Enghili Ca- thohks to re 'I vpon in this point , but the ge- nerall confenr, and agreement of fo learned, holy, and venerable an aircmbly ; yt might iuftly feeme fuificient in the light of an indif- ferent or reafbna >Ie man to weygh, and oucr- Weygh, againft the particular iuJgements of all the innouators of any age to the contrary^ and fo no maruayle, though they flood fo ear- nefl againft that innouation , this being the ftate of the controueriie on their parr. 5. But now for trie Proteftants , the ftate of their queftion was farre different. For firft, irhc \7\/her^sM4rtjf n Luther about thep. orio.ycare ^ueftion Henryes raignc,had begon fome noueltyes for the about the fecond and third quellion of Tran^ fUms, fubftmtia'ion and Sacrljice , hoMing ftill thefirfl: ofthe redU pre fence tor iirmQ ^ and that three of his firft fchollers Oecolampadm, Caroljladius, and Zuin^lm full fore ag.^inft his will , takmge oc- cation of his mnouations, had added others of their owne, about the faid hrft queftion , de- nyinge the reall prefice, though m different forts: and that after them againe lohnCaluynz French-man, had diuifed a third manner of beleel-e therin.not a litrle different from them ail about the faid dodrmejboth affirrainge & dciiyinec the reall prefeme in different manner DiJpMtatms, aktit ^Rellghn. Chap, u p j and found of words: yt teemed good to our EnghniProtcftantsatthat tyme, or the more pare therof, to choofe the iaft and neweft opi- nion of all, and toeftabliiliyt by parlament^ banilliinge thervpon the ould faith^ that euer vntill that day had byn held and beleened in our countrey^as well by themfelues as others. 6. And thus came in the firft new Religion ' into Engfand^by feme fliew of publike autho- rity, which being fttt forth with fo great ap- '^^f^^^^ plaufe^andoftentation both of publike dilpu- in new tarions, colloquyes, conferences, leiluresj ^^^^s^®^ preachings, expofition of fcriptures,and con- fenc of Pariamenc, as yowhaue heard, did partly by this outward iTiewand oflentation of authority, partly by the plealinge face of nouelty yt felfe, and fweet freedome that yt brought from all former Eccleliafticall difci- plme^fo infecSljand enchaunt the hartSjiudge- ments, & afFedions of diuers of the common people, andfomealfoofthe learned, (but the Iighter,and more licentious fort)as afterward when Q^Mary came to take accoumpt , and would recall them againe to the ftation which they had forfaken; they chofe rather of prideand obftinacyj to fufFerany thinge, yea to dye 5 and go to the fire , then to renounce thefe new fancyes once faftened vpon them: Vnto which pertinacity the fame of the forfaid Proteftants difputations, did not a little ani- mate them^^for that yt was giuen out general- ly (and fo doth Fox ftand ftllfely in the fame) that the Sacram^ntaryes had the vpper hand 1^6 A revicit^ of ten publike in all, as well againft the Lutherans in thd firft quelHon of reall prefence, as againft the Ca- tholiks in that and ail the rclt : which bragg how vaync ytwas, will appeare after when we come to examine their arguments in par- ticular . 7. But yet before we come to that,' two other points feeme expedient to be pcrfor- med>for better direction of the readers vn- derftandinge in thefe high mifteryes of our faith: the rirlt to fee what fure grounds the Cathohks had, and haue at thisday toftand firme, and immoueable in their old beleefe about thefe articles, notwithflandmge any plaufible or decey tfull arguments of fenfe and reafon, that r^iay be brought againft them j Sc iecondly certayne obferuations, wherby the force or rather fraud of hereticall obiedions may be difcouered, which fo beguyled many Jimple people in Q^Marjes dayes, and made them runne headlonge to their perdition j the firft of thefe points I iTiall handle in this Chapter: the fecond in the next that fol- low eth. Catholike groundes of thefe three af^ ticles^ andjirfl of the reall prefence. §. I. 8. The firft ground that Catholike men haue of thefc^ and all other mifteryes of Chriftian faith l^iJ^titatioHS, about Kelighn, Chap.2. 0 laith that arc aboue the reach ot common fenfeandreafon , is the authority of the Ca- tholikc Church , by which they were taught the fame : as points of faich reucaled from Cod. And this is fuch a ground, as we fee by experience , that the moft part of people of what Rehgion foeuer^being yonge or vnlcar- ned> can yeld no other reafon in etfe A , why they beleeue this or that article of their^s faith, bur for that they receaued the fame from their Church and teachers therof, being not able thcmfelucsto fcarcheout any other grounde therof : yea the moft learned of all from their infancy, tooke ail vpon this aiTurancc only of their Church , which Church yf they held to be of infallible authority, fo as iTie can neithei* bedcceaued nor deceaue(as we do of the Ca- tholikc ) then fliould they reft firme & fure in their opinion vpon this ground ; butyf they hould that all Churches may erre, and bringe into error both in dodrine, and manners, as yow hauc heard lianjn Buser hold before in su^,tMp.u hisC4fw6r/^f^^conclu(ions, and moft fe<9:aryes ofour tymc do follow him mthat aflcrtion> then can they haue no ground or certainty this way, but each man and woman muft feeke other grounds and proofes , and ftand Vpon their owneiudgements fortriallof the famCjwhich how well the moft part of people can do, being eyther yonge , limple, vnlear- ncd, or otherwayes fobufyed in other mat- ters , as they cannot attend thervnto , euery man of niwane difcretion will confider, and 98 A review of ten fubliks confequently they muft needs be (aid both to liue and dye, without any ground of their | faith at all, but proper opinion, andfoperift i cuerlaftingely. 9. The famous Do takinge bread, brake and diltributed the %fAttKt€. lame>fayinge : thu u mjf bidj thdt pulhe ddiuerei iJt^ztT f^rjou^, which words arc recorded by three fc- uerall Euangelifts, and that with fuch fignifi- cant, and venerable circumftances on our Sa- uiours behalfe, of ferucnt prayer , wailiinge his Apoftles feet, proteftation of his cxcefsiue loue, and other deuout, andmofthcaiienly (peaches in that nearnelTc to his pafsion , as well declared the exceeding grcatneffe of the miftery which he was to inllitute: whervnto if we add that excellent cleare cofirmation of S.Paul, who for refoluing doubts as itfecmcd had conference with Chrift himfelfe after his afcenfion(for before he could not,he being no Chriftian when Chrift afcended ) the matter will be more euidcnt . His words arc thefe to SC$r,ii. the Comth. Ego enim dccefi a DmiH9,qu9d & tradi- di vobts,&c.FoT I haue receaued from our Lord himfelfe, that whichlhaue deliuered vnto confi"ma ^^bouc the Sacrameut j and do yow note tiTa^(!f* the word (f$r) importinge a rcafon why he the re*^ ought fpccially to be beleeued in this afFayrc, for fo much as he had receaued the refolution of the doubt fro Chrift himfelfe. And then he fetteth do wne the very fame words againc of the Inftitution of this Sacrament, that were vfed by Chrift before his pafsion, without al- teration, or new expoficion , which is moral- ly raoft certayne that he would haue added for cleariwge all doubts, yf there had bynany other fenfc to haue byn gathered of them, then the plaine words themfelucs do beare. Nay Dtjputations, dout Keligion. Ch4p. 2, to/ Nay himfelte doth add a newconrirniation, when he faith , that he which doth eate and drinke vn worthily this Sacrament, rm $rit mporu fan^uinis Domini, Ihalbe guilty of the body and bJoud of our Lord. And againe: J«- dicium ftbi manducat & htbit , non dijudicans cerfm Domini, he doth eat & drinke his owne iudge- ment, not difcerninge the body of our Lord: Which inferreth the ycaU frefence of Chriftes body, which thofe,whomethcApoftle reprc- hendeth; by the fad of their vnworthy recca- uing doe (o behaue themfc!ucs, as yf they did notdifcerne it to be prefent. All which laid togeathcr, & the vniforme con(ent of cxpoli- tors throughout the whole Chriftian world, concurringe in the fclfe-lame fenfe and mea- ninge of all thefe fcriptures,about the redUpre- fence of Chrifts true body in the Sacrament, yowmay imagine what a motiue yt is, and ought to be to a CathoHke man > who defireth to belceucjand not to ftriuc and contend. And thus much for (criptures. 17. There followeth the confideration of^^^^^^^^ Fathers, Dodors and Councells, wherei n as ground a- the Sacramentaryes of our tyme^ that p leafed fhoj\^y'^ firft to deny the redU prefence , had not one au of fa- thority, nor can produce any one at this day> that expreflTcly faith, that Chrifts real] body is not in the Sacrament, or that yt is only a fi- gut*e» iTgne , or token therof ( though diuers impertinent pecces of fomc Fathers fpeaches they will now and then pretend to aileage) fo on the cotrary fide, the Catholiks do behould for toS A r evicts $f ten fuhlike for their comfort, the whole ranks of ancient Fathers through eueryage, ftandinge with them in this vndoubted truth: Yeanotonly affirming the fame reaUfrefcnce in moll cleere, Sec cuud, and perfpicuous words(wherof yow may fee %^r&' whole books in Catholike wryters repleni- BeUarm. /. ii^ed with Fathers authorityesjaid togeather ^and ^u^of^cu^^y ^g^ Chrift downewards) others, but that which is much more, yeldinge rea- fons,5cendcauoring to proue the fame by ma* nifeft arguments, & theological! demonftra- tions, vling therin fuch manner of Ipeach and words,as cannot pofsibly agree vnto the Pro- teftants communion of bare bread and wyne> with their fymbolicall fignification or repre- fentation only. As for example, where the Fa^ thcrs do flicw how Chrifts true flelh com- *rht firft nieth to be in this SAcvzmSt^videlket: by tb€ true \hc^i\ of bread into his bod)>,2n6 by ^ that thu body xhcrt.*' of bread, and by, that the fuhfiances of bread And vyyne be changed, and other like fpeaches, as may befeene in S.Ambrofe ^. deSacram. cap.'^»& lib. 6. cap. I. lib. de myfl. imi. cap, 9. Cypr. Serm. de Ccena. Chryfoft. hom»S^. inMattb. &deproditione luda. CyrtL Catec, 4, Myfiag, Nipntuorat. Catech. 37. and others. The fecod ^8- Secondly, yt is an ordinary fpeach of the leafon of Fathcrs,to cry out J\: admyre the miracle that rathcrs., ^^pp^Qg^h ^ by (he conucrfion in this Sacra- ment, afcribinge the fame to the fupreme om- nipotency of almighty God » as yow may fee in S.Chryfoftome l.^. de facer dot to: Omtraculum^&c. S.dmbrofe lib,/^,. deSacram.cap. 4. lufiinm Martyr Apslog.i, fayinge: that by the fame emnipotency of "GodyVvhcrbjf the word was 7nade flesh, the flesh 9f the Word was made to be in the Bucharijl * which a- grceth not to a Calumian communion. 19. Thirdly^fome of them do cxtoll and ma- J^^^^^^^^* gnilie the exceeding iouc & charity of Chrift to wards vs, aboue all other humane loue , in that he feedcth vs with his ownc flelh, which no ihephards did euer their iheepc^or mothers their children , which is the frequent fpcach of S. Chrj^foftome horn. 85, In Matth. & 45. In loan, d^hom.i^. mep.i. adCor.i. &homiL 6o.&6i. ad Pof. Antiech. And to the fame effec^t S, Augu-^ fttne ep,izo. cap.ij &m Pp/.JJ* which fpeaches can no waycs agree to the Proceftants fuppcr. 20. Fourthly , diucrs of the faid Fathers do The 4; cxpreffely teach, thar we do rcceauc Chrift in ^'^afom the Sacrament not only by faith, but truly, really, and corporally, femetipfum nohu copimtfcet (faith S. Chryfoflome) nonfldetantum, fed & reipfa: chryC^fl. Chnltdoth loync mmleltc with vs (m the PcpuL^n^ Sacrament) not only by faith>but really. And ^'"'^^ in another "^place, he putteth this antithefis or *T>tSsn^A oppolition betwixt vs, and the Uag%, that faw and beleeued in Chrift lyinge in the manger, thatthcy could not carry him with them, as we do now by rcceauinge him in the Sacra- ment, and yet no doubt they beleeued in him, andcarryed him in faith as we do now- to which cffed S. CyrtU Alexand. faith: Corporaltter 4» ^ lo^^* nobis filim vniturvt homoJpirituditetyVt D^«j;Chrift '"{[^'z' lu as a man isvnitedvnco vs corporally, (b^thc*'*^ 17* Sacrament) and fpiritu^Ily, as he is God. Whcr- lid A review •/ ten publikf Whcrvnto yow may add S. UtUry lib. S. de Tri. nitate, and Theodirm in the CounccIlof£p^Mi t$m. 6. Appendix 5. cap, 2. and others. The fifth 21. Fikly the Fachersdo many tymes, and jcafon, indiuers places, and vpon fundry occafions go about to proue the truth of other myfte- ryes , and articles of our faith, by this miracle of the being of Chrifts flelh and body in the w'""** Sacrament, as S. Irettdtu for example, doth proue Chrifts Father to be the God of the old Feftament, for that in his creatures he Jbtdcm. hath left vs his body & bloud, and in the fame place he vfeth the fame argument, for efta- blifliinge the article ef the refurreftion of our bodyes, to witt, thathc thatvouchfafeth to nowriili vs with his owne body and bloud, will notlett our bodyes remayne for eucr in Hem, }. fjf death & corruption. ^.C/^rt/iyf^w^ in like man- ner, by the truth of his redtlprefence in the Sa- crament , doth confute them that denyed Chriftto haue taken true flelTi of the Virgin Mary, which hardly would be proucd by the Sacramentary fupperof bread and wyne, as cuery man by himfclfe will conlidcr. The fjxih 22. Sixrly to prctermitt all other points han- reafon. ^jjcd to this cffed, by the faid Fathers, as that diuers of them do exclude exprcflcly the name of figure, or (imilitude from this Sacra- ment, zsS. Ambrefe lib. 4,. de Sacrum cap.t. D4- mafc, lib,/\.. CAp,^. & 14. TheophtUS. in Matth. 26. Others yeld reafons why Chnft in the Sacra- ment, would be really vnder the formes or accidents of bread and wyne^ to wirt;thar our faith Vtjputatlons, shut TleligUn. Chap. 2. m faith might be proiicd and exercifcd thcrby, & the horror of eating flefli 3c bloud , in their o vvne forme & iTiapc, taken away , and fo the fame S. Ambrsft Ibid. de Sacram. c.4,. Cyrill. in CAp.ii.Luc.apudD. Them, incatena. Others do perfuade vs not tobeieeueourfenfesthatfee only bread and wyne, wherof we lhall fpeakc more in the obferuations following: fo S. Au-- gufiine, firm, de verbis Apgft. & Ui.de Trinit.cap, x o. Others do proue this rcalJ preftnce by the (a- crifice , affirmingc the fclfc fame Chrift to be offered now in our dayiy facrifice vpon the Altars of Chriftians , after an vnbloudy man- ner , which was offered once bloudely vpon Diuere the Altar of the CrofTe, as more largely ftalbc J^^^J^^^ ihewed : fo S. Chvy^o^mehom. 17. dd Eabr. &i. togcathc^' in 1. 4d Tim. Greg. Itb.^. duL c. 58. Nijfentu orat.u in pafcha.&c. All thefe confiderations I fay,and many others that may be taken out of the Fa- thers wrytinges> I do for breuityes fake lett paffe in this place, though moft euidently they do declare the faid Fathers plaine meaningc, and beleefein thisarticle,and cannot any way be applyed to the new Communion of Pro- teftants, but by manifeft impropriety and de- tortion. 23. And therforc I will end only with one ^he fca- confideration more , very ordinary with the ucmhrea^- faid Fathers, which is, thcdiuinereuerence>^^"* honourjand adoration, that in all ages the faid Fathers haue giuen vnto the bleffcd Sacra- met, whofeauchorityes were ouerlongheere to recytc in particuliiir. The fay inge of 5. Afijlm tii A review 9f ten pNbUke augl tone, isknowne l^^emomanduc^ttmftprmddoraueriLtta * man cateth the Sacrament but firft adoreth homf'y in the (ame, and S. Chryfejlome, AdoYA&manduca. tptft. ad adore y t and reccaue y t ^ And Theoderet to the Thildcr. tH fameelfed, Et creduntur & ad0ramur,quod eafint ^. didog. quA creduntur. Tiiey are beleeued and adored (the flesh and bloud of Chnjl ) for tha-c they are in deed the things ciiey are beleeued to be* And to fpeake nothinge or many other Fathers faynigs to this cii^dL^SXhryfo^ome his large diJC- hcZi<^M courfcs about this matter may feruc for all, PopuL.An^ who wryteth > that at the tyme of confecrdtion horn. ^,tn dud ftnYtflce^ the very Angelh come dewne , and vvitk ^<i%^'de adore ChnfttheiY Lord therin frefenty Smrdotf! which he would neucr hauc wryttcn, yf bread, and wyne were only there prcfent. 24* By ali thefc wayes & meanes thenjmay The third caiily be feene what the auncient Fathers in €oaceib. their ages did thinke , fpeake , and belceue, of this high & admirable miftery of Chrifts reall prcfencc m the Sacrament. And albeit there were no Councclis about this matter, for the, fpaceof a thoufand yeares after Chnli , the caufe thcrof was, that in all that fpace no one man euer openly contradiAcd the fame, at leaft after the tymc of S. IgnatiM vntill Berenga- rim, (foryfany man had done yt, wcmayfte by the forcfaid Fathers fpeachcs, whomuft haucbyn thechiefcin rhefe Councells, what their determination would haue bynagainft TUodoretuj thcm) aud when the faid Bereffff trim had once in I. DUi, broached this SacramentaryherdVjthe whole J Chriftian world rofe vp prefently againft the fame, fanle, asagamrt ablafphemousnouelty, and ten fcucrall CdunccHs condemned the fame, as in the former Chapter hath byn declared. - 25. Wherfore the Gatholikes hauinge with thcmallthefewarrantsoftruthby fcriptures. The 4. fathers, councells, tradition of antiquity, vni^ thrchur^ forme confent of all Chriftian nations , both thcs cot?^ Greckc,Latyn,Afian, African, & other coun- ^"^^^ - treyes embracing the name & faith of Chrift, and that no beginninge or entrance can be fhewed of this dodrine in the faid Churchy nor any contradidion againft yt when y t lirft: entred: as on the cotrary fide the firft^oflpring of the other, togeather with the place^author,. tyme, manner, occafion^refiftance, condem- nation , and other Hke circumftances are and may be authentically iTiewed, prooued and conuinccd,yea that the very face of Chriften- dome from tyme out of mynd, by their churches , altars , offerings , adoration , and manner of diuine fcruicc admitrted euery wherc,without contradidion, doubt,or que- ftion, do teftifie the (ame: the truth moreouer therof being confirmed by fo infinite con- coinrfet^f manifeft miracles, recorded by fuch autnors , as no man with piety can doubt of their creditt ; the Catholiks I fay hauinge all Miradcfr this tfiajftteclcUdofrnttnefes (to vfe the Apoftles words) for thetoftimony of this truth, and being pracftized and accuftomcd in the beleefe therof for To rhany ages togeather without interruption , and fcing moreouer that Luther himfelfc , and all the learned of his fide that H wer^ U4 ^ review of ten publike were open protclFed enemyes in other thing* to the CachoJike belecfe, yet in this protefted the truth to be foeuident, as they durltnot impugn e i t,nay held the firft impugners ther- ot for damnable heretiks, addinge alfo heere^ vnto that Zumgl'm the tirft chiefe author^con- feflechhimfeitc to haue byn moued thervnto by a certayne extrauagant fpiritt, which he I de faith he knew woi, whether ytw^ blackf or whhe» Z:ntam. ^11 thcfc things, I fay, laid togeather, and the lines and manners confidered of them, that haue held the one & the oiher faithj that is to fay the infinite Saints of the one fide, whome the Proteftants themfelues do not deny to haue byn Saints^ and the qualirycs and condi- tions of the others, that firll began, orfincc haue defended the new Sacramentary opi- nions : lett the difcreet reader iudge, whether co^nfid^^I the Catholiks of England had reafon toftand ticms."^' f^^^ in their old beleefe, againft the innoua- tions of our new Sacramentary Proteftants in K.Edirajds d^VQs. And the likefiiallyow fee in the other ?rricles chat enfue of Tranfuhfian- tUtion :ind Sacrtjice, dependingcof this hrftof the reall prepnce , as before yow haue heard. But much more will yow be conh'rmed in all thi?, when yow iTiall haue read ouer the di- fputationsfollowinge, and fccne the triflinge arguments of the Sacramentaiyes in thefe fo weighty & important articles of our beleefe, and the ridiculous euifion? where- with they feeketo auovd , or delude the graue tiftimo- nyesof fcriptureg , and Fathers before men- tioned. fcioned. For therby wilbe feene, that they fcekenot truth in deed with a good and fin- cere confcicnce,& feare of Gods iudgemeiitsj but only to efcape and entertayne talke for continuaunce of their faction , vvhich ought to be marked by the reader, yf he loue his foule. And thus much for the grounds of the reall-prefence. Groundes of Tranfuhflamiation. Touchinge the fecond queftion about Tranfubllantiation, though y t be lelTe princi^ pall then the formeir of the feati-prejence ^ for thacytconteyneth but the particular manner how Chriftis really in the Sacrament5& con- fequently not fo necefTary to be difputed of with Sacrameritaryes , that deny Chrift to be there really at all , as before hath byn notedt yet lliall we briefely difcouer the principall grounds wheron Catholiks do ftand , in this receaued do($irine of the Church againft Lu- therans efpecially , w ho grauntinge the faid reall pre fence, do hold th^t bread is there togea- ther with our Sauiours body : which Catho- liksfor many reafons do hould tobeabfurd* And albeit the w^ord Tranfubfianttdtion &: par- ticular declaration therof^was not fo exprefle^^ ly fett downein the Church vntill feme 40 Oo yearesgonein the genera!! Councell ofLate^ Hz f^il H& A review of ten fuhUhe ran vnder Pope Innoc^ntius the third , as tha wordTriwif^, Homonfion, or Confubfiantialiij znd cleere cxpolicion theiot\ was not vnciU the Counccll of Kiee joo. yea res after Chriftj yet was the truth of this dodrine held cuer be- fore in effed: and fubftance , though in diffe- rent words: to witt mutation, transmutation, con-- uerfion oj bread into the body of Chrtji, tr an felement ac- tion, and the like, which is proued by the per- petual! confcnt ofdocftrine, vttercd by the an- cient Fathers in this point from the begin- ninge^which are recorded by Catholike wry- ters of our dayes from age to age:and one only alleageth thirty and two , that wrote heereof iiatUcra before the Counceil of Lateran, and are ouer- authod-^ long to be recited in this placcj only they may ced to be reduced for more perfpicuitie to two heads heads: the one of fuch as deny the lubftance of bread to remayne after the words of conft- cration j the other of fuch as do exprefTely auouch a conuerfion of bread into Chrifts body . ^ Firfthead. 2/. Of the firft fort , that deny bread to re- maine,iSiS. C;nB BilTiop of Hieruralcm,whofe c^tech. 4. words are: hoc fcien$, ac pro certiftmo habens,fanem ^yft^l' hum, qui videtur a nobis, non ejfe panem, etiamfigujlus fanem effe fentiat,&c. Thou knowing and being " certay ne of this j that the bread w^hich we fee isnor bread,notwithftandingittaftas bread; and the W7ne which we fee not to be wyne, ^.^^^^JVbutthebloudofChrift, though tothetaftvt B^^p tn. ftill feeme to be wyne. And S, Gregory Ntffm: ^^^^ F^w^ ifiefank efi In initio communis, &c. This btead Di^utatiens.ahm^elipQn. Chap. 2. uy bread at the beginninge is comon bread > but » whenycisconfecrated, yt is called, and is in- deed the body of Chrift. Againc Eufebimr Ants- quam confecrentur9 &c. Before confecration p^fc* there is the fubftance of bread and wyne , but „ after the words of Chrift, yt is his body and ,5 bloud: All which do exclude, as yow fee, bread after confecration. And to the fame cf- fcdS. Ambrofe : Fanis hie, pants ejl, dttte verbs Sa- DeSMcr/m, fYamentorunty fed vbi accefferit confecratio^ de pane fit ^'^^^ faro Chrtfii. This bread before the words of the Sacraments, is bread , but after the confecra- tion, of bread is made the flefhof Chrift. And S.Chrjffojlome ttQ^iting of thismiftery, asketh this queltion, and aunfwereth the fame. Num Bcm de videsjpanem ? num Vinum ? ahfit, ne fic cogites ! Doft thou fee breads doft thou fee wyne heerc? Cod forbidd, thinke no fuch matter. And to this fame effed many others might be cyted> but yt would grow to ouergreat prohxity. 28. Thefecond fort of teftimonycsthatdo 2,hea& affirme conuerfion and change of bread into the body of Chrift, are many more , yf wc Would ftand vpon their allegation , and in place of all might ftand S. AmbrefeyWhok faith was the generall faith of Chriftendome in his dayes; & he doth not only oftentymes repeat, that by the words of Chrift vttered by the Prieft vpon the bread, the nature & fubftance therof is changed^ into the body and bloud of Chrift, but proueth the fame by examples of all the miraculous mutations & conuerlions, recorded i)a the old and new Tcftament. Pr^- H 3 bepm ii8 A review of ten fuhltke ambritr I. hemm (faith he) non hoc effequod natura formanit^ tniumZ fi^ ^^^^ henediBh confecrauit , maioremque vim eff&, tap.^. benediilionii qtmu natura, quia benedtitione etiam /p- fanaturamutatur* Letc vsproue then (by all „ thek other miracles) that this which is in the „ Sacrament,is not that which naiure did frame „ (vfed bread and wyne) but that which the „ blefsinge hath confecrated, and that the force „ of biefsinge is greater then the force of naturej „ for that nature herfelfe is changed by blef- ,t finge; Andagaine: Sitantum valuit femeEU^.vt ^^r*/. ignem de co^lo depoueret-^ non valebit fenm Chrijti, vt Jpeciesmutet elementorum? YfthzfpQ^ch of ^lyzs was of fuch force , as yt could bring downe 5, fire from heauen^lliall not the words of Chrift 5^ (in the Sacrament ) be able to change the na- tures of the elemets? videlicet (as I (aid before) of bread and wyne. And yet further; lowhaue read, that in the creation of the fporldy God faid, and thinges were made , he commaunded , and they tpere created • that Jpeach then ef Chrifi^ which of nothings created that tphtch wa4 mt before 5 p)aR jt not beabU to exchaunge thofe thinges that are , into other thinges, which thiy were mt before? for yt is noleffe to giuc neiv natures to things^ then to chaunge natures, but ra^ iiiermm, &c. 29. Thus reafoneth that grauc and holy Doctor, to whome we might adioyne many more both before and after him, as namely ^Jecf^ua ^' ^yP^i^^ i^"^ his fermon of the fupper of our Lord: Fanis ifte quern, &c. This bread which Chrift gaue vnto his difciples being changed 3, not in ftape; but in nature, is by the omnipo- tence Vi^utations, akutReligm. Chaf.i. 119 tency ot ciie word madeflcft. S. Cyrill BilTiop ,^ of Hierufalem proueth the fame by example ofthe miraculous turning of water into wine, at the marriage oi Cane in Galelcy : aquam mu- tauttinvinum (lauhhe^c.) Chrilt turned wa- fiag,^!' ter into wyne, by his only will , and is he not „ worthy to be belecued quodvinumin fanguinem tranfmutauit y that he did chaunge wyneinto „ hisbioud: For yf at bodily marriages he did „ worke Co wonderfull a miracle,why fliall not „ we confeife that he gaue his body and bloud (in the Sacrament) to the children of the Ipoufe? wherfore with all certainty, let vsrc- „ ceaue the body and bloud of Chrift, for vnder 5> the forme of bread is giuen vnto vshis body, and vnder the forme of wyne his bloud.Thus „ hee ofthis miraculous chaunge, wherof Saint „ Chrjifojlome treatinge alfo vpon S, Mathew wry- f^^^J^"^^* teth thus : Noj minifiroYum locum tenemm, qui veto fdnSlificat & immutat.tpfe efi.WQ that are Priefts, „ liouid but the place of his minifters : (in this great chaunge) for he whodothfan(5lifieall, „ and makech the chaunge , is Chrift himfelfe. „ To like effect wry teth Eufebius Emipnus-^ quandQ ^^"^'^ benedicend^.&c. Whtn the cre^itmQs of brczd mZi. andwyncare layd vpon the Altar tobeblef- „ fed, before they arc con(ecratcd by the inuo- „ / cation of the holy Ghoft , there is pre(ent the „ fubibnce of bread and wyne ^ but after the Words of Chrift, there is Chrifts body and ,y bloud. And what maruayleyf he that could }> create all by his word , pjSet creatd conuertere^ „ ^ could conuerc , and chaunge thofe thinges „ H 4, that no A revleuf of ten fuhlike thac he had created, into other natures? 30. I might alleage m^ny other Fathers to this cffed , but rny purpofe in this place doth not pcrmitt yt: this lhalbe fufficient for a taft, that the dodrine of conuerfion or chaungc of bread and wync, into the body and bloud of ChriftjWhich is the dodrinc of Tranfuhftan- tiation, was not new at the ty me ofch e Coun- cell of litrer^w , but was vnderftood and held euer before, by the checfe Fathers of the Ca- thoUke Church , yea and determined alfo by two Councells at Rome : and the firft therof Zar>ftane,i general 1 , whcrin was pr^km out Lanfrdnm ^liGuit.' vpon the yearc of Chrift 1060. vnder Pope i>Vww*'^ N/Vate the fecond ; and the other 19. yeares JnfdtpM after vnder Pope Grf^0r/thcfeauenth,& both norp^Dmu of them abouc an hundred yeares before the Councell of L4W4», whcrin notwithftanding is declared exprelTely this dodrine , of the chaunge of bread &: wync into the body and bioud of our Sauiour, albeit not vnder the name of TranfubJlAntiAtion'^ andytis proued ex- preffelyput of the words of Chriftsinftitu- tion , Thk if my bod/ , which can haue no other probable expofition , but that the bread i$ chaungcd into his body. And fo yt is expoun- ded by all the forfaid Fathers^and others that, before this controucrfie fell out, interpreted the fame words of our Sauiour. The con » Thefe grounds then had the Englilh Ca- wTuaM ^- ^dfvards dayes to ftand in the de- chuich! f^^ncc of this dodrine, that is to fay, the cleere words of fcripture fo vnderftood by all anti* Dl^uutions, about Eeligm. Chaf. i . 121 quity, togeather with the affertions and affq- uerationsof all the Fathers ^ the determina- tion of Counpdis prefently vpon thecontro- iierfie firft nioued > and namely of that great famous Lateun Councell , wherin concuned ^»^.fii both the Greekc and Latyn Church , there ^* being prefent, the Grecke patriarks of Conftan" t'moplezndHierufalem.jo. metropolitan Arch-* biihop5, andaboucathoufandand two hun- dred other Fathers of diuers ftatcs^Si degrees, (compare this with a meeting of fome twen- ty or thirty minifters impugninge the fame.) All which hauingc difputed the matter, and Thcgjcat- confidered as well by {cripturcjand by ancient Jj|^^*^£^tc- tradition of the Fathers and vniuerfall Cath. wncous-^ Church, what had byn held before, did with full agreement determine & declare this mat- ter, accurlinge whofoeuer Ibould from that tyme foreward,deny that dodrine of Tranfub^ fiantUtim Which decree of that CQunceli being receaued generally, vvithout contradiftion throughout the Chriftian world, hath byn confirmed by feauen other Councclls fince that tyme, as before we haue Ibewed. And let the difcreet reader weigh with himfelfe, which party hath more fecurity for yt felfe, cyther the Catholike that followed all this authority & confent of antiquity, or our new Proteftants , that vpon freili imaginations of their owne heads,diuifeda new dodrinecon- trarytoall this antiquity* And thus much of this article, for a taft of that which may be al- leaged for yu A YcvUfP of ten puhUkf Groundcsforthe facrificeofthe majfe. 32. The third queftion propofcd to be hand- led in the torefaid difputacions, w as about the fampceofthe majfe, to witt^ whether the feife- fanie body ot our Lord, whofe reall prefence • isproued in the firft queftion, be not only a Sacrament in the Chnrtian Church, asytis receaued vnder a iTgne of bread and wyne by the Pricft and communicants , but afacrific© aUo, as yt is offered to God the Father by the Prieft vpon the Altar ^ and whether thiscx- ternall and vifiole facrincc be appointed by Chnft, to be iterated and dayly frequented in Th« fiate the ChuTch vnto the worlds end 5 and this ftion^^**^' both for an externall worlliipp peculiar to. Chriftians, whereby they are diftinguilTied from ail other people, as alfo for propitiation offinnes, by applyinge the meritt and vertuc of the other bloudy facrihce of our Sauiour ontheCroile once offw^red for all, and euer auayleable (as5. P^«/ at largedeclareth inhis epiftleto the Hebrewes) for fandifyinge the redeemed: this then beingthequeftion, and this being a dodrinc fo generally receaued throughout the Chriflian world, both in the Greeke, Latw, Aethiopian , AmenUn y and other Chriltian Churches, as there was no doubt or <|ueftion th«rof . when Luther and his offpring DiJj)Utatms, dout KeUgion^, Chap. t. 123 began ^ ytfell out in England, that vnder the child King Edward hisraigne, name & autho- rity, that the i. Seymour protedour and his followers , with fomc few Priefts that were weary of mafsinge, and defirous of marriage, but cheefly Cranmer and RidUj, Hooper, Latj/mer, and others , bad heads of the cleargy in thofe dayesj tooke vpon them to pull downe this publike vfc of faerifice, and afterward to exa- mine.and call in queftion the dodrine therof. At which chaungc and fuddayne innouation, ; neuerfeene in England before, from the firft day that Chriftian Religion cntred vnderthc Apoltles , as all the realiues and contreycs round about remayned nftonilhed : fo diuers notwithftanding of the Hghter fort, enclyned to noueltyes, applauded to them, & followed theirdiuifcj others more prudent and refpe- £tiuQ to their owne faluation , coniideringe that there went more in this matter then the pleafureandfancyesof a few particular men, flood conftant in thar,which before they had receaucd, and that which generally they law, and knew to be in vfe throughout all Chri- ftendome without cotradidion, which could not be by S, Aufienstult.hut that yt muft needs tlpfif'llj. come downe from the Apoftles themftlucs, itb.A.cof,6. for fo much as all oppofitedocftrinc tothat, tlt^i which was firft planted by them &receaued from them , could neuer befo generally ad- mitted without contradidion. 35. Wherfore cntringe into due confidera- tion of this matter, whilftall the ruffe ran the otbcr ^24 A ntxltw of ten fuhlikf other way for 5. or 6. y earcs fp^ce, vndcr that King Childjand thofc other htcle tyrants that bare (way, and one deftroycd the other by Gods iuft iudgement vndcr him. Thefe good men ( the Catholikcs I meane ) fell to fearch what grounds they had, or might find out for The fc. ^^^^ receaued a dodrine & pradife , as this arch of of the mafle and facrifice was. And firft they fnd^cf 'Z found, thatwheras the firft infult of heretiks i^dvv. for* was againft the very name of themalTe, asa of^hc^^* new diuifed tfeinge without reafon or fignifi- maOc. cation J they found (I fay) thatit wasavery About the ancient and vfuall word, for the external] fa- Sfaffc."^^ crifice of Chriftians vpon the Altar,in the La- ^^'Sefii tyn Church, fortwelue hundred yearespaft bSerm^^i] and downewatdj in place wherof the Grecians % &fi-m ^^^^ ^^'^^ word Liiurgie , SynaxU , and the 337. in do'^ hkc , and this vfe is not only to be fhe wed by ItcnuS^^ the teftimonyes of particular Fathers, as Smt c Ep.il a Amhufe , S. ^ Augujltne , S. ^ Leo , S. ^ Greg9yy^ ^SMcfX * ^^^^^ Vticenfis, ^Capanm, and other • but by Cirm. ' whole Councellsalfojas by that of gRcwi^vn- tiZ.io! derP(?/>^5//«^?/?^rthelirftof275.Biniops, held eub.Vhji] almofhjoo. yearesgone^thefecond& fourth dt ^ CdYthAge held the next age after , and the iant.ff^ord. CounccU of ^ Agathd in France the fame age; IfTr' the Councell of ^ llerdum and ^ Valentia in hint. (one. . ii i #4«.j.^4. Spainc, and of ^^Orleance in Trance , allaboue f cl%7. o* yeares gone, which was fufficicnt mac- ican^/ ter againft the vanyty of heretiks, that con- l^Tan!iz. demned the name &the words: for example ^imkrcf. ' Amhro^e fayingc Mi ff'am facer ecapi , orarein ' eblatmeDeum . I began to fay mafte, and to pray pray to God in the oblation of the facrificc, and chofc of 5. Aujlen: In UBme quA mhis ad mif" ^ag. ihi^ legenda efi , mdituri fumtu. We lliall heare of this matter ^more inthelelTon which is to be,* read vnto vs at maflTcThcfe fpeaches I fay^Sc this praftifeoffo ould learned &c holy Priefts:^ as theft and their fellowes were, did preuayle more with the grauer fort of EnglilTi peoplcj, then the lightnelTe& inconftancy ofCranmer Ridley, and fuch other licentious Priefts^ as for liberty fell to Apoftafic. 34, And this for the name of the majfc. But for the nature and fubftance therof , which, conteyneth the external! true and proper fa-- ctifice of the Chriftian Church, they found fuch ftore of cuident proofes, and moft graue authorityes,as might ftay, confirrae and fatif- fie any mans mynd , that were not willfitUy bent to the contrary. And wheras I do vfc the Words ofexternaU, true and f roper facrifife, yow muft remember therby the fraud of thefe new heretiks , who , as before about the reall pre- fenee,did go about to delude all the fayings of holj Fathers, and other teftimonycs of Anti- quity, that fpake of Chrifts reall being in the Sacrament,by running to the words ^irituaU Ijyfacramentdly, by faith, and the like : ibheere fyndinge the whole torrent and ftreame of Chriftian antiquity to ftand for this Chriftian ffcrificc, & to mention, reuerence, & auouch the fame -J thefe fellowes for auovdinge their Author! tyes do runne fidm the proper exter- nal! facri(ice; wherof we treatc 5 vhco the in-^ ternalij tl6 A review of ten pUtke ternall , and inuifible (acrifice of the myn^,' wherof IC, D^w/^i faith, that a contrite fpiritt is a {acrifice to God* And when this cannot ferue^ they run alio to improper and metapho* ricall externc facrifices^fuch as are, mortification '0f the hodjf Rom, xi. facrifice ef thanhefgeumge. Ffalm, 4,^. Sacrifice of almes deedes. Hebr.il. and other fuch good works, which byacertayne analogy or proportion with the nature of propcf facrifices, are called alfo facrifice in .fcri- ptures & by the Fathers, but improperly. To thefe then do our Proreftants runne, when they are prefled with the authorityes ofaun- cient Fathers , that name the vfe of Chriftiari facrifice in the Church , and will needs make vs bclceue, that the Fathers ment nor proper- ly of any true vifible or extcrnall facrifice, but cyther of inward or inuifible facrifice of the hart, mynd,and good defire^or els of outward metaphoricall facrifice of pious and vertuous workes. 3^. But all thefe are fraudulent fhifcs to ouer- throw one truth by another. For as we do not deny , but that there is an inward and.in- uifiblc facrifice of our myndjin dedicatinge of our felues to Cod^and to the fubiedion of his Maieftie, without which the externall facri- iRce is little worth to him that offereththe fame: And as wcgraunt that all good works be facrifices in a cerraync fort, by fome fimili- tude rhey haue with true & proper facrifices, for that they are offered vp to God in his hu-* nourj yet do we fay, that tlii: is from our pur^ DtJputatkm^ahmiRellghn. Chap.t* 11/ jpofe in this place > who taike of a true proper externall facrifice offered vp to God, after a J^!^ peculiar facred rite, or ceremonyes, by pecu- ©fa'u^uc liar men deputed to this office in acknow- ^^^^^^^Ll ledgement of Gods diuine power, maieftie, facrifice. and dominion ouer vs, & proteftarion of our due fubiedion vnto him/uch as were the ex- ternaii facrifices in the law of nature, offered Vp by patriarks and heads of familycs , and by Priefts of Aarons order vnder the law of Moyfes, and by Chrift and his Priefts accor- dinge to the order of Melchifedech m the new law ; and for To much as both the jnternall, & meraphoricall facrifices before mentioned of ' good affe£lion , defires, and holy works , are not peculiar to any law, but were law full and needfull vnder all lawes, and in all tymes,and require no particular kind of men or minifters to offer them , but may b^ offered vp by any man or woman whatfoeuer : therfore do we exclude all thefe from the name of thefacri- fice, which heere is meant by our defcription^ and comprehendeth as yow fee an externall vifible oblation , made by him or them, whd are peculiarly deputed by God to this office^ which.are Priefts: So as whenfof uer our ad- tierfaryes do Hipp from this proper fignifica- tion of a lacrifice totheocher.eyther internalt or metaphoricall^which may be offered by all forts of people , and therevpon do fay thatall men are Priefts^ they runne, as > ow fee, quite from the purpofe^as they do a!fb for examples fake, when toauoydthc necefsity of externall h8 A revlettf of tm pultikf AnexHple foftingc, tliey runne to the internall fstdingi Ktkau^ ofthemynd, fayinge that true faftinge» is to boufy^ faft from finne, which as we deny not in that ftingc. " fenfeof fpirituallfaftingej fo is it iiotwith- ilandinge a plaine ihifc, and runninge from the purpofe, and cannot ftand with many places of the fcripture , which muft needs be vnderftood of the externall faft j as when Chrift is (aid by the EuangeUfts to haue fafted 40. dayestogcather-and S.P^uUffirmQth that he and his fellow Apoftles fafted frequently; It cannot be vnderftood (I fay)of faftinge on- ly thofe tymcs from finne j for that Chrift fa-^ fted alwayes from finne without exception; and fo do all good men both faft and facrificc alfo, byofferingc vp good defires and pious adionstD almighty God, dayly andhourely without diftin(9:ion of men or tymes, 36. B ut this is not the proper, vifiblcjSc exter- nall facrifice which heere wc meanc , which wasinftitutedby God, as pccuhar to Chri- fiian people vnder the law of the ghofpell, for an externall worlhipp vntohini (befidesthe internall) and teftification of their inward fubiedion , loue, and piety towards him- which facrifice commingin place of all others that went before, both in the law of nature and of Moyfes that prefigured atnd fordignf-^ knr^of - fame- and being but oihe and fingular thcchri- infteed of them all, and their great variety, is ftian and tobeefteemcd fo much more excellent then extcrn^II 1 m • ijcrificf. they all , as the law of the ghofocll is more excellent then thofc lawxs, and truth aboue ihad- t)ipitatms, aheut Religion. Chap. 2. li^ iliaddowes, & the facred body of Chrift God and man himfelfe > to be preferred before the bodyes of beafts , byrds and other fuch crea-* cures , which vvere but fignes and figures of this. 37. And in this fen fe do both fcriptufds, fa- thers, councells, and all holy Chriftian anti- quity fpeake and treat of this moftdiuine, ve- nerable and dreadfull facrifice, vvherof, asof , thehighe(t and moft prindpall myftery and treafure, left by our Sauiourin his Church, there are fo many teftimonyes, as before hath byn fignifyedj thatyt ihall not be pofsiblefor me in this place ^ and with the breuity which is neceflfaryjto alleage the Icaft part therof^yec {bme few general! heads lliall I touch, which the learned reader may fee more dilated , by diuers Catholike wryters ofour dayes,and he that hath not commodity or tymc to do that, may geuc a ghelTe by that which heerc I lhall fetcdowne* 38 Fitft thcn,forthatthishoIy facrificeof the Chriftian Church was fo principally in- tended by almighty God for the new law, as hath byn faid > many things were fett downe by the holy Ghoft in the old Teftament,both prefiguringe and prop!\ecyinge the fame, as firft the facrifice of the King and Prieft Mekhi- -^^^ fedech in bread and wyne , Gf«. 14. which all the auncient Fathers, by generall confent, do apply to the facrifice vfed now in the Chri- ftian Church^andyt were ouerlong to alleage f heir particular authorityes, Ictt. S.Augufltni 150 A reriew of ten pblike au£. fpeake for all; frimum apparuit ((aith he) fdcrift^ c^/'ii! ^^^^^ (Melchifcdech) quod a Chrifiiann nunc offer-- tur Deo toto orbe terrdrum. fhe firft facrificc ap- „ pearcd in Melchiledech , which now is offe- „ red to God by Chriliians throughout all the iM>,\.t9nu world. And in another place: Videntnunctak mduerf. lei. fdCY ijicium offem Deo toto orbe t err Arum: Chriftians %!it'' do fee the Jike facritice (to thatof Melchifc^ dech)to be offered to God,oucr all the world. And all the other lactifices , lignes and obla- tions mentioned before, as prefiguringe the reallprefence of Chrifts facred body,and true fleih in the Sacrament, are applied by the lelfe { / fame FatherSjWhome before we haue named, to the prefiguration alfo of this diuinefacri- fice,contcyninge the felfe fame thinge, which the Sacrament doth, but in a different fort, in refpeftofdiucrs ends, the one asytisreceaued by the communicants ^ the other as yt is offc-. red vnto God the Father. 39. After thefe prefigurations there follow the predications of Prophetts as that of E/47 19. and 66. where is forteold the reiedion of the Aaronicall priefthood and facrifice,and a new promifed vnder the Chriftians. The prophefy of DanieU alfb, where it is foretould, that in the laft age of the law of grace, by the comminge *D4B.z.4r of Antichrift, iuge ficrijicium, thatis thedayly *** facrifice ihall ceafc. Ot this (I fay) is inferred by the ancient Fathers, that vntill Antichrifts comminge there fhalbe a perpctuall and dayly facrifice amonge Chrifiians; which is moft of i^aUiif. I. all confirmed by the prophefic of MAla^hias 'm t>iJ^ut4tiQn$, dout Retipon. Chap, il i|t thefe words: Ad vosb facer dotes, To yew 6 priefts, that defpife my name, and do offer „ vpon my Akar polluted bread , and do facri- , ^ fice the beafts that are blind, lame and wcake, I haue no more likinge ofyow, faith the lord ,^ of hofts, and I will not receaue at your hands ,j any gifts,for that from the eaft to the weft my name is great amonge the gentills , and they „ do facrifice vnto me in euery place, and do of- fer vnto my name a pure oblation^for that my name is great amonge the gentills, faith the ,^ iord of hoftcs.Out of which place the Fathers dofiiew firft, that heere thepriefthoodand facrifice of Aaron was to be rcieded> & a new | priefthood and facrifice^ accordinge to the or- J der of Melchifedech, erected amongft the gen* ' tills, wherby ordinarily are vnderftood the Chriftian people conuerted chiefly (from gen- tiUty) who were to (iiccecd in their placc^and that with fuch certainty , as the prefent tcnfe *rhf o^: is put for the future,accordinge to the manner Ifthcpro- of prophefies*,and the Antithells or oppofition plicae bctwcene the two facrifices,the one reicdcd, *^ the other promifcd , doth make the matter more plaine* for that as the lewes facrifice could not be offered but in one place, to witt, in the Temple of Hierufilcm : fb iliall the Chriftian facrifice be offered vp in^mni loco, that is euery where without refped of places from the eaft to the weft. The lewifh facri- fices were many and of diners forts , but the Chriftian facrifice that iliould fucceed in place thcrof was to be but one. The lewiiTi Hicri- I % fices A Ytv'tew of ten fiMke ^ fices were polluted, not fo much m relpeft of great quantity of bealb bloud powred out therin, and for that they offered dcfcduoug beaftb,as for the wickednellc of them that of* fcred thefame^but the Chrifhan facrifice was tobecleancoC vnfpotted, not only inrefpccil of the vnbloudy manner, wherin yt was to be offered vndcr che formes of bread and wyne, but cfpecially for the excellency of the thinge ytftife ottered , being the moftpretious body of ChriU himlck'e , and for that the demeritt of the offerer cannot take away the worth of che offermge. 40. Thefe circumdi^nces then confidcrcdj and that the heretikes heere cannot runne to their fliift of inward , and inuifiblc facrificcs, (for that thefe couid not be vnderftood by the Prophettasnew facrihces, that Ihould fuc- ceeda to the ouldjfor that thefe were alwayes in vfe with good men,duringe the ty me of the ftanc^eT' facrificc alfo, and werelawfull, yea com- thaiptoue mauudcd in all tymes^ro witt^to haue inward fic!-orthc piety and deuotion,giue almes, andthclike) niaffe to thcfe things I fay coniidered, togeathcr with for^e^pro- the cxpofitions of holy Fathers, aswellvpoii phcfKd* thefe as vpon other places of theoIdTefta- ment, there can be no probable doubt , but that this external] facrifice of the Chriftians' was prophefyed by the holy Ghoftlonge be- fore the comminge of Chrift. 41. Secondly, the fameisproucdoutof di- ners places of the nevv Teftament : Andfird out of S Johns gho^pcli, where as our Sauiour pro- Dijputattom, ahout Relipon. Chap. t^i promiied in n\j rterious words the inftitution of this biclTed facrifice , as before hath byn ftencj foalfo didhefignifie that this facrifice ^Tiould fuccced in ftced of all facriiices that went before. For wheras the Samaritan wo- man at the well, fpeakinge of the fchiline be- d. lo. de tweenethe I ewes & ^^tw^r/Uw about adoring ^numtat. in the! emple Of- leriuaiem, and in the hill GatizjmofSaHiaYi/$ ( which word of adoringe mult needs in that place fignilie lacrifyciuge, as yt doth alio in other places of fcriprure, as Gen. 22. i42. 8. and els where, for that the con- trouerfie betweenc the lewes and Samarttam was about the vfe of facrificing, asthehigneft externall a<3; of adoration) out Sauiouraun- fwervith to her qucflion , that the houre was nowcomejwhen neythcrin that hill oi Sama- ria , nor in lerufalm they Ihould adore ; that is to fay, vfe any more facriiice , but that a new adoration in fpiritc and truth iliould fucceed the former 5 which adoracion being vnder- Th^cxpii- ftood of facrifice, as the circumftancc both or ^^g^p^acc ♦ the place and matter do enforce,yt followeth of s. ' that Chrift did heere promife a new facrifice, stcrS"" thatfliould befpirituall and true: fpirituall, both in companion of the bloudy facrifice that went before, & for that the confecraticn ofChrifts holy body in this facrifice, is mads by fpeciall workeand operation of the holy Ghofl: ; true alfo and in truth^it may iuPdy be (aid to bee , for that yt is the fullfiiling ; of all^ precedent facrifices, and the truth cf all for- mer figures. 134 ^ revieuf of ten fuhlike Matth.i4. 42. There enfue the places of Saint Matheuf^ Marks, S. Luke, and S. Paul about the inftitu^ C#Mi. tion and firfl: ceJebration,of this vnbloudy fa- crificeof Chrift in his laft fuppcr, where yf we admitcthat, which all the circumftances of the places themfelues do plainly inlinuate or rather inforce • the continuall expofition and tradition of the auncientChifrch doth teach vs,towitt, thatChnft our Sauiour hauinge confecrated his facred body,did offer the lame vnto his Father as a moft gratefuU facrifice in his laft fupper • then muft yt follow , thac the words hoc facite in meam cmmemorationenf^ do this in remembrance of me,implyed a pre- cept not only of receauinge and communica- tinge the body of Chrift, but to ofFeryp the fclfe fame alfb to God in facrifice,afccr the ex- ample of Chrift himfelfe-, which is that wc call the facrifice of the malle, &c to proue thac the ficri*^^ ch' Apoftles vnderftood thefe word$(I meane, ficc by ^ do this in remembrance of me) fo- and in this fenle, chriiis not only the moft ancient Father5,as hath byn tion!"^^ faid,do teftific the fame, but the ancient litur- c;iesorrituaIlsalfo of the Apoftles and their Ichollers, as namely of S. lames, S. Clement.^nA S, Dionyfim Areopapta, do make the matter ma- nifeftjConccrningthe Apoftles praftifcin this behalfc , to witt, that they did offer vp this Chriftian externall facrifice in all places of the world, where they liued, and that from them the Church tooke the fame precept and vfc, accordinge to the teflimony of old Iren^iu Bi- ihopp 6c Mat tyrj that liued aboue t joo.yeares gone, whofe words are: Eumqul excreaturapx- ^^'j^* nis ejl, dccef it, & gratias egit, dictns'^ Hoc eft cor- ta/.^Cl^* pus mcnmt^&cdlicemfimiliter^quiejiex ea creatu-- HA qud efi fecundum nos fuum fmguinetn confejfus ejl, & HQui tejldtnenti nouamdocuitoblitmem, quam Ec^ £lefi4 db Apofiolis acafiens, in vmuerfemmdooffert l>€9. Chrilt tooke that bread which was a *» creature and gaue thanks fayinge: This is my >» My*y and that cupp orwyne in like manner, » which accordinge to vs , is of a creature , he »3 confeffeth to be his bloud, and heerby taught a new oblation of the new Teftament, which the Church reccauinge from the Apoftles, doth offer the fame to Cod ^ throughout the whole worlds 45. Heere nowjire touched all the points that might be doubted of by fedarycs,to wit, that this bread and wine being lirft creatures, are confelTed by Chrift, after con fecration, to be his body and bloud: fecondly that this was notonlyaninftitutionof the Sacrament, and place of communion, but of a new obb.tion & facrilice fo/7hc'*' for the tyme of the new Tcftamcnt : thirdly dayiy r». that yt was not only to be offered once and in one place , as Chrifts bloudy facrificc was vpon the Croffc , but throughout the whole World by the whole Church. And fourthly that this manner of oblation was taught the Apoftles by Chrift himfelfe, andbythemde- liuered to the faid Church. What can be fpo- kcn more clcerly or diftinAly by fo ancient a wittneffe ? ncyther can hcreriks heere haue 5^ny refuge to inwrnall or inuiftble facriilces of A imtw of ten puhtik§ the mynd, or to vnpropcr cxternall facriffcef of thankefgeuinge , almefdeeds, andtlielikej, for that they are many , and were before alfa lawfull vnder the law ofMojffes, as often hath byn noted, & heere is faid to be taught a new particular s^nd Angular oblation of the new Tcftament , in fteed of all the facrihces of the ould Tcftament, which hen^f^tu confirmeth prefently in the next w^ords af ter^ by the pro- phecye of MMdchje before mentioned fayinge: ^nn,m. MjtUchi/u ficpY(cft^nipcaHit,&c. Malachy the Pro- phetdid fo foretell vs, (that this new (aerifies and oblation of the new Teftamcnt, Ihould J, thusbeinftitutcd by Chrift, and frequented 5j by the Church ) when he faid to the lewiili Priefts, Ihauenowillorlikingein yow, &c. Manlfeflipme fignificans^ quoniam prior quidem popi-r lui cejfauit offerre Dco-^ omniMtm loco facrijicium o/V fertur Deo , & hoc purum in gentihm molt mani- feftly fignifyinge , that the former lewiih people ( oeing reieifted) haueceafed to offer facrifice vnto God^ but that amonge the gen- t\\h (towitc, Chriftians conuertedoftbcm) a pure (acriffcc is offered in euery place of the world, that is to fay, without rcfped of any certaync place, as the lewillifacrifices were, 44« With SJrenam Bilbop and Martyr,con- ^urrcth in the fameage.and fomcwhat before him, S, luftinui philofophcr and Martyr, who ipeakinge of the felfe fame thinge, and of th^ le vves reprobation, and of the facrifice of the Jiiew Teftament ordayned by Chrift inplace (herofjWriteth thus in his dialogue^inci ruled, Triphon l)lJl^ut4tion$, about 2eUgm. Chaf.i. Tn|?l;o« again ft the (aid lewes: A nemine Demiufih. w hofim accipn, nift afacerdotibm [uis, &c. God doth ^''^^^ accept holis and facrificeof none , but of his Prieftsj wherfore he preuenting all thofe that $9 do offer fugh fachfice vnto him in Chnfts name, as lefus Chrift hath deliucred to be » made in the Eucharift of bread and wyne , & n arc made by Chriftians in euery place , doth 5, tcliify that they are gratefull vnto him: but,, your facrifices (0 I e vves) he doth rcie(^t. Thus he. And ihefe two teftimonyes, of two fo fa- mous Martyrs and D odors, are fufficient for witcneiles of the lirft and next age after the Apoitlcsj to declare what the faid Apoftlcs both taught and praftiftd in this point ofpu^ biike facnnce, and what the Church of that time vnderftood Chrift himfelfe to haue done in that behalfe5though I might adioyne other ^^ ^^^^^^ foure teftimonyes more auncient yet then ^poft.t,^. thefe; which are S. * Clement, fchoJler to S.Pe- ter S.^ Dtonyfm AYCofagita^ichoWttio S.Paul^ hUcEecU S. c MmUll Biiliop of Burdeattx, and S. ^ Alexan f derBiihop and Martyr of Rome^AlI which do ^ttrdieiaL no lelTe cicerly then thefe two, declare vnto ^"^y. ^)^. vs the do($lrine and pra(5lice of their tymes tret.adOf" vnder the Apofties. 4^. But for auoydinge prolixity I muft pafl© them ouer, aduertifinge only by the way, that where in the A (fts of the Apoftles yt iswryt- ten by S.Luke, cocerningthe mifsion of S.Faul, and Barnahy to preach, Minijirantibmiliu Dotmne, ^^^^ ieiunantthus, dixit Sfir'ttm Saniius, Jegregate mihi Apoftic* S4ulum & Barnabam, &(. Tiacy mimftring vnto f^J^^^^' Cod, t;8 A revxeuf §f ten puhUke Go J, andfaftinge (towicc, Barnabas, Sjim9fi, Lucius, Manahenmd Saul, that were Prophctts and Dodors faith S.Luke) the holy Ghoft faid to them, take out for me Saul, and Barnabas, to the workcthatlhauechofenthcmfor. Now as concerning the myniftery which thefe men were performmg, when the holy Ghoft fpake tUctif^ vnto them , the Grcckc word vftd by S. Luke, l0Hnttft. ifnporteth rather facrificing^and fo doth Eraf- i»/«trannatcyt , who was no euill Grecian, norof fmall crcditt with ouraducrfaryesiand of that word proceed the names before mcn- cyoned o'l Liturgy, conteyninge the order of this facrifice in tlie Chriftian Church. 46. But howfoeucr this bee , yow haue heard the iudgement of the firft age, after the Apoftles.by two wittneflfes of h'ngular credit, S. luflinus, and S. Jrenam : for the fecond may fpeake S, Cj^rian co the fame effect : lefm Cfert- c^lji't^ fius Dominm & Dem nojter , ipfe eft fummm facerdos Dei P^nis^ cJr facrijicium Deo Patrt ipfe prmusobtU" lit J & hoc fieri tnfui commemoYa^tone pr^ceptt. lefiis Chrift our Lord and our God, he is the high „ Pneftof God the Father, and he offered vp 5, firft of all to God his Father a facrifice, and „ commaundcd this to bcdone in his commc-- „ moration. Lo he commaundeth vs to facrihce as he did facrifice. Andforthe third agcafter the Aportlcs S.Ambrofi may only fpeake: Ponti- ^mbrof. ^Qp^f iiig ^ ( faith he 1 qui ohtultt hoftiam nos ini/Tio. muniantetn-^ ipfam o^erimus nunc , qudt tunc eblatd ^Hei^r. quidem , C9nfumi mn p9teft. is our high Prieft 9, that offered the hoft which made vsdeane, Dijputations, about Tyeligion. Chap, i . 139 , the felfe fame do we offer now , which then wasofFerred , and cannot be confumed. Be- hould that wc offer the felfe fame hoft that Chrift offcrcd^and cannot be confumed. And for the fourth age S. Aufien may ftandforail, who anfwering Fauftm the M4nichee,th:it obie- d[td, that he and other Catholiks did offer fa- crifice vnto Martyrs^ the holy Father denyeth ytfayinge: Sacnficare martyribtu dixi, &c. I (aid ^u£,u^ that we did not facrihce vnto Martyrs, but ^^^^^^^^f* I faid notjbut that we facrififed to God in the mcmoryes of Martyrs, which we moflfre- ,^ quentlyvferodo, after that only rite, which „ God in the manifeftation of the new Tefta- ment hath comaunded vs to facrifice vn- 33 to him. 47. By all which teftimonyesis euidentjthat the Church of Cod, in the lirft foure ages af- ter the Apoftles, did both offer an externall facrifice, which was the fame that Chrifl had offered before , and this after a peculiar rite infinuated by Chrifl to the Apofties , and dc- liuered by them to their pofterity ( which pe- culiar rite is more expreffed in the liturgies before mentioned) and that all this is done by the authority and example of Chrifl himlelfe in his laft fuppcr , and by tradition of the Apofties 3 which is inough to (ettle any pious mans confcicnce. Now then thirdly, wheras I iTiould by order pafTe to the confideration of ancient Fathers fayings & teflimonyes about this matter, th«y rre fo many and copious , as I Ihould be prolix and weary t0 the reader in produ-* ©iuers 14.0 ^ A revUtv of ten puhtike producing fo many as may bealieaged,no out anicie or myftery of our faith, benig fo often handled or inculcated by them , as this of the Church facrifice. For better comprehendinge |ifads*of ^^^^of> nWJ, asforthemyftery of the realt prefcnce before, heere note only vnto thee cer- raynegenerall heads, whervnro the faid Fa- thers teftimonyes may be reduced^as firfl:,thac cuery w here in their wry tings , fpeakinge of this oblation made in the mafle , they vfe the words fdcrtficifim, hcpa^vidima, efferre, immlare^ facYJpc^re , all whicii are words that pecuharly and properly do fignify facrilkcjwhich is ccr- taync that the faid Fathers would neucr fo comonly haue vfed> no more then the Prote- ftants do vfc them now of their fuppcrjifthcy had meant no ocherwife then the Protellants do for other Sacraments- as Baptifme for ex- ample they do not call cyther facriiiCCjhoftjOr viiiime, nor that the ad of Baptlun^e, is ofTer- ringe> immolation or facrifice, astiicydothe ad of celebratinge mailc, wherof yow may read all the Fathers generally , as S, Hyppolitus Marryt^ Orat, de Amichrifl, S.Ajnhrofe in pfalw.i^. J^tffen.orat. de re furred, Chvyfojl. in uCor. & hem, 17. i»t epift. ad Hebraos, Cpill. lib, de adorat. Au^. ii.qudjl. tiung. q.^.^U^. de Trtmt.capA^. 2, 48. 1 he fecond head isofthofe autnontyes,^ that do compare this Chriftian facritice with the facrifices oi- th^ Ievves,afilrmipg: the one to be ofthe flt (h of bcaih & fportcd, the other ofthepiire, and immaculate flclTi of Chrifi:, which they would neuer haue done in like manner^ T>}Jpmatms, ahout Reltgm. Chdf. t. %4.t manner, yf they had not meant properly of true externall facrifices, offered by Chriftians in the new law, wherof y o w may fee at large TemllUn lib. c^ntr. ludaBs up. u lujlm. in Trifh. €hryf$ji. in ffalm. 95. Cyprian. Ub.de vnitat. Ecclefi^ Ambrof in cap. u Lucdt, NasLianz,. oraUi. dep^fchau Aug. hb.xj. de CiutUt. Deicap. 20. S. Leo,[em. de p^fwn. and many others* 49. The third head is of thofe aiithorityes, that compare rhisdayly facriticeof the Chri- ftian Church, offered in euery place through-* out the world, with the only facrifice of Chrift , offered once for all vpon the Croffe, wherin for differece fake they vfe the wordf^ eYumtum & incruentum facrijicium, that is bloudy and vnbloudy (acriricejfor diftinguifhingc th^ siiancr of the oblatio, the one vpon the Croffe, tii€ other vpon many Aitars in the Church at once, tili the worlds end, otherwife holding the thing it felfe offered to be the very fame in th' one & other (acrifice. See S.ChryfoJlMm^i^m in I. Cer. &hm. ad 2. Tim. Cyprian, lib. 2. ep. Ambrof, in pfilm^^S. Niffen.orat.u derefurreU. Aug* lib. 5. cont. Donatifi, capi 19. &lib. 20. eentr. Vaufl. up.iu Ifichimin Leuit. cap. 8. and others. 50. The fourth head isofthofe^thacafKrnie this our dayly (acrifice to be propitiatory both for the Hue and dead , as well thofc that are abfenr as prefent^and that for both thele forts of people yc ought, and wasaccuftomed to be offered in their daycs , which doth euidently proueyt a true facrifice, for that a Sacrament only doth profitt only thofethat do commu- I4> A review of ten puUihe nicateand receaue the fame, and noProtfi^ ftanc will fay that their communion is oife* red vp for thofe that are abfent, quickc or dead> as the ancient Fathers do euery where fay J that our hoft & Eacharift was offered vp in their dayes , and conlequently they held yc not only for a Sacrament, but alfo for a facri- fice^wherof yow may fee SXhr^fefiome hom^j^^ ad Fop. Antiochen-j where he faith yt was offered for Billiopps and Goucrnours of the Church;^ & hom.ji.in Matth. for ficke men, & lih.6.deSa^ cerdomfox the dead. For which cffed fee S.Au* gufitne lib.ii. de ciuit. caf. i.&in Enchirid, cap.no. &Ub. p. Confefi, cap* 12 . where he profeffeth to haue offered facrifice of themaffe for his mo- ther S. Monica. 51. The lifch head is of thofe places wheriii the Fathers do vfe the words Alur, Vriefls and TrieJlhoodyZS proper>pecuIiar>and appropriated to true facrifices-5For as the Proteftants of our tymes do not vfe thefe words, for that they hould not their fupper to be a facrifice,but ra- ther do fly them, though neuer fo much vfed by the faid Fathers, and in place therof do vfe the words, table y mlmfier, m^mfirjf, and other fuch like of their new Religion ^ foneyther would the Fathers haue vfed the fame words; yf they had had the fame meaning that Prote- ftants haue J For that well knew the faid Fa- thers how to expreffe their meaninge in pro- per words , and therfore when they fay that to^ut.u. Altars amonge Chriftians, are, fedes^corpom Chrijli the featsof the body of Chrift, and that in Dijfutdthm, dim :Rell^Un. Chap.f^ 14| in their dayes Chriftians did ^adgemculare aiu htMutn Dei, kncledowne at the Altars of God, &qu€ci ^ obfcuUbantur altaria , that they ki fled the Alv^-^'^^'^'^- tarsjandthattheofficeof ChriftianPrieftsis to facrifice vpon the faid Altars, yt is cuidcnt what they meant,to him that will vnderftand them , whcrof more may be read in S. CyprUn Ub.uep. ^.Eufek Ub. i , dewonfir. Euang.caf. 6 . Athan. in vitaAnWh J^az.ianZn orat. in Gorgon. Isltpn. Ub ds baftifmo. Chrjfoft. how. ^y^^dd Fop. Antiock & horn. 20. in 2. CorMieron. Ub. com. Viplant. diaLcont0 Lucifer. Aug. /it. 8. cap. vlt. and others. 52. The fixt confideration out of the Fathers, 6^ may be their lyturgyes or forme of diuine fer- uice or mallle, for offeringe of this facrifice in thofe dayes, of which fort of liturgyes there are extant vnto this day diuers, as that of S. lames the Apoftle, S.Clement fchollerand fucceflbr of S.feter, of 5. JS^ji/i, S. Chrjfoftome, S. Ambrofe, which albeit in all particular forme of prayer, do not agree with our forme and canon of mafle at this day,yct in the fubftancc of the facrifice they do , as alfo in many other particular circumftances, vfinge the words of Mation , facrijice, yl£lime, fignes, fwgings, blefmgs^ ekuations, and other fuch rites which Prote- ftants cannot abide. And for the cannon, and forme of our malTe , which is vied at this day in the Latyn Church, moft parts thcrofare to be feene in S. Ambrofe his books de Sacramentii, and the whole order as now yt is bath endu- red without alteration from S. Gregnji tht firft downew^ard^ whcrpf yow rnay kQAlcuinm, ^Anuld^ 144 ^ revietP of ten publike AmdU7im,VV^ljridui,^nd other ancient author* in their books de dtuinis offictjs. Luthcr^^ 53, By all which gcneraJI heads, yew may aiiFathers caiily fee the mul titudc of teftimonyes, that abo^^ may be alleagcd out of the Fathers, yf we ^ ' llioLiId profecuce euery one of thefe in parri- cularj& how great reafon Martjin Luther had to except againft them all,or rather to dety them all, when ririt he bcga to write againft this fa- Lth. di criiice,Hi<; nen mmamur (faith he) fi cUmitant Fa- ^tfro^Ji p;;5^,Ea7r^-ened, yf the vfe thcrof had not byn prefcri- b^d and left by Ghriftand his Apoftles them- felues. For what men or people would haue attempted tobegin, or bring in fo great a mat- K m i A revieip of tenfuhUke terasthis? ox who would hauereceaued yi without oppofition^yfythad not byn eftabli-^ (5, llied eucn from the beginninge ? I adde alfo another cofidcration of no litclc importance^ which isjthatyf Chrillhad left his Church & people without a particular extcrnall facrifice, wherby they lliould be diftinguiihed from all other people^chc Chriftian Church vnder the law of grace , iTiouid be inferiour to the Church of the patriarks vnder the law of na- turcjand vnto the Prophetts vnder the law of"^ Moyies: tor that both of thofe Churches and people had an externall dayly facrifice, wher- by to honour God> befides the internall facri- fice of their mynd: ney ther can y t be faid,that Chrirts owne facritice on the GrolTe, once of- fered for all , is this dayly facrifice apprehen-* ded by vs in faith , for that they alfo beleeued^ in him , and their facrifices were acceptable^ on!} by faith in him to come. And therfore as Chrifts one facrifice then to come, was no im-, pediment, why their dayly facrifices, which tooke their valour from this one of Chrift,« lliould not be dayly offered amonge them : fd * the fame facrifice of Chrift vpon the Crofie, " being now paft, fliould not take away our dayly facrifices offered in remembrance ther- of, and for the applying of the infinite valour of that one facrifice vnto vs, from which this! otherdayly facrifice taketh his fijfficiency. • J, 55. Furthermore the very outward forme- of all Chriftian Churches, there buildinge with CrolTes, Alcar, IJes, and the like, the foun- iToundinge or monafteryes, Chappcils. orato- ryes>the ceremonyes in foundinge them,rheir ftatutes for fayinge of mafles ror the dcad> which were in Britany both before our na- tion was conuerted, and much more afierj the whole Canon of ourLatyn mafTe- booke which is graunted by our aduerfaryes, and euidently proued to haue byn 3 asyrisnow^ forabouea thoufand yeares togeather, and brought in by S, Augufl'me out ^xk k^o^h: All thefe things I fay, do Ihew wherhet this were a marcer to be called in qtieftion by a few li- bercyne Priefts, and auaritjous noble men, &: to be banifhed thcrealme vpon a foddayne> vnder the name of a child Kinge, thatknaw not what yt meant > as yt was in K. Edfpards dayes in our miferable countrey. 56. Moreouer yf yow ponder with your ^ ielfe, what manner of Priefts they were for Iife> learninge^and verrue that acknowledged themielues to haue offered facriSces vpon Al- tars in their dayes , as S. Iren^m, Cyprian, S. Ambrofe, S. Chrjfoflomey S. AftgufUne, S. Gregory. and others of the firft ages, jea and for thefe later ages , fince Berengmm mooucd firll the igueftion about the r^43pre'/e«care them with the fitft mat rycd Priefts and Apoftata friarS) that we^c the ftrftimpu^ners Ki . of 148 A miiw of ten puhliJ^ of this facrifice in England or round abou? vs, welliallfindagreac difFcrenec. And thca yf we confider,by whacgood fpirittormo- tiuc Luther began the fir It contradidion in Germany y which was by the diuclls o wne per- fuafion and perfonall appearance vnto him, and difputinge againft yt ( for y t feenied that he efteemed fo much both of the man and the matter, that he would not fend an Embafla- dour vnto him, as he did foone after to Zuin^ flm, for impugninge the reaUfrefence, but go himfelfe in proper perfon ) and that all this !s confeflcd by thcmfelues , and teftifyed by their o wne wrytings: 411 this,I ray,being laid togeather , may ftrengchen him that hath any faith at all, to ftand confltant in the beleefe of theCatholike Church concerninge thefe ar- ticles: For y f there be any certainty or ground in Chriftian Religion atall , ytmuftnceds be in thefe, wherin aathority,learninge,antiqui- ty, confcntj continuance, vniueriality, mi- racles, and a!! other forts of theologicall argu- ments, both diuinc & humane, do concurre^j andnothingeat all with the impugnerS) but only felfc'Will , pafsion , and malitieus obfti- nacy, as yow will better fee afterward, when yow come to examine their obie^lionsv 57. Furthermore yt is^ to be pondered, what miferablc men they Were that fir ft in our daycs, againft the whole army of Gods Church did prefumeto impugne thisblefled facrificejvpon fuch fimple and fond reafons as before yowhaue heard,to witt Ltnher in Ger- many^ Di^utatiens, about Relipon. Chap. 2. 14^ many, vpon the motiuc laid do wne vnto hirn by the diuell, in his difputation with hini^ re- corded by himfelfe in his wry tings, and Nire- la6 Ridley in England, vpori cenayne places of the fcripture, and cert ajne tefihmnjfes of Fathers ( to vfc his owne words) which made nothinge at all for his purpofe , as aft^i: rnoft clecrly lhall he Ihewed in due place>and we may eafily gheiie by that, which hath bynalleaged before out of fcripturesand Fathers : for that fcriptures cannot be contrary to fcriptures ; nor arc Fa- thers prefiimed to impugne Fathers, in Co great a point of faith as this is, 58. Wherfore miferable & twife miferabic were thefe men , that firft vpon To fmall grounds aduentured to make fo fatall a bre- ach in Gods Church - and thrift miferabic were other, who vpon thefe mens creditts, ranne to adqcnture both body and foule euer- laftinglyj inpurfuite of this breach and con- tradidion bcgunne , as were the moft of Tox his phantafticall Martyrs of the ruder and vn- learned fort, who in all their examinations & anfwers, were moft blafbhenious in defiance and dsteftation ofthis bleJ]id'Sacramem,zs yow hauefeenein their hiftoryes^ and therbydid well fhew that they were gouerned by his fpiritt, that aboue all honours doth enuy this that is done to almighty God , as the higheft, and moft plealing to his diuine Maieftieof all others. And Co much for this poin4:. A revieiP of ten fuhlike CERTAYNE OB^ SERVATipNS To he noted ^ for better amfreringe of bmticallCauillations ^againjh thefe articles of the blef^ fed Sacrament. Chap. I I !• H\ V I N G exhibited a taft in the former , Chapterjofihe manygrt^at andfubftan- tiaii grounds , which Cathohke men haue to ftand vpon, in thefc high and diuine miftei y es or Chnlts facredbodyin the Sacrament and lacritice , and fhewcd in Hke manner that the faithleiTe and inndions Sacramentary, that wrangelcth againft the fame, hath no one piainc place indeed, eyther of fcriptures or Faihers for his purpofe, but only certayne ob- iedions^founded for the moft part vpon fenfe and humayne rcafon againft faith , and aun- fvvcred ordinarily by our fchoolemen them- ielues that firllobiedcd the fame, and out of whofebodksthcheretiksftole them'i I haue thought yt beft for more perfpicuityes fake,& for helpinge their vnderftanding, that are not exercifed in matters aboue fenfe,to fet downs a few obfcruations in this very bcginninge^^ yvherby Di^titatms, ahut 'Religion. iff wherby great light will grow to the reader^ for difcouering whatfofeuer iliall after be trea- ted about this matter. But yet before I enter „ 1 t r ♦ i -T T 1' things ai- mto the obleruations themielues> 1 would ugenciyta haue the reader confider two things; firftthe denoted, inequality betweene our aduerfaryes and vs in this cafe, for that their arguments againft theft myfteryes 5 being founded almoft all in the appearance of comon fenfe (ashathbyn {aid) the vnlearned reader is capable of the obiedion, but not of the folution 5 which muft be taken from matters aboue fenfc, as prelently yow fbali fee. z. The fecond point is , that yf any of tha old heretiks , or heathen philofophers fhould rifeagaineatthis day, and bringe forth their arguments of fenfc & humaincreafon againft fuch articles of our faith, as in ould ty me they did impugne/or both improbable and impoC- fibleinnature J as namely the creation of the world out of nothingej three diftin6fc perfons of the bleffed Trinity in one, & the felfe fame fubfiance ^ two diftin (3: natures in one perfou conioyned by the incarnation of Chriftj the refurreftion of ourputrifyed bodyes, the felfe famefubftance,qualityes5quantityeSv& other accidents^ Be fuch hke points: Againft which, I f!iy, yf ould philofophers, & heretiks fiiould come forth againe in our dayes , and propofe fuch ar^^uments as in their dayes they did, which feeme inuincibleand vnanfwerable to common fenfe and humaincreafon ^ do yow not chinkc that they fhould haue infinite K 4 pcopte ^5 2 4 fevuw of ten fubUks people both men and weomen to follow them, efpcciailyyf they were countenance^ out with the authority of a potent Prince and Kingdome , and fufFered to fpeake their will, as our men were, that firft impugned the reaU frefence, and facrificein England and yet as the auncienc Fathers inthe\r ^ymes, did not abandone thefe articles of faixh for thofe dif- ficultyes, or appearance pfimpofiibilityes^no nor the common Cacholike people them- felues, that could not reach to the vnderftan- dinge therofjfo muft not we do now, though \ve could not aunfwere in reafon the aduerfan- ryes arguments, which yet by theenfuingc obferuacions, yow will eafily be able to do^ And this for an entrance j now to the obftr^ uations themfelues. FirH Obferuatiort. That we are not in this myfieiy to fohtv our fenfe, or Imagination. 4» ^» Jo The firft obferuation is taken out of the ancient Fathers wrytings, who treatingeof this myftery of Chrifts being in the Sacra- ment, do cxpreflfely warne vs to beware, that we iudge not of the matter according to (cnfe c^rttt. or humayne imagination : So faith 5. Cyy/// B,. Tt"^'Z^ ofHw«f^/f»i,whofe words are: Quamuis[enfu$ JL^mT hoctihifuggerat, &c. Albeit externall fenfe do fuggeft vnto thee, tfgat this Sacrament is bread 35 ^ad wyne j ^^i Un faith confirme thee to the coatrary^ pljputatiem, about ^elighn. Chaf.'^. tf^ contrary • neycher do thou iudge by the tali, ^, knowingemoil cercaineiy, that this bread, „ which fecnicth fo vnto vs, is not bread in ,^ deed, iiQtwithftandinge the raft doth iudge it to be bread-jbut is the body of Chrift-and that the wyne,which fo appeareth to our fight, & by the fenfe of our talt, is iudgcd to be wyne, yetisit not wync, but the bloud of Chrift. Thus hec, necre thirteene hundred yeares gone. And the like aduertifment giueth in the fame matter 5. Ambrofe , fomewhat after him,whohauingdetermined moft cleerly the truth of the reali prefencCy fayinge: Tanis ifie, pmis -^^^^ ''4* ffi ante verba SacrAmentorum, vbiacceptit confecra- tto, defamfitcoYfus Chrifii : This bread is bread> before the w ords of the Sacrament be vttcred (bj thePriefi) but when theconfecration is ad- ded thervnto , the bread is made the body of Chrift: He frameth an obicdion of the fenfes |n thefc words: Forte dicas, almd video, &c. Per- ^^hrMM haps thou wil t fiy, I fee another thinge (to win ^I^^J'" hread , and, not the body of Chrijl ) and how then doft thou fay that I receaue his body ? To^^ which queftion^, ilw^&r^/^aunfwereth at large alleaginge many other myracles, wherein our lenfes are deccaued. 4. The like obferuation hath S. Chry[ofiome in fundry placcsjtalkinge of this myftery:Cr^- damm ((aith he) vbique De0, necreptgmmm ei, etfi fenfui & cogitatmi nofltd abfurdum ejje videatur.&c. u^th!* jLet vsaiwayesgiue creditc to God, nor let vs „ refift him^albeit the thing feeme abfurd to our fenfe and cogitation , for our fenfe may cafily ,p 1^4 ^ revietp of ten publike bedeceauedj and ckenorc tor ib much as he hath faid j This is my body, lecc vs not doubc „ therofatall, Diu beieeuehim. Saint Epi^hanm ftandech a!fo vpon the fame adfiertifmenr, rc- prehendinge them greuoully, yea condem- ninge them chat difpiue and frame their argu-r ments, from the ttllimony of their fenfes a- gainlt the reallprefence , whofe words he brin- Epiph. m geth in thus: Et vidmus. fay lhty\Hod non aqiiale tZ7!: ^fi> We do fee with our eyes, that this d^uf^. which we do rcceaue in this Sacramet(1ttf «^/7f, M tb^fcoy?)isneytherequallnor like the image of 5> Chrirtinfleih, nor to his inuifibic deity , nor 99 to the formes or lineaments of his body,foryc is of a round forme, So they • but S. Epi- Epiphr iM. pfj^^ji^ his conc-ufion is againrt them thus: qtd non credit ejfe if [urn verum, excidtt agrma &Jalute'^ „ he that doth not beleeuc Chrilt himfelfeto be truly there (vnderthe round feme oj bread that is giuen) is fallen both from Gods grace, and his 5> owne (aiuation. And finally not to enlarge my felfe fur- ther in this behalfe, 'Eufebius Em;jfenus, or who els was the author of chat excellent fermon de eorpore Domini , concurrcth alfo irj this note a-^ gainft the iudgement of our fenfes fayinr^^e- Wufcb'tus Vere vnica &perfeUa hofiiafide ajlimanda.non jpccie, T'f/p^' exteYu)ri cenfenda vifu-^ This only and perfecft fihMt. hoft is truly to be efteemed by faith , and not „ tobciudgedby thccxtcrnall iTiapeor veiwof „ oureycs. Thu^hee- v;herof5. C&r;/i/?t?w^gi- ,> ueth an example when he wryteth of this my- „ fiery: O c^m m9d^ dtcm.vehm formm,& jpcciem Dtjputations, dout Kelipon. Chap. 5, 155 fim.vellem vejilmentaiffa.vellem cake amenta rider e. chryfofi. 0 how many are th^vt (videlicet oi the fimpler ^^^^-n' fore 5 and not Co grounded in faith ) that fay, -w^wfe, 1 would I could fee Chrift, his forme & lliape >t in the Sacrament 5 I would fee his apparell, 5> I would fee his veryflioocs. Thus faid fome in thofe dayesjvpon fimplicity perhappesj but fo fay many more in our dayes, vpon hercfie and infidelity. And truly yfwcconfidermoft of the arguments of all Fox his artificers, or weomen Martyrs, they were fuch as thefe heere mentioned, & deryded by S.ChrjfoJloffie^ and vpon thefe arguments went they to the ftake : Let your God in the Sacrament ( (aid Alice Driuer and her fellowes) fjedd fome bloud, and we Will beleeue. The like cryed out many other limple & rude people; we fee bread, we fee wjns^ we fee around ca\e , we mllneuer yeleeue jft to be Gody except we fee him workf fome miracle. What would S. Chrjfojlome (thinkeyow) and other Fathers before mentioned haue faid'totheie people , yf they had heard them found out fuch blafphcmouscryes of infidelity, and vn- belecfe in their dayes ? And fo much for this firft obferuation, which is vfually to be found in all auncient Fathers wrytinges. A review of ten fubUk? The fecond Obferuation. That not onl/fenfe and common Iwaglnation, hutnej^ ther philofophkaU reason u neceffary to he followed in the fe mjfieYjes. ^. 2. 4. The fecond obferuatton is much like to the firftj but pafleth fome degrees further,and is taken out of the auncicnc Fathers aduertif- mentsin like manner, towitt, that not only fenfe, and fenftiall imagination is not to be followed in thefe diuine myftcryes, of our Sa- uipurs body- but neyther naturaII,or phiiofo- phicall rcifon it felfc, isallwayes to be fol- lowed, notwithftandinge yt reacheth farrc higher then fen ft can attayne to: which is proued firft by the generall definition of faith, vfedby S.?aul \v\ his epiftlctothe Hebrues, where ytisfaidtobc argumentumrertmmnap^ paremium,An argument or aiTenr of things, that donotappeare by reafon , v;hich yet is more cxphcaced by Saint Gre^ory.whtn he faith: jirfei , vbi humana. ratio prabet experh- ^^^^ mentum • faith hath no meritt, where humane reafon doth yeld a proofe : Saint At^gupne alfo ^^Vuari -^'^^ ^ thepra'ift offaith,yf that which is belee- y3'tn $an. ^^^^^ fccHe , foY what grcut maticY id it, yf that be heleetied, which m etudent? And this is vniuerfally in all points of our faith, the beleefe wherof mufl; not depend of the euidencyof reafon, for then yt Ihould be fcience ( as philofophers tiB^rmc yt) and not faith ^ which faith depen- 1)i^utAtms, about Religien. Chap.'f i^y deth oa the authority, truft and creditt wc giuc to the rcucaler,which is God himfclfe* J. But cfpecially is this to be done in this high myfteryofthe blefled Sacrament of th^ Altar, whieh is not only a myftery, but a mi- racle alfo , and fuch a miracle, as requircth no leffe powerthen thcomnipotency of God to performe the fame: Nec0]f4mmeft (faid S.chry^ chryfoft. ii» foftome to his people of Antioch) myjleriorum difceremtraculumy (fc. It is ncceilary tor ysto u^cb. learnc this myracle of myfteryes , what it is, „ why it was giucn vs, what vtility cometh therwith vnto vs & the like : And againe the fame Father in his bookes of Priefthood, des- cending to treat more in particular one point of this myftery,which isjhow Chrifts body is at one tyme in many places, he cryeth out^ O mttACuluml 0 Dei henignitateml O myracle! chryfifi. pgoodnclTeofGod! and why? quicumfatre^-^'^^s^ furfumfedet, in ilk ipfotemporis articuh omnium ma-- ^'^^'^'^ nibmfetraSfatur, he that fitteth aboue with his Father, in that very in ftan t of tyme is handled by all Priefts hands: And S.Cyprian to the fame ' effed: Panis quern Uominm difctfulis porngehat.mn cyfY.firm ejfigiefednaturamutatm, omnipotentiaverbifaHuseJl ^^^^f caro: The bread which our Lord gauetohis difciplei>(at the laft rupper)being changed not in out Wi»rd ftew (for yt appeareth bread ftill) ' but in nature, by the omnipotcncy of Gods word is made flelli. 8. Thus thought and fpake the ancient Fa- thers of this high myftery, and myracle in the Sacrament. And conforme to this^, they called ijS A renew of ten puhlike vs alwayes from rcafon to faich,trom conten- tion to humble belcefe, when they treated thcrof, for fo wryteth among other auncient JitUrhkt, F^^hers S. Hilary fpeakinge of this marter : nori MiTr^nit^ ejl humane aut [acuU fenfu in Dei rehm loquendum^ >> We muil not talkeof works of Godaccor- 5>diuge to humayne and wordly reafon, 3, touchinge the naturall verity of Chrift in vs ,, (by this Sacrament) that which we affirme p> except we haue learned y t of himfelfe, we'do ,5aifirmethefamefoJini!y, and impioiilly , but /t4». tf. he hath (aid : mj flesh is truly meate , d^c. Vntd whome S, i4w&r^»/if agree in ge, faith of the fame ^mhrj^. myftery: Quid hie qu^ris nature ordinem,(irc. Why t/X''"' ^'^^keft thou heere the order of narure ( tou- » chinga the body of Chrift in the Sacrament) forfomuch as our Lord lefus was borne of J, the Virgin befide the courfe of narure. Heere yo w fee he comparcrh this myftery, and my- racle of Chrifts being in the Sacrament^ with the myracle of his incarnation & myraculous: byrth, dfthe bieffed Virgin. Thever)^fame TnlZrf' iudgemcnt held S, Ephrern equal! in antiquity Dei m'.ni. to S. Ambrofe . Qyd fcrut^ris hifcrutabilia . &t; 2L%T VVhatdoft chou karch after thmges vnfcar- chcablc ? Yf thou examine thefe thinges cu- riouily , thou wilt feeme not to be faithful! ^ but curious: be faithful! and fimple, and Co participate the immaculate body of thy Lord; ^ beleeuinge moft certaynely, that rhou doft" cat the very whole lambe yt felfe, &c. So he. 0. Saint Angufime a-fo in many places doth beat earneftly^againft this ftanding vpon rea* fori Dtjputatms,4h9Ut:Reriom. Chap.f^ i^pf Ton irt| matters of faith, but efpecially in his ^^.^ epillle to VolmUnw, fayinge : Qiidifihi qmfquefa^ ^%utki tllia, &c. The thinges which each man eftee- mech eafy for him to conceaue , though he cannot make them , he is content tobeieeue them>but all that is aboue his capacity he hoi- deth for falfe and feigned. And againe: Si ratio qu that they alfb be myndfull of theirs, to thc,> end that our humayne infirmity do not paffe,> further (in fearch of thcfe myfteryes ) then is » fafe for vs to do. So bleffed S, Augufane. „ to. And finally S. Cyrill Bilhop of Alexandria handlinge thofe words of the faithleffe Ca- pharnaires, loan. 6. Houfcanhe giuehk fieshtobe eaten, &c. reprehenderh greatly fuch curious inquiiuion fayinge ; 'Ntmquam in tamfublimihta rehu* i6o A revtett^ 0f ten pMike ^1^^ ^ rehm ittud (quomodo) m c^gttemui m proferanfm. Iri T$an. ^* fo high matters (as thefi of the Sacrament) Jet 11. vs neuer thinke or alleage this word (quomodoj that is 5 hmjft can be ? And in this manner did the ancient Fathers proceed about this myfte- ry, by way of faith and humble fubmifsion of their iudgements and vnderftandingSjand not by feeding their imagination with probabili- ty of humaync reafon againft faith , as the fe- <9:aryes of our tyme do , yea and placiage Co much conHdcncc therin , as they werecon- tent to dy for the fame (as after yow will fee by experience, when we come to handle their arguments in particular, wherof the greater part (yea almoft all) relyed eyther vpon com- mon fcnfe 5 or fome little lliew of humaync reafon . And thus much for the fecondobfer-i tiacion . Third Ohferuation . That reason is not contrary to faith, but inferior vnto ir. 4- J-* ' if.^/trhe third obfcruation may be , that thoujgh y t is iuftly accoumpted a fault of folly, , pride, herefie.or infidelity by the forefaid Fa- ; tKcrs, to ft^ind too much vpon fenfe & reafon in thefe myfleryes, which do furpaffc them both^yctarc they not contraiy to reafon , for that one truth cannot be contrary to another, and God is the author of both lightes ^ the one a$ a lower , the other as a more high and Eminent ^inen t iighc,fo as,though this lower cannot reach to dUcouer that> which the higher doth difclofe & comprehend y yet is not this cxtin- guilhedor violated by the other, but rather perfeded and ftrengthened. Reafon reacheth only tothinges that are probable in nature, faith afceiidcth to all that is pofsible , and not onlypofsibletoman, buteuentoGod him- felfe^which fo farre exceedeth both the power and vnderftanding of man, as S. Faul fpeaking but of one point only of our faith, which is theioycs ofheauen, (aith that the hart of man could not comprize the ftmc. 12. And yet yf we would enter into the fearch of what is pofsible to Gods power and omnipotency, the fcripture in few words (et- teth yt downe : Non efl impftbile 4pud Deunt Imc^ efHneverkum: there is nothinge impofsible to Cod, which is as much to fay, that all thinges are pofsible. And againe our Sauiour fpeaking to his Father faid : Omnia tihipfthiltA funt: All Mdrc. m» things are to thee pofsible. And yf we would require examples , the creation of the hea- uens, and of all things both in & vnder them, will minifter thoufands, whervnto humayne ireafon cannot reach. And S. lohnBaftlft gaue £„^.|i ! an example to the lewcs , that God of ftones is able to raift vp children to Abraham-^hut this alfo is nothing in refpeft of Gods infinite and incomprehenfible omnipotency , which is aboue the reach of our vnderftandinge. 15. No limitation then at all is to be layd to Gods almighty power, but that he may do L whaF i6z A mlew of ten phlihe whatfoeucr he pleafe > except only one > ac* cordinge to diuines, which is, that the things do not imply contradiction in ytfelfe, as that ^.Th^.i.ytffmld be and not be at ence , which is impof- ^nf^j!'^^' libie, or that ytlliould importany imperfe- iiion or impotency in God, astofynnc, or dye, which are effects rather of want of power^ then of omnipotcncy. And in this do the more learned Proteftants alfo agree in Word with vsjfayinge, that yfyt wereclecrc that God would haue y t {b,or had faid y t^that of bread iTioiild be made his fleilijand that one fubftance fhould be turned into the other, they would graunt that he could do yt by his omnipotency. Thus they fay in, words, to auoid theodiousnoteofinfidelity,or Hmiting Gods power ^ but when they come to the point indeed, they found all their greateft ar- guments vpon the impofsibility thereof, as though God could not do yt. And fo IhaU yow fee afterwards, when we come todil^ cufle their ftrongeft arguments. And their great Grand-father lohn VVtklijfe, or rather vvMinf. VVlcked'beleefe, as FF^//(^^/74WcalIcthhim,did tom.i.cap, abfolutely deny that God was able to do yt, 7J-^&7i' as Thomas VValden teftifieth out of his owne Wrytings. Aud lobn Caluj^n his (choller in this f)ointcaIleth vs madd-men, for that we be- eeue that God was able to make bread his flclli in the Sacrament, and yet not to haue the externall forme , nature and propriety of I')?^'.^.ttt.; flei'h: hif^ne (faith hel quid a Dei potentia pojiuUs, J7. $.14, vt carnemfaciatfmul ejfe, mnejfe carnem? Thou madd- Disputations, ah^uf ReUglon^Ciup. p t ^ liiadd-man how doft thou demaund of the power of God , that he iTiould make flefli to be fleili, and not flefli at one tyme ? But how doth Ol/<;« proue (thinkeyow) that our be- icefeof the Sacrament implyeth thiscontra- dicSfcion offielliandnoflelli? Forfooch (tovfe fais words) for that we graunt, that God can caiu.ihiL make, that tht felfe- fame flesh of Chrijl can occupy di- ner sf laces at once , and that yt be contejned in no cer- tayne place, and thatyt laclzeth both the outipard fliafe 0j flesh and fYoper manner of being, &c. And for be- leeuinge of this he counteth vs madd men^ as yow haue heard , and fo mufi he accoiiut a! fo of necefsity al! thofe holy Fathers before Hientioned, wlio beleeucd the fame niyfteryj as w^e do^ notwithftandinge the outward ap- pearances of impofsibihty 5 for comprehen- duige wheror chey fiedd from fenfe and rea- fon to faith and beieefe. 14. And yet further then this the reader mufI Vnderftand that for fo much as the faid reafon 5ind faithjare not contradidory the one to the other J but more eminent the one aboue the otherj as before hath byn iTiewcd , CathoHks do take vpon them to proue , that no one of thefe difficultyes obie6ted by faithJefle Protc- ftantSjis impofsible^or implieth contradiction in reafon it felfe. as by tbt enfting confideia- tions fliali more particularly be declared- no- tinge only to the reader by the way , that yf the particular intrinfecall natures and effences ofeuery thing w^ere cleerly know^en vnto vs, as they are for example vnto Angells, and h z other t6j^ A review of ten pdUke other Saints, that be in glory, we iTiouId ea^- ly fee what doth imply contradidion to the iaidnatures> and what doch not, but for that God, for our humility and greater meritt, would haue vs not alwayes to fee this • thcr- fore are we forced to ghelle at the fame by way ofdifcourfe andreafon, and by oneex« ample to another, as yowlTiall fee in the cn- fuingc obferuations* Fourth Ohferuation. How a, body may be without an ordinary mmratlfUce. 4. t^* One of the greateft difficulty es therfore obiededbytheaduerfary , is, that a true and natural! organicall body , fuch as Chrifts is confelTedro be in the Sacrament, cannot be without the ordinary dimenfions of a peculiar place, w^hich we deny in Itich fenfe , asheere we ihzll declare. For better vnderftandinge w^hcrof is to be noted, that three wayes a thinge may be in a place , firft naturally and ordinarily by extenlion and commenfuration vnto the faid place, foe as eucty part and par- cell of the thinge placed, do aunfvvcre to each part of the place yt felfs, which manner of being in place^philpfophers do call circmfirip- tiuel}, for that all places of the body fo placed, are fo limited and circumfcribed by the parts of the place , as ncyther that body can be in iny other place , nor that place admitt ano- ther Dijf utatiGns, about Religion. Chap.'^. t6^ therbody> without penerratinge the one of the other, which by ordinary courfc of nature is held for impofsible. t6. Another manner of being in place is more fpiricuall, and hard to conceaue^to witt, when a thing is fo in a place, as the parts ther- of are not extended to che parts of the pi^ce^ as in the former example, but yet thu the whole thing is fo defined and iimited within the compaiie of that whole place afsigned thervnto, as naturally yt cannot be in any other, whileftytis there, as for example, the foule of a man in the body thcrvnto afsigned, is fo contey ned therin , as y t is not elfvvhere^ and yet is it not fo extended by commcnfura- tion, as in the former example , that one part of the foule aunfwereth one part of the body, and another, another part, but the whole foule which is indiuilibie, and hath no parts at all, is wholy in the whole body, and who- ly in euery part and parcell therof , which is a miraculous ftrange being, yf yt be w^eli coniT- deied, & notw^ithftandrngnamrailasallphi- lofophers do graunt, for that the whole {civfe of man is as w^holy (for example) in the nngat and footCj as in the breall: and head, and yet is but one foule in all, and nether manyfoules nor one foule diuided in to pares. And after the fame manner, is an Angel! alfe in a place defi- nitiuely, and not circumfcriptiueiy, that is to fay whoiy in the w hole place,which he occu- pieth, & wholy in euery part therof, without: multiplicatioa or diuifion in himfelfe > or cx;- L3 '~ tcnfioa i66 A review of ten puhlilie tenfion vnto thepircs of the place wherin ye is. But for that the example of thefoulc, is more familiar and euidcnc to our fenleand reafoiijitdoch better exprelTe the matter. And yt isto be noted, that yt doth fomewhat imi- tate the being of God himfelfe wholy, and without diuifion in all parts of the world^and in all creatures therof without limitation, change, or multiplication , hut only yt diife- reth in thisj that the fQule,oran Angell^being both creatures, cannot be euery where,as the creatour naturally is, and he cannot be other- wife ; but yet by hisdiuine power, the faid creatures may be in diners places at once , as after ITialhe Ihevved. 17. Thefc two wayes then of being in a placej as I haue (aid, are naturally the firft cir^ cumfcriptiuely , thefecond definitiuely. But befides thefe two, thercis a third fupernatu- rail, and pofsible to Gods diuine omnipoten- cy, and not repugnant to reafon yt (elfe, as af- ter Ibaibe ihewed^ w^hich is, that one and the felfe-fame thing,may by Gods diuine power, be placed in two di fferent places at once, thac IS to fay, that the felfe-fame foule, as yt is na- turally, wholy, and entyrely in the head , for example, and in thefoote; fo ytrepugneth not to the fame nature or effence of the foule, to be putt in two different bodyes atonce. The like ofan Angell in diuers places,and the fame aho may be held of a natural! body, yf God will haue yt fo , as in the next obferua- Uqn ftalbe proucd . And rhis way os mawer BiJ^utations^ahoHt'ReUgm. Chaf.^, tir ©fbeing in place, for that the Cach. Church doth hould y t to be in the body of our Saui- ourin the Sacrament, is called by diuinesa facramentail being in place, nor for that the true body is not really there, as foine hearinge the word SacramentdUT^xCcd fometymcs by the Fathers andDocftors , do fondly apprehend^ but for that it is there after this ipcciall man- ner, as we haue declared, that is to fay, fo as y c is alfo in other places at the fame ty.me. 18. Now then,thefe three wayes or manners of being in place declared, ytremayneth,that Wc ihew how yt is pofsible to Gods power, and not repugnant to natural] reafon , that a true body, which of his owne nature is in ^^J"^ ^ place, only after the firft manner of circum- be dcfin\! fcriptionandcommenfuration, orcxtenfion, ^i""^y in may^by Gods power,be in place alfo after the ^ fccond and third way, that is definitiuely and Sacramentaliy, without the firft way of com- menfurationandexteniion to a place , And firft heere we fhall lliew the faid pofsibility iii the fecond way , and then of the third in the^ enfuinge obferuation, 19. The only cheefc ground, or reafon obie- d:ed by the heretiks , why it may feeme to re- pugne or imply contradidion, that a true or- ganicall body togeather with his quantity>^ fuch as Chrifts is in the Sacrament, iTiould be - definitiuely without extenfion in place, is, for that yt appeareth contrary to the nature of (quantity to be without fuch extenfion: but this ground Cath, Phiiofophers and diuines '%6t A renew of ten fuhUkf do cafily oucrthrow , fhewinge that three things do agree to quantity or magnitude^ wherof the firft is to be extended in ytfelfc, and to haue diftincSt partes one from the other among themfeliTesjthough not euer vifible,or perceptible by our (cnfej and this firft point is To effentiall to quantity and magnirude , as y t cannot be imagined feparable^io as it remaine quantity , And therfore this is graunted to be in the body of our Sauiour in the Sacramentj, though our fenfc doth not comprehend yt. The (ccond property of quantity or magni- tude, proceedinge from this firft, is ; not only to haue partes diftinit in themfeUies, but to haue them extended alfo in place^accordinge tothecommenfuration therof, as in the firft way of beingin place we haue declared, zo. And for that this fccond condition, or propriety, is later then the former, & enfuecb thcrofjyt is not fo intrinfccall to the nature Sc cflTcncc of quantity, but that by Gods diuinc power y t r^ay be feparated, without deftroy- inge thej f;;^id nature, which ourdiumesdo iTicw by examples of other thinges , where God hath feparated fuch fecondary proprie- tyes, without difloluingc the natures, as hea- tinge, for example>from fyrc in the fornace of| Babylon , which heatingenotwithftandinge^. is as naturall to fyrc, as y t is to quantity to oc-t Cip. x?. cupy place. Chrift alfo in S.Uathetpes ghofpdl^ „ hauingefaid to his difciples, that ytwas.eafier^ for a Came II to pafle through the eye of a> ^3 needle ; then for a rich- man to enter into the* ' King-^, Blj^utations, about 'Relrglen. Chaf.i. ^^9 Kingedomc of heauen , and the Apoftles wondringe therat, and fayinge: who thm can be faued? our Sauiouranfwered, that, that which was impeftble to mm.vvoi popble to S^^/^which yet could not be pofsible^but by feparatinge from the camell all his naturall cxtenfion^and com- menfuration of place. Whcrforc all the aun- cient Fathers vpon this place attributing this tomyracie, doaffirme, that by God? diuinc power yc may be done, to witt, that a camell remayninge in the nature of a camell, may palTe through a needles eye: quidp]ohihet (laith S. Gregory Nazianzen) quo minu^hoc fiat, ft vo^ ^^xi^yiXi luHtas itatulerit? What letteth but that this (of •'•^f. the camell) may be done, yf Gods willbeto haue y t fo? Some Proteftant will ftepp forth^ rw^^* and fay that yt cannot be done , for that the Camell ftould not in that cafe haue quantity and be organicall (for fo they fay of our Saui- ours body in the Sacrament) , but Nazianz.en was of another opinion: And fo may yow read Origen, S. Emome , S. Augujltne , S. Uilary, Matth. i% S, Chy^fojlome, and other Fathers in their com- ^^^rc.\'9. mentaryes, and expofitions vpon this place of S. Mathetpes gh o (p e 1 1 21. The third naturall condition or proprie- ty of quantity (proceedingc of this fecond) is, The third that for fo much as by the forfaid fecond pro- condition priety, the thinge placed doth fill vp the place pd^y^f which yt occupycth, cuery part therofanfwc- quamity, ringe to cuery part of the faid place only , and one place conteyne one body ^ fo as naturally yt is nokfle impofrible for two bodyes to be %yo A review 0/ ten puhlikc in one place , then for one body to be in ma- ny. Yet notwithftanding fupcrnaturallyjand by Godsomnipoccntpower, boththeonc& the otncr may be without implication, or contradidion of the elFcnce, or nature of a true body. The reafon wherof is this: for that this third propriety in quantity or magnitude, flo winge of the fecond, as hath byn (aid, may much more eaiiiy be feparatcd from the ef- fence of the faid quantity and body , then the fecond , and confequentiy the former being feparable, this is much more , wherof our di- umes dogiuediuers moft cuident inftances, loan.io. outoffcnptureytfeife. As for example out of S- lohns GhofpelJjwhcre twifeyt is faid, that he came in to his difciples, when the gates Math. 28. were iTiutt . And in S. Mathemy and S. Marke, whereyt isfliewed, how Chrift after his re- furredion came forth of the fepulchcr , the ftonealfo being ihutt; and in hisnatiuity he came forth of his mothers wombe > without Ephei^. violation of her virginity, andinhisaflenfioit he paiTcd through all the heauens with his e^fad*^^'- »^^^*^"ra(l body • In all which myraculoufeex- luf&i 1- ^mples ( for fo do the ancient Fathers hould M-T^c^' 'Uid affirmethemto be) there muft needs be chryfoi. penetration of bodyes , or two bodyes in one ^mJ^f\'n P'^c^j w hich is no leffe repugnant to the or- c.^^mtnti^' diliary nature of quantity (as hath byn (aid) ^'>i^' then for a body to be without certaine di- menfion of any place. 22. Befides this our diuines do alleagethe examples of the damned foiritSp miraculoufly D ([put at ions, dotit Kelipon. Chap. 3 » 171 tyedtocei tayneiocail places in heli^ and thae which is more niariielovis, that the damned foules being fpirittSj fliould fuffer, and be tor- mented by corporall fire , wherof S. Mgufiine treatech at large iib.n. deCiuit.Deicaf.u 2.& deincep, which is no Jefic againft the ordinary nature and propriety of fpiritts, to fufFer cor- poraily^then yt is againft the nature of a body, to be after a certayne fpirituall manner with- out his iocali dimeniion- by all which we may perceaue 5 that although yc be aboue naturall reafon> that organicall bodyes fliouldwanc* thefe cxternall iocall pofitions • yet is yt not contrary, or contradiftory therynto, but fub- iedto Godsomnipotentpower , when, and where y t pieafeth him to make y t fojand con- fequently yt may be fo alfo in the blefied Sa- crament, without dcftroyinge the nature of a true body> as fondly Proteftants do pretend. 23. And heerby now falleth to the ground, a whole mayne multitude of vayne arguments, brought by Fox his Martyrs^as after yow^liall fee, againft the reall prefencejaliofthemfoun- dedvpon rhis ground, that a true organicall body cannot;by Gods power^^be either with- out locall dimenfions 5 or in moe places then one at once. The firft of which two affertions^ hath now ben improucd , and the fecond flialbe in the n^xt enfuinge obferuation. A revietp of ten fubhke The fifth Ohftruatton. How a hodj may he in dluers places at once, 4 • 5 =• 24. As the weakc faith and learninge of the Sacramcntaryesofourtyme, cannot reach to conceauc , that a body can be without an cx- tcrnallplace^ fo muchlefle, can they compre-* hend, that yt may be by Godsomnipotency •placed in diuers places at once, for that yt fee- meth to their fenfc 3 and humaync reafonto be impofsiblc • but the ancient holy Fathers, more wife and learned then ourfaidSeda- ryes, tooke another courfc in this point, which was to aficribe yt to miracle , and to Cods infinite pow^er, which they could not by reafon arriue vnto: I might cyte diuers Fa-, thers, but one or two iliaii feme for all ; O;;//- chrjfoft. fdclcl (faith S.Chryjcfiome)egQodne$ofGod I that ^'^^ f'*^^^^ ^'^'^'(/^ ^^'^^ rfe m heauen with bis Father, ii conuerfwt at the felfe^fawc iymt, in the ka7ids of all that reccauehim on earth ! And the fame Father, wry tii^ge of the fame facred body of our Saui- our, as yt is a facri'xe> fiiith: Vnum eft hoc fieri" ch^jfofi. jicium,&c, Thu facrijice ii but one, for that othcrwife, tiT* ^Id fc^t^^w/J* yt is offered in many f laces, there fDould he ma- *jotbr^, * ny Chrifts, vvhich is ^li^tjo,. but one, and the felfe-fame Chrtft is irtetmypLue, [ v v hen yt is olFered) hereyt is whole Chnft. and thtye it t> w^ ole Chrift.andyet but one body : for as euery where one body, and not many hodj^s are offered, \q is there alfo but 0ie facnf^ce, ^c. lyi^utauom, dout ReVgien. Chdp. ty^ tn which places you fee S. Chyjfifionu co hould & to affirme, that Chri fts true body , without diuifion or multiplication,is o{fcrcd vp in ma- ny places at once, yea innumerable places, yf Wtb^QQUQ S.GregorjNiJfen whole words are: As Chrtfts dtuinity doth repUnUh the world , andjet U 4^f^Ztt hut one-^fois his bodj confecmted in innumerable p laces ^ andyetishutonehodj. So he. And do yowob- fcrue , that the Father faith not , that Chrirts body is euery where, as his diuinity is, as the Lutherane Vbiquitaryes of Germany, do ab- furdly affirme • but that yt is in innumerable places by confecration, 2^* Well then thefe Fathers denycd not the reallprefmcey^s our Sacramentaryes do/or that they conceauednotthereafon,how one body might be in diners places at once , but m.oun- ted by faith aboue reafon , affcribing the fame to miracle and Gods omnipotency , as yow haue heard : and fo do Catholiksatthisday. Heare the pious fpeach of a great learned man aboue 400. yeares gone . Tow will fay to me ^"l^^^f^ (quoth he), horn can one and the felfe fame body y he dt Saaaml at one tyme in dtuers places. Sec. Do not tnaruayle, he t^^^c^f''^^- that made the place y made the body , and the place for t he body, and the body in theplace-^ and when he orday- ned that one bodyffmld be in one place, yt was as plea-- fed him, andyfhe would, he could haue madeyt other^ wife, &c. Thou haft feene only that which be hath made, and not that which he can make, and heerevpon d&jl maruayli when thou feeft any other thinge , then * that which thou art acctiftomed to fee ; hut do then thinks yfon the m^er^andyt will ceafe to be maruay- t74 ^ review &f ten puhlik? lorn, or at: leafltvayes.yt will not feme to be imedihW Thus he. t6. But our diuines do go yet further, fliew- inge that this is not impofsible , cuen in na- ture yt felfe^for God to performe^as yow may perceaue by that we haue declared in the for- mer obferuation : For yf yt were repugnant and contradictory to the nature of a true bo- dy, to be in diners places at once, this muft be Two dif- eyther in refped of the vnity therof , for that foiucdr iTiould therby be diuided from yr felfe, or mulciplycd in yt felfe, and fo nor be one but many bodyes^or els fecondly yt lliould be im- pofsiblcto be indiuers places, in refped of the quantity, which a true body hath,wherby yt iTiouId be limyced to fome cettayne fpace or placejbut ney ther of thcfe two ditficultyes do impofsibilitatc the matter, as now wcfliall declare. The firft 2/. Nof the firft about vnity, for that God difficulty 4>einga fubilancc indiuifible, is euery where about I 1 ' ri • % vnity. whoiy, and m euery one ot his creatures, and yet remayneth one ftill, nor can be diuided or multiplyed : which is fo wonderfull a confi- x^ug. ep. J. deration, as S^Augt4^\ne faith therof: Mir Aim hoc *^ ^•''"•^ mens humana , & quia non capit , fortajfe non credits Mans mynd doth wonder at this, and for that yt conceaueth yt not, perhaps yt doth not be- leeue y t. Some likeneffe alfo of this admirable being is in an Angell,which though it cannot be euery whereat once, as God is, yet hath yt a wonderfull beinginplacejnotwithftanding, as before hath byn touched , being placed within toijputamnSy nheut teligm. Chap, i7f Within any compalTe or circuite , as for ex- ample in a houle or Church, yt is whoiy in all that fpace^ and whoiy in euery part rherofj 5c yet remayneth one and fimpie without diui- Hon in himfelfe: which example is more eui- dent alfo in our foule , as before we haue de- clared, for that the felfe- fame foule in a body^ when yt is an infant, and when ytisathis full grouth, is wholy in the whole body,& who- iy in euery part thjerof^and yet is y t not multi- plyed therby, nor diuid^d. Whereby is mj^de nianifeft, that yt repugneth nor to the eflence or vnity of any one fubftance, to be in diuers places at once , and this naturally , but much more fupernaturalJye , by the omnipotent power of God. 28. There remayneth then the feconddiffi- The fccoj culty about quantity , or a body indued with ^l^f^^f^^ quantity , how yt is not kttQd therby to be in quautity* two places at once , wherof we haue treated in the former obferuation, fliewinge how aduali locality by circumfcription, being but a fecondary propriety,fo}Io wing and flowing from the nature of quantity , may , by Gods power, be feparated from the fame, fo as the (aid quantity may remayne with her true ef- ftnce, of hauingediftin^ parts in yt felfe, and yet no extenfiue location,or commenfuration of place, in which cafe yt repugneth no more for the feife-fame quantity to be in many places at once, then ytdoth vntoa fpirituall fubftance without quantity, fuch as is an An- gell , or the foule of man j and conftqucntly I the I A review of ten puhlike the fubftancc of Chriits body, togeathcr with the quantity in this manner, may by Gods power be put in many places at once , as wc fee by courfe of nature it felfe , that the fub- fiance of mans foule without quantity, is put in many particular places of a mans body, without diuifion or multiplication, remay- ninge ftill but one only foule, as hath byn de- clared. And this iTiall fuffice for explication of this pofsibility , how yt doth not imply con tradidion , and ther fore is not impofsible to God. i3mersar- 29. Neythcr do our diuines fhew only, that lecued^by ^^^^^ uot impofsiblc in our Sauiours body, iroteftats but further a]fo,that we do beleeue diuers fcard^\hcn Other my fterycs of our faith as hard or harder this. then this:» yea much more impofsible to fenft and rcafon , yf we confider well the difficuK tyes thcrof^ as the creation of the world of npchingC) the myftery of the bleffed Trinity, the beleefc of Chrilis incarnation , our rcfur- region, and the like, for yt is much harder by humayrte reafon and narurall philofophy, to conceauc how the world could be created of nochinge^and how one and the felfe-famc na- ture can be wholy in three reall diftinft per- fons, without diuifion or multiplication in yt felfe 5 and how one perfon can be in two di- ners diftind.natures , as yt is in our Sauiour, and how one, and the felie- fame thing being periled and corrupted , may be raifed againe with the felfe f^mc accidents that periflicd before . Thc{e points I fay, and diuers others whi€ft Vvfeich both we and Protcltants do confefle to be true, arc more harde , and impoisiblein naturall reafon , then yc is to be beleeue that one body is in diuers places at once, go. Furthermore there be certayne familiar Nattarii examples in nature yt felfe, that do refemble indudn| fomewhat the matter , and may iiiduce a man to ihi^ that is notobftinate, and hath any meaneca- biing"?^ pacity to conceaue fomewhat of thepofsibi- chriftcs lity therof, as when a great lookinge-glaflc diuJrs*^ that reprefented but one face vnto yo w when pi*ce5^ yt was whole, being broken into many parts euery part will reprefent wholy the felfc- famefa4ce. Thevoycealfoofhim , that fpea- keth to a threat multitude, thoughyt be but oncmyt fclfe 5 yet Cometh yt wholy to euery mans eares^ which S.AuguJline aileaLgedfora wonderfull thinge towards the prouingcof Cods being wholy euery- where: Omne qued ^ ^ ^- pnat (faith he) & omnibus 1 0tum ep , &ftnguli$tO' sumejl. All that foundeth is heard wholy of all, and wholy of euery particular rtian. And though thfefe examples be not like in euery refped: , yet rhay they feruc for a certayne in- dudion to make vs comprehend the other^ Wherof we now fpealce. p. LaftofailjCatholikediuinesdonotonly > ftew the pofsibiiity of thispoint,that our Sa- ofthc ^ tiioursbody may be in diuers places at once, is alfo that fundry other my fteryes of our faith ^dfik ire beleeucd , df more difficulty then this > yf . ive regard common fenfe and reafon , but do ^n^* iitew alfo out of the fcriptures thcmfelues,that M Cferift 175 A review of ten puhlike Chrift after his alTenfion hath byn m morS then one place at once, asismanifcft by that ^ famous apparition of his to Paul, recorded in the z£ts of the Apoftlcs, when he appeared vnto him in the way neerc to Damafce, inuiro- ned with a great light^and talked with him in fuch fort, as both the light and words were jj^^^^^j 3^ leenc and heard by his compan!ons,and many di txcUa other apparitions to Feter himfelfc, teftified ^^Amfr!' f>y ^4#P^* JJ^nd S. Ambrofe-^ to S. Anthon; zlfo mt. cent, teftitied by S. Gregory y & belidcs diners others ^TX'T recorded by S.Paulinus, loannes Dtacomis, and vita^nton. othcr authcncicall wrytcts, ftom whomc,ex- ^ili'c^it] ceptwe will derogate all credittand autho- PauL tp.di rity , wc may not doubt, but that Chrift rc- uTdI. mayninjrcftillinhcauen (for fo hould both h 2. dtvtu we and Protcftants togeather , that he depar- Gfcg.ciz, fed not from thence) appeared alfoindiuers j^iart, ic. pbccs of the earth to his Saints , and conft- quently his body could be in cjiuers places at once>wherby is broken and dilToIued another ch'^^T 1$ ^"^d^'^" arguments, framed by the Sacra^* in h'-aucrt mentarycs of ourdayes to the fimple people, an.iin aia as though Cliriftsrcall body could not be in afrcradif- the Sacrament/or that yt is in heauen^wher- ^'"^^ as wc affirme, that both may be and (land to- gearher, though m cjfterent manner, for that in heaucn he is circumfcrtptiuelj , and in the Sa- cr^nent facramentAlIj, which tearmes wc haue before declared. '■nil I I ...... ■ , — The fixth Obfermtion I Mow Chriftes body in the Sacrament.maj be now vnder 4gYt4ter forme, now vnder a kffe, md the Uaft, thaimAy be d^fcerned^ 4» 6- 32. By thisalfo which is faid may be cori- ceaued> how thefacred body of our Sauiour, in the S acramct vnder the accidents of bread, is fometymes in a greater vifible quantity,and fometymes in a lefle, accordinge to the exter- nalJ formes and accidents vnder which ytis, yea and in the leaft part & parcell of the con- fecrated hoft > that is perceptible to our fenfe^ for that the faid body being remoued by Gods Omnipotent power from all locall extenfion, it may be vnder a greater or fmaller externall quantity , without alteration of the body yc ftlfc, as we fee in the fouleof man , which is the felfe-iamc in the Icaft part of the body wherin it is, as in the greateft,or in the whole body , yea when the (aid body is changed, or groweth from a leffer to a greater quantity,as in an infant, who after commeth to be a great inan,the felfc-fame foule replcniflieth the one and the other without grouth or diminution in yt (elfe, and fo the body of Chrift in a great hoft or a little , or in any leaft part therof^ when yt is broken , is wholy , and the felfc- [ fame body, with the felfc- fame internal! or- ganicall quantity, which yt had vnder agrcac hoft* And this point that the quantity of i M % fub- i8a , ^ finem of ten phUki ilibftance maybcincreafed ordiminllTieSesc^ Note tViii cernally,in refpcd of place, without altcratiS cxamp ^fj-j^g inward quantity^ or fubftacd,iseuidenc by many examples, virhich wc fee dayly of ra- fefa(5tionahdcondcnfacion • As for example when a gallon of water is put in a gre;it veflb JI ouer the fire,yc comcth by boylinge to fill the whole veflelljthat is capable of many gallons^ and yet as the inward fubftance is nor incrca- fed, fo neyther the quantity in yt felfe; and contrary wife, when the faid water is again^ cooled,it returncth to occupy as fmall a place^^ as yt did at the beginninge, and yet retayneth allwayes the felfe fame both quantity and; fubftance. 3 J. By which example, & many other thatr may be alleaged , fome kind of notice may be gathered vnto our common fenfe and reafon^' how the fubftance of Chrifts body in the Sa- crament , togeather with his internall quan- tity, may by his omnipotent powef,befome- tymes vnder a great externall quantity, or cx- tenfion in place, & fbmetymes vndcralefler^ yea the leaft,that by our fenfes may be pcrcea- ucd : and yet is Chriftsbodywholy and enti- rely there,accordinge (in fome proportion) ro thclookinge-glafle before mentioned^which being broken into diuers fmall peeces, each one repreftnteth the whole vifage feuerally, which before was exhibited by the whole: And fo, when any confecrated hoft is brokert into many parts, that which was coteyned be fore m the whole hoft,is now coceyned who- Di^utat'ms, ahout ^^Ugion. Chap. 3. %h ly vnder eucry particular parccll theref, as y t was alfo before. And to this ciPfc A, are thok words of S. Epifhanius before alleaged, againft them chat faid: Videmmquodefiaqu^k.&c. We vajm^^' fee that the hoft re(;eauediq the Sacrament>is a, notequallpr Hketothe figure of Chriftsbo- 3s dy, but is round, c^i^. Whcrfore all the argu- ments of Pox his Martyrsj that were founded on this improportion of the hoft to Chrifts naturall , and externall quantity , haue no ground at all, but a little fraudulent lliew and appearance of (enfi ble improbability, and yet were many of their chccfcft arguments buil- dcd on this pnly foundation , as yovr haue fecnereadingeouer their hiftoryes before re- tyted, and flialldo more afterward, when wc come to examine iheir arguments feuerallyj and in the meance fpacethis ll?all fufHcefor an aduertifment about this obferuation. The feauemh Ohferuatim. Mom mcidcnu may he wtthm a p4bie£l , and utf them $f eratiens in that cafe. 4. /. ^4. The feauenth obferuation may be,abouc s:hc accidents or formes of bread and wyne, that do rcmayne by Gods omnipotent power without a fubied, after the words of confe- -cratioo, as they did before in the fubftance of bread, whervpon the more fimple fort of Sa- cramentaryes following fenfe, will needs ar- gue^ that the fubftance alfo of bread & wync^ t8i A revieu^ ten fuhliks do remaync after the laid confccration j and thofe that be more learned, do go about to proue the fame by philofophicall reafon , for chat the nature of an accident is to beinano^ ther,as the nature of a fubftanceistobe inyt '^rifitt. J. fcife, wherofenfueth, that for fd much as no t9K^!iu accident can be in God , as in a fubied, (ney-. ther are they in Chrifts body , aswealfodoe confefTe ) they murt needs be hcere in their proper fubied and fubftanccs of bread and wyne: but all this is founded vpon a falfc ground, for albeit naturally an accident can- not be but in a fubied.yec fupernaturallyjand by the power of God fufteyninge yt, and fup- plyingc the place of a naturall i iibied, y t may pe , as we do confeffe on the contrary fide by Chriftian faith , that the humayne nature of Chrift in the myftery of the incarnation,hath not her proper fubfiftencein ytfelfe (which yet is as naturall to a fubftance to fubfiftinyt felfe, a$ y c is to an accident to be fudeyned by another) but is fuftcyned by the diuine perfoix pfChrift. 35. And the reafon of this , concerninge ac^ cidcnts,is;that albeit the intrinfccall nature of an accident is to be vnperfe<5t, and to depend of another , and thcrby to haue an aptitude to be in another^ yet the ad thcrof may be fcpa- rated by Gods power , from the faid nature, as a thinge pofterior,and followinge from the faid nature , as we haue (Tie wed before in the naturall propriety of quantity, to haue com- xncnftiration ofplaccj and tWs to b?;,true that Dijputatiom, dout Religm. Chap, tSj that this aduall inherence of accidents, may befeuered from the cfTentiall aptitude ther^^ ynto, without deftroing the nature of the faid accident , many philofophers both Chriftian and heathen do affirme, whofe (entcnces you ^^^^^^ may fee gathered by diucrs learned men , as well of ancient as of our tymes. Sundry Fa- *^^^v^ thers alio are of opmion, that this calc happc- Lfint. vtu lied defad:Q\n the creation of the world>when y''^^{/' th« light being made vpon the firft day, as the um. Z booke of G^;i(^^ r«counteth , which being but 7^. quality and accident , remayncd Without a fubied: vnto the fourth day, wheiithe fonnc and moonc wcare created. And of this opi- nion expreffely was BaftU, in his explication ^^f^^- ofthe works of God inthofe fixdayes. And tp^^fix the fame holdeth lohn Dma^cene, Vmop'mm ^^^umD^^ his commentary vpon the firft Chapter of Zf!y' Gmfu , and Sdht lufm$ in the explicatron of our faith . 36. This then being fo, that thefe accidents of bread & wyne may remainc, by the power of God, in the Sacrament, without their pro- per fubieds, yt followethtoconfider> what anions they can haue: And firft yt is to be no- of ib« ted, thatwhatfoeucradions, or operations 3^^^*^ are proper to them, as accidents > when they being fe- were in their proper fubieds of bread and ^^^^^^^^f^^ wyncjbeforc confecration^thc (ame they may fubftancc haue afterwards, when they conteyne the bo- dy and bloud of Chrift, without inherence therein, for that God fupplyeth all by his power^which their faid fubicdsor fubftaiices M 4. <3id ^84 4 feriew of ten fublikf did performc> when they were preftnt. So ^$ the elFeds, for example , that the accidents of Vvinc & bread did wqrke in our fen fes before, by mouingc our fight by rhdir colours to fee,' our taft by their faj^our, and other like clFedts: the fame do they performe alfo afterwards; Soi as, for example ftke, by drinkinge much con- lecrated wyne , though there be no fubftance of wyne thcrin, but only the proper accidents bfwyne, as heat, fmell, and other quaUtyes and proprietyes of wyne j may a man be in- tenfcd, or diftempcred^as much as yf the fub- itancc of wyne were there in deed, forthefc are the proper adions and operations of the faid accidents themfeluesjbut where the con- curracc of fubftancc is neceffary to any adion, as in nutrition, generation, or corruption of 9nc fubAance into another , there doth God fupply the matter, that is neceflary to thac adion, when the body of Chrift doth ceafc t(i> be there, which is, when thofe accidents of bread and wyne are corrupted and not other- wife: As for example, in the refurrcdion of ourbodyes, where euery body istoreceauc ^is owne proper fleft againe, which y t had in this life,yf fome one body hauinge eaten ano- ther body, or parcell therof in this world, and conuerted the (ame into his proper fubitance^ in this cafe (I fay) almighty God muft needs fupply otherwife , by his omnipotent power, thac part and matter of iubftancc , that wan- teth in one of thefe two bodyes , for that els «pneQf (heiQlliould be vnpcrfc^^ and wane Di^utdtions, dout 'Religion. Cbaf. 3. 1 8^ partof hisfubftancein the refurre Aion. An4 after the likie manner wc fay, that when a confecraced hoaft is eaten , and afterward is turned into the natiirall norilhment of the e^^- tcr, w}iichnoriflinicnt rcgyiretha mat^riall fubllancc, God doth fupply that fubftance in thatinrtant, when the formes of bread and wyne perilhinge , the body of Chrift ceafcth to be there. 37. And tliis appertayncth to the proui- dencc of almighty God, for fqpplying the dc-^ hdcsof particular naturall caufts , when any thinge fayleth,that is neceff^ry fpr their natu- ral! operations. The very faine alfo is to be obferued in generation, and corruptionjas for example,when the accidents pf the confecra- ted hoft periftinge, and ibme other fubftance iliould happen to be engendred thereof, as wprmcs, orthelikc, there thebody ofChrift ceafethto be, when the faid accidents do pe- rifli, and for the new generation infuingc thereof, God fupplyeth fitt matter , as in the example before alleaged of the refurre<9ion of our bodyes, wherof the one had eaten part of the other. By which obferuation yt wilbc cafy afterward to diffolue many ^amllations, proceedinge eyther of ignorance , hcrefie, or both,and obiedcd by Sacraipentarycs againi?; shismyftery. A revtem 0/ ten publikf The dght Obferuation, ^ AhoHt themrdes Sacrament, fignc, figure, type, commemoration, memory, &c. ^, 8, 38. For Co much as the Sacramcntaryesof our tyme , did forfee that they (hould be for- ced to oppofc themfelucs, for defending their heretical! nouehyc,sagainft the whole ftrcamc of fcripcures, expolitors, fathers, councells, reafons>pra£t:ife,antiquity>and vniforme con-* fenc of the vuhole Chriftian world , they thought beft todiuife certayne tearmesand diftinclion$,which lliould fcruc them for eua- fions or gappcs to runne out ar, when- foeuer they (Tiould be prelTed by our arguments: and thcfe their Ihifts do confift principally, in the fraudulent vfe of thelc tearmes of Sacrament, jigne, figure, type, commemoratm, memory, facra- mnutij,jpirituJly and the liKQ. Wherfore we thinkc yt needfull to explane and declare in this place,the naturcs,vfes and abufes of thcfe words • 39. Firil then a Sacrimienc^^iccording to the Thcvvord common deilnidonaflcribed to S.Auguftiney u sacramct dvifibU figneofdn imifible grace, as in baptifme, tcd.^"' extcrnall wafhinge by water , is the figne of the intcrnall w^afting of the fqule by grace: So heere alfo in this Sacrament of the Eucha- rift, the extcrnall & vifible figne are the con- fecratcd formes of bread and wyne , as they coxiteyac the body of Chrili ; the intcrnall or Vijputations, about Kelipon. Chdp. 5. 187 fnuifible grace lignified, is the inward nou- rifliinge and fccdinge of our foule: And this is thefirltand cheefe manner how this Sacra- men t is a figne, that is to fay afigne grace , and not of Chrifts body abfcnt, as Protcftants are wont moft fondly and fraudulently to infcrre. 40. Secondly thefe extcrnall formes and ac- ^:idents of bread and wyne , are alfo a»fignc of Chrifts body conteyned vndcr them. And in this fenfe is the Eucharift called fometymes by the Fathers, the figne of Chrifts body, but of Chrifts body prefent, as hath byn faid, and notabfent. Thirdly this Sacrament is a iTgnc of Chrifthis death andipafsion, and of the vnion of his myfticall body the Church with him: For that as bread and wyne rcprefented by thefe formes, are made of many grains and many grapes^fo is Chrifts myfticall bodyjCon- fiftinge of many members vnitcd to him jfo as by all thefe wayes may this Sacrament be cal- Ud a figne, to witt, a (igne of the inward grace, and norilTiment of the foule obtayned therby, a figne of Chrifts true body prcfent, a figne of Chrift his death, and myfticall body , and yet do none of all thefe figures exclude the true real] being of his body in the Sacrament > but dp rather fuppofe the fame, 4t. And the like may be faid to the other ©thei words, or tearmes of figure, typg^commmoration, vvords of otmemorjt^zU which,when they occurre,are to cxpil! be vnderftood in fome of thefe fenfes^ without catc(L preiudice of the reality, or truth of our Saui- ours being in this Sacrament^ as for example, this |88 A renew ten fublike this Sacrament is a forme, tjpe,cmtnemoratk» 8^ frremory of Chrifts death on the CrolTc , an4 yet this cxcludeth not his reall frefence fronn her.ce. As for Cxarnplc,if a Prince hauing gay- ned in proper perfon a great & fingular viAo- yy- ilioujd inftitucca (bilcmne triumph , to be madceuery ycare in memory therof, &fomc times Ihould go in that triumph himfelfe aifo, Kote this y t might be truly faid,that this triumph is a fir wnipic. gure, type, commemoration, and memory of the other viiftory , & of the Prince, yet is th^ Prince truly alfo in ythimlelfe,and fo may bq faid in hke manner of this matter of the Sa-r crament, wherin Chrift in differ^ t manner, is a figure or type of himfelfc. And the like may he (aid of thcdayly facrifice aifo, which (acri- fice is a commetnoration or memory of th^ other bloudy facrifice , once offered on the croffe^and yet cfonteynech the feme rcall body of our Sauiour, which the other did, after another manner. And by this will the reader cafily difcouerdiuerspoote lTaifts& fallacyes ofourmodernc heretiks, c^ecially of Ridley before named , who as yow haue heard him profeffe^ was moued to leaue his ancient faith of the malTe, & his pradice thcrin, for that in fonic certaine placesffor foothjof the Fathers., fee found that thk ficrijice (of the mafic) in called a commemoration ef Chrijls pa f ion j a ftronge argu- ment, no doubtjto moue him to fo grea? a rc- folution. And fo much of this, 42. Now then arc to be examined the other WoxdSf fmmemalljf.reaUf^znd §\rttud); and as for bl^utduons, dhoM Keliglen. Chdf. f. it^ for the hrft, the common l"enfe,and[ meaninge '^V^J^^ bf fchoole diuincs is,that diuifcd this WordPro of'th^ fignific therby a peculiar manner of Chrifts fupertiaturall being in the Sacrament ^ difFe- and both rent from his haturall and cireumfcHptiue jl^j"^^^^ being in heaueri ^ and from the natural! being uryes.; of an Angelldcfihitiuely in a place, wherof we haiie fpokcn before. So as, when they fay that Chrift is ftcramentaily vnder the formes df bread and wyhe, they do not deny his true andreall being thetein fleflij the very felfe- fame that is in heauen* biit he is there in anq- ^ ther manner. And thisisthechiefe proper fi- gnification of the word fdcramentaUj Amongtd fchoole-men , for which the word was in- ucnted, 45. But In thcjcomm6n vfcjand (cn(cofour fpeach, ^mmentdly fignifieth, that Chrifts body is there vnder a Sacrament or figne, which arethc formes of bread and wyne^ and not in his owna proper lliape, euenasan An- gell, whenhe appearethin abddy, he may be laid to appeare bodyIy,for that the body is the figure or forme, vnder which he appearethj and conforme to this fenfe , we are faid to re- ceyue Chrift fkcramentaUy ^ when Wereceaue him tfuly lina really, but yet notin his proper forme, but vnder another formejthatisto (ay of bread and wyne, wherby the fraudulent dealing of our mddetne Sacramentarycs may ^ppeare, who deceauing the people with this word facramentdUy , do oppofe yt to rtaUj and truljt , as though when any author faith , thae We ipo A review of ten publiks Wcreceaue Chrift facramentally in the'Eu- charift, yt were to be vnderftood, that wc did nocreceaueChrifts body indeed and redly, but only a figne therof , and by this they cn- deauour to delude all the places , though ne« uer fb euidcnt, of holy Fathers affirminge, that Chrifts true flefli and body^the very fame that was borne of the virgin Mary and cruci- fied for vs, is rcceaued in the Sacrament, thefe good fellowesaunfwcre thatytis true, /Jrcr^- menuUj, which wc a!fograunt,yf/4^r4Wf»r4fl;'^ do not exclude reallyf, accordinge to the true fignification of the word: But yf by facramen- tally, they msanc as they do, that only a fignc is receaued of Chrifts body in the Sacrament^ then is their deceyt nianifeft as yow fee j for that facramentally, hath no fuchfignification at all amonge diuines, but only is diuiftda- monge them for a iTiift. What the 44,. The like fraud they vfc about the word litu^n^^^ which in the lenfe of holy Fathers, gnifieth in being oppolite to carnally and corporally, in ftcry.""^' their ordinary materiall fignification, is by fe- Aaryes alfo wrefted, as though yt were con- trary to the word reall/, fo as whenfoeuer they are forced to graunt Chrifts body to be fpiri- tuallyin the Sacrament (by which phrafc the faid ancient Fathers do meane only, that he is not there after a carnall, or common manner, as he lined vpon earth ) they will hauc yt vn- derf^ood,that he is there only by faith^and not indeed really and fubftantially- They abufe alfo the fignification of the forefaid wordes carnally t)tjput4tms, aUut l^ellgm. Chap. i^i carnally & corporally, which hauing adouble fcnfe, the one thatXhrifts body is naturally and really in the Sacrament, the other that he is thereafter the externall being of other bo- dyes, they deceytfuUy do take them now in one fenfe, and now in another , and alwaycs oppofe them to the word JpirltUdUj, which in the former fenfe are not incompatible , but may ftand togeather, though not in the later. And for auoydinge of this equiuocation , di- uines do with thofe two words , carnally and corporally ^ though true in the forefaid fenfe, yet to be more fparingly vfcd, then the other words really and fubftantially , that are equi- ualcnt in fenfe , and leffe fubied to equiuoca- tion and miflaking* 45. Wherfore to conclude this obferuatior?, all thefe words are to be notedjand their true v(e and fignification remembred by hiriij that will not be deluded by hereticall fleights and impoftures in this high myftery,but cfpeciaU ly are to be pbferued thefe three , wfaerby out Sacramentaryes do moft of all deceyue the vulgar people, in their aflertions and anfw^rs to our arguments , to wittyfacrmmallf , ^in^ tuAllj 2nd bjf faith, as though they did exclude the real! prefencc of Chrifts body in the Sa- crament -5 which is moft falfe , for that in the true fenfe weadmittthem all. For example, we graunt that Chrift is facramentally in thi^ Sacrament , bcth as facramentally %nifieth ^ diftind manner of Chrifts being there> frorti thatinheauen , andasytfignificthhis being there Ipt AfevirnQfienfuhlike there vndei: a Sacrament or ligne , but ye^ . really, we grauntaifo that he is there (piri- tually, that is to fay, aFccr a fpirituall, an and when iii other places the fame Fathers da profelTe, that the very (ame flelTi that was borne of the virgin Mary and crucified for vs, is there, they aunfwere , jt is true ^iriiualh and by fairh, but not reallyo And thus they do euacuate and delude all that can bealleagcd: But yf they cannot iliew (as they cannot) any one Father that tooke or vfed the words fa- '€rmentaUjf,jp'mtuaUfy or hy faith, in this fenfe, as oppolue to redly and truly in this myftery,theni IS it euidentjthis tabe but a fliift of their owne inuention,to efcape thcrby. And fo much oC this obferuatioa ^he nynih OhferUaiwn. UotP Chrifl is receaued of emU meii in the Sacrament; knd of good men both inland ^t ofthefme. ^. 9, 47, It followeth vpon the former declara- tion of the words, p^r^wfwt,^^^^, and the refty ^hat wc explane in this place,accrtavnedi- ftinftion infintiated by the ancient Fa hev , i and touched in the Counccll oltirent,ohhx^< r^^^'ii r-d . [ ^oih of receauingc and eatinge Chnft by this A reviet^ ef ten pihlihe ^.Thm.^. Sacrament: Firltfacramencaiiy alone, the fe- irH'tt ^^^^ fpiricually only,thc third both facraiiien-i^ tally and fpiritually togeathcr. An exampld^ of the firft is 3 when euiH men do rcceaue the Sacrament vrt worthily, for that thefemen, though they receaue the vety Sacrament, td witt the true body of Chrift vnder the formes of bread and wynej yet do they not receauc the true fpirituall effcft thcrof, which is grace andnourilTiment df their foule^ aridofthefe doth S. Fdul fpeake cxpreffely to the Corih- thlans, when h c (aith: He that eateth and drinketb I. Cor. it. rnworthtly ( videlicet the Sacrament) doth eat and dnnke iudgemm t9 himfelfe^ not difcerninoe the body efourLorL And in this fenfe do the auncienc Fathers vpon thisplace,cxpound the Apoftle, as yow may fee in the commentaryes of Sami jhii. /. Chrjfeftome^ Ambrofe, S . Anfeime.^irid other ex-« t ^T' pofitors boih Greeke and Latynjand S. AuJleri '''^ in many places of his works dothexprcfleiy iTiew the fame 3 alleaginge this text of the ^4ug,ef>ip. Apoftle for proofethcrof, Corpus Domini (fMtH & in 0, Jan^ui^ Domini nihilominmer at iUu.quibm fj4m. 10. ^^y^^ ^^^jioifi^^ It wasnotwithftandingthe body & bloud of our Lord^which they tooke,' to whome the Apoftle faid;he that eateth and drinketh vnworchily,eateth and drmketh hi^ 6wnedamnation» And to the fame effed hef faith in diuers other places,that ludds receaued' the very felfe-fame body of Chrift , that thd Other Apoftles did - and the fame aflirmeth S. Chryfojieme in his homily intituled 5 of th« ffeafonoflud^U-^ & generally it is the vniform Cpinicf^ ©pinion of aii the auncicnt Fathers, when- foeuer any occafion is giucn to fpcake or treat therdf* 48* The fecorid mariner of rcceauing Chrlft l>y this Sacramep.t, is tc^rmed Jpirituaty only- for that without facramentall rcccauinge of ChriUs body and bloud , a man may in lome cafe receaue the fpirituall fruite or efFcd ther^ bf , as yf he had reccaued the ftme really, and this eyther with relation to the Sacrament, pidelicei > when a man hath a defire to receaue y t aduallyj but cannot ; or without rcfcrencje thervhto, when by faith and grace gobd men do communicate with Ghrift^and participate the fruite of his pafiion. In which fehfe of fpirituall communion^ or eating Chrift, S. An- ^JuptrJ: fien wryterhvpon 5. Johns ghofpell , Cf€de& ^^•'^^'^•^ manducafiv^ bcleeue, and thou haft eaten . And %o the fame effed do our Fathers often fpeake. When they treat of this fpifituall & mctapho- Hcall eating only without relation to the Sa- tramet : which manner bf fpeaches the Sacra- inentaryesof oiir dayesdofeeketoabufe, as ihoiigh there were ho other eatinge 6f Chrift In the Sacrament, but by faith alone , which is furtheft of from the faid Fathets meaninge, though fometymes they had bccafion to Ipeake in that manner. 4^. The third member of our former diui-, fionis, toeat Chrift both facramentally and rpiritually, as all good Chriftiari^do , when' with due preparatibn & difpofitiori , they r^- fe^^auc both the outward Sacraiheni and in- 2 uvim of ten piUihe \ ward grace and fruite thcrot : by obleruatioil j of which threefold manner of receauing, ma- ny obicdions and hereticall cauillations will eafily afterward be difeerned. And fo much i for thiso The tenth Obferuation. Tmhln^e indtgnityesand incdnueniences obieSled bjf Sacrmenuryes againjl vi, in heldmge iheRe^llfrefence. 4. 10. 50. As by the former obie^lions of nattiralf impofsibihtyes, yow hauc heard this foue- raignemyftery impugned,bothby thelearne- derfortof old and new herctiksj fo do the morefimple& ignorant infift& infult mofta vpon certAync inconuenienccs, indignityes^ and abfurdityes,as to them do appeate. As for, cxampicjthat Chrift in the Sacrament^fhould be eaten with mens teeth , go into the belly,j not only of men & weomen,buc alfo of bealU. yf they Ihould deuoure yt, that y t may putri^^ fie^ be burned , caft and fall into bafe and vn-^. worthy places, be troden vnder mens fect^' with the like 5 which is a kind of argument plaufiblc at the firft fight vnto vulgar apprc> henfibns, and fuch as feemcd to moue princi- pally the moft part of lohn Fox his artificers, and fpinfter-martyrSj as may appeare by theif^ i^ude clamours, and grofic obiedions, expro*.* Orations, irrifions, iefis and fcolfes attheij^ Itinlvveringc before their ordinarycs. , Dijputat'ms, about B^eligiofj. Chap.i. ^97 And heerin aifo they ilie wed their fpintc bf derydingeand blafphemingc that, which they vnderUopd not, toconcurre with that of the pagans and lewes againft the whole body of Chpifiian Religion, and of auncient lierctiks againft the principall articles therot'i Ofthe pagans5.i4^^^^(/2iw or one woman haue byn wife of feauen men. And the Mdrcionifis infamous heretiks, that tooke the fame herefie from the Sadduces,as alto the Originifis concurripge therin againft the faid beleefe of our refiirredion , went y^^,^^^ ^ about to difgrace the fame , as both TertulUan, reful, c^tl and SMkrome do teftifiejby certaine abfurd in- '^j^p/''"^ digiiityes, which they imagined would enfue N I fhsrofi 19? A revieip of ten fuhlike fhcrof, a$ for example that difference offexel procreation, mydwyues, nurfes, priLiyes, an4 the like, muft needs be inheauen,but the aun-s- cienc Fathers anfwered them with the words ofourSauiourtothefaid Err^m, wf- • * * fcientes fcripturam, ^ vimtem Dei. Yow do erre, not knowinge the fcriptures , nor ;he power of God, 51. And the fame aunfwere was giuen by Cathohks to the firil: Sacramentaryes , thac cuer publikely appeared , to witt the BerengA^ rw»jaboue ^oo.yearespaftjwhoobiededthe very fame abfurditycSithat our hereriks do at OHitmun-- this day , as ttilidcth Guimundusznd Algem^ UhnM^ thatliucd in that age and wrote againft them; " : (ont. they were aunfwe red (I fay) that their error proceeded of not vnderfiandinge the true meaning of fcriptures, nor the power of God, which in the Sacrament conferueth his body without all leallon, hurt, indignity, or iqcon- uenicnce, whatfoeuer happeneth vnto the formesjvnder which his body is> and that it is nothing fo bafe and va worthy a matter,euen in our fenfe & comon reafbn, that Chrift ouc Saiiiour being impafsible in the Sacrament^ Ihould vndcr another forme be faid to fail on fhe ground, to be burned, to be eaten, then in his p wne proper forme , when he was pafsible , and (enfible to ly in his mothers V. ombe, or to cry and weepe in the cradle, or to fiiffer hunger, thirft, and other humayne necefsitycs,and to be whipped,wounded and put to death^all which indignityes^fuppofing fhathe was the fcife- fame God that create^ yhe world, might iecnie more abfurdjand im- probable in crommoa fenfc and reafon, theq this of the Sacrament, ^nd fo they did feeme to old heretiks, who obie ded and derided the farpejas the forfaid Umhnifisjh^i God Ihould be in a womans beljy, ;^nd m a maunger • and Neflerim the h^retike,that God Ihould be two moncthes old for example, and two cubitts bigg , ^nd other fuch iefts and fcoffes, as yo w ^.^^^ ^-^ ^ may read of tbem in TertuUian^ Tkegdoret , £«4-- chr*(ii jjn(« and other wry ters, tA^hllti 5 J* ^herfpre to conclude ?hisobferuation, fAbli. & two points arc to be noted in this whole rnat- ^^^f^J^/' ter: Firftthatm.any things that leqmc to hap-^ pen to Chrift in thefc cafts, do not touch him indeedjbu^ only the epcternall formes of b^cad and wyne, as when they are burned for ex- ample, do putrific, or the like, Chrifts body is fiot burned, or putrified, but cea(eth to be vn- der them, when the faid formes or accidents are corrupted,for that the fubftance of Chrifts, body, rupplyinge the fubftance of bread>is no longer there then the fubftance of bread would haue byn there,yf yt had not ben con^ uerted into Chrifts body, but y f bread had re- |iiayned,yt would haue c^cafed by any kind of corruption, as burninge, putrifyinge, prthc like , and fo doth Chrifts body , though in a ^iflf^rent fort ? fo jhat the fubftance of bread mightjby the faid corruption.bc chaunged in-j to fome other fub lance, which Chrifts body canpotbe^ but only eeaiTeth to be therc^ God ioo A review of ten puhUkf fupplyinge fome other nuccer tor produ<5i:ioii otthat, vvhich is bronght forth ot new, asiii the former obferuation liach byn declared. 54. The other point, thatthofe other con- ditions which by rcafon of the formes are aikribed vnto Chrift his body in the Sacra- menr , as to moue from place co place , when the formes ^re moued , to he feenc , touched, eaten with our teeth and chc like > w hich are fv^o^w-^^ frequent phrafesarnong the Fathers, haueno topics, inconuenience amonge them at all , no more for example, then when our foule is faid to be moued wuh the motion of the body , which foule notwithftandinge of his ownc nature is not moucable; fo as an Angell being a fpiritt, may be handled, (eene, or itroken in the body which he takeih to appearcin,asiseuidentby the whole ftory of TgbiM and other places of fcriprure, which Angell ofhimfelfe notwith- ftandinge> is not capable of fuch thinges; and finally Gods cternall diuinityand maicfty is prefent in all places & things, the mod bafcft and horrible th^t can be diuiied,and yet fuffe- reth no inconuenience therby; for though he be for example in the dunghill Vyet he cannoc be fai4 to haue any euill fmell therby, ney ther to be burned in the fire, though the formes of bread and wyne be burned therin, nor to pu- trifie , though he be actually prefent in thofe things that rott and putrifie. And by this may yow fee the vayne calumniations of fond he- retiks, again^ the power of almighty God, fut of choir fcnfcs and foolilb imaginations* Dijputations, akut Religm. Cha,f. 3. 201 The eleuenth Obferuatm . Ahout the nature of a ficrijiee, as It is ordayned to di§ir rmt effedes^ ^and hm that of the Cpp fiandetk With that of the maffe. ^. u. , The eleuenth and laft obferuation flialbe peculiarly abouc the laft of the three qyeftion§ propoled J which is facrifice of the maffe, no-? tinge therin two ends, offices, or effefts to be f onlidered : Firft that y t is ordayned ad cultum externum^ to an externa}! worlWpp of God pe- culiar CO himfelfe^in the highcft degree of ho- nour, called by the G re tiaiis lrfm^ .' (ccondly 4d frofitiationem propeccatii, for pacifyipge of Gods wrath for fiiines , and albeit both thefe c ffec^ls may he in one and the felfe- fame facri- fice (and fo we hould them to be in the facri- fice of the jmaffe , for that yt Wits ordayned by Chrift, a$ well for a perpetuall outward ho- nour &worlTiipp to be exhibited vntoCod in the Chriftian Church vnto the worlds end, asalfp forremifsion of finnes by application of the mcritt of Chrifts bloudy facrifice on the CrolTe ) yet may th^y be feparaced pf their pwne natures, fo as a facrifice may be orday- ned only ad cultupi, that is to fay, for an exter- nal! woriTiipp only, without ppwer to remitt jSniles: And fo in a manner w-ere the facrificcs of the ould laWjWhich little or nothing auay- led for finnes. Andagaine^^facrificemay beor- deined only or principally to fati^iy fotfmncf^ withoat a 02 4 revtetif pf ten publikf without relation thcrof^^f cultum.xo perfeqcrf in any ftate of men, to be oKcen offered by thcm> and fuch was Chrifts on the Croflc^ which is not reiterated againe in the fame bloudyandpafsibje manner, ^sthcn ytwas, but in another farre different fort in the maffe> which is capable of both thefe effects, as hath byn faid, ffhc firft Now then in the firft fenfe, as a facrifice af is ordayned ad cultum, to an cxternall wor(liip pf God, ytcontcynethari outward protefta- tion of our knowledge of Gods fupreme Ma-r ieftie^powcrjand abfoiute dorninipn oucr vs, and in our fubiedion thervnto , which is the higheft honour that can be giuen by a crea- ture vnto the creator > andis fo particular tq God alone > as hath byn faid, as yt cannot be imparted to any creature, without the hor- rible linne of Idolatry, and is fo conipyncd with the nature of Religion yt felfe, as no true Reh'gion hath euerbyn without this degree of externall honour, exhibited vntp God by his people- and fo we fee that all good qienin^ the law of nature, by Gods inftinii:, did facri- ficc vnto him, as Ad^^n, Abell, Npp, Melchi(cd^ckf^ and others, as afterwards alfo in the law of Moyfes, the fame w^s expreffely prdayned by Gods owne cqmrnaqdemcnt-, & the Gen- tills did the fame, though not to one true God, but to many idolls, by fuggeltion of the d:uell,thacthcrin emulated Gods honour ex- hibited vnto him by facriticc. And this for th^ firii tffv^cl Oi* Oiiice of facriilce. PiJputationSy dout Keligion. Ckip.^^ 203 57» Tii^ fecond h propltiatiGH, or pacifyinj^e The rc^o^ pfGods wrath for linhes, as iiathbyn faid. lfi^^%ciJ^utdthns,ahout Religion. Chap.f. io^ that rcmy ttcd not finnes, nor ycc in a manner of fo potent effect , as to acquire the price of pur faluatioh > for that y t is not offered vp to that end , but only to apply the vertuc of the other facrifice already gotten ^ and fomay be iterated , not for any defed in it ftlfe, but for that {nines dayly growinge haue need of day- ly application of the faid facirifice^ as hath byniaid. ^o. And in this fenfedoallthe ancient Fa- thers;in the places before alleaged> call this fa- crifice of the inafle iuge facTtficium.z dayly (acri- fice^ and iterable , nocwithftandingc that the Other on the Crofle could be offered but once, as S. Paul proueth . And now thefe obferua- tions being premifed y we ihall paffe to exa- mine and aunfwere the arguments of our aduerfaryes , in all the former di[putiiti0n^ brought forth , f FT E 2o6 A revletP $f ten phlihi THE EXAMINATION OF SVCH ARGVMENTES As in the former deputations ^ereaU leagedby theZuingl'ims ^ Calm-- iiifts^ againfi ?/^^rcall-prcfence of Chriffles body in the Sacrament • Chap. IV. Now then to ioyne more necrly with - ourSacramentaryes, and tocometothe fcc'con^^^^^ vew of particular arguments, brought forth dcrcdl againft the article of the reall frefence , yt is to be held in memory, that which before we haue noted : i^r% that thcfe new DocStors ha« uinge no one dircd place eyther of fcriptures, or Fathers for their purpofe, thatexpreffely denyeth the (aid TealUprefena ( as we haue for the aifirmatiue ) they are forced to runne to ccrtayne infcrencesj as/or that Clmjl u in heduen, he cannot be in the Sacrament, & fuch other like iio validicy.as prefently yow lihall fee. And fe- condly it is to be remembred, that thefc argu- rrients (the moft wherofarc founded on fcnfc and humayne rcafon againft faith)are ordina- rily to be found both alieaged,vrged and auri- fwered btjpuiathm, d9Ut Eellgt^i^ <:hap. 20 f fweredin all our fchoolmcns books atlarge,i Before our Sacramentaryes wete borne , and conftquently thcfe men bring no iiciv things, as worthy of a new labour^ Biic yet for betrer fatisfadioil of thelini^ that haue not read the faid fchoolncicri , nor arc of fufficient karning to fee the fblution of thernftlues* we b^eefely riinrie buetin this placcj whdrfoeuer was obie(5i:^d by the faid Sacrariientarycs, of any moment in all the fdrmer dilputations^or othet conferences 5 cblloquyesj or examina- tions , reducinge all for more pcrfpicuityes fake veto certaine heads dx groundcs iii riiaii^ ner follbwinge. The JirU head or ground of Sacramen^ tary obie^ionsi for that yt feemetb mpofiible to theni^ that Chriftes body can be in many places at once. $.1. i. This is the firll prihcipall gfotttid of alf the Sacrameiitiryes vnbeleefe , ^hd out of which they draw the greateft fqliadton of all their arguments and bbiedions , as preftntly ybwlhalHce> fotthatyt is a point very plau- fible to combn-jTenft and hurhayne reafon, that a naturail body naturally cannot be but in one place at once: but he that ihallread our bbfetuations in the pfeccdet Chapter, wher€ we haue Ihe wed, that not only fupcrnatural- Ij and by Gods omnipotent po^'er yt may be done- 1 08 A review 0/ ten publike doncjbut that itcomprehendechnot fb much as any contradidion in nature it (elfe^ and further fliall confidcr, that albeit Chrilts true and naturall body be in the Sacrament at ma- ny places at once,yet not after a natural! man-* netjbut Tupernaturall arid miraculbus^a^ eue- ry where the ancient Fathers do admonilh vs (and wehauealleaged many of their admo- nitions before)he I fay that lhall confider this, will eafily contemne and laugheat the vanity offb many Sacramentary argumcnts,foundcd vpon this wcake ground and prmcip!e only, that a natUTAll body cannot be in more places then one 4t once, which is true nacurallyjthat is to fay by the ordinary courfe of nature, but by the power of God 5 that is aboue nature, ytmay be, and this without an clTentiallcontradi- Ition, as I haue faid, in nature ytr;ilfe. 5* Well then, now will I fett downe the. whole fquadron of arguments, which out of this falft principle, or rather true principle mifvnderftood, lohn Fox layeth foorrh with great oftentation out of Feter Martyr his Ox^ ford difputations, which arguments are 8. ir^ number, and did feeme fo infoluble vnto Fox his diuinity, and philofophy, as he putterh no anfwcre at all giuen by the Catholike defen- dants to the fame. I iball deliuer them alfo ill dialedicall forme, as they ly in Fox this once, togeather with his foolery of cytinge the moods and figures of fophiftry in the margcnt to eije»y argument, a thinge knowen to euery chi/ j that beginneth logique,&: confcquently is f i^- Dijpmatiens, deut neUgm. Chaf. 4,^. lo^J h ridiculous to men of learninge , though ftrangc to the ignorant people, that may ima- gine great fecfets to ly hidden in thofe words of Difamk, Darify Baroco, Fefiino, Bourdo, and thinkethat lohn Fox doth go about to con- iurevs his readers, bylettinge themdownes but now to thtf arguments themfeliles. I. Argument. 4. * The true naturall body of CHrift is " it . placed in heauen. Mattk24,.&i6. loan. S'^"^'^^- fa^ * The true naturall body of man can be h It is true but in one place at once , where he is. ^^^^^^^^h Atiguft. ad Dardanum, propter veri corporis modumy faith he, that is for the manner ofa true body. ffiis. * Ergo the true naturall body of Chrift c But yt cart be in noe place at once.but ih hea- ^^-i uen where he IS* saUy. z. Argument bd' ^ Eucry true naturall body rcoiiireth one drha a ceruyne place. SnXc! ri- ' Chrifts body is a true naturall body, exrue. /. J^£rgo. Chrifts body require th one cer- /^'^"^ "^': tayne place. - w y= ^. Argument. « Auguftine giueth not tq the foule ofj^'^m O Ciiiift * to the ot- dinary na- ture of a fottle, b The one and theo- thet may be by Gods om- nipotccy. i Trueac- cordingto their or- dinanr coutfc of nature. l;^Chrifl in the Sacra- met fiUcth no place. 1(0 A review ef ten puhlikf Chrift to be in more places at once thesi one. Aug. dd Dardam ^Ergo. Much IciVc yt is to be giuen t6 the body of Chrift, to be in more places at once then one. I ThU is fallc for Fox his B4- foulc f vas in his foote and head , and yet not God CO. m Natu- rally. 4. Argument. * The nature of Angellsisnottobein di- uers placesjbut they are limited to occu- py one certayne place at once. BafiL de JpmtHfanll0. cafi 22. ^Ergo. The body of Chrift being the true naturall body of man , cannot fill diners places at once; Arguments ' Whatfoeuer is ui many & diuers places at once, is God. The body of Chrift is not God, but a creature. Ergo. The body of Chrift cannot be in more places togeather. n This is faifs ♦ n9. C. Argument. We muft not lo dercnd thediuinity of Chrift, as we deftroy his humanity. " Yf we afsignc more places to the body of Chrift, we dellroy lus humanity. Ergo. We muft not afsinnc to the body of Ghnft plurality of places. DifputAtms, ahm Relipon. Chdp. 4.' i n . J. Argument. jpe- ^ VVharfocucr thingc is circumfcribeH, * This that is to fayjconteyncd in the limitts ^""'^^ed, of any peculiar place, cannot be di- fperfed into more places at once. / it is true fii^ ^ The body df Chrift is a thingecircum. tJuf^t fcribed. not in the m. ^ Ergo the body of Chrift is not xiifpcr- ^True'a. fed into more places at one tynie. is circu- * fcribed. 8. Argument. rrm^ni^ ^ ir- • 1 • 111 turallybufc Da- Euety quantity, that is euery body ha- tiotfupec- uing magnitudcjlcngthjand other di- menfions, is circumicribed in one pc- ^ culiar place. CyriJl de trinlt. lib. body i& ri- ^ The body ofChrift hath his dimenfions, ^'"Smi and is a quantity, fubftance « /. ^Ergo the body of Chrift is circum^ "^J^^ fcribed . f y^*^ Aunfppere. ^. Thelc are the doughty argumentSjWhich ^ Fox aflirmeth their great Patriarke Peter Mar^ ^ tjr to hauc alleaged againft the reall-prefme, * out of this firftphilofophieall ground, thatoni hoiy C4nn$t be in mahy f laces dt once ; Whervnto , 1 might aunfwcre in the words of 5. Aaguflm, ^ to fuch kind of men^asmcafure Gods power by their owncimagination: Ecce quaUbm ar^u- -fH-^-i-ic fBentu^ommp0tenti^ Det,humana CQntrmcit tnjirmi^ c^^. ^ ^ '^n A mien^ of ten fulltke id, quam popdet vmttiu: behouid with wJi^i kind of arguments, the infirmity of man, poC- fciTcd by vanity, doth contradict Gods omni- potency. Yf yovv read the fourth and fifth ob^ fcruations fctt do wnc in the former Chapter, yo w yvill cafily fee both the infirmityjand va- nity of all thefe arguments, & how this great variety vpon one ground > are but minced- meats guifcd in diuers forts and fafliions. by the art ofFgx and ?eter Martjfts cookcry,and ycc are they held for great demonftrations j and ftronge fortrelTes of the Sacramentary faith, or rather infidelity, and vrgedeuery where by their followers* 6. lohn Rogers vfcd the fame argument in his defence before the Bil]iops,as yow may tec in ¥oxfag, 1^51. Chrifiis corpraUj (faith he) inhea^ lien only yer go not in the Sacrament, where he vfeth an equiuocation a!fo in the word corporally, for that we do not fay, that Chrift is corporal- ly in the Sacrament^yf by corporally he meane not only really and fubftantially, but alfo after a corporall manner, accordingc to externall dimenfions. Thomas tompkjns the weauer of Shordicbjvfeth the fame argumentagainfl bis; Ordinary in like manner, towitt> thatchrifls body cannot he in the Sacrament , for that yt » in hea^ uen. Fox fag, 135)5. Maijler Guejl in his Cam- bridge difputations againrt Do5lor Ghn, leaned principally ro this argument, and 6. Rtdlej, his moderator, or prefidenr of thefc difputations^ vrgcd a place of S. Augufiine ad Dardanum to the' fame e iTed. TtHe^atia CQrforihHi^& nhfquam erunt. Dijputatiens, about Relipon. Chap. 4. Take away the fpaces from bodyes (faim X Aufien) and chcy Ihaibe no where. But D, Gljn detendanc anfwcred him well, that S.Augufiine fpakcexpreflelyof thenaturali being or bo- dyes, accordinge to their ordinary external! dimenfions , and not how they might be by Gods fupernaturall power ;^nd pmnipo- tency. •7. But aboue all others^ Vhilpott did keep re- Phiifn his, uellin theconuoeation houfe about this ar- ^^y"^ gument, agamit MAijter Morgan , & Matjter Ear- uocatioa pei^eld^ alleaginge diuers places pf fcripturc for ^j^^ thefamCj but little to the purpofe God woo- argument, teth, as that of 5. Faul i Chnfi is itkf vnto vs in all folntSy except [mm , And therforefaid he> as one "^^^^ of our bodyes cannot be at Faules,znd at VVefi- ' minfin togeather ^ fo cannot Chrill: be in hea- uenj and in the Sacrament* But yt was told him, that thefe words of S. faul, wcretrue in S. FauUs {en{^, but yet that Chrifts body was vnhke alfo vnto vs belides finne, in diuers other points 5 as for example, in that he w^as begotten without the feed of man, andthas his body was inuifible, when he would haue foejand that he rofe out of the fepulcher the fame being Ihutt, and diuers other like points, which our ordinary naturall bodyes haue not, though God of his omnipotency might giue the fame to our bodyes alfo. Then he allea-- ged the favinge ofs. F^f^rin the A(5ts: VVhome heauen mu^ receaue mull the confumatien of the world. VVherof he would infcrre a necefsit}^ of Chrifts remayning in heauen, Yntill the day " 9 1 # 2 1 4 A review of ten fuhlikf of itidgemcnc. Then Morgan laughed iit this (faith Fox) Harpesfield Hood vp> and asked him 5. Ttm. iioy^ he vnderftood that place, Oportet Efifca- pm effe vnm vxbyU vimn , A Billiop muft be the husband of one wife. And whether this be of fuch necefsity, as he may not be without a wife^one at leaft? With which demaund Pfci/- foit was fo entangled, as he could not well gQ forward, as there yow may fee,and rcfufed ta aunfwere Maificr Morgan, as the prolocutor would hauehadhim. S. Well then, this is the firft and principal! ground and bulwarke ofall Sacramentary yn^ beleefe in this article , that Chrifts body can- not be by Gods omnipotent power in two places at once, to witt both in heauen, and in rhc Sacrament, which we hauelliewed bcr. fore in our fourth, fifth and fixt obferuations, to be a fond and temerarious pofition, whcr - vnto we referrc the reader to fee the ground s more at large, andheerc only we fhallfaya Word or two to the former eight arguments, as they lye in order. Yetfirrtit ilialbegood for the reader to remember that, which we hauc Mfian^h. noted before in the ftory of Melanilhon , who £ptrt,ia ad j^^i J had YAther offer my felfe to death, then to af- GsreiitjH ^j. prme,a6 the Zutngltmsdojhat Cbnjtes body cannot be bMt in one place at once. Bmytt Peter Mariyr, Phil'* pott , Cranmer , and their fellowes would dye> and fome of them alR) did dye, for the contra- ry, fo as Saints of one Calendar, do heercdye forconrr.uy opinions one to the other. But let vs anfwere the arguments, 8. Ta Dijputatms, dout Religm. Chaf^ 4, 2 j y g. To tae tirlt wc (ay,conccrning the minor J^^ propofition, that a true natural! body, natu- jJcm!'^ rally > and by ordinary courft of nature , can- pot be at one tymc, but in one place, and that nieancch S. Augufline Ad DdYdanum , but fuper- naturally, and by Gods omnipotent power, that exceedeth nature, y t repugneth no t to be in diuers places at once, yf God willhaue yt fo: as in our fifth obferuation is proued. To to thyQW may fee more at large declared in our fourth and fifth obferuationSi To the eight and lart, we fay that the maior is to the to be vndsrftood naturally, and not fuperna- turally by diuine power: to the Minor, w/^ aun- fwere , that Chrifts body hath not externall dimenlions in the Sacrament, though y t haue in heau^n: and in the Sacrament y t bath only internall and inuihble quantity, without ex- tenfion to place; whcrofyow may read more in the fourth and fifth obferuations. And this iBaibe fofficient for this firft ground ofphilo- fophicall arguments. Now will we palle to she fecond. The fecond head or ground of Sacra- mentary argument es^ dra^pen from contrary quality es or quantityes^i^c. §. i. II. This fecond ground is not much diffe- rent from the former, for both of them arc founded on fenfe^ and humaynereafon , and ^^ere I will notconioyneaU the arguments togea-; 3tt8 A revietp of ten fuhlihe togeathcr^as before i did,!>ut fee them downe £ uerally, as Fox recordcth them Qutoi^etet M/irr/M difputation. I. Argument. Bd^ Yf Chrift had giuen his body fubftan- tially and carnally in the fuppcr , then was that body cytherpafsible orim- paGible, But neyther can yow Tay that body to be paGible or impafsible, which he gaue at fuppcr: not paf^ibleforthat^. ilw- fien denyeth yt Pfalnu 98. not impaf- fible , for that Chrift faith : This u my body, which pulhc giuen for y9m. €9. Ergo he did not giue his body fubftan- tially atfupper. 0 Annfipere . 12. And this fame argument vfed others af- ter Veter hUrtjr, as Pilkihon againft DeHor Glytn^ &alleageiti the fame place ot^S. Atifien, asyow may fee in Fox fag. 1259* But the matter is ca- fiiy anfwered, for that the minor or fecond propoiition is cleerly falfe, for that Chrills body giuen in the fupper, though yt were the fame m fubftance, that was giuen on the Croffe, the next day after , yet vyas y t dcliuc- redat thefupperin another manner , towitt in manner impafsible, & vndcr the formes of bread and vvyne, fo as according to the being; which Dijputations, dout Religion. Chap. 4* 2tp which yc hath in the Sacrament , no natural! $:aufc could exercife any action vpon yt> though being the felfe fame which was to dye vpon the Croflc, y t is alfo paGiblc , euen as now in heauen it is vifible, & in the Sacra- ment inuifible , though one & the (clfc fame body3& now in both places glorious and im- mortal!, & this meancth exprellely S. Aujlenm the place alieagcd, whofe words cited by Fox are : Tott^ are not 19 eatethis body thatyow fee, nor to drmkf the bloud that thej are to fbedd who f hall cruape me. Which words being fpoken to them, that were fcandalized at his ipeach about the ea- tinge of his body,do fliew that wc are in deed to eate his true flelli in the Sacrament,but not afcer that carnali manner, which they imagi- ned: carmliter cogitauerunt (faith S.AuJlen 'm the s. ^u^t^ fame place) ^ putauenmt, quodpfdtcifurm effet D^- ^^^^^^ ?mniu partkulasquafdamde mp&re fuOy dr daturus dnnkinge illis. rhey imagined carnally, and thought that Chrift would hauc cutt of certayne peeces of his body, and giuen vnto thcm^ which groffe imagination our Sauiour refu- tcth by tellinge them, that they lliould eat his true body, but in another forme of bread and wyne. 15. And yet that yt Is the felfe^fame body& the felfe- fame bloud, the fame Dodor and Father affirmeth expreflcly , both in this and many other places. VeremagmnDominm.&cAit w is in deed a great God, that hnth giuen to cat 'p^£'.\^, his owne body^in which he fufFered fo many, „ and great thinges for vs. And againc talkinge ofhis 220 A revietif &f ten publike i In pp>. oFhis tormentors : Ipfum fangmnewquentperitP^ faniam fader mjt, per gratUmbibeYunt. Thefelfe- fame bloud which by fury they llieed, by grace they dronke. And yet further of the fame : QuQuf^ biherent fangu'tnem quern fuderunty mercy left them not, vntill they belecuinge him , came to drinke the bloud , which they had iTiedd. And finally in another place: Vteim vtiiit iam fanguinem nopnt bibere cudent es, quern fuderxnt J^^^'^^^'^'fcuientes'^ that comminge to beleeue in him, they might learne to drinke chat bloud^which in their cruelty they flieed • AndlaltofalI,ia another place explaninge his owne faith, and the beleete of all Chriftians in this behalfe, he j lib.t. c$n' faith againft hcretiks of his tyme • Uedtatorem: \ ^T9£h,c, f . receaue the mediator of God and man Chrift lefus, giuing vnto vs his flelK to be catcn,and bloud to bedronken, though yt may feeme mrt herrible to eat€ mans flesh, then to fled the [me, and ra dnnks mans bloud, then to ffJedd the fame. Conlider heerc the fpeach of Saint Augufilne , whether iu may agree to the eatinge of a figne of Ghrifts body orbloud what ^horror is therein that§ And thus much to this firll argument. 1. Argument. « wuK- F/- ''Bodyes organicall without quantity, cu^ntiry. he no bodyes. i Not ^ The Popes dodrinc maketh the body IiVquan- of Chrift in the Sacrament to be ^^y* without quantity, (• Ergo: i)ijputdtms, ahout Religion. Chafi 4.! 11% Ergo : the Popes dodrine maketh the body of Chriftuithe Sacrament to be no body* 14. We graunt that bodyes organicall, withi out all quantity are no bodyes- but Carholikd dodrine doth not teach^ that Chrifts body m the Sacrament i i^rwithoutail quantity, buc only without externall quantity, aunfwering to locall extenfion, and commenfUration of place, which repugneth not to the nature of quantity > as before is declared at large, in the fourth obferuation of the precedent Chapter- wherbyyowmay fee both the vanity of this argument^ as alfo the notorious folly & igno-^ ranceof F0X5 who by occafion of this argu- ment of an organicall body vrged, by Cranmer in Oxford, again ft Maifier Harpespeld when he proceeded Bachler of diuinity, bringethni ^ whole commedy of vayne diuifes, how all the learned Catholike men of that vniucrfity, were aftoniilied at the very propoundinge of this graue doubtj to witt ^ Whether Chrljihath Fox p^j[, hk quantity, qualitjf, formeyjij^ure, and fuch ulepro-- fertjes in the Sacrament. All the DoUon ( ftith Fox) f ell in a huiLz^tnge, vncertayne what to aunfwere , fome thought one waj, fome another , and thus Maijler Do* ^tors could not agree. And in the margent he hath t h i s n o tc : Ths KMyns could not Agree among ft them- feiues : and then he profecuteth the matter for a \vho!e eolumne or page togeather, makinge 211 A review ten puhlike A^^Comi- Dollar Treffam , to fay one thinge , DoHor Snittt of lohtt^^ ^ri^^hcr^ Hatfes^eld xnoxhtt ^ VVeflon another, Fojc M. VVurd philofophy-reader another 5 whofd phiiofophicall difcourfc about the nature of quantity, Fox not vnderftandinge, neythcr the other that WTsreprefent, as heaffirnieth. Fox ihii. conciudeth t\\m:MarfleY Ward amplijied fo large^ ly his words, & high he cljmed into the heauens with Duns Udder yank not with the fcriptures, thatyt is to he vmaajfUd , how he could come downe agatne without falling. So lohn according to his ^i^ill;,butM4i^ fier Ward and the reft, that vnderftood philo-i fophy, knew well inough what he faid, and yow may eafily conceauc his meaningejas al- fo the truth of the thinge yt felfe, by readingd my former obferuation • for I thinke yt not conuenient to repeatc the fame againe heerc. ^. Argument. All thinges which may be diuided hauc. quantity. * The body in the Popes Sacrament diuided into three parts. Ergo: the body in the Popes Sacrament hath quantity, which is againft their ovrnedodrine. Annfaere. iif. We deny that it is againft our do(5irlnc^* thatChriib body in the Sacrament hath in- \vard quantity , but only cxternall and localL « Falfc & r/- foolish. Dljputatkm, dUut Relighn. Chap. 4* 223 Wc deny alfo, that Chrilts body isdiuided into three parts in the Sacrament , or into any part at all,for it is indiuiliblcj only the formes of bread arc diuided. And this is the igno- rance of the framer of this argument, that vn- derftandeth not what he faith j for it i$ ndicu<» lous to affirmc, that when the confccrated hoftis diuided into three partes, thatChrifts body isdimded alfo > which is no more truc^^ then when a mans fingar is cutt of wherin th^ foulc was wholy before , that ihe is alfo diui- ded therwith. 4- Argument. - E^- No natural! body can receaue in y t felfe at one tyme contrary or diuersqua- lityes, VigiL cent. Eutkh. Uk 4. rU *To be in one place locail 3 and in ano- * Falfe^ thcr place not locall, in one place fwV^'*' ' ! * . 1 . X ^ , ^^^^^ pro* witn quantity, and in anoth>:r place p^-ciy^a*. without quantity , in one place cir- cumfcript, in another place mcir- cumfcript, is foranaturaii body to rcceaue contrary qualityes. f. Ergo: they cannot be faid to bqin Chriftd t body. j ' 16. To the firft proportion of this argu- ment, I fay, that the fentence o^' VigtUm, allea- ged by Fox m this place, n nothingctohis purpofe* 214 Arevlewoftetj^uhlike purpofe : Fc r that Vigilius dealinge againft th ^hey being euill-men pcrilTied accor- „dmgdv. 22. The other places cyted m the margent, I pretermitt for breuity fake to fett dbwne at b , rhis being knowne to be thegenerall Carholike fentence ol all auncicnt holy Fa* ^yitti^ concerning^ ludoi and other cuill-men. J)}Jputatms, about Relipon. Chap. 4. 229 that they receaue Chrift, but to their ownc damnation J and the fentence of S. Paul befoic cytedis fodecre, and euident> as no reafo^ nable doubt can be made theroff And when Fo5C doth h^ere allcage certayne places of S. Cypian and Auguflme, affifminge that the catinge oi Chxi^ udmllinge 'mhim and he in vs, and that thofe that dwell not in him, do not cat him > yt is to be vnderftoodof fpiriiuali and fruitfull eatinge of Chrifts body , which agreeth only to good men and not toeuill, which cuill do only receaue facramentaliy the body and bloud of Chrift, as before we haue faid, and more at large is declared in our ninth obferuacion 5 yea the very words allea- ged ht^xt o^ S.Auguflinehy fimple lohn Vox.ih^t ^h?- '^ difcerneth not what mal^eth for him, & what elp!Ts^ 2gainfthini, do plainly teach vs this diftin- ^!;tion. For that ^. 4«^^(jfi«^vpon thofe words of Chrift in S. lohns ghofpellj he thateauth my icaiu €. flesh, and dmketh my bloud^ dwelkth in me , and I in him, inferrcth prefently thefe words: Chrifi p)ew€th fvhAt yt is, not ^ facramentaliy , but indeed to * Non s^- eat his body and drinke his bloud, which u n^hen a man ' ^0 dppeUeth in Chrifi, that Chriji dmUeth m him. 23. So he. Which words arc euidcntly meant byS. Augufilne of the fruitfull earing of Chrifts body to our Saluacion , which may be faid in cifed: the only true caringe therof ^ as he may be faid truly to eat and feed of his mcate, that profiteth and nouriiheth therby : but he that taketh no good but rather hurt by that he ca-- t€th ^ may be faid truly and inelFed not to Fi ^ %IQ A revieu^ of ten fuhlike feed in comparifon of the other that profitetfr by eatinge, though he dcuoure the meate fete before hirn ^ and fo yc is in the blefTcd Sacra- ment, where the eiiiil doc eat Sacramento tenus^ S. Augupne faith, that is facramcntally only, and without ftuite j not that they receaue not Chrifts body , but that they receaue yt withr •utfruite to'thcir damnation j which diftin-- d:ion is founded in the ftriptures, not only out of the place of Paul before aJIeagedcq the Cormthians,hutout of Chrifts owne words in fundry places of the ghofpell j as that of M^nh.'te* SMathew: Venit^lim hminu dareanimamfuam re" demptionempromultu, Thclbnneofmancamc togiue his life for the redemption of many^ wheras indeed he gaue y t for all > but for thac no t alljbut many lliould receaue fruite theiby^ yt is faid tohauc byn giuen fruitfully only for 244th.ii>id. many and not all* And againe in the fame Euangelift : This is my kloud of the new Tefiament that Jbalbe fbeddfor many, that is to fay fruitfully, and to thcit faluation , but (iifficicntly for all, and To in like manner all men good and badd, do eacc Chrift in the Sacrament , buteuill- men facramcntally only, without the fpiritu-^ ail effed therof, but good men both (piritual- ly and facramencally togeather, 24. And to this end appertayne alfotho(e words of S. Augujim, alleaged by Bradford.Rul-- ?ox ^4>j. ley and others , that wicked-men edmt panent ^-ir^^«- Dmini&mnpanem Domini , they eat the Lords bread, but not the bread that is th-s Lords; ^hat is to fay^they eat not t;hc bi:cad,that brin- Dijptitations, about Religion. Chaf, 4. i^t gethvnto them the true cffed and fruite of the Lords body, which is grace, fpirit, and life cuerlafting, though they eat the body itfelfe, whiehis called the bread of our Lord only in this fcnfe, that it hath no fruite nor virall ope- ration, but rather the contrary^ 3. Argument. Ma- Yf the wicked andinfidells doreceaue the body of Chrift , they rcceaue him by fedfe, reafon, or faith* fb- But they receaue him neytheir with fenfe, rcafon, or faith, for that the bo- dy of Ghrift is not fenfible , nor the myfteryis accordingetoreafon , nor do infidells beleeue» fo. Ergo. Wicked-men receaue in no wife the body of Chrift. t^. This argument is as wife as the maker^ for firft we do not alwayes ioyne wicked- men and infidels togeather , as he (eemeth to fuppofe 5 for that an infidell ( their cafe in re- ceauinge being different) when he receaueth the Sacrament, not knowingeorbcleeuingc yt to be the body of Chrift , he receauethyt only materially, no otherwife then doth a; beaftor f€niile0e-man , without incurringe new finne thcrby: wicked -men receaue yt to fll^ir damnation , for that knowinge and be- ? i iceiiing^^ 15 z A review of ten fuhUkg keuinge yt to be the body of Chrift (or at leaftwife ought to do) they do notdifcerne orreceaue ytwich die vvQf thyncffb of prepa- ration , which they fliovild do: and as far fenfe & rea(bn>though Chrifts body be not fenfible, yet are the formes of bread, voder which y t is ^ prefeat and receaucd , fenfible , for that they haue their fenfible t^ft, coulour^ fmeil, and ocher like accidents, and though the myftery ytfelfe ftand not vpon humayne rcafon , yet are there many reafons both humayjne and diayne, which may induce Chriflians tobe- leeue the truth therqfjCU^n accordirge to the ruieofreafon ytfelfe, which reafons we call arguments of credibility : So as in this Sacra- jTient, thoughyt ftand not vpon fenfe or rea- fon , yet inreceauinge therof is th^rc fraudc bochin fenle ajid rcaiqn , which is fufftcient; to fhcw the vanity of him that vrgeth it; now fli^li we paffe to the lad argument of Fetet MdTtj/^ though drawen from another ground. 4. Argummt. The holy Ghoft could not come yf the body of Chrill were really prefent,for that he faith : loan. 16. vnleffe I go from yow. the holy ghojl ffjall not come* But th^^ttheholy-ghoft 15 come, yt is nioft certaync. Ergo : y t cannot be that Chrift himfelfc iliould be heerc really prefent. >jcc this Bip- irgumeat vrgcd by Cauften^ other Fox- ian Mar- c/t/-^ tyrs. pa>r, do^ Ampper^^ piJpHt4ti9ns, about Reli^kn. Chaf. 4, 235 m Amfmre. 26. Firft neyther Fox, nor his Mdrtp can dmy huz that the hplyrghoft was alfo in the world, whillt Chrift was bodyly prefect , for that yt dcfcendsd vifibly vpoii him in the forme of a douc> aqd after he gaiie the fame to hisdifciples fayinge: accifite Jpiritum fdn^um*^TC' nm. zol ceauey^ the holy-ghort ^ whcrby is nianifcft, that there is no repugnance , why Chrilts bo- dyly prefence may not ftandtogeather , with the prefence of the holy-ghoft. VVhcrfore the nieaninge of thofe other words loan.\6. that except Chrtfl departed, the holjf-ghefi fbouldnot cmt^ uan, rnnltneedsbe, that fo longas Ghriftrcmay- ned vpoa earth viiibly> asa Doftor , teacher, Scexcernall guide of his difciples & Church^fo loDge the holy-ghoft lliould not cpme in fuch abouiidance of grace, to dired theGhurch, cythervilibly 5 a^he did atpentecoft or inui- fibly, as after he did. But this impugneth no- thing the prcfsnce of Chrifl in the SacramSt, where he is inuili bly^Sc to feed our foules, not as a Do dor to teach & preach^as in his bodily cohuerlation ypon earth he was^for this he af- fcriberh to the hoh -ghoft after his a(cenfion: lUf jp'nittu veritatis docehit vos nmnem ventatmit\\zt fpirit of truth lliall teach ycu all trutht 27, And thefc be all the arguments of fetet Martyr regiftred by Fox, who concludeth in thefc words : Aftd thm hnefelywe haue rmneouer 4II the arguments, animhoritjes of Peter Martyr in " ' that 254 revletp often puhlikf :BoKpdS' tl')^it di^uution 4t Oxford with DoAor Tre- fliam, Chcdfcy 4wi Morgan, before the Kinpyifi- toursaboue named, dnno 15:45?. So he. And for fo much as he fettcth downe no folution vnto thefe arguments; we may imagine that he held themfor infoluble: and then yf youcon- fider how wcake and vayne they haue byn, and howcafy to aunrwerc ^ yow will therby fee how fare grounds , this poore Apoftata- frhvMartjrh^^d tobecomeafacramentary, 5c to Icaue his former Religion, which had en- dured in Chrills Church for fo many ages be- fore^yca and to oppofe himfelfe againft DoUor Luther in this point of the reall-prefence, who was their Prophet, and had firft of all opened X^ntohim & others the gapp to his Apoftafie. And finally what good alliirance a man may haue, to aduenture his foule with thefe com- panions in fuch a quarrell , as Cranmer , R/rf/e/, Latjmer, Rogers , Hooper , and others did , who hauing byn Cath. Priefts for many yeare&,did firft of all others imbrace in England thefe new opinions of P^f^r Mmyr, which yet were foyonge and grecnc, as himfelfe was fcarfcly fettled in them, when he firft cntred in to that * Menfe ^1^"^ > in his ftory more particularly we haue declared • Whcrfore to Icaue him, we fliall now examine fomc other arguments^alr leaged by others after himjcfpecially by thofc that were ailors in the former ten difputa- tions at Oxford, Cambridge and LcndoH , which rirc not much fewer in number, then thefe al- leagcd already of Fcter Idartju Dijputatim, dout Kelipon. Chap. 4. 23^ The fourth fort of arguments alleaged by others after VctciManyr. $-4. 28. And of thcfe the firft is the fatisfa- (ftionfor the world: Butyfhe take the Sacra- ment for the outward fignes only of bread & wyne^them he graunfetn both the conclufioni and the whole fiJIogifme to be true , that the Sacrament is not the body of Chrift . VVher- Vnto Til^inm makcth one only reply,and that moft fondly? out of the fame equiuocation, fayinge: that the Sacrament hath not (atisfied for the world, and chat men may be faued without the Sacrament, as many were before y t was inftituted : Whervnto Doctor Glyn very learnedly learnedly aunfwered: thatyfhetooke the^^-* irament , as before he had diftingiiilhed , for Chrirt conteyncd in the Sacrament, then had the Sacrdment, that i& to fay Chrift thcrin con- teyned^ both (atisficd for the whole world, and none were cuer (aued without him > for that all were failed by faith in him to come* p. The fame Pi/j^«f^» leaping from his for- mer argument, without takinge his leaue, fal- leth vpon another medium in thefe words: The body efchrijl U r^fiam in heauen. Piikimni And the h9dy ofckrifi k in the Sacrament. J^^^^^^ Ergo: the Sacrament u in heauen. This argument yow fee is as good and no bet-^ ttr, then yf we ihould fay: The [ohU $f4 man u in the fingar. And tl)e fgule of a man u in thefme. IrgOy thefoote U in the pngar. But yet D0a§r Glju declared there furthcr^aftet he had icfted at the arglim^nt.that Chrift was in one fort in heauen i and after another fore in the Sacrament- in heauen locally, vifibly& circumfcriptiucly, but in the Sacramentinui- fibly and facramentaliy : which differences being not found in the foule, being in the foote and finger, maketh our argument more heard to anfwcrej then that of Tilkjntm 5^. There followeth a third argument of Pilkinton thm: In the body of Chrift there be no accidents of bread, pui^^^ But in the Sacrament there be accidents of bread, third ar^ Ergo: the Sacrament k mt the body of Chnfi. s^nicaw ij eere yow fee is the fame fond equiuocation and i^o A review of ten puhlikf and doubtfuH fenfe of the word Sacramcnl before expounded,and poore Filkjnmczn not gettoutofyt: For yf he cake the word Sacfa^ mnt, for the only body of Chrift conteyned therin, then is the minor propofition falfe^ for that the Sacrament in this feme hath no acci- dents of bread in yt. But yf he take the Sacra- ment for e^tternall lignes,then we graunt both his minor and conclufion to be trite , and no- thinge againft vs, to witt,that the Sacrartnenc in this fenfe is not the body of Chrift, though comonly in our fenfe the Saerament comprc- hendeth both the one and the other. 34,» But further MdifrerPHklntm had a fourth argument, & with that he was briefly difpa- tched: he propofed the fame in theft word?. 'pVktnt.ns y yfjerfoeueY Chtifl is, there k his minihrsdlfoM gumeiu. fohepYotmpth.^ ' ^: . But CbYtfi, jQw bould is in the Sactment^^ Ergo: hu mmjlers ^re there alfo: This argurnciK is worthy of MaifieY Pilknitori^ and his miniiters ^ for y t proueih by like con- fec]uence>th.it they fliould haue byn in Pilatts pallace with him , and on the Croffe. And yt may be argued aifo; that for fo much as they aYtmi with him noip in heauen,ct^o: he is net f/;f rf .Whcr- tuh,ii. fore the mei^ninge of that place in S. Johns ghofpell; where ) m there mj miwfter ^[he (iirh not i^vherefoaier as Udtjler Vilkinton putteth yt downe) is to be vnderliood of the partici- pation of Chrifts glory in the next hfe, a^ hdn.ij. himfelfeexpoundeth in the xj.of S.lohhyWhtx^ be faith to his Father,that he will haue ther<5> to W n he with him, to fee his glerjf. And in the meanc fpace we fee how thele feIIowes,that glory fd much of fcripture, do abufe the true fenfeof fcripturej incuery thinge they handle. And thus much do I findoBieA'cdagainfl the reall" frefence in the C4W&n4g^dirpucations. 55. There enfueth another difputationhoul- den in the Conmcation-houfe, in the beginninge of ^M^^^fi raigne^which in our former order or Cataiogue of difeuracions is the (eauenthj M. philips wherin MMfleY FhiUips Deaneof Rochejler, did ment!^"* argue again it the rcall pre fence in thi? fort. ^^'^ P^i* Chrtk faith, yotr ff)all bane poore People With nw. ^\ Butmejow full not baue, loan, iz. Ergo. Chrifi is notprefent in the Sacrament. Whervnto Dotior VVejton prolocutor in that Conference anfwet^d , tha* Thrift is not pre- fent in that manner ci bodyly prefence , as then he was^ (b that good people may vfe works of deuotion and piety tds'i^irds him- jfelfc , as th^ri S. Miiry Magdalen did, in whofe defence he fpoke thofc w ords: Bui PhtUtps not contenting himlelfe with this anfwere, allea- ged a longe difcdurfe out of Augufline in his commentary vpbn ^-I&bwgholpeii, where the holy- father faith 5 that Chrijl u pre fent with v.< hi ^^^^ ^^^^^ Maiefiie , prouidtnce , grace, and loUenow^ hut not in s^lmUan. corporall prefence. Whervnto anfwered D.TF^f- /i« afterward B. ofLincolne, expoimdingc that place by another of the (ame Father vpon the fame Euangelift , where he faith : that Chrift is f^^^^ pot now pre fent after that ^ortall condition, which then h^vvoi, &c. Which norhinge letteth his bein^ ^ ffF/^ Bf ten pihUke after another manner in the Sacrament. Nay I S. Augufttm in the very fame Treatife, not ten : lynes before the words alleaged by M. Philipps, ! ^ui.m. hath thefe words: Habes ChriftumpAfentem,pn \ altarii dbum & fotum. Thou hall Chriit prcfent . in this hfe, by the foode and drihke of the Al- | tar: which is another diftind way of prcfencc i from thofe two, named by him in the former place, of grace and corporaU conuerfation. And yc may feeme that this PW/^pi was not only fa- tisfied by this anfwcre, for that he replied not; but further alfo was conuerted vpon this conference, or difputation in the conuoca^ pa^. xi8|. tion-houfe, or very foone after: For that Fox tnnMr^me, coctnucd DcsincofAocheJler^ all QJfdarjies day es > which no doubt he Ihouldl not haue done, yf he had not fublcribed, as all the reft did, to this article of the redU-prefence. 36. Next after ?hilifs Deane of Rochefterydcp^ ped vp Philpm Archdeacon of VVinchefier Fox vvith great vehemency , and tooke vpon him ml^.'W!" to prone, that Chrift in hislaft fnpper did not cat his ovvne body by this argument: that for yhiipottf much as rewifion of fmnes woi promifed vnto the re^ Kicftt?^"' ceauingeofchrijisbodjf, and that Chrtfldtdndtreceaue remifton &f fmnes, ergo, Chrifi did not receaue his ewne body. Whcrvnco Maifier More-ntan who, extern- porf was appointed to anfwerehim^and DoHot V Vefton the prolocutor,gaue this anfwere^that as well he might prouethat Chrift was not/ baptized, for that he receaued no remifsion of finnes therin:but as he receaued thar Sacramct for our inftruction and imitation onlyj fo did lie this other. Whcrabout though Philp$t msidc a great ftyrre , as not content with the aun- fwere* yet could he reply nothing of any mo- tnent, and fo ended that daycs difputation* The next day he returned againe , and w ould haue made a Icnge declamation again ft the reaU frefenct, But being reflrayned he fell into fuch a rage and pafsion, as twife the prolocu* tor faid, he was fitter for Bedlariljthen for di- fputation . - jr. After fhUfott, ftodd vp lUtfier Cheney Archdeacon of Hereford , another of the fix V<;hich did contradicSb the mpznd reallprefcnct in the Cenuocatibh-houfe ^ who was after made B. of Glocejler.hdng that tyme perhapps incly- tied to Zuinglianifmc, though afterward he turned, and becarric a Lutheran and fo lyued and died in the late Queenes dayes. There is extant to this man an eloquent epiftle in La- tyn of F. tdmund Cdmpian, who vnhappily had byn made Deacon by him , but now being made a Cathblike , exhorted the Biflioppto leauc that whole miniftry: This mans argu- ment againft the redS prefence, being taken out of the common obiedlions of Catholike wry- ters and fchoole-men , was this , that for fo much as it is cleare by experience, that by ea- tihge cdnfecrated hofts for example, amari fn^ybe noufillicd, and that neythcr Chrifts body , nor the accidents and formes alone^canf i>e faid to noriflb. ergo befides thefetwo rhere inuft be fome other fubflance^that noiiriftieth, i^hich fccmcth can be no other but breads 244 ^ revien^ of ten fuhUli And the like argument may be made of coU^ lecrated wync thatalfo nourillieth • And fur- ther in like manner he argued , conccrninge confecrated bread burned to allies , demaun- dinge wherof^that is to fay, of what fubftance thek alhes vverc made , for fo much as we hould no fubftance of bread to be therin : and Fox would make vs beleeue, that all the Ca- tholiks there prefent could not aunfwcre that doubt, and amongeft others he faith of DoHor iox , Harfesfield: Then vvds Maifier Harpesjield called in t9 J a88. ^ fi^ ^^'-^^^ fo^ <:o^W in the matter ^ vvho t9uld a fajre tale of the omwfetencjf of dlmightjf God. But Fox vnderfteod not what Do^er Harpesjield (aidia that behalfe, as may eafily appcare by his fond relatinge therof: We haue iett downe the , aunfvvere to thefe and like obiedions, before The aun- ia the /. and I o. Obferuations , and ytconfi- M?chlt fteth in thisj thatin thefe naturalladions,and , ncycs ar. fubftaatiall changes of nutrition and genera- , fboirrai- tron> v/hcrin not only accidents are altered, trition 6c [^^t ucw fubfhuccs alfo arc produccd,& con- . gcneratio. (^qy^j^^-jy according to nature that Operation doth require not only accidents, but alfo fub- . Itantiall matter wherof to be produced j God , by his omnipotency doth fupply that matter, ^ which is neceffary to the new produdion , ofthatfubftaftce,cyther by nutrition or gene- ration . V 58. And albeit the vnbelecfe of heretiksdoth -j not reach to comprehend nnd acknow^ledge,^j that God (houM do a myracle or action abouc i^attureeuery tyme that this h^ppeneth our, yet Di^utatms, about Religion. Chap. 4,. 24^ yetcan they not deny yt in other things: As for example, that euery tyme, when any chil- dren are begotten throughowr the world> Cod inimediatly createtH new foules for them, which needs muft be thoufands eiiety day , yet none of our feftaryes will deny or fcoffcatthis, or hold yr for abfurd, the like may be faid of all the fiipcrnaturail ^ffedes & bcnefites which God beftoeth dayly & hour-- ly vpon vs in the Sacraments or otherwift. 59. There remaync only fome few places out of the Fathers to be explaned, which were obied:ed in this article, partly by Maijler GrinddU againft Dp£lgrGljn^ and partly a!fo by VeterUanyrm the end of his Oxford- difputa- c^mynj tion i but related by Fox in the queftion of father* Tranfubftantiation,?C not of the teall-prefemt, cxpUned. thoq^h properly they appertaync to this , as now yow will fee^ The firft place is out of T^rf«f//4« again ft Mmion the heretike , where he hath thefe words (faith Fox):Tfc» ii my body, fox n?. thAtUtQ^4y,thukthefigneefmfhody. Whervnto «->®-^«^^^- I anfwere , that Foxdeaierh heerelikea Fox in cytinge thefe w^ords fo cutteclly , for that TeYtuWian in this very place (as in many others) doth mofl cifeas they do not take haue from Chrift, that he was the true fubftance of ^lli^li^^ his Father or true God, or true man in deed hercfics (though out of euery one of thefe places fome Talhccs^* particular herefies hauebyn framed byaun- «htir cient heretiks,againft his diuinity or humani- ITandingc ty) fo do not the forfaid phrafes, fometymcs t^^ir vfed by the aftncient Fathers, callinge the Sa- crament a figure , figne , reprefentacion or fi- militude of Chnfts body,excIude the truth or reality therof^ for that thcreis as well , fignnm & fynrarel pnfintis quam abfentis , A figne or fi- gure of things pre{ent,as well as of things ab^ fentj as for an example, a firkyn of wyne han- ged vp for a figne at a Tauerne dore,that there is wyne to be fould , is both a fygne of wyne, and yet conteyneth and exhibiteth the chinge yt felfe: And fo yt is in the Sacrament>which by his nature being a figne5tigure,or reprefen-- cacion , doth both reprefent and exhibitt , fi- gnifieth and conteyneth the body of ourSa- uiour. 0^4 4tfAn4 ^ tevleip of ten fuhliks 4u And as it lliould be an hereticall cauill to argue out of the faid places oiS. Faul, as the bid hcrctiks did , that Chrift is galled a figure oj the fubfiance ofhu Father, and the Image ^ G^d^ or the fimilttude of man: ergo , he is not of the reaU lubltance wirh his Father,nor really God>nor puly man: lo is it as heretical! to argue as our Sacrani^ncaryesdqj that lertuJlidH.Augujlme, & fome orher Fathers do fometymes call ihe SacramcBC a fimtliiude, figure, figne or rmeptjbrance of Chriih body , his fleath and pafsion > as iii deed yt is ^ ( for that o^iHervyife yt lliould not be a Sacrament ) ergo ; y t is nqc his true body, that iscoqteyned therin> efpecially feiogrhe fame Fathers, do in the (eife (ame^piaces, whence chefe obiediions are d.educed> expref- fely & cieerly expoiiud themfelues, affirming Chrifts true reall body to be in the Sacrarnenc vnder the formes of bread and vyyne: as for ^mbr 1,4. example Saim Amhrofe heere pbiecfted in the ^; ^''^^'^^ fourth booke rf^^^fWA;f«f^(:4p.4. dothexpref- fely and at !arj;e proue the re all-pre fence ^ as ex- a6tly as any Catholike can w ryte at this days fayingc : that before the wordf of confecration, ft k bread, bat after jt u the body ofcbrijl. And againe. S ^mbrofe Before the words ofChrifi be vncud, the chdUe is full dc?h him- c»/i'^7yc 'tnd ivater, but tvhtn ihe words ^f Chvifi h^ue felfe a- vi^rought ihe'ir efjeci, then is, made that bleud /t^hicl) re- ll'o^ci^^J the people. And yec fuuher. Chrifl ItfuA dot'} te^tfie vnto that vve receaue his body &bloud, anifl:adipcd9ubtofhis teflimoiiyl Wnich words being fo plame and euident for the truth of C.itholike bele^fv , Ictc the reader confidcr. BlJpuuti0ns,dQUt Religion. 249 how vame and food a thing yt is tor the Pro- ceilants to obie though he be faid , to be the Image of God, as before yow hauc heard. 42. There remaynech then only to be auu- fwered, that fpeach oF S. Auguftine obit ^td in ihcie diiputations. Qmd fam denies ventrem? ^^^jr^Sf. mde & manducafii: Why doft thou prepare thy 15. iccth aiid thybeljy? beleeue arid thou haft eaten, Whervnto i anfwcre, that this fpeach of S.Augujline :ind fome other Hkc, that are found in him, and feme other Fathers, of the fpirituali eatinge of Chrift by faith, do not ex- clude the reall prefmce, as we haue fheWcd bc« fore in ourn3^nthobferuation. Itislpoken a- gainft them,that come with a bafe and groffe imagination to receaue thisdiuine foode, as if yt were a corporall refection , and not fpiri- uiall^ wheras indeed faith & charity are thofe vertues, that giue the lifevnto this eatinge: fauhin beleeuinge Chrifts words to be triie, j|s5. Ambrofe in the place before cytcd faith. A review of ten publikf and therbyairuringc our lelues, Chriftstrue body to be thcre:and charity in preparing our fcluzs worthily,by examinations of our con- icience , char we do not receaue our owne damnat^n , as S. Paul doth threat. And this i$ the ttue fpirituall eatinge of Chrifts body by faith, but yet truly and really, as the faid Fathers do expound vnto vs,whofc fentenccs more at large yow ftiali fee examined in the Chapter foUowinge. The con- 4J* Thefe then being ^^11 in elFcdj or at Icaft ciuHon of wayes the moft principall arguments , that I this chap- findobiewh€- ther learned or vnle^rnsd (but c^P^ci^l^y ^he Thcmif^ ignorant) to ground thcmfelues & their f^ich of fcaa- ypon their ownc or other mens difputations, ^^^^'^J^^^*^** which with euery licde llicw of realbn to and fure frp, may alter theire iudgcment or apprehen- f/^^jj*"^^^^ iipn, and in how miftrablea cafe Chriftian to. men were, yf their faith (wherof dcpendeth their (aluation or damnation ) iTipuld hange ypon fuch vncertayne meanes as thcfe are , &: jhat God had left no other more furc or cer- taineway then this for men to be refoiued of the truth, as we fee he hath, by his viliblc Church, that cannot erre j yet thpughtwe good to examine this way of difputatios alfo, and the arguments therof vfcd by Proceftants againft the truth. But now followeth a larger ^ more important examen, of the Cathoiike arguments alleaged by our men againft them, in this article of the r^aU-^re fence. And what kind of aunfwers they framed to theftme, wherby thou wilt be greatly confirmed(good reader) yf I be not much deceaued. in the opi- nion of their wcaknelTe, and vntri^th of their w H A r A miefP of ten fuhltkf VV^HAT CATHOLIKE ARGVMENTS ^ Vf^ en alkaged in thefe dijputatipns fir tbetcd\L^rc[cncc'^ and ho'p they ypereamfyperedor Jhiftedof bytheProtefiams. Chap. v. As I haue briefly touched in the former Chapter, the reafons and arguments al- leagcd tot the Sacramentary opinionsjagainft the r€4ll'pr f fence (6 now I do not deemeyt amiflfe, to runnc oucr in like manner, (ome of thcC^thohke arguments that were alleagcd again A them, though neyther ty me nor place WiU permitt to recyte them ail, which the di(creptt reader may calily imagine by the grounds and heads therof, feet downcin the fecond Chapter of this Trcacife , though ma- ny &: waighty they were or might be. Wher- fore to fpeake hreifely fomcwhat thcrof > and for more breuityandperfpicuity, to draw the matter to (ome kind of order and methode: yow muft notc,that of chefe ten difputations, only fourc were in tyme of Catholike go- ucrnemcnt> as before I figni;ied,that is to fayj the fix-dayes conf^^rcnce in the Conuocation^ Uufe/in the beginningc of P, Uaryes raigne, & , J ' , *-» ^ CI,, ,.7^ / jtioiiintn< chechrce-daycs fcuerall dilputaxion at Oxjora conuoca- with CYanmer, Ridlej , and Latytfter , fome mo- ^^^^^ nechcs after. And as for the firft in the Conm^ cation houfe, the Proteftants only did difputCj for three continuail diyes cogeather , to W'itt> Phillips, H4ddonyChejngy,Elmdur,zndPhilpd^^ (euerall Catholike men were appointed to aunfwere them. And when in the end the Proteftants were required to aunfwere accor- ding to promife,in their turnes,the Catholike opponents for other three d^iyes, theyrefufed roxpaf^ yt alljfauing Fhilpott,Yp6n certayne conditions l^^J^'"^'^ to be heard yet further > but Do£lor VVeJlon the prolocutor reieded him, as dtnanpttertobe fent to bedlam (faith Fox) then to be admitted to dipita- rhiipoti tioHy&c. For that he both was vnlearnedjand a very madd man indeed. Whetfore out of this difputation , little or nothinge is offered about this article of reall-prefence , for that the Cathohke party difputed not at ail. . i. And as for the other three dayes difputa- tion in Oxford, the laft, which was with Laty-^ ffieYi was very Httle, for that hefledd difputa-. tion 5 as there yow iliall fee; and the few argu- ments that were made againft him , were ra- ther in proofe of the facriffce of the m afTe : (6 as moft arguments were aileaged in the for- mer two- dayes conflict againft CunmeYmA Ridley^ which prefently we lliall examine, though vnder K. Edu^aYdMoy one day of the Omfcri^^^ difputations was allowed to Ca- tholike opponents,to propofe their argumets. 154 ^ reneuf ten pubHke VohdrUidetp being defendant for the Prote^ ftancs,and DeSlor Glfn,MaifterLangdail,Sc Maiftef Sedg-wUke opponents for the Cacholikf? : io as oucofthefc fouredifputations, wefhallnote breifcly fonrte Catholike arguments , that x^erc alleaged , aduertifingc the teaider firft to confider with fonle attention the points enfuinge. Firft 5. Firft that we haue nothinge of thefc di- brobfct fpwt^tions, their arguments or aunfwers,but wed. only fuch as pleafcth John Fax to deliuet and impart with vs, which moft euidcndy do ap- peare to be mangled and vnperfe6t in many places, without head or foote, coherence of conicquence, which rrtuft proceed eythcr of purpofe to make matters obfcure, and therby to bnng the reader into doubt and confufion, br of lacke of good inforniiation; and that the fornler is more credible then the fecond, may be gheffed by the variety of impertinent notes in the margent, fcofFes, and iefts in the text yt ^ felfe, often tymesputtin to deface the Catho- like party, arid to giuc creditt to his fecftaryes: Arid confequcntly what faith rriay be giucn to his narrations (but only where they make againO himfelfe) iscafy to bcfcenCjefpecially in thathimftlfe cofeflethj that Rirf/e; wrote in prifon his ownc difputations after they were part, & the fame we may prefume of the reft, and then no man can doubt, but that they would putt downe their owne parts to theif vrtermofl aduantage.or at leaft-wife with the fmalleft loffc; that they could diuift. 4. Dtjpuutlom, dsut IRellgm. Chap, 2^5: 4., Secondly yt is to be confidered of the '^^^^[^^l^ precedent reader , that muft aduenture his brobfr!:- foule eucrlaftingely by takinge one part or other in this controuerfie heerc in hand, how much yt may import him to ftandattenttd the places and authorityes, alleaged out of fcripturcs & Fathers for the truth,& to confi- dcr them well, reading them ouer againc , and againe & weighing the true meaning & fenfc of- the wrytcr , and not how jleightly or cun- ningly they arc > or may be lliifted of by any witty wrangler , for To much as this maybe done with any wry tinge or cuidcnce neucr fo liianifeft, yf the defendant will lift to cauilljSr the reader be foinconfiderate orcarelefleof his o wne perill , as to be delighted or abufed thcrwith . 5, Thirdly in the allegation of Fathers tefti- The third monyes, which heere are to eiifue, yt is to be ^"^^^^^ weighed, not only what they fay, butalfo rabic> how they J[ay,what phrafes and fpeaches they Vfe, and to what end ~, and whether yf rhey had byn of the Proteftants Religion , they Would haue vfed thofc phrafes or no , more then Proteftant wryters do themfelucs at this day , cfpcicially fo ordinarily and commonly as the faid Fathers do, they being men both learned, wife , and religious , that well knew howtovttertheirownemynds & meaning, what is proper & improper fpeach,& withail not being*ignorat,how great inconueniencesi inuftenfue of improper fpeaches in matters of faith, where men are bound to fpeake pre- dfe ly ti}6 A review of ten puhlikf ciJfely and warily : and on the other fide is M be conlidered aifo , yf they were of contrary opinions to the Proteftants , and of thac faith which we aifirme them to be in this point of the r^*i//pr^/i«^(r,what more effecluall fpeachcs . could they haue vfed to exprelTe yt, then they do, cailinge yt the true body, the reaU body, the na* turaUbody ofourSafmur, the fume body that he took^ $f the bhffed Virgin, Atidgaue rpon the Crojfe, the body yvherb) he u vnited vnto vs in hummitj ; and deny- inge itexpreiTcly to be bread after the words of consecration, though yt feeme to be bread to our eyes taji , andthat (remufinottrujlour fenfestherin , but y eld to Gods Gmniptemy y andbeleeue, that he hath wrought infinite other miracUs , fo hath hedonethisy that m muft adoreyt, with the highefi adoration^znd other hke phrafes,which neyther Proteftants can abide , or euer do vfe in their wrytinges; nor could the Fathers, yf they had byn ex- prciTeiy ofour Religion (as we fay they were) diuile words morefigniticant, proper, or ef-i fcciuall to expreiTe the triiih of our Cacho- like faith, then yf oFpurpofe they had lludyed for yr, as no' doubt they did^ So as yf the aun- cient Path ers did vnderftand what they fpakcj and that they fpake as they meant ^ then arc the Proteftants in a pittifull phght, whofe faluation or damnation dependeth in this, whether we muft vnderftand them , S. Paul, and Chrifthimfelfc literally, as they fpake, or by a Pgure only ^ fo as yf they vfed no ngure, thcp. isthe Sacramentary opinion to be held forherefie. 6. Fourthly htj^utaiions^deut Religion. Chaf.^. i^t i. Fuui thiy is to be coiitidcred alfo in this tIj; #: iliatter, as elPwhere we haue noted, that ^^t^l When any bhe of thefe auncient Fathers, iri What age (beuer , is found to vfe thefe effe- d:uall words, for vttering his meaning about this high myftcry^ of Chrifls bemg prefent in the Sacrament, heistobe vnderllood toex- prefle n6t orily his bwnc iudgement, and be- lecfe therin , but the iudgement alfo and be- leefe of the whole Church of Ghriftendome in that agejfor fo much ^ s aiiy Do by reafon of the often interruptions of the Cambridge-prodors and Heights vfed by Ji/^ and much lelTe receaued he any fubftantiall (blution therof. Asforex- amplejin the beginninge he made a very cfFe- du,ilIdil'comTc how this diuinc Sacrament, conteyning?. Chrifts reall body, was not only prefigured by diners figures in the old Tefta- mcnr, as namely the PafchalUUmbe , the fnantfa u. cLynne ^I'ld pwp- bread (which fignifyed the great im- dilcourVc P^^^^^^^ ^^^^ moment therof when yt fhould be performed} buc alfo was fo peculiarly and diligently promifed by our Sauiour,in the fixt of S, John, comparinge yt with the faid figures, and Shewing how mucii yt was to exceed the fam.c, and namely the mdWi/i that came from heauen , and finally expoundinge y t to be his owne bijputations, aJjout V^elighn. Clap. ^. 25:9 '6vvnc fleili which he would giue \s toeatein fulliiliinge thole figures: Fanis quern ego daboca- Um.^^ mea ejl, che bread rhac I will giue }ou iliaibe my fieili, and that truly and indeed: caroenim m^,^^ me A vet eepcibtU'y (or rhy flelTiis triily meate,c3r(;. 8. Thispromife then^and thispirefiguracioa was not (quoth he) performed by Chrift, busp in his hil fupper w ben he rooke bread and de- liuered it f^yinge: this is my body: whicii perfor- mance, jfyt muft aumwbre eyther to Chrifts jpromifein the ghofpeli, or to the figures in the old Tcftament , miift needs be rriore then bread, for that otherwife yt fliould not be better theii thttndnna, that was bread from heauen, which Chrift \\\ 5. lohm ghofpellex- preiTely promifed , flhould be changed into his flefli* And yf Chrift in his laft fupper, had but giuen a figure of his true body j then had he iullfilJcd the figures of th'old TeiUment with a figure in the new 5 and fo ali had byn figures contrary to that of 5 lobn : Lex per Uoyfsn datA u igfly Veritas autem fer Ufum Chrijlum fa£ia efi. The law was giuiiin by Moyfes (in rigures) but the truth thereof was performed by Icfus Chrijft, &c. 5). Thus began Do^or Glyn , but I find no fo- The lutiongiuen thervnroj but that DoUurUddew ^qLaUto being asked whether the Sacraments of the vs by ihe bid law, and new were all one? hefaid:^^4iK tar^To^* *^eed effe£l:boilor Glyn inferred, that then they were not inferiour to vs ; for that they had bread ?hat fignified Chrifts body as well as ^urs, and they by eating that bre.id with faith R ^ m '4^0 'A review of ten puUiki in Chtift to come , did eat Chrith body , «nit participate his grace therby,no lefle then we, which is a great abrurdity,and contrary to the whole drift of S. Vxul fpcaking of that matter, and extollinge the dignity of this Sacrament, yea corrary to the exprefte difcourfe of Chrift fM». i. himfelfe, fayingc; not Meyfes gaueyotp bread from fc^4/^e;i(meaning the Manna} 6«f mj Father giueth pw true bread from heauen. And to this difcourfe iaHo yow lhaii find nothinge aunfwercd in 10* From this bo^or Gljti palteth to fhew rex out of S. Aughfime, S. Ambrofe, and S, BafiU^ that the body of Chrift muft be adored before yt be rece;iued j whetvnto was aunfwercd: that Adoratio ^^^^) ^ certajHe feUerefit manner of receauinge was of the sa- therbj meant, but no adoration but the other re-^ cramcnt. pjy^^^ j-j^^j. Fathers fpake of proper adora- tion j yea S. Auflen went fo farre therin in his books De c'mtate Dei^ that he affirmeth the heathens to haue efteemed the Chriftians , to haue adored Ceres and Bacchus, Cods of bread and wyne , by the adoration which they vfed to this Sacrament of bread and wyne, which they would neuer haue fufpe^ted of the Pro- te.flants, by their behauiour towards their fupper of bread and wyne. Whervnto ano- th :r aunfwcre was framed, that Saint Augtifline m^antonlyof adbringe Chrirts bodyinhea.- uen> and not in the Sacrament- and this aun- • fwere was conffrmed by Ridley very follemne- Iv, fAvingc for his preface : Tor because J am one that doth Im the truth, I vvtU heere declare what I ththke Dif^mtiens, about ^eligm. €hap. ^. i6% I thfnkf iH this paint, &c. I d& graunt a certajne nourand ahiAi 'mtQ be done vnto Chrips body , but then the Fathers Jpeake not ojyt in the Sacmment, but efytin heduen, &c. Neythcr is there any ^ocher aunfwere giuen, Andyet who feethnQtjthac this is buc a piayne ftift? For when S.Augufttne for example faith : Nemo illamcaYnemmanducAt, ^H- «« ni^x prim ddorauerit: No man eateth that flefli (in the Sacratncnt) but firft adoreth yt. And Saint Chrjfojiomc Adora&communiu /dum.proferatur chryp(f. famjiciwu, adore and communicate, whilft the p*^; ^J^^^f facrifice is brought forth • yt is euident by tmh. common fenfe, that the adoration is appoin- ted to that body, which there prefently is ea- ten, and not to Chrifts body abfentin hcaucnj for by this kind of their adoration , wc adore alfo our ordinary dinncrsjto witt by adoringe God in heauen^and fayingegrace^c^^. And h^ that iliall read the place of the Fathers them- felues, will wonder at this impudency, for Saint Au^en doth expound thofe words of the Pfalme Aieratefcabellumfedumeim^znd applie^h ffkim.f^ ytto his fleiliin the Sacrament, and ^5^, Cfey;- foftome. fpeaketh exprelTcly of Chrifts flefb, as yt is in the Sacrament 5 and offered as 3^ (a- crifice. II. And yet doth Fox make Doctor Glyn to haue replycd neuer a word , nor fo much as produced the textes themfelues of the Fathers named by him , but giuinge y t ouer pafTed to another argument, fayinge: Ifytfleafeyourgcoi Lordp'ipp, S, Amhrefeand S. Auguftlne dopy, that be^ the mfecration yt » but bread, and after the con^ i6i A revieu^ of ten fuhlihe 6. ^m^itrt fecrationyt is called the body of Chrift-^ Wherto was fi'mh^t ^^unfwered: Indeed pis the very body of Chrifi Sa- fomd y CYdmentally after the confecratton , vvhem before ft ii ftxiiud of. fiQ^]jiyigc 1^141 common bread, and yet after toatyt is the Lords bready and thus tnujl S.Ambrofeand S.Auguftine be vnderjhod. So faid the aunfwercfs,anci Do£lo7 Glyn was by the proders commauncicd to ceafsj and pafle to the fccond queftion^ but he ^ otym obtayned by intreaty to go foreward anin- ^* ftance or two morclliewing out of the words o?S. A'nbrofe, that RidleyesTLX^n^'yNtvt could not Fox p^^, be true • for that S. Ambrofe Czid ; that after the confecratton , there ts not the thinge that nature did forme.bm thattvhich the blefing doth confecrate. And that yf the benedi to be- come the Lords b.read« 12. To tliis reply there wa? no other aun- fwere giuen, but that 5. Ambrofe hisbooke d€ Sacramentii vi^s not his, & Ridley aiTirmed that all the Fathers did fay fo: which was a fliame- lefTe lye in fo great an auditory , nor cou'd he bringe forth fo much as one Father that faid fo,nor aileaged heany one argument to proue yt to be fo^ andyf he had, yet S. Ambrofe repea- tinge againe the very fame (entence in his booke de imtiandis is fufHcient for the authori- tv of the place, but Glyn is made to palTe away the matter with fylence, fayinge: Well Utt thi$, ^^Jfcj And then goinge to other authori- tycs Pi^uuttom, ahut^eligm. Chap 16^ tycs of Fathers, yswyped of with like IhiEsj when he cytech S. Cyprians words : Vmis non f^^^^?^^^ (?ffigie,fedn4tHramutam,QmnipQtmi4 Deifitcaro: the bread by confccration oeing changed not ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ in lhape, but in nature, is by the omnipotency [her,, " of God made fle£hj they aunfwere that by na- ture is vnderftood a naturall property or qua- lity, and by flelh , a flefhiythinge or quality, and not the fubftance, fo as the ftnfc mufl: be> that bread is changed not in outward fliapCj, but into a naturall property of a flellily things i^c. And when D@£iof Glyn replyed to ouer- throw this inuenrion out of S. Ambrose , who ?iffirmeth this chage of bread to be made into, the flelli > ?hat was taken of the Virgin Mary, €Ygjyt was not only inta a flefhiythinge, qua- lity, or property 3 but into, the true flefh of Chrift- Kit//;? gaue an aunfwere, that I vnder- ftand not,nor himfelfe I thinke, but only that he muft fay fomwhat in fo great an audience, and expedation j or Fox vnderftood yt not that fetteth it downc: for thefe are his words: 15. V Vhen DoSor Glyn vrged the fayinge of S. Am- brofe, that bread u changed into the body taken from the virgin Mary, that k to Jay (faith he) that by the word Fox ^c- 0/ God, the thtngthath a being that yt had net before, I'J^^ and we do confe crate the body, that we may receaue the grace and power of the bodf of Chrift in h^auen by this Sacramentall body. S o he. And doth any man vn- derftand him ? or is his aunfwere anv thinge to the purpofe for fatisfyinge the Fathers? S.CyprmCmh: that the breatTby the oanr po- tency of God h changed in nature, and m^^^o. ^ rmem of ten fuUike AeiTi and S. Ambrose faith : jft is the flesh taken fiom the Virgin ^ and Ridlej faith heere ; that yt hath ^ Uing, which yt had not before, and that> they do con^ fe crate afacramcntaU body ofChrijl, therby to., receaue the grace and ^ower of Chrifis body in heauen j but Iiowfocue^ they do consecrate that bodys (which isaftrange word for Sacramenraryes to vfe)yet do they graunt that this Sacramen- tal] body is but brcad^and ho w then can yc be flelh.andflelhofthc Virgirij\vcrenotthe Fa- thers ridiculous, yf they vfed thefccquiuoca- tion$3 yea talfe and improper fpeaches? t4. VV^ll Do^or Glyn goeth foreward,and al- leageth S. Chryfefome vpon S. Mathewei gho- fpeiljwhere to perfuade vs the truth of Chrifts ?ox body in the Sacrament, he faith : that we mufi beleeue Chrifis words in tbefe mj fiery es , and not our fenfesjor that ourfenfes may be deceaued j but Chnfi f^y^nge this is rriy body c^nnf^t deccaue Vij and that he made vs one body with himfelfe.not through faith only^ but in very deed : and further, that the miracle which he wrought in his lafi fup^er , h^ vvorkethdayly by hi$ f miniRers.&c. Whervnto JRW/^y aunfweredno- tea of. things but thefe words: Maifier Doctor ^yow tnuft vnderfiand, that in that place S Cbryfoftome fhewedj, that Chrtfi dcliuered vnto vs fenfibl^ th'mge m that fupper. So he. Which no^vvithltanding is eui- dcntly falfe, for he deHuered feniibje bread 5c wyne, according to the Proteftants faith,an4 accordingc toours , the formes of bread and \vyne, which are alfo leniible : and yf there werenofenfibie thinge, then could there b,e no Sacrament^ which rauft conteyne a fen- Bt^utAtions, about Relighn. €haf. i ^ Cblefigne. And to refute thisftiftof 'Esdlej^ f>oilQY Glp obiethat the bread is tranfekmented, and tramf^rmed. He alleageth another place or £Wo of iS^. togeather with S. Inmm: M^th.i\i To all which Rochejfer aunfwereth refolurel) : V Veil faj what your Uji-^yt is hut afiguratiue Jpeach, 04 S. lohn BapuA woi fatd to be ^I'mfor a property, &c. How s. But who doth not lee the ablurdity ot this ^^^^^^ cualion^for fo much as the meaning of Chrift, about his fpiritt in S. lohnBaptifl, is cui- ^lent , nor ei^e? went any auncient Fathers about to aflirme or proue by arguments, that S. lehn B4ptijl was truly Eltas in perfon ( him- ^f^»-«« felfee^^prelfelydenyinge yt) or that yt was meant iiterally, as they do of the words of Chrirt in the Sacrament : And this could noc pdley but fce,but that he was blinded in pride and pafsion^for that otherwife he would nc« uer hau^ gone about to aunfwere the Fathers by cuidenfc wranglinge i fo contrary to their owne fenle and meaninge. 15^. After DoSor Glyn was putt to {tlenccin tangdak this order, fucceded Umjler UngAde, Jl4i/cr ^i^P«^«^ S^dgemcks and Maimer Tonge , but very breefcly concerninge thi§ article of the realUprefence, not being permitted to fpeake more , and the moft part of the tyme trifled out alfb > with courtefyes of fpeach^ the one to the other^ My good Lord'^good Maifter Dodor \ pleafeth yt jof4tgooi Lordpitpp:^ lil^th ytjour good Father ffnpp'j honour abk F4tker^ and the like ^cremonycs;, for they durft 266 A reviem of ten pubtih do no other, Ridlejf being then high commifi fi(m^r'^ yet M/tJler Lan^daie \rgcd z place of S. Qhtjjepme, where he bringcth Chrift,fayinge fox^^f. thcfe words: I vvould be jeur brother, Itooi^evpon. m^,'4i'/' me common flesh and bloudforpurftkes'^ mdeuenby the fame thmgs that 1 am iojnedtoyou^, the very fame 1 haue exhibited to yow againe:^ meaninge in the Sacrament. Wherof Matfler Langdale inferred, that feing Chrift tooke vpon him true natu- ral! flelTi, and not a figure of flelh only , or re- membrance therof, thcrfore he gaue \s his true naturall flelli like man in the Sacrament, and not a figure. Wherto Ri^i/^'aunrwereth • £oxi^/i. in thefe words and no more: VVearemtioynei hy naturall flesh'y but do receme his flesh Jpiritually from^ aboue. Which aunfwere is not only contrary to the exprefle words and meaning of S.Chryr- fojiomein thisplace, but of Chnft himfelfe alio brought in heere by S. Chryfofiome to vttcr his meaninge, as yow haue heard. 1 tookfvponme common flesh for your fakes^and by the fame things that I am ioyned toyow^the very fame 1 haue exhibited yjh tojQwagaine. Where yow fee that he faith, he gaue the very fa;Tie in the Sacrament, which he had taken vpon him for our fakes, and that by the fame he was ioyned to vs againe ; and now Unifier Ridley faith- that we are not ioyned t$, him by naturall fie sh.T he k be contraryes, which of two fliall we beleeue? Chrift, and S. Chryfo- flome expoundingc him, or Ridley againft them. vvn[^^*t I (J. U=i^fler Sedg-wicke difputcd next,but hath difputa- a columns or page allowed to the fttting^e. DfJputationSy about Kelipon. Chap. 5^. ^6/ fettinge ciow ne of his vvhoJe difpiuatJorSj y^t Iievrgmge diners reafons in that iict^etyme out ot the fcriptures , why the Sacrament of the Aitar cannot be in the new law by a fi- gure, but mufl needs be thefulifiilingeof oM hgurcs, and confequently the true and reall body of Chnft:he brought Marker Ridley with- in the compalTe of adozenhnes, to giuetWQ aunfwersoueplaine contrary to another, as his w^ords do import: for thisisthcfirft: Idd grmnt yt to he Chrifls true body and fiah, hj a poverty m. nidhy of the name ajfrntpted to the Cod head , and we do commd"* really eate and dnrke his fiesh and Houd, after a cer^ aion. taine reall proper tj!. His fccond aunfwere is in thefe words : It k mib'tnge hut a figure or token of rox tbiL thetruebodjofChrifi , a$n if fudof S. lo'm B^prtfi, be is Ehasj not that he was fa indeed or inperfon , but in property andvertue hereprefentedt.iiA^. So ne. And now lett any man with ludgtmsnt exa- mine thcjfe two aunfwers : For in the firft he graunreth at leaft wayes a true reail property 6f Chriftsflelh, alTumpted to his Godhead, to be in their bread, wherby we dorealh eate his f\^(h, and drinkehis bloud. And in thefe- cond he f;?ith, y t is nothinge but a (igure. and confequently exchideth all reall property* fot that a figure hath no reallity or reall property, butonly reprefenteth and is a token of the bo- dy, as himfeife faith- which cuixlent aUo by his owne example > for that S. John Baptiji had no r^all propertv of Ikas in hiny hut only a li- niiiitude ofhi^fpirictanct vertue. And fo thefe pcople^whilft they would fetmc to Cy fo -ne- A reriem of ten fuhlike what , do (pcake contradidorycs among© themfelues, 17. There followed Malfier Tong$ ^ who as brccfly astheochcr^touchcd fome few places Tflnj^^.' of the Fathers (though they be not quoted) ci9^?** where they fay that our bodycs are nourilhed ^, in the Sacrament by Chnfts flelh, and that truly wedrinkehis bloud therin, and that for auoyding the horror of drinking mans bloud* Chrift hadcondefcended to our innrmityes, ; and giuen yt to vs vnder the formes of wynej and other like fpeathes , which in any reafo- nablc mansfenfe, muft needs import more then a figure of his body and bloud, or a fpiri* tuall being there only by grace, for To much as by grace he is alfo in Baptifme and other Sa- craments: & finally he vrged againe the place of 5. Cyprian : That the bread being changed not in ff^ape but in nature , vvoi hj the omnipotence of tho^ word, ftiAde flesh. Whcrto Riii/r^ aunfwered againe in thefe words : Cyprian theu doth take t hk word natm e for a^roperty of nature, and not for the natural fuh^ame. To which euafiqn Uaifter reply eth : this is aflrange acception.that I hauc Hot read in any authors before thii tyme. And fo with this he was glad to giue oucr (faith Fox) and askingc pardon for that he had doncjfaid: 1 am contented , and do mojl humbly befeecbj/eur good Lordfoipp to pardon m of my great rudeneffe , &c. Belike this rudeneffe was for that he had faid, that yt was a ftrange ac<:eption of S. Cyprians Words, to take change in nature , for cbangt into /C property of nature , and flelh for a flcfhciy things or quaiuy> as before y ow hauc heard^and thac this ilioiild aunfwere S. typrians intention: for htt vsheare the application: ^nad (in the Sa- ^^^^^^^ crament) being changed not in jhape but in nature pT Atf4i^«» (faith S. Cyprian) by the mnipotencyofthewbrdu made flesh ytmt is to lay , as Rsdlejf will haue y t bout Sam^ bread , being changed not infDape, but in a property ef Of^^* nature, is made a ftefhelj thinge , or fit [inly quality: What is this? or what fenfc can uhaue? what property offleihely nature doch your commu- nion bread receaue? or what real! property of bread doth it leefe by this change mc ncyoned by S. Cyprian^ We fay, (to witt S, Cyprian) that our bread retayning the outward ihape, doth leefe his naturall fubRance 5 and becommeth Chrifts flefli, what natural] property of bread doth yours Icefe ? And againe. What fiefhely thinge or quahty doth yt receaue by the om- nipotcncy of the word in confecration ? And is not this ridiculous, or doth UtdUy vnder- ftand this his riddle? But lett vs palfe totha next difputation vnder ^^M^r^, wheM we fliall lee matters handled ocherwifejand argu-* meats f@flo wed to better elFe^ and ilTue* 270 A revtetp ef ten fuhlike Out of the firH Oxford-dijputation H the beginninge of QjMary es raigne^ '^herin D. Cranmer / late Archhi-^ t8. When as the Doctors were fete in the diuinity fchooie, and foure appointed, to be txuf tores argumentorum (faith Fox) fett at a Ta jiein the niiddelt therof, togeather v\^ith foute Ovher notaryes nctingc with them , and certayne other appointed tor judges (another manner of indiiT;:rency/ihen wasvfed w Ktng Ed^i^ards dzycs vndcr B Ridley, in thatdifputa- tion at Cambridge) Doctor Cranmer was brought in, md placed before them ail to anfwere,^nd defend his Sacramentary opinion, giuen vp the day before in wrvtinge , conccrninge the article or the r(^4H pre fence. Fox according to his Cuflome noreth diuers graue circunrftances, as amonge others, that the beedle had prouided drinke, dnd offtfed theAimfit^erer, but he refufd with thanks. He telicth in like manner, that Do&of VVeftun the nrdlocucor offered him diuers coiirrclves for his bodv, yf he fhould ne^d, Wiiich I oinitt for that they are homely: againfl which Decloi FFfjfo/^ norwithftnndmg he afterwards Aormeth, and make rh a great inuecliud Dlj^utathns, d@ut ^Religion. Chap. 27I lauecftiue for his rudenes^and in particular for that he had (as Fox faith) his Ihefm by him, thatisto fay a cuppe of wyne at his elbow, whervnto FoxaJfcribeth the gayninge of the \i6kovy^f:kyingC'y)tvvasrjonsaYmjle though he gott fok fa^^- the victor) in this dijputation, he dijpminge as he did, non fine fuo Thefeo^rb^tr is not without his tiplit^g^ tuppSo Fox. And yet further, that he holding the faid cuppe atone tymein his hand, and hearinge an argument made by another that liked him , faid : vrgehoc, nafnhocfaiit pro nobis: vtge thiis , vrge this, for this maketh for vs- Thus pleafed it John Fox to be pleafant with DoSor V Vefion-y but when yow fliail fee, as pre- (ently yow ITiall , how he vrgcd lohn Fox hi$ three Martyrs , and rdmmes of his pcke ( for fo els-fwherehecalleththem) in thefe difputa- tions, not with the cuppe J but with fubftan- tiall, graue> and leatned arguments, yow will, not maruaile that he is fo angry with him: for in very deed he brought them alwayes to the greateft exigents of any other, and more then all the reft togeather : Now then lett vs paffc to the difputation, fp* Doiler Chadfdy was the firft that difputed againft Cramner, beginninge with the inftitu- tion of Chrifts Sacrament, recorded by 5. Ma- Mm, z^: thew, Markf , and Luke , flicwinge out of them ^l'^^' by diuers plaine claufes and circumftances, that Chrijft in hislaft fupper , gaue vnto his difciples, not bread , but his trhe naturall body , which was giuen the next day on the CroiTe, to all which Crdnmer ^LunCw^x^d thtts: i y t A miefgf of ten pMike I fj$w vnderfiand by the btdy naturall, Or gin f cii ml Box f^f. that is haumg fuch proportm of members, m he had /i- la^*7&/* uingeheere,tben launft^erene^atiuelj. By which auafwere wc may perceaue, that this great Doctor, who had wryttcn a great booke a- gainrt the fedU frefence, by which Jjttjmerz-' niongft others was made a Sacramentary,and Rood therin vnto death vpon the creditt of p. chitifiys this bodkc (as atter yow fhall heare him often mcnT^^' profciTe ) vndiirftandeth not the very ftate of the quellion betwecnc vs , for that we hould not Chrifis body in the Sacrament to be Or- ganicaU ^ in that manner as Cranmer hcerc iaia- guicth,with extcrnall dimcnlions&propor- rfgf^eap.^. tions of members as he lined vpon earthy though truly organicall , in another maiiner^ wiihout extcnfion to place, as in our fourth and fifth obfcruations before fettddwne we haue declared j fo as he erringe in the very grounds and firlt principles of the controucr- fie, yow may imagine how he will proceed ill the reft. ^ ^ 20. It was obie(fted vnto him next afceti axgumlt. this, that as a wife-man lyingeonhisdeath- bedd> and hauing care that his heyres after his departure do Hue in quiett, and not contend about his Teftament, doth ndt v(e tropes and figures, but cleare and plaine fpeach in the faid TPn, Teftament^ fo muft w^e prefume of Chrift, & 130I. for the confirmation of this.Dodor VVefton al- Icaged a place out of AUgufiine, Dc vnitate Ec^ W^jt^vrgingc this very Cime fimihtude ^ that yfthe laft words of any graue or honeft manf lyingd Ifinec oh his death-bedd, are to be belceued, much more the lalt words of our Sauiour ,af. Chriftin his rupper>to which argurmnt^ noeffeiftuall aunfwere giuen at all . but only ,^ t;har Cranmer faith: fb^f fc^ which fieaketb hytrofes and figures, doth net lle*^ but he auni wereth not to the other inconuenience, that his heyres may fall but about his Teftament, theonevnder- ftandiiige them literally, the other figuratiue- ly,as we & they do the words of Chrift about this Sacrament,. %u Next to this is brought in a large tefti- Atga- mony of i^. Chrjifofiome, out of his homily vnto the people of Antioch, which beginneth: Nccef- chyfof^. ^ariumefi y dtleili^imi y mj/jimerumdifceremiracu^ hom.si. ai lum, quid undemfit^ Square fit datum, & qu£ni thcL^"^^ ytilitas.&c. It is neccliary , moft dearely be- loued j to know this myfacle of rhyfteryes, what yt is, and why yc was giuen, and vyhar prpfitt:Cometh to vs therby, &c. And then S. Chrjip}flme declareth at large , how Chrift moft myraculoufly aboueall humaine power, piuethhisbody to be handled andeaten by v$ in the Sacramentj fo as we f^fitn pur teeth in hisfleili, and that he did more then euer any parcntsdid, who many tymesgiue their chiU ^ dren to others to be ftd, but Chrift feedeth vs with his owne flefli , and with that very flefti by which heisoiir brother , and vnited vnto^^ vs in flefii. Out of which difcourfe D. VVefion vrged, that for fo much as Chrift is made our i)rothcr and kinf-man^by his true, natural! &; organicall flellij ergo he gaue the fame hi^ truej S natural! 474 ^ revleu^ of ten pubtii^ nacurall and organicall flelli to vs to be CatcH in the Sacrament. Wherto Cranmer aunfwe- t^x red : J gr^unt the consequence , and the confequenti ^.i! ^* Which is contrary to that he (aid a litcle be- fore, (yfyow mar key t) that his organicall bo- dy was not there; 22. But DoBor went further, that feing he graunted this, then did yt follow alfo, that his true organicall flelli was rcceaued in our mouth, which S. Chrjfoftome calleth our teethe But this Cntww^r denyed, and (aid, he vva4 edteri mlybyfd'tth: VVhervpon FF& theif readers , as though they faid fomewhat tcr auoid CathoUkcai-gumentSjtaken outofaun- cient Fathers plaine and perfpicuous author fityes', whera;^ indeed they (ay nothinge iri ^bbftance at all but do turneand wyndand liidlcthcnifelues vnderihe found of dilFercnc \vords without lenfe. For yf yt be true as Cranmer hc^rt g aunted , that Chrift gaue his true naturall and organicalJ flefli to be eaten in the Sacrament , and that with our teeth or corporal! mouth, as S. Chrjfojlome faith , how can yt be denyed , but that we eat his fleili really, and not fpiritually only , yf (piritually be oppofite to realiy, as in Ctahmers fenfeyt is, which vnderftandeth,j|>imff4l/7and^^ ihpu doft inioy , for that we are nourifhed „ therin with the fdfe fa. le thingc, which the Ang^lls do bchould and tremble at, &c. V Vha, if$ A mUw of ten fuhlihe ^eake the powers of thy Lord ? V Vhofball decUfi forth all hit praties ? V Vhat fajigr hath euer nourifued hu fbeepe with his owne flesh, &c. Chrifi feedeth with his owne body, and conioyneth & vniteth vs to him i»p/-/.so. therhy . And againe vpon the 50. Pfalme : Pro Cibo came propria nospdfcit, propotufangulnent fuum nobis propmat. In rteed of meat > hefcedethys • vvich his owne flelli, and in ftced of drinke he giiietH vnto vs to drinke hisovviie bloud. And ihryfo!i. a2;aine, homlL Si.inUatth. Non Metantum, fed umxU. reip fa no$ corpus juum effeat , &c. Not only by faith 5 but in deed he hath made vs hrs body. And finally for that yt was denyed expreflely, rox/tfj. Saint Chryfofionie to nfjeane that we receaued Chrifts body, with our cOrporall moutKDo£l$f Chryfifi. FF^j?^w vrgedthefe words of Saint Chryfoflemei ^%Tuy^iZ vulgar emhonor em confecutumefi os nofirumex* cipiens corpm dominicum.Om mon th h ath gotten no fmall honour in that yt receaueth the body of out Lord • 24. But all this will not ferue, for ftill CraH" aunfwered by his former Height thus: F Vith our mouth , we receaue the body of Chrifi , and teare it yvith our teeth , that is to fay the Sacrament of the body of Chrift. Doyow Teethe cuafiqh? And, what may not be ihifced of in thrsorderjdoch, anyminirterin England vfe to fpeake thus of his communion- bread, as S. Chryfofiome in the place alleaged of the Sacrament , after the; words of confecration? or do any of the aun-i ^c:: px^. cient Fathers wryte fo reueren tly ot the wa- . mfjli''' terofbapcifme,which they would hauedone/, and ought to haue donC;yf Chrifts body be nty. BiJpHtatms, ^boHt Religion. Chap.^. tjj 0therwife prefencin this Sacrament, then the holy-ChoiUs in that water^as Cr^«wfr oftcn- tymesaffirmech, an4 riame|yfpmefewlyne$ after the fprefaid places alleaged? But Tia^m s- Atg^^ VVe^on feing him to decline all the forfaid au- thorityes by this ordinary iTiift , of the words fiiritudy znd facrmentallj y vrged him by ano- ther way out of the CzmQ Chrjifofiome , concer- ninge the honour due to Chrifts body vpon earth, quod fumm^ honor e lignum efi id tibi in tend chrj{fP^ ' eJlendo,drc. I do ftcw thee vpon earth, that which is worthy of higheft honour , not An- gells, not Archangells, iior the higheft hea-- tiens, but I iliew vntp thee the Lord of all thefe things himfelfe.Confider how thpii doft not only behould heere on earth , that which is the greateft and higheft of all things, but doft touch the fame alio, & not only toucheft him, but doft eatthe famCjandhauing^rece^- iied him, returneft home. 25, Thus S. ChYjfe^otHc. Out of which place bo^or V Ve^on vrged him eagerly , excludingc all figures, and eatinge of Chrifts body abfent /'/^* by faith \ for that S. Chrjfi^ome izith not only Q^enh tihi, I do ilie w vnto thee, that which is n. vvtftm.^ worthy of higheft honour abouc Angells,and c^gcriy!^* Archangclisjbut tthiln terra^ I Chew yt to thee heere vpon earth, yvhich fignifiech the prefence of a (iibftancc , wherto this higheft honour is to be done, and that thisthingcis feenc, touched>&: eatcn>in the Church,which cannot be a figure,nor the facramentall bread, fj5sr Uaat liigheft honour is not due to them^ S 5 27% A review of ten fuhlikf nor can yt be Chrift abfent only in heaucn,for S.Chryfofiome faith it thee heere on eAuh.&c. To all which prcfsinges when Do£lor Cranmet had no other ching in elFecl to aiinfwere, but thcfe phrafes often repeaced j thdt it is to be vn^ ier flood facramentally, and, I aunfmre that it is truf ftcrdmentallj, ^c. The hearers fell to cry out, and hilTe at him, cUfftnge their fcWi^faith Fox) and cMinge him , tndo£lum, $mperitum^ impudentem» vnlearned, vnfkillfull 6c impudent. And Fo^c to help out Cranmer in this matter, befides all other cxcufcs, makeththis learned gloffein the margent vpon SXhrj/fofiomes words: Ojien-' dotibiinterra,&c. I do Ihewvnto thee vpon carthjWhat is worthicft of highcft honour, to ^4X* thrifts body .The bodjf of Chrifi (faith Fox) is [hefp^d forth vntp vs heere on earth diuers vvajtes , as ^ in readinge fcrif turei , hearmge fermons , and Sac ra^ ments, and yet neyther fcriptures, nor fermons, nor Sa^ cramentsare to be woipnpfed,&c. So he, which is as iurt as Germans lippcs. And I would askc this poore glofsift , what makcth this note to the purpofe of S. Chryfofiome ? for neyther doth he fpeakc of the different waves, wherby Chrilts body may be Ihewed forth vpon earth , but faith thathimfelfe did iTiewytiri the Sacrament vpon the Altar, to all that would fee it. Nordothhefay thaothemeanes or wayes, wherby Chrifts body is (hewed, are worthy greateft honour or worlliipp^but that the thinge that is (hewed forth , is worthy of highcft honour. And how then ftandeth Fox hisigloflc with this fcnlc, or wherynto fer- Di^utatim, about Religm. Chaf, 5. 2751 licth iCjbut only co fliew thefc wrechcd-men$ pbftinacy , that one way or other will breake phrough, when they arc he(^ged in by the Fa- thers authoriryes rnoft plaine and manifeft. After this aflault giuen by DeHor VVefion, $. Argq- the firft opponent D^^gr Chadfey returned to ^^^^'^^r^^ dcale with Cm«w^ againe^Sc by iflTue of talkc, camcto vrgethefe words of TertuUian :^ Care Termuj.d^ corpu& fanguim Chrifiivefam, vtmmadedeo ^f^'^^' ^ fagittetur . Our flefli is fedd with the body i^nd ' bloud of Chrift,to the end that oiir foulc may be fatted with God, which is as much to fay, that our mouth doth cate the body of Chrift, and our mynd therby receaucth thefpirituall fruite therof . Out of which words D- VVe^on vrged , that fcing our flellieateth the body of Chrift (which cannot eat, but by the mouth) Chrifts body is really eaten and receaued by our mouth , which fo often by Cranmet hath byndenycd, but now his words are: VntoTer-- tuUian I aunfivere, that be caSefk that the psh, which if thfSaaament. Of which aunfwere I cannot vnderlland what mcaninge yt l^ath, except Fox do errein (ettingeytdowne- for yf the fielli be the Sacrament 3 then muft the Sacra- Cr^**^^n mcnt feed on the body and bjoud of Chrift, accordingc to Tertullian which isabfurd. But I rufpeca that Cranmrn meaninge was , that the body of Chrift was called the Sacramenr, for (o he expoundeth himlelfe afterward, when he faith: The psh Imth h the breads but the f&ule k inwardly fedd b} Chnfl: fo as when TertuU im uiih ; m psh u fedd hj Chrifts body and iloudn S 4 2tQ A revtem of ten fuhliks he would haue him tomeane, that onrflefh eateth the Sacramentall bread and wyne>that; fignitiethor figureth Chrilts body and bloud, & our foule feedcth on the true body of Chrift by taith: but both DodorChadfej&cDellQr VVe^ . Jlon refuted this ihift prefently by the words rtYtAbid. iinm^diatly cnfuingein TertuUian: N$n foffunt pgo fef atari in mercetU, quas Qferk cmungit : Ou* body and ioul^ cannot be (eparaicdui the re- ward, vv home the fame worke doth conioynq togeathcr- and he meanethcuidehtly by the fame worke or operation, the fame eatinge of Chrifts body. Whernore yf the one,that is the foulc, doth eat Chrifts true body , as Cranmer confelTcth then the other, which is our flcilii eateth ^Ifb the fame body as Tm«fl/4» faith j and for that DgStsir VVeflon bkcd well thisar- rox/"«x» 8^"^""^ Tertullian y and faid to VQliof^ 1305. * Chadfey, fticke tothofeu^grdjofTertuUidH , as Fox affirmeth, yx is liRe that the forefaid tale of ^^ andclecrnes of his words and reafon , feemed to all there prefent to conuinccj nor could Doctor Crmmr any way handfomely ridd himfclfe of this place , but by his ordinary fliiftinge interpre- tation, as ptefently llialbe feene. Po^or Treffarti hisdifcourfe was this, that wheras the hkc controucrfie for diuers points, had byn bc- tweenctheold CathoIiksand4ryi4«jf in Sdint htlUrjes tyme , as now is bctwcenc vs and hor Crdnmer , and his fellowes , the Cathohks Jbouldingein that controuerfieVthe vnionof Chrift with his Father to be in nature and fubftaiice , and the Arrians in will only and afFetftion : Whatfoeuer authoritycs the faid Catholiks alleaged out of fcriptures or aun- cient Fathers , for the naturall vnion be- twccne Chrift and his Father • I 4nd my Fa- ther are one. Such other places: the Arriam iliifted of by fayinge: that if true in vviU, but not in nature , jt is true in Uue and affs^ion , but net in fub^ pance-j euenasour Sacramentaryes do now^ Vvhen we alleage neuer fd cleere authoritycs, for the true rcail nature and rubftantiallpre- fence of Chrift in the Sacrament, andtherby of his real! vnion alfo with vs by eatinge the fame- they delude all with fayinge only ^^r ft true by grace and not by nature '^jt is true by faith, hut pot in fubfiame j p is true fi^uratiuelj and facramen* til 4 review pf ten puhlikf taUjf, but not reMy-^yt u true in 4 figne}y a tYope*y aftetr a certaine mdnner efjpeach'^ yt if true ^irituallj \ and by a naturaUptopertj.but not indeed fubjlmiallj: and fuchaunfwers^ but all thefe Ihifcs (faith DQ^lor Trejfam) did S. UiUry cutt of fo longe agoe, for that he proucch the true naturall coniuncSlion of Chrift with his Father, by our true naturall coniun6tion with him, by eatinge his fleili in the Sacrament^ fo as except wc deny the true cflentiaH,reall and fubftantiall vnity of Chrift* with his Father , we cannot accordingc to ^. mUry deny the true^reall and fubrtantiall vni- ty of vs with Chrift, by rcceauiug his true na- turall flelhin the Sacrament. 28. The place of 5* UiUry is in his 8. bookc of the hleff^d rrwy againft the Arriam , as hath byn faid , w^herc he expoundcth thefe words j^. of Chrift in S. Jofcmghofpell: Astheliuing Father fent me, fo do I alfo Hue by the Father, dnd he that ^4- teth my flesh, fhall alfo Hue throw me : vpon which fox f^X- words of our Sauiour S. Hllaty faith : Thii truly is the caufi of our life, that we haue Chrtfl dwellmge by his flesh tn vs , that are fieshye , which alfo by him paU hue in fuch fort , oi he liueth by hit Father. Of which was inferredjthat Chrift dwelled in vs in fleih by the Sacramcnt,and not only m fpi- ritr. For better declaration wherof D. Tref^m, before the allegnion of thefe words, alleageth alargerdifcourfeofthe fame S.HtUrr, againft the faid Arriansy^on this point in thefe w ords: UiUr. 1.9. Idemxundof them now'SMhUtllarj) who WiUneedt ^ rrmft. haue the vn'ity of will onU betweene the Father, and the fotme, vvbeiher Chrifl be now in ys truly by nature , or Ptjputations, about Kelipon. Chap, ^r- 285 0nly hy the agreement of vviUes^ jjthe word he incar- nate tn very deed ^ andvvereceaueat the Lords table the word made fleshy how then it he to he thought not to dfpell tn ysnaturaUy, &c. Out of whi^h words of 5. Hilary DoHor Trejfam vrged,that Chrifts flelh was not only imparted vnto vsin faith and fpiritCjbuc alfo reaily and naturaily5according to S. Hilary, and that as his<:oniundion was natural! with his Father, and not in will and loueonly: fo is his coniundion with vsin flelh truly naturall, rubftantiall,and reall, and not only in (piritt and faith. For more confir- mation wherof,D«c1cr Trejfam allcaged alfo the ^^uar, u words of HartynBucer, their late Protcftant- ^' reader m Cambridge, who wryteth that accor- ding to the holy Fathers meaning, Cfcr//? du^el-- leth in vs (by the body giuen in the Sacrament) not only bj faith and hue, as abfent, but naturally, cor- porally y and carnally, &c. To which authority btBucer DoHor Cranmer gaue no other anfwcrc but this ieft. I kpow that Maifier Bucer (faith he) u^ai a learned man,but your faith is in good cafe tphich leaneth vpon Bucer, dye. .29. But he could not (b cafily lhake of the ^utority of l^ilary^wt was hardly prelTcd ther* with, as yo w may fee readinge ouer the place ytfelfeof thisdifputation, as alfo by that hie aduocate lohn Eox is conftrayned to make fun- dry large notes, and glofies in the margent to hclphimout: For DoBor Trejfim \rgcd ^ thzt we are not only vnited to Chnft by faith and fpiritt , but carnally alfo : Whervnto Cranmer ^ feekinge an cuafion anfwereth: ifay that chrijl n^^!^ 2^4 ^ revi^ft^ of ten puhlike was communicated vnto vs not only by faith Mt In yeryi deed alfo, vvhen he was borne of the Virgin. Behouid the fliifc, wc talke of Chrift imparted to vs in the Sacrament, and fo doth Hillaty^ hcanlwe- reth, that Chrift was imparted to vs in the in- carnation; and yet yf yow confidcr, our fleft was then rather imparted to him, then his to vs. And againe, Turks and Infidellshauc as muchconiundion with him by the incarna- tion as we , for that they are men, & the flell^ that he tooke,was common to allj So as heere yow fee nothing but euafions fought forj and Doilor Trejfam perceaying that he could gett no, more of him to the purpofe , fell to pray for him^but Do£lor FFf/?ow followed the argument much further, as there yow may fee , for ytis ouerlonge to be alleaged heere . The princi- pal! point is> that S. Hilary auoweth: That our coniundion with Chrift is notonly by will, 5iFc61:ion»and faith: but naturall alfo and reall , by eatinqc his fielli in the Sacrament , as him- felfe is naturally vnitqd to his Father and not only by will.iVnd when Doctor Cranmer fought many holes to runne out at, VVefton prelTcth him againc with other words of 5. HiUry cx- plicatinge himfelfc, which are thcfe. ^ 5 o. The ff things ( fai th h e ) aye recited of vs to thk ' end, lecaufe heretthsf^igningt a vntty of will only, he^ tweene the Father, and the fonne , did vfe the example efour vnity with God.as though we b/iftg vnited to the (ome, and by the fonne to the Father only by obedience, and Will of Religion , had no propriety of the naturall eoniurSion bj the Sacrament of the body and blouL t>tJpatathm,4hout Reljp9n. Chaf.f. it^ l^oheercycis accoumpted a poidc of Arm- nifme by Hilary, to hould that we are vnited to Chrift only by obedience and Will of Rcli- lion , and not by propriety of naturall com- munion with him , by eatinge his fleili in the Sacrament of his body and bloud. Whervpon DeBlor VVeJion vrged often and earneftly , that not only by faith^but by the nature of his fleflu in the Sacrament, we are conioyned not fpiri- tuallyonlyj ^^nd by grace, but naturally and corporallyjWhervhto Crantfters aunfwere was in thele words : i gramt that CyYtllmd Hilary d& fay that Chrifi » vnited to vs, mt only by will, but alfi by naturtyhe is made one with vs carnally and corporal^ ly, becdufehe tooke our nature of the Vhgtn Mary,&Co Do yo w fee his runnings from the Sacramene to the natiuityj but heaire out the end. VVeft. Hilary J where he faith Chriit comrnu- nicated to vs his nature, meanetli not by hi^ 33 hatiuity, but by the Sacrament. Cran. Nay he *V communicated to vs his fleiL by hi^natiuity. VVeJi. We communicated to him our flefh, when he was borne. Ctjan, Nay he commu- » nicated to ys his flelli when he was borne, & » that I Will ftcw w out of Cyrill. Wefl. ergo, Chrift being borne gaue vs his flelTi. Cran. In his natiuity he made vs partakers of his fl eft. VVeft* Wryte fyrs. Crdnm. Yeawryte. And fo ended this Encounter, brought fasyow fee) totwoabfurdityesbn Cr/jtwwm fide • the one, that where 5. Hi/^r/ fpeakech of the Sa- crament of the body and bloud of Chrift , he flyeth ftill to the incarnation: the other, that A review of ten fullike he faith J Chrift to hauc imparted his flerfi t6 vs in the iHcarnation , wherin he tooke ours. Wherfore Do^9y Chaifey feing the matter ini rhis ftate, interrupted chem by accufing CtdH^ met to haue corrupted this place of S. iiiUry.m his booke againft the rcall prefcnce tranlla- tinge theft words : f^es vere fub tnyflerio Carneni corporis fui fumiwus , we receaue vnder the true myltery the flclh of his body • whcras he Ihould haue faid: V Ve do receaue truly vnder a mj^ fiery (or Sacrament) theflcih ef his body^ which fraud Crdnmer could by no other wayes auoid, bur by fayinge, that his booke had Vera zud not m^, which Uhn Fox faith was a fmall fault-' and yet yow fee yt altereth all the fenfe, as yf a man iTiauld fay Fijior for Pajlor. jt. The next conflica to this was betweene lioBor Tonge, and Doclor Cranmer, wherin 7onge acculinge him firft for denyinge of principles^ and confequently , that they could hardly go forward wirh any fruitfull difpurationjCxcjpt they agreed vpon certayne grounds , he made fundry demaunds vnto him, as firft, whether there were any other naturally true body of Chrift^but his organicall or inftrumentall bo- jEt.r$n^i dy? If^w whether fenfe and reafon, ought not difputeth. gi^j^ p[^^^ myftery to faith ? Further^ whether Chrift be true in his words, & whe- ther he mynded to do that, which he fpakc at his laft fupper? And fina'ly,whether his words Were effeAuall , and wrought any thinge or noe ? To all which Do£lor Cranmer aunfwered affirmatiuclVjgtaunting that the faid words of bt^utathfis, d0Ut l^eligten. Chap, 2 tf Chrifl did workc theinfticucion of the Saera- inent, whervnto DoBor Jonge replyed, that a figuratiue fpeach wrought nothinge, trgpyji wag not a figuratiue fpeach w^hen he (aid: Boc ^ji torpm meum. And albeit D. Cranmer fought by twoorthrceftrtiglingcs to flipp from this inference, fayinge that yt was fophiftry , yet both D jpeach worketh not,t butofdiuersand fundry plaineteftimonyesof the Fathers, which there openly he caufed to be read and namely S. Ansbrofe , as well in hii^ booke de imtUndis , as de Sdcramentu , where he. handleth this matter of purpofe, to prbue that the fpeach of Chrift in the Sacrament, to wit,, hoc ejl corpus meum, did worke & con uert breads and wyne into flefh andbloud, and proueth the fame by many other exaples of fcriptures:_. ^emoChrifii (faith he) quifomtexmhilofacere,^^^^^^^^^ quod mn erat, nonfottfi ed, qua fm in id mutare.quit nm erant? The fpeach of Chrift which was „ able to make of nothing that , whiich was not „ before, ftall yt not be able to change thofe „ things that were before , into things that are „ not? And to the fame effed: in his booke de iumentb: EfgefemoChrifii hoe cmficit Sdcrmen^ dTs^i 'Jam tum\ Qmfemo? nemfc i$,&c. Thcrfore the fpeach cap. 4. bf Chrilt doth make this Sacrament-but what >• fpeach ? to wi tt, that wher by all things were „ created: the Lord conimaiindcdandhcauen >, was made,the Lord comaunded & earth was ,9 made > the Lord comaunded & the (eas were rnadc, (^c. Vides ergo quam operatorim fit fernto Chrijliifi irgo tanta v« eft in fermne Domini, vt imi- ferent ejfe qtu non erant-^qudnto magis operatorius erit, vt fint quA eranty & in aliud commutentut? Yo w fee ^-^^^^rtp cherforc how working the fpeach of Chrift i.«* dccrt & yf then there be fo much fotce in the fpeach ^i^'^^a of our Lord, as that thofc things which were andf^l not,tooke theit beginning therbyj hotv^ much more potent is the fame fpeach in workinge> that thofe things which were bef6re,bechan=* ged into another? And prcftntly he addeth: ^ the heaiien was not,the fea was not, the earth wasnot, butheare himfpeake: hefdidtheivord^ dnd they Were dmie ^ he eemrhdunded dnd thg were (redted'j Wherfore to anfwerc yow I fay, that it was tiot the \)ody of Chrift before confecra- tion,but aifter cofecration,! fay vnto theejthac no vv ytis the body of Chrift. So S. Amhrofe. J4, And heere now ( good reader) I doubt T notg ijfO ^ rmew of ten publike not, butyow feethefondeuafionofCr^;^^;^^^ and Fox his aduocate>cleerly refuted by S.Am^ brofc'^ where they fay , thdt the jpeachor words cf Chnfi worke not, but Chttfi by the words^^zs though there were a great diuerlity in that point.But now lett vs fee , how they will fcamble ouef this authority oi'S. Ambrofefthu faith expreffe- ly, both that the fpeach of Ghrift did work* potently > arid worke the coniierCon of btead and wyne into flefh and bloud: firft Fox hath this not^ in the niargent againft i^. Ambrofe , as though he had mifcompared the words of creation, with the words of the inftirution of ,^mhrcfi the.Sacramenf. The Lord lefus {Czith Fox) rfed ^o"^^ed fjggyg contmaundement in the Sacrament , 4i In ^ ' creation, for we read not Hat hoc corpus meum, as vvt read f iat lux, &c. Do yow fee the mans fubtilc obferuation > or rather fimple & fottifh cauil- lation againft fograue a Father? The words: Hoc ejlcorptumeumy this is my b^dy, imployeth fome what more then fiat corpm meum : Jett yt be my body j for that yt fignifieth the thinge done already , which the other willeth to W done. And fo for this we will leaue John Voi td ftriue with5.ilw&y^p,ab6ut thevfingeorabu- finge of fcriptures alleaged by him. And fo much of Fox. ^fj. But how doth Cranmer himfelfe auoyd this plaine authority of S. Ambrofe, thinkc yow? Yow ftall hcare ytin hisownc words, for thev are very few to fo large an atithority . aU thefethinges (faith he) are common, I fay that God doth chiefiji worke in the Sacraments, Do yow fee bijpmatms, about ttligtoH. Chapo 5', BIS brcuicy and obfcurity ? but his meaning is, that wheras before he had dcnyedj, for a lliift, that Chnfts words did worke , but only Chrift by his words ( a difference without a diuerfity)nOw (eihg S.AmbrofrCo plaine to the Contrary ^ in fettinge forth the workinge of Chrifts words, he feeketh aRother fhift in this aunfwerc, which is , that dlbeit Chufis words do ^ork^ tn the Sacrdmentsjet Chuftchieflj^^zs though any controuerfy were in this,or any man had denyed yt. But what faith he td the mayne how point, wherin 5. Ambrofe affirrheth not only ^^^f^*^!^^^ Chrifts words to be OpeutofU , workinge- slmtlim^ Words, but that their worke is to make bread, the true and naturall body of Chrift after they be vttered by the t^irictt? nothing truly in fub- ftancedothheaunfwcre herevnto, butaftet his lliifts he faith only, thdtyt wai caUed the hodj ip/ Chrifl , ds the holy-ghofl vv4S called the done , ani S AohnB^f lift was cdUed E//^ (which arc bur bare ligncs & reprefentations, as eiiery one fteth) hay he goeth againc prefbntly from this^ which heeire he had gratintcd, that God worketb intheSacrmenti: For when boUor Xonge vrged him thus: if God worke in the Sacraments^ he wor^ keth in this Sacrament (^ofthe EuchariJK; Cranmer y^x^^ aunfwercth: God workfth in hisfdnhfM, not m the n^;? kacrarHents.ktxi. thlls he goc h forward graun- ""^'^^^ tinge and denyiilge , tiirninge arid wyndinge, ind yet podre miftrable man he would not turne tb the trtith , not had grace to ac- knowledge the fame laid bfeforcnirTi5btit toy- led Himfelfein contradidions , endeaiiourin^ i^t A re^letp of ten fuhtil^e to iWftof niofteuident authoritycs ofanci^nf Fathers , by impertinent interpretations. As when Doilor Towgf vrged him with thofe cleere JrHht, ^.4^ words of S. Ambrofe : Before the wordsof Chrift be 5^^"^ jp^ken, the chalice is fullofwyne and water, hut when the wordsof Chrift haue wrought their effe^, then i$ there made the bloud that redeemed the people^ Cran^ mer aunfwered: that the words of Chrift wrought nootherwife in this Sacramet,thea inbaptifme. Ambrofe fald (quoth he) that the bloud is made , that is , the Sacrament of the bloud is m^tde , fit fanguis the bloud is made , that is to fay oftenditur fanguis -y the b loud is fliewed forth there. 36. Thefe sind fuch like vvere Cranmen fleights to ridd himfclfe taht day , and yet did not Doctor Chadfey and VVefton leaue him for thejfe ftartSjbut followed him clofe with other deere places of S.Ambfofe^xh^ one expounding the other, ksfor Qyi7imp\ty Tone dicxs.^c. P^r- ''^'^r'""' hapiyotvmayfay, how are thefe things true? I which ^* fee the fmilttudejo not fee the truth of the bloud: Firjl of all I tould thee of the word of Chrijl, which fo wor^ keth, that yt can change and turne the kinds ordajned of nature, &c. And againe in another place. Ergodidicijii, crc. Therfore thou hafi learned that of bread is wade the body of Chxift , and that vvyne and water is putt into the cu^p , but by consecration of the heauenly word it is made bloud, Sed forte dices jpeciem fangUtnisnonvideri , fed habet fimilitHdinem: But perhaps yow will fay, that the llrape or forme of bloud is not feene^ but yet it hath the limi-* liiude. So Se Ambrofe , and for that he faith, as. yow t^iJpHtattdns, about l^eligm. Chap. ^. 291 yowfec > that alueic the bloud after confc- cration , hath not the iTnewor fornix of true Woiidj yet hath iimiHtqde, (for that the forme of wyne commeth neereft to the like- neflfe of bloud) heerof Cramner iayinge hands, could not be drawne fioni affirminge that S. iiwitro'/^meaningeisj that itisnottrue natu- rall bloud after thcconfecration, but beareth afimilitudeonly, reprefentation,or tipe rhei^ of, which is quite contrary to S.Ambrofehis whole drift and difcoqrfe, y f yovv confider y t out ofpafsionv 57. After thefe bickering? about S.Ambrofe, were vrgedagainft him, by the tw^o DocSlors, Chad fey zndVVefton , diuers other Fathers, as luft inns Mar tjrzhow 14. hundred yeares gone, ^^^^^^^ whoe in his Apology for Chriftians writeth: s. that as by the word of God, leftu Chrijl our S amour ^-^^^^^^^^ being madeflesh^had both^esh.^nd bloud for our falua- tion : fo are we taught , that the meate confeerated by the word of prayer inflituted by him ( vvherby our bloud rufm. and flesh arc nourifDed by communion) is the flesh and ^' hloudafthe fame lefm , that was made flesh. Out of which place they vrged, th^t as Chrift is truly and really incarnate , fo is he mily aiid really in the Sacrament, accordinge to S. lufiinus.mA that our ficfli and bloud isnourilTied by that communion,and'confequentIy in Saint luftinm tymc , yt was not held that Chrifts body was receaued only by faith. 38. The words of Saint Iren^m were vrged in like manner , he being another Martyr of the famQ ;ige with f lujline, who wryteihthus: ' T 5 Eum 294 ^ review of ten fublike iren, li^.s- Bum CdUcem , qui efi ex creatura , fuumcorpiUS conft^ c««r. ^^^^^^^ €xcim nofiraauget (or for a, (src. 1 his is the cupp^which beinga creacMre,hc confirmed tq be his body, by whichheencreafeth our bo- dyes, when both the cupp mixed & the breacl broken, harhipyned tpytthe wordpf God, yt is made the Eucharift of the body & bJoud of Chrift , of which the fubOance pf pur flelh is encrealed and conliftcth. By which word? the faid Qpdors proued, that the flelb and bloud of Chrift was other wife held by S. Irs.-- n^us to be in the Sacran^enc, ^nd receaued by vs, than only by faith, feing our bodyesalfo are nourillied therwith^yea the very fubftance pf our flelh is encreafed and conlifteth therby, as his worcjs ^^re. To ajl which Cr4««;/rhad no other aunfwere , but his old ihift , that th^ Sdcrament of the hodyand bloud, was called the fiesb and blond of Chrifi, though really yt be not. And from 4>iucts this he could not be drawqe: And fo finally fw^cdcd^ the tyme drawinge latc,they vrge^ him there to r r-^- publil^ely with certayne falfityes, vied in his bookeag^^inft the reallprefence, and befides thofe that had byn obieded before, as for ex- ample. Dp£ier Chadfey obieded a manifeft cor- ruption in tranllatinge the forefaid place of 5. lufiine, which Cr^wiw^y excufed no other- mV^*^* wife y but th^t he tr^^nflated not lufttne word forward, buconly gaue the meaninge^ but the other,as alfo Do^lor HarpispeldAh^WQd that he peruerted the whole meaninge,andfpytijf cuident to him that readcth lupne. ip. Doilor VVefifn obieded a place corrupted in DiJ^utatims, dhoutReligm. Chap. 29^ inBmijfcnushy putting in the word jpiritualibm, Cr^wwrr aunfwered , that yt was fo in the de- crees , Doctor VVefion replyed , that he had left out diuers iynes of purpofe, which made againft him in Emipnus for the reall 'prefence^ Cunmcr aunfwereth : this bo^ke hath not thdt, VVefion obieded another place falfilied> where for noma corpus Wt r«i,h6'n6ur the body of thy Godjto witt of Chrift, Cr^ww^y had tranflatcd yt thus: honour him which is thy God. Wherto he ^nfweredjthat he did it not without a weigh- ty caufe, that men fiiould not thinke that God had a body. Vo^or VVefion obieded alfo;, that alleaginge a fentence out of Scorn, he had left out a claufe , that made much to the pur- po(e in the matter handled , to witt fecundum 4fparentiamy^% may appearc. Cranmer anfwered ieftingly : thM is 4 great offence I pomi[eyowo Ano- ther place in like manner was obiefted , as peruertedhy himin ^^rcm words, asalfoone or two in S. themai Aquinas , wherto I find no auafwere; butdifputationis broken vp with this cry of the auditory, in fauourof the Ca- tholike party 5 vicit Veritas , the truth hath had thcvi(itory^ and with this we (hall alfoend this firft difputation againft Cranmer , hauinge byn forced to he longer then we purpoled at the bcginninge,& therfoje we (hzlht Co much the iTiorter^yf it may be,in that which enfueth with Ridley znd Latjmer, 2p6 A review of^ten fuhliki Out of the Dljputation yoith D.Ridley in the fame dininity-fchoole at Ox- ford i the next day after Cranmcr^ to'Svitt^ theiy.ofAprillij^4. §. 3. 40. The next day followinge (faith Fox) was brought forth DoUor Rtdlej to defend in the fame queftions of the reall-prefence. Tun-- fabfiantUtm, and S^crifice-j againrt whorae Da- clor SmlM). was the firft and principall oppo- JD. Smth nent , for which cauf? Fox> before he hegin- of poncnt, ^^^^^ relate the comb.^tt, tnakcch a particu^ lar inuediue againft him, for that he had byn vncqnftant in Religion,the fimple felJow not confideringe that y f yt had byn true , yet that the fame might be obiecSited vvith much more reafon , againft theft his cheefe champions, Crdnmer, K/^/fe/and LiM^jmer , that had byn Ga- thohke Priefts for many yeares togeather^But Fox his great anger againft Do£l$r Smith w:ls^ fpr that he prelTed hardly B.Ridlej in his difpu- tation y and Co did Bailor VVejion alfo , as after yowlhallfee, for that vpon all occafions he came in with Vrge hoc, vrge hoc \ but for the reft 'B.tdley was mpft cpurteoufly vfed by them both, and offered to h^uz his opinions takea in wry tinge, and that he lliould haue fpace till faturday after to confider of them, and that what bookcs foeucr he would dcmaund, ihould. Di^utMhns, about Riligm. Chaf.^;. 29/ fliould be deliuered to him,and that he might Two choofe any two of the whole company to be cho^fcn. hisfeuerail notary es, and he tooke MAifiei John ^ox f^g. leweU afterward made B, of S^luburjf by iQ^Ei/- ^3"* x^abeth, and Ma'tfier Gilbert Monfen , that had byn notaryes ynto ^. Cranmer the day before. 41, But the greatert diffcrencej and difficul- ty fell our, for that Ridle)f hauing brought thi- ther with him his opinion, and large explica- tion thereof already wrytten , would needs, read the fame openly to the whole auditory, which was penned in fuch bitter, fpitefull Sc blalphemoijs termes, with fuch abhominablf fcoffes, and raylinge contemptuous fpeach> againft the facrcd myftcryes, and the yk ther- of > as the commifsionars w^re often-tymes forced to interrupt him, and commaund him to fylence , or to begin difputation , ney ther whcrof would hp dp , but with an obftinate face go foreword in readinge his declarationsi whervpon, DoSler VVeften callinge vnto him faid, as Foxrclateth: TofP vtter bUJphemjes with Fox p^x* an impudent face. Whcrfore finally they made Isimbreake of, promifinge that they would read & ponder all themfelues, not being con- qenient to infe<9: mens eares with publikc readinge therof, but that he might defend the fame , as occafion fhould be offered in his an- fwers andjdifputatiqns- 42, The firft argument brought againft him by DoileY Smith was j for ouerthrowinge that principall foundation of the Sacramentary hcrefie: Chrifis b&dj is inheauen, ergojt is mt in the 2^t A revtew of ten fublikf Sacrament. Wherof yo w haue heard often be^ The firft forc, toT that both Teter Martjr alicaged y t>as a aLouT''' checfeforcreffe of their faith, though Wtlipp cnrifts Melandhon , that is a Calendar- faint togcather rainy wlth FetiT MattjT , as before yow haue heard, piaccf. did fay, that he had rather offer himfelfe vp to death, then to affirme vvfth the Sacramentaryes, that Chrljl$ ^^l^*' hody cannot he hnt in one place at once. And this was jur^mcnfi a principal] ground alfp of lehn Lambert, bar- '^tctmh. j^g^ Sacri^mentary opinions vnder K Hen^ rj the eyght , againtt whome Do^or Cranmer^ then Archbitliopp of Canterbury, was the firft and cheefeft difputer after the King, and fpe- daily tooke vpon him to confute this reafon of Lambert as vayne and falfc , and contrary to fcripture^as before yow haue heard in the ftor ry of Lambert. And the fame reafons , and ar- guments, which Cranmer vfed againft Lambert out of the fcripturesjdoth Do£lor Smith yCc now againft Ridley , to witt that Chrijl appeared corpo^ . rally and really on earth, after bis affenfton, to S, Faul and other s,tvg6^ his being in heauen is no let to bis reaVi e doth neuer forefake the fame? Kirf/f^ an fwereth in thefe words: ifyow vnder" fiand his fitting to be after a corporaU manner of fitting, icxpaji. foishealtvayespermanentinheauen: Which yfyc ni5.<»/.i. be truc,then is that falfe which before he iaid^ num. 4t. ^^^^ cbrifis body is not fo tyed to heauen , hut that he ntaj come dotvne into the earth when he vviU . And much more falfe is yr, that Chrift did really and corporally appeare vpon earth to Saint Taul, and others as a little beforehe graun^ ted; fo as by thcfe yow may fee the briars vvherinto iDiJputatms, dout Religien. Chap, y." 5 01 ^hcrinto RidU/ was driuen abouc this ar- gument. 45r. The third point to be noted in thefe in«- conftantfpeaches ofJR/^//i?7 , is, that yt is not pofsible for Ghrifts body to be in heaucn and earth at one tymc 5 and yet when we vrgc them with impiety forlayihg impofsibilityes to Gods omnipotency, they will prefently runne to that anfwere, as Ridlej^zlCo afterward doth: that they dilute not what Godcan do.butwhat he vpiU do. Wherforc tore'turnetoour difpu- tationj when Do£{or VVefienhc^rd him taike of this impofsibility> & that Chrift yf he would appeare in earth, muft leaue heauen, he tookc Vpon him to conuince this falfi ty , ou t of two authorityes, the one of 5. Chfjfojlome^thc other of S. Bernard. S. Chrjfojleme his place , is vpon the Epiftle to the Uebrues, talkinge of the day- ly external] facrifice of Ghriftians, offered throughout the. world in many churches at once, faith thus- vna eft hac ablatio, non mulu^&c. fj^^ffy, m this oblation offer is one and not manyj ep.adHeir^ and how is it one and not many, which being >i once offered vp in fanHo fanciorum (towitt, Yponthe Croffe) notwithftandinge is offered by vs dayly ? Thisfacrifiee (which dayly » offer) is a paterne of that (oiice offered on the » Croffe) and alwayes we offer the felfe-ftme, ,not offeringe now one lambCjand to morrow » ar^othef, but alwayes the felfe- fame- wher- « fore hc'ere is but one lacrifice , for that other- m waycs by this n)eane$,y f there be many facri- ,p tiees in many places , there ihould be many Ghrifts, Joz A review of ten puhliike Chrifts, which is not fo > but one Chnft in all places^ qui & hie plentu, & iUicpleniu, mum corpus^ Which Chrift is fully hecre , and fully there, being but one body, &c. 46. Out of Which place DQllef VVeJlm did Vrge J?. very ftraitly , who lirft, would feeme to make light of the place, (ayinge: th^Ji things make nethttige dgalnfl me: but V Vejl$n vrgcd : how fay yow then one Chrift is in all placeSy heere fuUf, and there fully. Ridley. One CijftftismaA places, but not one body b in all places, dye. And this euafion piealeth fo much lohn FoXy as he wry- teth in the margent, one Chrift, but not one body in dU pUees, as though Chrifl could be feparated from his body , or as though Chryfoftome did notexpreflcly talkeof one body: Heete Chrift fuUy, and there Chrift fully one body j and the very next words of Chryfoftome immediatly fol- lowinge are thefe ; euen d4 then Chrift offered iii many places , is one body, and not many bodyes, fo is the (aerijice alfo but one. But lett vs heare Do£lor We- fton vrge the fame: VJ^Sion.Onebody faith Chry-^ foftome. Ridley. But not After the maner of bodily fuhftance he is in all places, not by circumfcrtption of places: for hie & iliic^heere and there in Chryfoftome do afigne no place as Auguftine fatth : Surfum eft Do^- tninus , ^ vbique eft yeritas Domini. The Lord is aboue , but the truth of the Lord is in alt places. Wefton. iou^ cannot fo efcape , Saint thry foftome faith, not the verity of Chnft is one, but one Chrift is in all places both heere and there., Ridley. One facrijice is m aH places, becaufe of the fnlty of him , vvbome the facrtpce doth ftgmfie. t>ijpui4thmy dm Irfig?^. Chap. 50 j not that the factijices be aU one and the fme. 47, Markc now hcere gentle reader, what An ob^r-^ yt is to difpute with thefe people*, that feekc J^J^^" after nothinge but fliifts & holes to runne out Shifts vps. at, orflippaway ? Confider how many they oSiy^if"^*^ be vpon this only place . For firft when iCtdlty s. chryp^^ Waspreffed with 5. Chrjffifiomei authority , as yow hauc heard , prouinge euidently , that Chrift could be at one tyme in diuers places, his firft fliift was, thatyt rrtaketh nothinge a- gainft him 5 and then, that albeit Chrift be iri many places , yet his body cannot be in many places, as though Chrift were in any plac6 without his body : And then againe yt being fliewed, that S. Cf?r;/J^j?d7»^lpeaketh cxpreffely ofChrifts body, the next fhift was , that his body is not there after the ordinary manner bf bodily prefence , to witt , by circumfcrip- tion of place, which is quite frofnthepur- ofe, for that we hould this alfo^as before yoH aue heard in the fifth & llxt bbferuations, to witt, that Chrift is not circumfcriptiuely iii the Sacrament And further yt is another ab- furdftiifc, or rather ignorance in Ridkj^ (and may be the fife or fixt about this matter) to af- firme as heere he doth, that Chriftsbody is; not by cikumfcripf ion euery* where, or in all |()laces:for We hould al(b,ndt only,that which fee faith)by circumlcriptiosbut that no wayes, either circumfcr!ptiueIy,or definiriuely^or fa- cramentally is Chrifts body euery- where^but only in many diftin A places , by Gods omni- potent will- The other of vbiquity being a j^ro^ 504 ^ review of ten fuhlikf property of Gods diuinicy only^to be in 6uery place at one tyme, as before wc haue {hewed. Andlaftly c6 follow Ridley and his riddles no further about this matter, the words of S^Au^ gujiine are foolilTiely alleaged by him j that the Lord is dbotie , but the ti nth of the Lord u in all places: for as Do^or VVefion well noteth and telleth h i m , vvr talke not he ere, hotv the Lords truth ii euery^ where , but whether Chrilh body be in diucrs places or noe : for Chrifts truth is eucry- where, where his faith grace or power is, but not his body . And albeit his truth admittnot the circumftances or proprietycs of places fur" fum and deorfum,yQt his body doth: which Rid^ /^^confiderednot, whenhe brought thisex- ample , but only defyred to fay fome-what> though neuer fo much from the purpofe. 48. And the like iTiiftes he flieweth in his iaft arifwere about this place of S. Chrj/foftome, when DoHor VVefton vrginge, that oneChriJland one body is in aU places wherfoeuer his facrifices are of-- fend, he aunfwererh not to the words of Saim Chryfoflome Tit all, but faith only at r^^hdome, that one facrtjice is in all places ( S. Chrjfoflome faith one body) becaufe of the vnity of him vvhome the fa^ crifice dothfigynfic^ which is as much to fay in his fenre,as the iacrifice being but a figne or figni- fication of Chrift that is one, is multiplycd iri diners places. And what great miracle is this I prayyow, to multiply many figures in di^ iiers places of one thinge, who may not do fof and yet Saint Chryfofiome fctteth yt downe for a Wonderful! ftrange and admirable matter, ^l^timhm, about ^eligm. Chap. ilw one Ckrijl the felfe- fame Umhey one body , fully heere AtJ fully there, ftould be offered at one tymein niaay places* which miracle in DoBot Ridley es feniQ is both eafy and no miracle at all, and fo much about this place ot Saint Chry-^ fiftme^, 4^. Thefecond authority out of S. Bernard is in thefe vvordst Vnde hoc nobis ptjpme lefu, &c. fJ^'J^^ Howcomeththis vnto vs, 6 molt pious lefu, Dem. that vve feely wormes crcepingedn the face „ oFthe earth, that are butduftandallics^lTiould „ deferuetohauetheeprefentinourhands, & „ before our eyes , who fitteth both whole and „ full at the right hand of the Father, and who in the moment of one houre, from the riflnge of the;funne, vntci the goinge do wne thereof, „ artprcfent one and the felfe-famc in many ,^ and diucrs places, To this place D. Ridley gauediuersanfwcrs: Tirjl {CTiith he) thefe words of Bernard mdke nothing for jfow at aU. This is very confidently fpoken as yow fee , no lelTe then to the place of 5. Chtjf&fiome before^ and I be- recuchewill not ftandlonge yncoyt: Foryf Saint Bernard doth meahe as he faith 3 he muft needs make much for vs in the Words now re- cyted, wherin Ireferrc me to the iudgement of the reader* Whet forr Maifer Ridley not tru- ftinge much to this anfwere, paffeth to his fe- cond fayinge : I k!^o(p that Bernard was in fuch a vok paf tyme, that in this matter he may vvorthdy kfjpiUeit ^^^5- So he. And yet Jeall he might feeme to leefe fome creditt in reie(Stinge Bernard, hehath a third anfwere thus: notJt^khftandmg (faith he) V Iwili ^66 A review of ten puhlikf 1 will fo exfoundhtmmher then retell him , thdthei fi)4ll nt^ks nothinge joryow At all Lo hecre his latt caft and this he learned of his Maijler Caluyn, not fo much to reicct in words the hathers,as Jl«(fo^r did, but rather by falfeand crafty inter- pretation, lleightly to aubyd them, which in- deed is not humility but double impiety^ and more impious to the Fathers themfclues^then to be vtterly denyed , for by this meanes they are made coadiutors of heretiks : lett vs hearc then iJ JBfrw^rrf expounded by Rtdley to his pur- pofe : S,Befntrd (quoth he^ /k/r/? , tlmwehaue Chrift in 4 my fiery , h a Sacrament, vnder a vcyle or €ouef\ tn the meane tynie heere now he pttth , that the rent} 4j Chnji U euery-vvhere. So he. And is not Rtdley rid«cuious heerc ? let the reader com- pare 5. Bernards words before aillcaged, with thisexpoUtjon of , and he will lay that the commentary hicteth as right the text , as the biyncl-'toid- man doth hitt the henncsf head on the ground, when his face isanothct* way from her. A^nd thus much of Dodor Rid^ teyes three aunfwers to this place of Saint Bernard. 50, After this t)o^or Smith vrged him ^Jgaine Another with another pUcc o( S. Chryfojieme, w^htrehe f^7hry'o' ^^'^^l^ii^s^ ^ companion, betweene Eltoi the fiome vT- Prophertand Chnfx , fairh, that Ei//^5 Jcfr hisT I/lf^^"^^ cloake to Elit.ew with his double fL>iritt, when he went vp to heauen - bur Chrifi did much ^, more miracuioully, torthathelef: vshisfleih horn 1 ad mthe biicrnmcnr . and yer tooKe the l.ime vp f^ch. "^^^'^ ^^^^^^ quidm melotm difapuh reltquit-y plm Iiijputattons,ahmRetigm. Chdp^ i^of pirn mem Dei afcendens, fuatn mhU carnem dimifit^ Helm quidem exutm^Chrifitu mem & nobis reliquit, cJr tpfam habeni afceadit. EUm indeed at hk de- ,7 parcure, left his cloke or hearcloth vnto his dikiplc Elium but the fonneof Godafcen-,^ dinge vp to heauen left his owneflelTi vnto ,^ ys: Elm left his cioake, but Chrift both left ,^ vtitohishisfislli&yetcarryedthe fame with him. Which plaine place when Ridlej went about to delude, as he had done other former places , by fayinge th^t Chrjfojlomes meaningc was, that he left his flefh vpon earth not real- ly and fubftantially, but to be receaued after a Ipirituall communicationj by grace, addinge this example: as wealf4 (quoth he) by hearing thi ghiojpeU, and bj faith: So as by this aunfwere wc haue Chrilts flelli no ocherwife prcfent by meancs of the Sacrament, then we haue hirri prefent by hearinge the ghbfpell, or by belee- uinge in him, which is to euacuate wholy the fpeach & comparifon of S. Chr^fofleme. Wher-^ fore to ouerthrow this {hih,DQ£lor Smith allea- ged another plaine place of the fame Chryfi^ fienie in confirmation of this where he faith: Omiraculuml o Deibenignitateml qui fuffumfedet, chr^0:^ tempore facrtjicij homimmmanibui continetur, &c* ^^^-^^^ O miracle I o goodnefie of Cod ! that he which fitteth aboue, is conteyned in mens hands in the tymc of the facrifice. But all this would not ferue, for he atioyded this as he had done the other, fayinge : he that fitteth there (to witt in heauen) is heere prefent in myflery and hi^^ce^ and is helden of the godly, &c. And finally V % thougW 3o8 A revietp of ten puhHke though there were diuers boutcs in thlsfti^f^ tcr, yet could iiothinge be gotten more. 51. But to this fenfc, Dodot Smith, DgHorSeton, Do£lot Harpesjield 2nd Do£lor VVepn, vrgedhim much about the place, asking him where was the miracle , yf Chrift left his flelli heere only • in myftery and by faith j how could the com- parifon ftand betwccne Hr/i^ zndchrijl? for Chri^ mtift do more then Eli^u j Elias left his mant^and could not carry yt vp with him, Chrift not only left his fleili , but carryed vp the fame , ergo he left the fame that he carryed vp, &c. But he carryed vp his true and natu-* rail flelTi, er^o he left the famej to all which he aunfwered agiine : He tooke vp his flesh with him to he/tuen , anile ft heere the communion of hti flesh on earth. With which ihiftinge aunfwere Dopier VVe^m being moued>/, began after his falhion to vrge the matter carneftly fayinge: yo w vn- derftand in the firft place his flefli for very true fieihj and in the fccond place for grace and communion of his flelTi, I will make yt eui- dent how blockiih andgrolTe your aunfwere is: As Eli^ left his ckkf (faith S, Chryfofome) fo the hom\! ad fonneofGdd leftbU fleshly but Elt4S left bis true fub^ Z7h fiantiaflcleke, ergo Chriji left his true fubjhntiaU flesh: and heerin he fpake in Englilh. RtdlY. I am glad nn^ Jpeakf in EriOli^b, and furely I would wish all the 'world Wight vnderfia^id your reafons and mj anfurers: Keliqult nobis ^jr«^;«,Chrift Itfc vnto vs his flclh. Tlmyow vndafland of flesh, and I vnderfland of grace: he carryed his fieshtobeauen , and left behind hhnthe (cmmunionofhis flesh mo vs, VVeflon. leeiudgej what Dijputatiens, ahout neiipon, Chap.^. 309 vvhMthinke yow efthU y Aun^were Judges. Iiidges. Ituaridiculm, and very fond aunfwere, Ridley. well I will take jour words patiently for Cbrlflsfaki. 5z. And this was the end of the controuer- ly about this place of S. Chryfifiome, towitt, that we mull take grace for iieilij and when Chrift is faid to haue left his flelli heere with vs, wemuft vnderftandhis grace: Yet Doilor VVefton alleaged alfo another place out of the (ame Father, where he faith : Spargimm , &c. VVe Are Jprinkeled with the very felfe-fame bloud, ijTr.W n thatChrifi cdrryedvp with him ^ ^c. Whcrvnto jp^idley anfwered after his fafliion : yt is the fme hloud, butjpirituallyreceaued. Then vrged he Saint Bernards words againe- r/;^ felfe- fame Chrift is pr^- [ent wholy in diuers places , euen from the vvejl to the tafi, from the north to the fouth, a^c. Wher to Ridley aunfwcred 3 that GodacmdingetobisMaieflieand prouidence, a4 S. Augufline faith, u euery- wherewith the faithful, and fomufl Bernard he expounded. Do yowfcc this cxpoHtion? Read Saint Bernardi words before fett downe , and yow iliall fee, that he (peaketh of Chrift , ^ fittinge inheauen, 4nd yet prefent wholy in the Friejls hands , &c. And not of his Maicftic & prouidence, wher- by he is euery- where , as before hach by n de- clared : So as this is not to expound , but to confound the Fathers,and I thinke verily that Ridley was much troubled, when he gaue fucht impertinent aunfwers and cxpofitions. 53. And with this would I paffe ouer thifor thac the water of baptifme hath the fame> & fo yow fee the whole Sacrament plucked vp bv thefepluckes of Philpotty and ret (faith Fox) that he did pjrewdly (hake guYYcaR fve- i^oxf^^. fence, hj gimnge fnch a plucke to one of ouy cheefefoHn- dations. Yow fee how oac of thefe men do flatter thie other. 55f. Next to this entred one UatfteY VVaYd to ^^^^^ difpute that had byn PW/pam reader, and (eing difputcth. p. Rtdlej to haue doubted fomuch ingraun- tinge anddenymge Chrifts body to haue ap- peared vpon earth , as in the former difpuca- tions of DoMoY Smith , yow haue partly heard, though much be omitted for breuityes fake, he began to vrge him againein that point, ai- ^a^, leaginge againft him the authority of a Ca- ini* tech ifme fett forth by bimreife , in the name of the whole conuocation-houfe in %Edwardi dayes,where the felfe-fame point is graunted, which heerehedenyed ^ but Si/i/e7 fortwo or three abouts, would not yeld that the Cate- f hifee w^shis , though the iudges faid thai y 4 Qrmm^ ' ^xt A ityitw of ten puhtikt Cranmer hadconlefTcd chemaccer the day be- fore , and Maifier Ward auouched to his face, that he being Billiop of London, & in his ruffe, compelled himtofubfcnbethervnto- yet at length he confefled, that both he and Crdnmer had approued the fame vnder their hands, & that the place alleagcd againft him, might ea- iily be expounded without any incoueniencej ^nd fo they flydd away from that matter, and aplaceofr/w;>&//4fl(cameinqueftion, where he wryteth , that Chrift in the inftitution of rhe9bh. Sacrament of the Altar tion dixit, hoc efifigu-^ iiomment, m Y^coYfoYis mctjed Iwc cfi coYftu fHeutn- he faid not, z^.Matth. that this is the figure of my body, but this is my body: which authority Ridley wlptd of by fayinge his meaninge to be, that yt was net on- Ija^gtlYeofhishdy. Where vn to Do£lot VVcJion rcpiyed, that this only was one lye put in by hini> for that TheofbiUil had no fuch word,nor could yt ftand with bis fen (e, for that he did not make the oppolltion betweene pgure^^nd only, but betweene the body and^^«re, ^^yi"g^i yt vv4slm body, andnotafigUYeofhu body. And for proofe of this, another place ofjheophUacl was V^!uS. ^IJwged vpon ^^iwrJofcw, where his words are? quoniam infiYmifumus, &c. foY that we are inpYme, And abboYYe to eate Ydw-^ah eJpecidUy the flesh ofman^ theYefoYeytdppedYed hYeadMti^p^h: what can be more plaine, and perfpicuous then this ? and yet do I not find any annfwere tohauebyn giuen by Do^oy Ridley to this place, but that he palTed to another matter, to expound the word TY4n[dememed vfed by TheofhlUH. And ^ Dljputatim, about 'Religion. Chaf.f^. 315 paflTe ouer diners other places , as that of Ter- ^^^^ ^.^^^ tullian, accepium panemcorfm fmmittud fecit : he com. may- rakinge bread madeyc his body j and that ot lufiimt^ Martj^rS^ying^i That Chnfis flesh m the Sa- ^^^^^ aament, is the fame that was taken of the hleffed Vir- in ^poi. i. pn* And that of S. Atigf^flme vpon the Pfalme; ^u^. that hegauevs to eat the felfe- fame flesh , whet in he ^fi^"^*^^* vvalk^^d vfoneATth. All which places being ob- ieded before to Cranmer , and read both then & now out ofthe authors ihemfclues, by Dq-^ Uqy VVefion that had the books by him , were no othcrwife aunivvered heerc, then by the ftmc lliifcs which Cranmer had auoydcd them before, ytappearingeeuidently that they had agreed vpon cerraynedirtindions 5 and com- mon eualions, wherby to delude all the Fa- thers authorityes that might be brought a- gainft them>though they were neuer fo cleerc or pregnant for the purpofe. 56 ? It folio w^th, that by order of difputation the turnecamcto Do&or Gljn to difpute againft DoHorKidlej, who madc(faith Fox)a very con- tumelious preface againft him, which Ridlej^ ^- <^^y"^ took^ the wore to heart , for that he had aUtpajes taken at)ouT^^ him to behi$ffend. And albeit Fox doth 'not fett vvorfhip- downe the fame preface, yet by DoHoy GZ/wj sicrametr> entrance to his argument,a man may ree,that the cheefe point was in reprehwdmge him, for deludinge and lliiftinge of both fcriptures and fathers fo jliamfully, as he had heard him do , for he fai th : I fee that yow euade or fnft away Fox /^e^. aUfcriptures & fathers. And Ridley an fw ered: thh ^ P 4Ste0OH$ cemumeljf^thatjfw caU me a ffnfter, &c. And 314 review of ten fuhlikf And finally Doctor Gljn endeauored to draw him to yeld to the Cacholikc Church, which ^ being the piiler oftruth,cou!d not be thought to hauc fallen to fuch Idolatry, as for many ages to hauc worlhipped crroneoully bread and wync,for the flelhand bloud of Chrillm the Eucharift, and for proofe rhcrof he allca- ged Saint Augufiinc againft TauJlinthQ Maniehee^ where he faitli^that chis vfe o[ adoring Chrilh body in the Sacrament, was fo auncientand F-!^^. mIi publike, as fomc pagans did thinkc that Chri- mcb Lzo. rtians did adore C^rrf and B^a/;(« the Gods of I}, breadand wyne. Heallcaged alfo Er^/wiwiau- Erdfro. in thority,who affirmeth that this worlliipping, Infer and adoration of the Sacrament of the Altar, ^*rm. was in vfe before the ty me of 5. Augufime and S. Cjfprian-j which is not fo in rhe Sacrament of Baptifmc, though Ridley affirmc there is as much the flelTi of Chrirt 5 as in the other, and confequently, there is fome fpeciallcaufcin the EuchariH aboue other Sacraments. To which two aurhorityes I find nothinge aun- fwcred-particularly ; (as neyther to Erdfmm) but to the thing it felfe Ridley auafwcred: VVe do handle the fignei reuerently, &c. And againe: There is a deceyt in this ivord Adoramtu, we adore, for we vvorfhipp the frmhoUs, when reuerently we handle them: wewoifnipp whcrfceuer we ferceaue benejins. VVhervnto Dtjputatms,ahomKeUgm. Chap.ff* 51 f but that all the adoe which the Fathers do make, about the highefi honour in earth to be giuentQ the Sacrament of the Altar , comes to no more by thefe mens mterpretations j but that thefignes of bread and vvyne mufi be reu^rentlj handled, & Chrifi abfentmufi be vvorfhipfed therein, as in other thinges, vvherin vveperceaue or receaue his beneptts : vvhich indeed are all his creatures made 6c ordayned for our profitc,for by them all,we pcrceaue & receaue Chrifts benefitts ; So as all thefe great admirations of the Fathers^about the honour, worihipp & adoration due to this Sacrament^ come to no more in cff^diybut that vventujlreue^ rence Chrifi therin, ^ in other his benejiciaU creatures, and vvorffnpp the fymboli of bread andwjne, oa much myow do the water in baptifme : vvhich yet ncucr any of the Fathers faid was to be adored byv? (as they do of the Eucharift) though Baptifme be a moft necelfary and profitable Sacrament. 57, Then difputcd one VoMor Curtopp, allea- ginge a place out of S. Chrjfofiome, affirminge: ^^^g^cd. that which is in the cupp,or chalice jo be the fame bloud (after the words of confecration ) that flowed chryfift. fiom the fide of Chrifi , wherof he inferred, that ixlr.toT true and naturall bloud did flow from the fide of Chrift, ergo true and naturall bJoud was in the chalice. To this fidley anfwered in efFc<5t Fox after his ould faihion , that yr was true bloud, that is to fayjjfo^ Sacrament ofhu bloud. Curtopp. The Sacrament of the bloud is not the blond. Ridley. The Sacrament of the bloud, is the bloud.and that is at^ trihuted to the Sacramentj^ which is j^ohen of the thing 51 ^ A rtvUw of ten fuhUke 9fthe Smament. Ac which aunfwere VVfJlm being moued, as y t feemed, argued in Enguih {faith Fox) thus: That which is in the chahce is the fam that piped out of Chrifls fide, but there came out very true Houd^ ergo there is very true bloudinthe chalice. Ridley- The bloudof Chrtfi is in the chalice in deed, but not in the reall pre fence, but by grace anJ^m 4 Sacrament, Weflon. That is very well ; then we haue bloudinthe chalice, Ridley, It is true, but by grace , and in a Sacrament j and heere the people failTed achini, (faith Fox) wh^tzt Ridley faid: O my maljlers I taks this for no iudgenient, I will Jland to Gods iudgement. This was his lali refuge and further then this, nochinge could be had at his hands. D. vntfin 58. There rofc vp after this De^or VVAtfon^ difputcth. who after a long altercation with Ridley, s^h^^ ther after conftcration the Sacrament might be called true bread : Ridley alleaged this place X. C0r. II. of S^ Paul. The bread which we breaks, i^yt not a coni-> munication of the bodjofChnfi? As though yt had made for him. But VVatfon brought .S. Chryfo- fiomes expodtio: Quare non dixit participatione.^c. V Vherfore did not S. Paul fay heere, that yt is the far^ ^hryf$(^. in t iclpation'^of ChtUh body) but th^ communication? I. ctr. II. because he would fignify fomegteater matter, & that h€ would declare a great conuenience betwene the fame, for that we do not communicate by participation only & receauingMt by co- vniung or vnion-Jor eucn as the body is cO'Vnited toChriJl-^ fo alfo are we by the fame bread conioyned and vmted to him. Out of which place of ^S". Chryfofiome, yt appeareth euidently, that his beleefc wasjchat as his body and flci'h was J)}Jput4ttem,dout Religm. Chaf.fi i\f %as really vnited to his perfon, fo are v/c vn- to him in flelTi, by eatinge the fame in the Sa- crament, which is another manner of vnion then by faith and generail only . But to this lett vs beare Ridleyei aunfwerc in his owne words: Ridleye, Let Chrjfofiomehaue his manner vffpeakinge, and his femencejfyt he true , I teled; jt not , but lett yt not be preiudiciaU to me , to name yt bread. So he. And thus was S. Chryfopome fhif- ted of, neyther admitted , nor fully reiecftcdj but if he Jpitke truly, then was he to he credited^whxch was a courteous kind of reiedion * for 'R.idley would haue^the reader beleeue^ that he fp^^kc not truly. And fo much for him. And fo when nothinge more could be gotten by Do^or Watson from Maifter Ridley m this argument , Do£ior Smith ftepped in to him againe> and vrged a pLiccof Augujiine vpoit the thirty and third Pfalme : Verehatur inmant^ hm fuis.&c.Ht w^as carryed in his owne hands, applyed by S. Auflmto Chrifl: : his words are: Hoc quo modo fieri pofit in homine, quis intelligat? i^: Who can vnderftand how this can be done by a man ?/(?y that no man is borne by his oa^ne hands, ji^, in > but by other mens hands , neyther can vvejind how this ^r«/f»- 3^ wasfullpedliteraUyin K. Dautd,bm by Chriftwejind it fuUfiUedJor that Chrifi tras borne in his owne hands, when he faid this is my body, ^for he did become that bo- dy in his ofpne hands, &c. And iigaine in another fermon vpon the fame place, he repeateth a- gaine the very fame thinge fayinge : Vlowvvas ji^^g, Chrift borne in his owne hands? for that when he did c^'^tf- ^\ commend vnto vs Im body and bhud , he toohe into his pt A review ef ten fuhlike hands thdt which th$ faitbfuU ks^ip , ani fo he ban htmfelfe after a mtayne manner , when he [aid this is my body. Out of which places appeareth eui- dcndy ,that S. Au^ujline bclccu^di that Chrift after the words of confecration vttered > did bearehisownc body in his hands, and that this in his iudgement was fo miraculous i thinge, as ncythcr Kin^Dauid , nor any other mortall man could do yc, but only Chirft, which yet is not fo in a figure (forcucry man may bcare a figure of his owne body in his; hands) and furthermore ytiscleereby thefc authorityes, and by thofc words (norunt jideles) that this was the beleefe by all faithfull people 6f S. Aufiens tyme. Which argument being much vrged againft Maifier Ridley, both by D^- Uer Smith and others, he fought to dcclyne thci force therofdyuers-wayes, as faying firft; thai Augufline went from ethers in this exfofitiony (but yet named none) and then, that this place ef fcripture was read otherwise of ether men , accordinge to the hebrew text, & other like euafions, which yet proue not (as yow fee) but that Saint Aujlen was of this opinion and beleefe himfelfc> (which is the queftion in this place) and after all this he paffed to his ordinary refuge , Chrijl bare biwfelfe facramentally only^and not ether-* Wife • l.^yinge hands, for fome rtiew of reafon* vpon the word qtiodammodi.yCcd in the fecond place by S, Auftenyth^Lt is, after a certayne mannerm A nd when it was replied to him,that S. Auften vfed that word, to lliew the different manner of his being in the Sacrament , and out of the Sacr?!^ DtJ^uutmSj dUut ^eTigm. chap. Sacrament, but that othcrwayes all parts and circumftances ofS.AuJlensrpe^chdo fhew,that he beleeucd Chrift to haue holdcn really, and truly his owne body and^flelTi in his hands, they could gett no other aunfwere from him but this: He did beare himfelfe, but in a Sacrament. Fox f^^^l Whefat men maruaylinge , I>i)fie?r 5w/f/?faid: lotp are holdenfaft, nor are je able to efcape out of this Ubjrinth. And then began Bo^ior Trejfam to pray tor him with a foUemne praver, which beingended hefaid: if there were an Arrianheere that hadthu fubtile witt.thatyow hauejje might foons finftefthe fcrtptures,and Fathers as jotp doe. Wher- at DoHor FFt/?ow, Teeming vnwiliingthartymc fhouldbefpcntin prayingeand notindifpu- tinge, faid : ejther dt^$ite,or houldpur peace I pray yow. And with this they pafied to another di- fpvnzi\on,vvhetheY euillmen doreceaue the true body ^fchrtfi or not: Bur S. Aufiens authority of bca- ruige himfeife in his hands, gatr no other To- lution , but that Chrift bare himftlfc in his hands, that i*^ the figure or reprefenrarion of himfeife, which neither £)4«/^,nor other mor- tall man could do : At which abfurdity Hioft ^f the audience did laugh * 60. Bur conccrninge the other qucftions, Mether emll m$n do receaue Chnft , Do£ior Trepm Trepm brought two or three places out of 5. Aufien^'^^^^^^^' concern mge Jr/rf4^, that he eat the true body of Chrift> as the other Apoftlesd^i, and then againeof wicked m'^rtin gcnerali: Qtila altquu -^.f- fton adjalutem manducat^ non ideo mn eft mpa: b v - caufe fomedonot catcto laiuauon, yt (01- low. ludasdideareortaftthcflefliofChrift. Rid- ley. Thdt is the Sacrament ef the Lords flesh, Doilor VVatfon replycd out of the Counceil of Nket Conctt. "Ht; Exaltata mente Meltter credamm, iacere in ilia fucra ut,d€ diui. menja agnum Det todcntem peccatammdt, a facer do^ &^v{nr» ^ibu6 facnjicatum. Let vs faithfully belecuc with t^mi^r^ an exalted mynd, that there lyeth in the holy „ cable the lambe of God, that taketh away the finnes of the world, which is facrificed by the „ Priefts. Rid ley. That Counceil vvoi coUeBed out of Pgx ibid, duncient Fathers, and is to me of great authority, &c, the words mahfor me : the Umbe of God is in heauen accordivge to the verity of the body, and heere he is tvttb vs in a myjiery accordinge to his power , notcorpraUy. Warfon. But the lamhe of Cod lyeth on the table, Ridley. Ttif^figuratnte jpcach. forin our mynd we Vnderjland hm which is in heauen, Watfon. But he Ijeth there, the Greeks vvord is vkMit k. R idley. He lyeth there, that isjie is there ^refent,not corporally. DtJpntMtms.Mbmit "Religion. Chap.f^^ ^li hut he lyeth there in his operation, &c. And by this Fox pa^l yow may (ee , to what piirpofe yt was todi- ipute wuh this man ; for that God by his power and operation is euery where, and in teuery creature. And yf G'iiriR benoother- wite heere, biit by his power and operation^ as in bapcifmey w^hat aiiimpertincncyis this of the Councellof N/^:^, to vfe fo many andfi- gnificanc words, that we muft faithfuUj beleeue with ahiohmynd and mirage y againPt fenfe and reafom that the lambe of God Ijeth on the table facii^ fcedbjFriefis, and the like- I s there any Protc- ftanr that fpeaketh thus,or can the like words be verified in the Proteftants commuiiion, of ligneS) figures, reprefentations and (j^mbblls? LnlUy to fkipp puerdiuers other things, Vodor VVeflon preffed him with two other ^hcQs of S.ChrjfGfiome, focleere, asnothinge can be (poken more cleerer. The firft is in ' thefe words : ^^ye yvorfhipp the felfe fame body in the Euchartfi, which th'e vvife men did worffnpp in the manger. And then ag^ine: vveha^enot heerethe chryfifl. Lord in the manger, but on the Altai ; heere a woman holdeth him not in her hands, hut a Frleft. .Tbefe are the words. Let vs heare his anfwere, Ridley, tgraunt the Prieft holdeth the fame thinge , bm after Another manner. She did hold the natmall body , the Friefl heldeth the myjleryef the body. Sohee. And ^^^.p^^r Fox w^yceth in the margcnt « Tte fme thinge^ uaa.' hut the manner dmrfe . But who feeth not, that our contention is about the thing, and not the manner^ for we reach affo that the manner of Chrifts being in the Sacrament, is differe^pc X from p.1 AtevUw eftenfuUtkt tromthe manner of his being in heauen , hui the thinge really is ail one. And fo y f Ridle/dc^ graunt the fame thinge to be hblden by the Ridley in Prieft hands, which the bJeiied virgin held in her hands, as heetc vow fee him srauntin to agree, words, then the controuerlie betweene vs and him is ended. B ut prefentlyhe leapeth from his graunt againe , fayinge Ihe did hold the naturall body > and the Prieft holdeth the myftery of the body ? which are dilFerenc thingSjand not only different manners of hol- dinge. Wherefore Dodor VVcji$n repeatinge ;^aine this argument out of Chryfiftome to the multitude in Engliili(faith lohn Fox) and confideringe the manner of :Rl(tlejei' aiinfwe- ringe, and that nothinge more could be had of him, hediifolued the difputationin thefe' Words: Vidcth fujradihomijjis anifmml^lori&fum, vajrunty inconfiantenty &c. Yow lee the Irub- borne, vauntinge, deceytfull, andinconftanc mynd of this man. And with this Encomiorr departed DoSor KidUjzo his prifon againe, and' the other Doctors each man tothcir ownc* lodginges. Out of the Dif^utationsioithlA. Hugh' Latimer togeather'Svlththtcon- clufionofthe y^hole triall in this article. $.4. Vpon the third day being wcdnefday the b^jputattom, about Religion^ Chap. 5^. 525 the iS. or' A prill , was brought forth Maifur UughLatyiner to aurifweic as the former had doae 5 but the difputatioH was much more iliorter then the ocheijand in Eng!iili^/or M^i- fier Latymer (faith Fox) alleaoed that he vviU out of vfevnthLatjn, andvnfntfer that place. He gaue 1312. Vphis confcfsion about the three aniclesia wrytinge, after the imitation of Cr^m^r and kidlej y full offcofFes and Bitter taunts 5 as his veyne was , and refted nioft vpon the malfe, ind the foure mmow-hones therdf{foi fo blalphe- Latymers^: mouily he called them) which v/ere (for- naorrow^; footh) confecrdtm, tranfuhfiamiation, obUtmt,znd the^jmaffco adoration, of ail which yo w haue lieard the an- cient Fathers fpeaches before, how dilferent they are from thefe of Latpner , as wasalfo their fpiritt* 6^^. The firfi: entrance to tallce betwene Mai- fier Latpner, and the DoAors was, for that he iayinge io his Wrytinge^that nothinge was to be receaucd concerning the Sacrametj which - WasnotexpreiTely fett downe in theinftitu-- tion of Chriftj Doclor VVeJfon inferred, that then weomen muft not receaue the commu- ilion, for that no expreflTe mention is made in fcripture oftheir receautngc; and when Latj- mer aunfwercd, that S. Panl faid : Frebet autcm feipfumhofh^which figniiieth faid he both men and weomen, yt was replyed, tharin Greeke ftwzs anthropos that wasproper to man, Then De&or VVeJionzskcd him, how longe he liadbyn of this opinion ? he faid about (ome f^Vuen yeares ( he being more then feauenty 2124 ^ revien^ of ten puhlike ofage)and thatmy L. of Canterburyes bookfe had Ipecially confirmed his iudgement theriiio And yf (quoth he) 1 could remember all therin con^ tejnedy I Would not fear e to aunfwere any man injhi^ matter. So he* And many tymes after he ran ftill to this booke of Cranmet. Uy Lord of Can-- terburyes booke[lV\th he to an argument oi Dodor t&x pag. Cart might) bandleth this very well.and by htm could I aunfwere yow^yf I had him. And againe in ano- ther place to another argument. The folut 'm of this (faith he) ii In my Lord of Canterbury his booke. LatyrMr And yet furth er co another . I remember / haue Hmrdfi' ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^terbury^s booke, Wher to on cran- Do£lor Trcffdm ^iuniwcvcd 5 that there are in that bookc. ^^^^ fi^ hundred lyes, but I^y'my reply ed no- thinge, &c. 64. Then faid boSlor VVepon: How were once d Lutheran. Latimer. NolwasaFaptJi, for IcouU neuer perceaue hoiv Luther could dejend his opinion,^ without tranfuhflantiation. The Tygurinei once did yvryte a booke a^ainfi Luther , and I oft defired God that he might Hue fo longe as to make them aunfwere. So he, whctbv is feene> that he fauoured more then rhe Tygurines at that tyme, fot that he would h;)ue h^d them aunfvvered. But luth. i. de T>oclor VV(JlQn faid further : Luther in his booke mf^aPriua^ pritiatawljfa, tcfiifuth that the diuellreafoned vyith ^Imt^tt^ h^m , and perfuaded him that the nLtJfe was not good, wherhy yt appeareth that Luther fndmajfe, andihe diuell dijfuaded hi7fjfromyt. Latimer, idonottakein hand heere to defend Lnthers faym;is or doings : yf he tvereheere , he would defend himfelfe well tnough I irow. So Latymer, Jeaumge Luther to hjm- Dij^utathns, ahout Religion. Chap. 5. 325 felfcjbut box will needs ciefeiid him with this margmaH note fa} inge : In that hooks, the diuell fox doth not dijfuade him fo much pom fa/mge majje, as to bring him to 'dejperatmjorfajmgemaffe.ftich tem^u- tionsmanj tjmeshappento goodmen, 65. Andwiii yowcQnh'derthc grauityand verity of this note J firft he faith that thedi- ♦ ueli did not fo much dilTuade him fromfay- ingemafTej as to bringehim to defperation: then fomewbachediddinuade him. , though lohn fox not fo much as to the other* which I beleeue, thrdhicu for that the one was his damnatioa j ^ndhis ^"^^''^^^^^ leauinge of mafle was but the way to yt . Se- ^\ltu condly yf the diuell did endeauour to bringe Luther to defperation for (ayinge of mane, he muft needs perfuade hini firil , that the mafle was naught^as yf he would draw a man' to defperation for viingalmerdeedsj he muft firft perfuade him 5 that almetdeeds arc naught and wicked, and as wife a man as he nioiild tew himfeife , that at thediuellspcr- luafion will beleeue that ahiiQf-deeds were naught, and leaue the fame- fo were Luther & Ldtjmsr as wife to beleeue this fuggefticn of the diuell againft the mafle. And where Fox thc Ji^ faith, that fuchtempmBfis of the diHcU h happen i»cHs im,- mmytymesto good-men. Igrauntyt,butnotthat oPthe"^^ cuer any^ good man did yeld therevnto, or ^^^^^ iudge a tKinge euill, for that the diueil did fay ucthft to yt was naugnt, but rather to the contrary, his ^^^^^ . impugnatioh of yt is alwayes afigne,that the thing is good and pleafinge to almighty Cod, W'hufe aduerfary the diudl isj yea the greater \ " " " his g i 6 4 revievp of ten publike hisiaipugnatioiiis, the better muft wcpri?- fume the thing to be>ancl coulequently wheii he would makcthe^ mafTe to fecriie To hey- \210usa thinge toLuthcr 5 as thac he ftould damned for fayinge the fame, yt is a goo4 proofe that the mafle is an excellent things 8c difpleafech thediuell, and that Lutlmmdhis followers leaning to fay maile^db pleaie mucin the diueli in foliowinge his fuggeiiion therin> as good and obedient children, to fo holy a ghoflly Father, and fp to hirn we leaue them, 66. There followeth, that albeit Latymer was loath to difpute^yet fome few argument$ were caft forth againft him^but all in Englilli, for fo he would haue yt « And firft M^ijlcr Do^ clor Trepm alleaged an authority of Saint Hila- Vj^r, afSrn^inge a nAturall vnitj to be in vs with Chrifi by eatinge his jlesk. Which phce, for that y r W' as iilleaged before againfthisfeliowes,! will not ftand much vpon y t > but only note this mans cuafion: Laty mer. J tan not jpeake Latyn fo longe^ crc. But as foY the words (&ch {\c)o f U '^lary J thinks they fif ake not fo much foryotv : but he thdt fwuld an^ ftpere the Doctor $\ had not ncede to be m my cafe, but fhould haue them in a readyne(fe, arid know their pix^ fofrMclmdhon fiith,thatyfthc DoQorshadforpene, that they fhould haue byn fo taken in this comrouerfie, they would bdue vvrylten more f Uinly. This wa^ his anfwere^and more then this y ow fliall not find, and in this, there is a notable impofture of an old deceauer^ for that Uelanclhon being of oppolite opinion to him in this article, and wry tinge a whole workc of the Doctors (en- tcnccs tences for proofe of the rcaU prefence, againft the Saqramentaryes ^ as in his^life wehaue iTiewcd> whathcfpcakethofchisrayftakinge the Fathers and Dodors, he fpeaketh expref- fely of the Sacramentaryes , and not of thofe that defend the redl frefeme , which he aifdj being a Lutheran , defended, and ai&nisth plainly that all the Fathers are of the fame opinion, though yf they had forcfeene, that fuch hcretiks , as are the Sacramentaryes, would haue rifen vp 5 and haue wrefted their words and meaning (as y o w haue heard both franmer.Ridley, znd Latjimer to haue done) they would haue fpoken more plainly in the con- ttouerfie,though hardly they could bane fpp^ fcen more clecrly againft them. And by this firfi: entrance^yow niay marke the plaine dea- linge of old Father L^tymer. 67* D(?(Sar5^4i(?wVice-chaunceIour of Cm^ fcriflf^e,rcing thefe fleights of the old fcUow^be- ginneth thus with him : I know your Uaminge ^^^^ yvoUinough, and howfuhtilcy^whe: IwiUvfeafefP 132s. words vvithyoip out qf S. Cyprian, who faith, that the ^ M Tefiament doth for bidd the itinkinge of hloud, and argument the netP Tefiament doth cmmaund the drinkinge of hloud. Out ofwhich words he framed this ar- ' gument. Thatyt was true and real! hloudy which tha old Tefiament forbadd to drinke , ergo yt is true and veaU bloud which the netp Tefiament commaundeth to drinke^ for that otherwife the amtthefts or oppo- fition of the two Teftamets in this point can^^ not hold, yf the one fotbidd the true drinking of true;?nd reall bloud, and the other com- X 4 ' niaun- 32 § A imew of ten puhltke rnaundeth the figuratiue drinking of fpirituali bioud by faith, for that thefe things are oppo-* fitc, and that the lewcs aifo in the oid Telia- ment did drinkc Chrifts bioud by faith , dr^. To which argument i^ypwrr aunfweredno- rox thinge in efFed , but this - vve do ujl mebhud, • * but jplritUAUy.dndtlm u ingugh. Aud then proueth he the ftme by thofe words of S. Auguj^neh^* v^M^. traS, fore aunfwcrcd by vs ^ crede & manducafii 5, be- ^uinisan, Jeeuej&s thou h^fteaten> as though the words credere and edere, were all one in the fcr ip ture?. \Vhervpon Redor VVefion recyted a ftory that paflredbetwene^4//?^rr JFi(?i?/?^rand B. Gardmr^ for when Hooper would needs hould 5 that t& €Ate was to beleue ^ and. that an ii/f/^rlignified Chrifkin the fcriptur^s^ 1. G^rr/^werr inferred, Mih.ii. ergo, when 5. P^ii/ faith to the Hebrewes, th^t vve haue an Altar, vvherofthe leit^esMU^ not eat: the fenfe is, vve haue Chrifty mwhome the letpes mufi not beleeue , And after this he retourned to prcfle Xrffy llrongly iagaine vpon this place of S. 5. cy^rutm cjprlan'^ (avinge : thatucomusamdcd in the neuj^ Teftdinent.iyhkh is inthe ould, but true vve^n. iiotii vvas f&rbidden in thi old, ergo truebloud alfo i$ commmided to be drunken in the new . Wher vnto Xrff;wfraunfweringc twife^yttered two con- ^3^5 ; ;,craryes: for hrft his words are : It u true as tou- www. tj. chingt the matter , hut noitu touchinge the manner of the rW/zg^, where he graunteth(as yow feejthat ts;ue bloud is meant in both;Teftanients, buc the manner of drinkinge isdii&rent , which a!fo we graunt & teach \ but hearc his fccond ^^uafwcre vpon the other iniUncc. Blfp titationiy about teligmn^ €haf, 529 518, Wetion. Tkeold Tejlapient doth forbidd the ^o^mi tafimge of blond, but the new doth commamdjt. La- jo. ty mer. It is true, not as tottchin^e the t hinge , but as tmchtngc the manner therof. Betore he faid: y c is true touchinge the Tnatcer, buc not touchinge the manner^ now hefAith-^ yt ismie touching the manner and not touchmgc the thinge : id as yf the thinge and matter be al! onc^as yt is, he fpcakcth coniraryesAViicrvpon Do^lor VVeJIon opened the whole argument to the people in Engiiih, and the abfurdity of his anfwere.bnt Latjmer reply cd againe and ap^aine ; that true bloud was comnuunded JpirituaUj to be dronken in thi new TefiammJ'Whtxvnto one Doilor Fje tc- plye(^3 and obieyow fee, hegraun- ifeth alfu the fubftance of bloud to be dron- ken5 though in a different manner from that of the old Teilament. But being prefied by the faid DoSfor P/r, that vve require not the fame mann- rof dvinkir^ge bloud in the nq|^ law, which was forbidden in theold:, but on& ly thatyt is as reaily and truly bloud , as the other was; hisfinall aunfwere and refolution this, It is the fame thinge, but not the fame manner^ I haueno?noretofaj. Heere then is his lafi deter- termination,and confider I pray yow the Tub-* flanc? therof 3^ yfyt pe the fame thinge , then 550 A review of ten publikf . muft yt needs be really and truly bloud ^ far this is thethingc or matter wheroftheque- ftion is, for that otfacrvvayes we know that the blQud forbidden in the old Teftament, i$ meant the bloud of beafts,and the bloud com- maunded in the new,is meant of the bloud of Chrift ; So as in this , Latymer cannot graunt them to be one thinge, but only in thc realli- ty and truth ofbloud,that is^as the one is true and reall bloud of beafts : fo is the other true andreall bloud of Chrift^ which yf he graunt (as heere in woids he doth) then cannot the diiferent manner of drinkinge the fame alter the fubilance of the thinge y t felfe^^or yf yt do, then is yt falfe, that yt is the fame thinge- and fo eusry way is ould Latjmer taken, but lett vs pafleforewatd. 6^. Doclor VVeflon to confirme the reallity of Chrifts bloud, receaued in the Sacrament, al- €hry(9f^. leaged another place of S. chryfojlome , where frTditf' talkinge of ludas ht faith , Chrifim ei fangninem quern vendidit offerebdt. Chrift gaue him (in the Sacrament, to wict,to ludas) the bloud which he had fould. Can any thinge be playnerfpo-. ken. Lttymet anfwered: /;f^4r«^ to Judas his bloud, in a Sacrament , and by this thinketh he hath faid fomewhatto the purpofcjwheras indeed he faitn nothinge. for we fay aifo , that he gaue him his bloud in a Sacrament,as we fay, that we giue wyne in a cuppe, but this exclu- deth not the reality of the bloud^no more then the giuinge in a cupp, or vnder a veyle, taketh awaynhe true reality of the wyiie j yet is this Btjputatms, dout l^eltgion. Chap^ ^. fhe comrnon hole tor Sacramentaryes to rimne cue aCj when they are pieffed j for both they and wc do agree 5 that Chriils bloud is giuen in the Sacrament: vnder afignefacra- mentaliy , and the nke phrafes • but the diffe- rence be cv'^cene vs is 5 that we by thi.^ do not exclude the truth &c reality of the thing therin conteyjned, as they doj & therby delude both tbemiciues and others jfpeakinge in fuch fort, as they cannot be vnderftpod , but only that a man may eafily vnderiftand 5 that they feekc therby euafions, and wayes to fiipp oufat. 70. I pafle ouer diuers other authorityes of Fathers alleaged by the Doctors, as thofe words of S. Cyrill: Fer cetnmunipnem corf oris Chri- cyriU.i.io: Jii, habitat in nobis Chrtflm cerporaliter. By the %a7/^^* communion of Chrifts body , he dweliethin vs corporally, ^r^ for that impor^ tech alfo really , as the fuUnelTe of diuiniry is really in Chrift incarnate, and not by vnion only of will, as the Arriam faid, and as our Sa- cramentaryes do talke of Chrids vnion only by faith in vs. And lett the reader note by the way John Fox his witt> 8f deepe diuiniry, who Icnovvinge not what he faith, graunteth by this example more thenw^e require- for he graunteth the fame fubftantiall vnity to be bccweene Chrifland our fouje , which is be- tweene Chrifts diuinity, and his humanity which is falfe j ours being accidcntall and fe- parable^ the other fubftantiall & infeparable, for that yt is hypoftaticalL But thefe thinges lehn hzd not learned , and io we pardon him^ and do returnc to iMymer againe, who being vrged hardly by Doiior Smith Tihow Saint Cyrills words- that Chrift by communion of his bo- dy in th^S^cv^mtntcdwelUthcorforaRyinvi, er^ go, not only Jpinttully byfaith-^hQ aunfwered: I fajt both that he dweUeth in vs JpirttujiHy , 4nd corf orally, {Ymtiially h} faith , and corporally by tahtnge our pih ypon him ^ ^for I remrmber that I haue read this m my Lord of Canterbury e$booke. Hecre now yow fee another lliifc different from that of Fox> au- thorifed by my L. of Canterburyesbookc , but fliakenofoy S>,Cyr ills boo]<^Qy which faith ex- prefTely as yow haue heard; that Chrifi dtrellnb in vs corf orally by the communion of ins body in the Sa-- crament, and talketh not of the incarnation. 7\. Wherfore Dotlor VVefton fting that more could not be had of Latjmer in this point, he pafTcd DiJ^utathni, about Religien. Chap, y.' puffed to another matter, which ^asto deals vvith him about the Sacri^ce ofche rriaffe^ In fcof- fingeagainft which, LAtjimers grace > or dif- grace rather and finnc, did principally con- iiftj and fo alleaginge many auncient Fathers authorityes againft him for this purpofe , and reading the places at length^hauing the book^ there prefent, Latym€Y\\zsc^\xiQk\y dryuento a non-flm , as may appeare by Fox his ow^ne narration , though he fetteth yrdownc like z Fox indeedsfupprefsinge all the particulars of the faid places, but only the names of the au- thors^and the firft words of the texts,and not themalfo in all. And then touchetli he the aunfwersof Latymer ^ and the Cathohke Do- <9:ors replyes fo brokenly and confu{cdiy, a^ may eafily fliew that he would declynethe tcmpeft of that combatt from Latymers Ihoul- ders, and nochaue the matter vndetftoodjin- finuatingeonly fome 8. or <). authorityes al- leaged fof proofe of the propitiatory facrifice, wheras more then 8. or 9. fcore might haue byn cyted to that eifeci And finally though Latymer muttered out two or three particular ^unfwers heere and there, fayinge-^r/Mf SXhry^ fifiome bdd Emphattcall locutions, and the like; yet his laft reift w^as fett vpon this ; that the Doilon ^ might be deceaued in (erne pints ^ thQUgb not in all things: Wherof Fox wel! aliowinge* makccb thisfcoffinge comment in the margent.Df^c1.9- res legendt fmit cum venia ^ the Doctors are to be re*ui with pardon , which can haue no oiher fenfe 3 but that eyther we muA pardon tl ein when A review of ten phlilte when they fpeake not truth , or'we miifl ask* pardon of them, not ro beleeue them wheii we millike them ; for other fenfs I canno-c make of this comentary. the laft_ 27. Do^loY Cok rcplyed ^ is it not a. fhamefor an VyithT*/ to l]ft?yoipfayyow are of the old Fathers fait IK^ tjmtr. Latymer, I am of their faith when they fay weU , I lov ibid, referre my felfe to my LordofCaterburyes booke wholy her in. D o Cxor Smith. Then your arc not ofS. Chry-^ fojiomes faith , nor S. Augujlinesjaith. Latymer. / haue pud, when they fay well, and bring f ripturesfot them, I am of their faith, and further Augujline requU tethnottobebeleeuedy crc. Wefton. Forty yeares gone, whether Could yotp haue gone to hat(e found your dodrine ? Laty m. The more caufe we haue to thankg God now , that hath fent the light into the vmld. Wefton. The light? ney light and lewd preachers,&c. remember what they haue bin , that haue bin the be^ gmners of your dodrine, none but a few flymge Apojla^ taes, runninge out of Germany, &c. remember what they haue bin , that haue fett forth the fame in this realme, a fort offlyinge braines, and light heads,which, were neuer conflant in any one thinge, which was well feene in the often alteringe of their communion-booke^ and turninge their table one daywefi, and another day eafl y they gott them a tanker d , and one faith J drinks and am thanks fully the more loy of thee, faith another, ^c. Tow neuer agreed with the Tigurynes of Germa^ nis , or with your felues , your ^ubburnejfe is of vaine glory, and we all fee by your owne confefion, how little caufe yow haue to he jiubburne, your learninge is in f coffer 5 hold , the Quecnes grace it mercrfull , if yow vviU rttmne* Lacymer. Tow fuall haue nohopein DifputatmSy deut Beligm. Chap, 53 f me t0 mmne . And thus ended that difpsi- ration • 74. Andheere lohn Foxis very angry with DoSloY VVefien for this fpeach^ and for reuenge therof,makcth this note in the margent: BUf-- fhemous Ives of DdHmr VVefion ftttin^e in the chaire fl[f fefiilemey and then prefently he maketh the narration of him, which before we haue rela- ted about VrgehCyVrgehac, and in the margent he hath this other Netandmn, vrge hoc quod Pve^ fion vmh his beere-fm in his hdnd: which not- withftandinge is more modeft, then yf y t had- byn a wyne- pocr. And I maruayle much why the wifdomeof Fox ihould obied this beer- pott fo often & c^g^vly zgziniiBockY VVefdn^ ieeiiig his owne great chaire , which is yet keptforareliqiieof hisholines in London by the filtersjhath two places made on both fides therof, the one for the Candleftickejthc other for the ale-pott and nutmegges, which Father Foxisfaidto haue loued well , and fo do his wrytings alfo flie w, & yet rid Cathohke man t thinke hath cuer obieded the fame vrtt6' him before this, as he doth the beer-pott to I>o£lorVVefton. But thefe are trifles. Lett vs palTe to more ferious confiderations, m ^ TheConclufion^ t>ith fime Confide'- rations theron. §• j. 7^. By the re- view then of thefe three dayes difputationsj a conie d:iire may be made> ho\%^ matters Ijd! A review of ten publike maccers die] palTe cht^n, and how jchey ftand st this day becwixrvs and Proteftanisin thele articles of controuerfie: Yow haiie heard be- fore the great vaunts that Do^or Ridley made in hisdifputarions Cambridge vnder K. Ed- ward, how eiiidcntly forfooth and apparently the truth ftood with hjin and his feliowes, & Fox f'di. this \pon jiue frincipallgrdhids and head-lptings as hexallerh them;; vyhuh aretheLMaiejlie andvc^ rity 0j fcripturti'^ the m&flcenaine tefhnwnj of the an^ cient Fathersi^tht dejinitwn ef a Sacrament'^ theabho^\ tmnable here fie of Enriches, and the moftfure beleefe of the article of our fMh\ Eeafcended vp to heauen. The vauts B, Cranmer aifo after that agaiiie in the begin- ^^^rtZ,r ninge of O. Maryes raigne, lettinge forth a cer- iiovv well tayne vauntinge fchedell,which Fox Called a med!^' P«r^^r/ how he, & his fellow Ridley were able to pe rforms their braj^i^es 5 and though yow hane feene them brought to the exigents^ which befor^ Iiath appeared: yet yf yow will bcJceue thcnt or lohn Fox cheir Chronicler, fettingefortll their Ads and Monuments,they were Co farrc offrom being conquered , as the aducrfepart was rather putt to the foylc , for chat they could (ay nothingein efFedagainft them. And for example, tox wryteth of Do£Iqt VVeJloH (who moft of all other vrged therh with ma- ny good arguments as yow haue heard) that Fox pa^j not only he had his The fern there hy him to help him out (to witt his beerc-pott) but moreBuerthdt he [aid md. pa^: neuer a true tpoi d, mr mdde neuera true mdufm aI- ^ ^ ^o. mojl in that di^utation. Which how true or falfe impujcn- ytis, thcreaderhimfelfemay be iudge, that cyoffox* hath pervfed ouer the fame in this our re vtem And the very like in elfed wryteth B. Cranmer vox p4^^ in a certayne letter of his to the CoUncell, vpon the igo of Apnll 1554. immediatly after the difputation ended, complaynirigc greatly of the diforder & iniquity thcrin vfed, which yet by that we haue exatnided before out of their owne words^l mcane fet downc in Fox» his penne being bent wholy to their fauour, there could not be great iniquity or incquali-i ty, thccombattconfiftirige id difcufsingcau- ihoritycs of auncient Fathcrsjbut yt is the na- ture of chi§ people ^ts alw^es to be Conten- tious., fo eiicr to be clamourous, and neuer ia- tisfied except they haue their \vill , but efpc- dally to wrytc and fpeake both contemptu- oully and partially: yow lhall heare how M^J- jier Ridley relateth the euent of this difputa- tion j fur chathauinge feet downehis owne Y difpti^ i - - - 538 A reviefp of ten puhlike difputationsandaunfwers in the prifon, and this with the greatcrt aduantage, yow muft imagine that he could diuife , at'ter much gall vttered in the preface therof agaiwft this di- fputation , concludeth the fame with thefe pafsionace wordsj as they are in Fox. j5 Ridieyei 77*- ^'^^ ^^^^^ ^^fi gloriotu dijputatseH of paiTionate the moft holy Fathers,SacYi^cers, Doners and Maffiers, tKifplf. vvhe fought mofi manfully for their G9d and Gods Jet tation. their fanh and felicity ^ for their comtrey 4^d kitchen, Pox pa^. fer their beutj and belly, with triumphant afplaufis andfamomofthe whole vniuerfity. So hee. And by this yow may know the man, and how much his words are to be credited; yow hamng con^- fidercd what hath byn laid downc before, by Fox his owne report, touching the fubftancc oi the difputatidn and authorityes of Fathers, alleaged and examined and iliifced of, though in the Forme of fcholafticall difputation and •yrging arguments, yt may be there were fome diforders J yet that maketh not fo much to the purpofe, how arguments were vrged againft them, as how they VVereaunfwered by theni; 5nd yet could not the diforder be fo great^as it wasvnder R/rf/ what was the difference in fubftance or fdbftantiali proofes^brought forth m the Cam^ iridge Proceiianc-dilputations vnder jBC. E^- WMdy and thefe Oxford Citholike-difputations Yiider^M4^j^ and whether P$^0r Ridley that was moderator of thofe, or DoUor VVifion pro- locutor in chefe, did beft vrge or (oiue argu- ments againft their aduerfaryes ; for that this ccadderation and coniparifon only, will giue a great hght to difcerneaifb the difference of the cauies therm defended. One thingealfo more is greatly in niy opinion to be v^eighed in this matter, which isjthat the faid auncienc Fathers hauinge to perfuade fo high and hard a myftery as this is j that Chrifts true and na- turall flelh and bioudj are really rnder the formes of bread and wyne> by vertue of the Priefts conlecration 5 they were forced to vfe all the rnanner of moft lignificant fpeachcs, which they could diuife to exprcffe the fame,, and to beate yt into the peoples heads and mynds, though contrary to their fenfes and Common reafon , and therby to fly from the oppoflte herefie and infidelity of our Sacra- mentaryes 5 lurkinge naturally iti the harts of flefliand bloud, and of fenfuall pebple* bul lynce that tyme by Sathans incytation, broa- ched and brought forth publikely into the world.For meetinge wherwith the holy pro- uidence of a! mighty God wasjthar the forfaid Fathers iliould by all forts of mofl Itgnitkant: fpeaches & phrafesj as hath byn laid, fo cleer- iv lay open rheir meanings in this matter, as no reafonable man can doubt therof, and not only thisjbut aifo that they iTnould \k certaine Y :^ ^x^g" 54*^ ^ revUiP of ten puhlike exaggerations the better to explane them-3 fclues, fuch as they are wont to do in other controuerfiesalfo, when they would vehe- mently oppofe thcmfelues againft anycrrot or hcre(i€,as by the examples of Saint AUgufimc againft the Pelagians in behalfcof Grace, and againft the Manichecs in the defence of Frrf- tPiU. And of S. Hierome ^igzinfi louiman for the priuilcdge of Virginity abone marriage, and other like queftions , wherin the faid Fathers , to make thcmfelues the better vnderftoodj da vfe fomctymcs fuch exaggeratiue fpcachesjas they may feemeto inelyne fomewhatto the other extreme, which indeed they do not,but do ihe w therby their feruour in defence of the truth, and hatred of the herefie Which they impugn^. Thc^^a- 7^0 AndthelikemaybeobferiTedrnthisar- an2\{ ^' ^icie of the real!-pre(enee, of Chriftsfacred fpcaches body in the Sacfi^ment of the Altar, which fuadTthc being a my ftery of moft high importance, and tcaii-prc- hardeft to be beleeued , as aboue humayne fenfe and reafon, and therforc csMed by them: chryfofi, the mpacle of m^fierjes: yt was neceffary for horn. 61. ad them, I fay, to vfe as many effeduall waycs, fj'c/i. as they pofsible could for perdiadinge the faid truth vnto the people, and for pfeuenting the diftruftfull cogitations and fuggeftions both of humayne infirmity,and diaboJicall infideJi-i^ ty againft the receaued faith and truth of this article* and fo they did , not only vfinge moft cleere, plaine, effeftuall and ligniffcant man- ner of expounding themfclues,and their mea- ningd, Dijputdtiens, about Religion. Chap,^. 54$ mnge> but many fuch exaggerations airo,as mult needs make vs fee the defirc they had, to be rightly and fully vnderliood therein . For better confideration of which point (being of lingular moment as hath byn faid) the reader iliallhaue a little patience, whiHl I detaync my ftlfe fomewhat longer, then I meant; to haue done , in layinge forth the fame be^ fore him. §0. And firft of all , conccrninge the effe^ d:uall fpeaches for vtteringe the truth of their bcleefe in this article , yo w haue heard much in the former difputation, and heere we iTiall repeat fome points againe, which in efFed are, that wheras the faid Fathers founded them- feluesordinaryly vpon thofe fpeaches of our Sauiour: ihisismy hoiyvvhuhflialbegiuenforyow: mm, i^, my flesh 0 truly me ate , and my bloud is truly drinke, The bread which 1 [\iaUgiueydw is my flesh for the life ° of the world, and other like fcntencqs of our Sauiour^ the Fathers do not only vrge all the circumftances heere fpecified or fignified , to proueytto be the true naturall and fubftan- tiall body of Chrift (as that yt was to be giuen for vs the next day, after Chrifts words were ipoken, thatyt was to be giuen for the lifeof the whole world, & that yt was truly meate, and truly Ghrifts flelTi)but do adde alfo diners other circumftances of much efficacy to con- firme the fame, affirminge the fame more in particular^ that it u the very fame body which was bqme of the bleflfed Virgin, the very A*Tie ^ody that fuifered on the CrolTe, corpm y 3 "^-^ a§xum. ^JLt A revieuf of ten fuhliki chry0, afji'cumyVerheratHm, cruc/fixum, cruentatum^ lamex tar?*'" VHlneratum (iaith S. Chryfrfiome) the reUc-famc „ body, chat was nayled^bj^accn^cruciiieclblou- „ ded, wounded with a fpeare.isrcceaued by vs in the Sacrament, Waervnto 5. Auften addeth this particularity, that yc is the felfe- fame bo- dy that walked heere amonge vsvponearth. As he walked heere in flesh f faith he) amonge vs • fo ijuim. j8. ^1^^ p^^^^ flesh dothhe giueto he eaten and therfore no man eatethy tbarfiesh ; bfufirfi adoreth ;f , jiefich. in and Hifichm addeth ; that he gaue the felfe-fame Lme.^* , vvherof theAngell Gabriell [aid to the Virgin Mary , that it ffmld he conceaued of the holy Ghofio And yet further - yt is thefaine body ((airh S.ChryfoJlome) that the Magi, or learned men chryfoft. did adore in the manger. But thou doji fee him ^iZd Cor? (fait h he) not in the manger, hut in the Altar , not in the armesof a woman , but in the hands of a Priefi. ^Mf. tn The very fume flesh (faith S, Aufien^^zuiQ) that fate ^coni^ii. \\' ^'^^ ^^^^^ ^'^^ ^"^fi f^^PP^^ y wafiied hU difciples & z* feet ; The very fame (1 fay) did Chnft giue with his owne hands to hts difctfles, when he faid-^ take eatejhis is my body. See. And fo did he beare hmfclfe in his oipne hands, which was prophefied of Dauid, butful^ filled only by Ckrijl in that Supper. 8 u Thefe are the particularityes vfed by the Fathers for declaring what body they meane^ and can there be any more elF;;<5tuail fpeaches then thefe? but yet harken further. Thoumujl ^^r^r.T ^'^^^ '^-^^ '^^'^ ^^^fl certaine ( faith S, Cynll) that Z»^P^'o^, which feemeth to be bread, is not bread but Chrt^s body , though the tafl doth in ige it bread. And agauie the fame father; Vnder thefo) me or fhew of breads iigtuen Dijputatwm, ahoufReliftdn. Chaf. ^. 545 ispuen to thee the body ofChrfJly& vnder the forme or ffjape ofwinCy Ugiuen to thee the blond ofchrifl, &c. And S. Chry(ofiome to the fame elFed: : We mufi chryfofl-. not beleeue our fenfes eayfie to be beguiled, &c. We mufi fimplj , dnd without aU ambyguity beleeue the yvordi of Chriji fa/tnge: This is my body, &c. O hoit^ many fay now addyes^l would fee hm,l would behould hisvifage,his vijlments,&cc. But he doth more then this, for hegiueth h 'mfelfe not only to be feene, but to be touched alfo, handled and eaten by thee. Nor only do the Fathers affirme lb aiteuerantly, that ) t is the true natural! body of Chrift, though yt appeare bread in forme and fliapeaand that we mufl not beleeue our (enfes heerin- but do de- ny expreflcly that yt is bread after the words of confecration, wherof yow heard longe dif- courfes before out of S, Ambrose in his books de facramemis, and deinkiandis. Before the words of ^Amkj.^. confecratmy it is, bread (faith he) but after confecrd- tton , depane fit earo Chrifti, of bread yt is made the dfimumdl psh of Chrifi'^ And note the W'ord (pt) yt is made. And againe. Before the words oj Chrifi be vttered (in the confecration) the chalice is full of wine and water ; but when the words of Chrifi haue wrought thtir effeil , ibi fanguisefficitur qui yc^ dGmitphbQm-jthere is made the bloud that redeemed thefeople. And marke in iike manner the word ejficttur^ is made, and confider whether any tiiinge can be fpoken more plainly, 85. But yet the Fathers ceafe not heere, but ^^^^^^j^^^ do pafie much further to inculcatethe truth about this of this matcer,reprehending iTiarply all doubt, ^^^^^^^^j^^^ fufpition or ambiguity, which the w^akneffe Y 4 ' of 344 ^ fey tew of ten publikg of our flefli or infection of hcrefie may fuggefl clttfh"'^' ^'^'^ matter, 5.C;riHreafoneth thus: VVhem /V^ /T^ Cferi/? fcjr/? pirf fl/ the bread, this is my body, yvho vviU dare to doubt theref? and vvheras he hath [aid of the mne, this is my bloud, who vviU doubt or f*yyt is not his bloud ? he once turned water into wine in Cana of Galiley by his only mil , which wine is lik^ vnto bloud, and [ftall we not thinke him worthy to be hdeeuei, when he faith, that he hath changed wine into hij blonde So he. And S. Ambrofe to the fame efFed:. 3^ ^^^^ ^^f^ ^^^^^ ^^^'-^ ^^P^^ ^^^^ ' ^'^^^ " receaue his body and bloud , and m^y we doubt of his (reditt o/tejiimonyf And the othet5^/wr Cynll of Alexandria izith to the fame eifec^t-, that in this Cyrti^itx, myftery we iTiould not fo much as aske quomo^ ^^howytcan be done? ludaicum emm verbum efi (faith he) &Aterni fupplicy caufa : For yt is a lewilli word , and cauie of euerlaftinge tor- ment. And before them bpth Saint Hilary left wrytten this exhortation : Thefe things (laith m*r, 1 1. he) that are wrytten, iett v$ read,and thofe things that fff«rX*. f^^^^ ^^^f vnderjiand , we p)aU p.erfedly f^* per forme the duty of true faith ; for that thefe points which we a^rme of the naturall mity ofChrtJls being in vs, except we learne them efChrifi htmfelfe,we af-^ firme them wickedly and foolishly , &c. VVherfore, vvheras he faith my flesh is truly meat , and n^y bloud is truly drinie, there is noplace left to vs of doubting^con- eerning the truth of Chrtfls body & bloud Jor that both by the affirmation of Chrtfihmfelff , andbyourowne beleefcy there is (in the Sacrament) the flesh truly and the bloud truly of our Sauiour. 83. So great S. Hilary: and Eufebius Emiffenui bringeth Dlpit4MH5,ahout IleUgm. Chaf. ^. 34^ Is^ringecb in Chrift our Sauiour fpeakinge in thefc words : F&r fo much ^ mj flesh is trul) meat, Eufcb. and my blmd is truly drmke, lett all doubt fullnei af in fZ^^^'^C fidelity depdtt j fof fo much 04 he who is the author of r^j^hi^ thegtft.isyv'fttmffealfoofthetruththerof. And S. Leo to the ftme cffctt : Nothinge at all u to he doubted of thp truth 9f Chnfls body , and bloud in the ^\ '^Z^^ Sacrament, &c. And thofe do in vaine aunfivere amen (when they receaueyt) if they d^Jpute agahffi that vvkiih is affirmed^ And finally S. Bptfhamus con- Epiph. in cludeth tnus : He that belaueth it not to be the very body of Chrifl in the Sacrament , is fallen fiom gract and f^luation* 84. And by this we may fee the 6arneft- nelTeof the F^tthers in vrginge the beleefe of Chnfts true flclli,4nd bloud in the Sacramentj But they ceafe not heere , but do preuent and exclude ailfliifts of Sacramentaryes, which by Gods holy fpiritt they forfaw , cuen in thofe auncient dayes, affirminge that not by faith only,or in Hgure,or i mage^or fpiritualiy alone Chrifts flelli is to be eaten by vs y but really, fubftantially, and corporally : Not only hj faith (faith ChrjMome ) but in very deed he mahth vs <^}'iff' m body, teducmge vs yt ipere into one ma\\e or fub- ^c SXhryfoftome do prouc not ^^' t. h^nf. only this, but the refurrection aJfo of our bo- ^juifmapoL dvesby thetruthof Chriftsfisihin the Sacra- zM^n- crament, ror that our fleflnoynmge with his j^elh which is immortail, ours iTialbe immor- chryf^. ^ tallalfo^ And the fame Saint Iren^m alfodoth l^^ad lo^^ proue further, that the great God of the ould ^nim^^- Teftament, creator of heauen and earth, was Chrifts Father J for proofe wherof he allea- geth this reafon^that Chrift in the Sacrament did fuUfill the figures of the old Teftament, &: that in particular , wherin bread was a figure of hisfleih, which hefuhilled i^{^\i\\lyen flelli in the Sacrament^Sc that we are brought „ therby into one malTe , 6r fubftance of flelli with him ; but many other like fignificant manners for vttetinge their mynds, as that of S. Chryfoflome: he nmifmhvs with his ofpne body, ^^^-^j^'^ and doth ioyne and conglutinate our flesh to hit. And t^op'Jtn^ againe: That by his body (giuen vs in the Sz f?*'^- ^ . cr^imQnt) Setwbu commt [cutty & mvnumnobtjcum han. redegit. He hath mixc himfelfe to vs, and it brought himfelfe and vs into one body and flelli. And yet further: hcdoth permitt him- » felfs not only to be handled by vs j but alfo to ,^ be 5^ro A revietp of ten publike b^ieateriiand our teeth to be faltened vpoil his fleiTi 5 and vs to be jfilled with the fame flclhj which is the greateft point of Joue (faith Saint %fxUh ^^^Ufifi^^O ^hat pofsibie can be imagined. So he. And con forme to this SXyriU of Alexandria vctererh himfelfe after another fort, for he vfeth the example of Jeiiea, which Sam Taut doth touch in his epiirle to the Corinthians, X. Cor. J. when he faith, f/^^r a little leuen doth leuen a whole hdch-^ eaen fo (Taich S. Cjrill) the jiesh ofchrifitoyned to our flesh, doth leuen or pear fe through tt, and conuert hTaJ'ca' ^^^^^^^ itfelfe. And in another place he vfeth m^oan.cap. j|^,3 j],^^]^ j^^j^^ that OS vvhen yotptake a peeceof wax melted at the fire , anddodreppe the fame vpoH another peeceof WAX , thefettvo waxes are made one fo by the communication of Chrifts body and bioud vnto vs,heisin vsand we in him. S^. Another auncient Father alfovpon the point of 1200. yeares gone had this limil.tude: M and the dodrine Catholike and generally recea* ued^which they endeauoured to inculcate by thefc (peaches 5 for fo much as we arc taught by all antiquity , that there wa§ fiich exad ri- gour vfed in this b^half^jri thofe dayes^that a word or fillable cbulcl not be fpoken amifle<> without prefent note or checkc. And -y.Hii?- rpme fti th ; that f&metjmes for one only word here ^ '^^'J?' t'tk^ haue hyn cajl m of the chrch. And S4mt BafiU Knf^nT^ ' being in treated arid vrgcd by a Goucriiour of Conftantm the Arrian Emperour^ tb accomo- date himfelfe in manner of fpeach only about two words : komioufiony ind bomouftori (which, are not.5 faid the gouernourv foimd in fcri- pture heanftperedhtmnoe:& that for em Silldble he rhe^iom: would o^er his life jf it vvere need. And the like ex- ^J'^^'^f' ^dnelte did the anciet Fathers^ of th^ Couceli of Efhefm, fl^ew afterwards in ftandinge fo re- comL fohitei y for the word D^ip^r^, mother of Cod ^^^^^ ^gim^l Neftmm.&ivciufmgiht vfe of the other ^* word CimyZ/p iri/motherof Chrift, though the one 5c the other of the words rcfufed^to witr^ homioujion & Chnf ifara in their fenfes are true-, but for that lomf heretical! meaninge might lurkethcriujthey wererefufed# ] v ^ mtew of un j>uhUk$ And to conclude, yf antiquity w^s C» careful! ^nd vigilant, to exclude dangerbus& incommodious fpeachcs in other articles, how much more would yt haticbyn in this alfo of the reall frefence, yf the faid Fathers ipeaches before rehearfed had not byn true^as in the Proceftants fenfe they cannot be, but muft needs tend to moft dangerous error of misbeleefe and idolatry? And confcquently there is no doubt, but that they would hauc byn reproued by other Fathers, yf the Prote- ftants opinions had byn then reeeaued for truth. And this fliall futfice for this Chapter^ Oi? tHE TWO OTHER ARTICLES ABOVT Tranfubftantiation ^ and the Saera^ mcnt^ ichat pajfedin this Difputation. C H A p. V I. • HA V I N G E handled more largely, then was purpofed ac the bcginninge,fo much asapperteynethro the firft article of the rr^H- pnfemey as the ground and foundation of the other two ; I mearie to be very breefcconcer- ninge the reft , as well for that in the Oxford^ diJpHtatms there was fcarfe aoy thingc handled therofj but only fomc dcmonftrations out of the Fathers alleaged to lAtymti ( w hich he as yow haue he^ird could notaunTwere) about the thiird and laft pointj as alfo for that what- foeucr was treated therofih the difputations at CaM)Yidge^ and in the ConuWatm^houfe, elpe« cially about Trm^mfiainm 'm , hath byn aun- fwered foi: the nioft part in bur forrher trea- dle about the reall prefence. And albeit it was ibme art of the Sacramenuryes>in the begin- ningeof thefe tontioiicrfics vndcr Edwkrdp to runne from the difcufsibn of the principal! j>oinr, as rriore cleerly againlt them , \mo the queftion of trdnfuhflantiatmiy foj: that might fceme to ye Id c hem fomc morelTiew of mat tec or obicdionstocauillat, as before we hatic 'declared : yet when the matter cornmethto fexarainatioii , they haiie as little for them iii this as in the other, or rather leffe, for that the bther, tbwitt, thQ fedU-prefince , or being of Chrift really and fubftantially prefentinthe Sacrament, hiuinge byn fo cuidently proued igainft them, as before ybw haiie ftene • this other of ffanfubpantsdtM, being biit mdme^iu- 'iiy the niinner how Chrift is theire j little im- porteth them; nay tbemfeluesdogriatintjthat yfChrift be there really ptercnt^ yt cannot be ^^cc^an- denyed but that he is there alfo by Tranfubjldn- not be: ' iiation of bread into his body: for fo Vather La- \ tjmer,yfyow remembcrjaffirrned before in his Tranfubji vnder the fame formes and accidents, and be teceaued togear ther being fo different fubftances, is a moll: grofle and fond imaginarion^fb as.the Luthe- rans graun ting the one, & denying the other, are condemned of abfurdity euen by the Zuinglians themfelues> as yow (ee, and as we; fayalfoiuftly. 2. And oh the other fide we fay in Irke man- ner, as before hath byn noted> that the Zum- gliansand Caluinifts, and other Sacramenta- ryes denyinge wholy the faid reM- pre fence, do in vayne wrangle about Tranfubfi^ntiatm. For as he that iliould deny (for example (ake) thac any fiibftancc of gould were in a purfe, or any fubRance of wyne in a barrell, lliould in value difpute whether the gold were there alone, or togeather with lome bafer metall, as filuer, tynne, or copper, oi* whether the wyne were there a'onejorin company ofwaterjfoin this controuerlTe yt is an idle difputation for Sa- cramentaryes to difcuffe, whether the fub- ftance of Chrifts reail fl^lb be alone in the Sa- crament* I)}jputatiens,AhoktUeUgwf2. Chap. 6. 5^7 pramenc > or togeather with the iubdanceof bread, for fo much as they deny y t to be there at all . 3. Yet notwithftandingjfor that their cheefe altercation is about this point, as bythcirdi» (putations may appeare , I lliail brecfely exa- mine their grounds, which, accordinge to B, JR/i/e^^'i oftentation vttered in Cambridge out againft^ of thcdiuinity chayre, %^nder King Edipard che '^^^^^'f'^^*- fixt, as before yow hauc heard, are hue in c^mlZg,. number fett forth in thefe vauncinge words: ^"^^t^j^^* The princip all grounds er rather head-jpring$of this iiei^^^ matter are Jpeciallyfitte. Fir ft, the authority, tnatefiiey 1 • verity of holy fcrtptures: the fecond: the mofi cer- 2. iayne te^tmonyes of the auncient QathoUkc Fathers: the third, The definition of a Sacrament: the fourth, The abhominable herefie of Eutichcs , that 4. tnay enfueofTranfubflantlation. V he ^ikh: the mofl 5, fure beleefe of the article of our faith: Heafcended into heauitt* And then a little after he conciudeth Yoxitid. thus: Thefe be the reafons which per fuade me to en- dyne to this fcntence and iudgemmt. 4. Heere yow fee the principall grounds, or rather fe^^rf-j^riw^i, that perfuaded Ridley to inclyne, or rather declyne, foryethe feemed not fully fetlcd in this article of beleefe. And albeit theft grounds may feeme toconteyne fomewhat,in lliew and found of words : yet when the fubftance thereof commeth to be examined, they are found to be idle, and puf- fed vp with words indeed. For firft what au- thority, maiefty and verity of fcriptures doth this man bring forch^trow^ you, for confirma-. Ti»c firft tion of this his vaunt? truly nothing in cffe(fiy fxattUncd. ofany llicw or probability, but only that yt is called bread and wyne in the rcriprurejafcei; the words of confecration ; For which pur- pofe he hauinge allcaged the words of Chrift : i^Mi.zc. I will not drinke heer after of this, jruite of the yjne^ lUrg. 14.. Yfniw 1 4o drmke yt neiv vvitk jom in the kingdome of mj/ Father: he niferreth that the fruitc of the yyne is wyne, which we graunt vnto him, & do hould is called wyne by him after the con- fccration,as hi? flelh after the words of confe- •fi.c^K.zr. cration is called bread by 5. lP4«/,iS. Lul^e, znd other Apoillcsj affirming yt notwithftanding to be his ownc true body and flelTi, but retay- ninge the name of brcad/or that y t was made of bread, and was bread before, as the ferpenc S4»d. 7. was called the rodd of Aaron , for that yt was made of that roddjand not bccaufe yt was not a true ferpent afterwards,though yt were ftill called a rodd , and to fignific this , that bread conuerted into Chrifts flcili is not really bread afterward , bqt the true flelTi of Chrift, though yt recayne the former name of bread, ytis not fimply called bread but with fome Mn. 6. ad^itipn^^^ bread of life: bread afheauenjhU. bread, and the like. And finally Chrift himfelf: dotK expound what bread ytis in S. Johns ghofpell M'hen hefaifh: The bread that I fiuUgiucjow , urn/ fiesh lor the life o f the vmli. 5. Heere rhcPi vow lee , that Rtdleyesteyt of fcrit>turt^ • 1 vviil not dr^nke hereafter of the fruit e oft'^svyne. vntdi I drinhe yt new with yow inthfL '^-tngdomc of mj Father doth notproue thatyt matenall w mie wiiich he dronke,for that helTiouid thendrinke materiail wyne alfoin hcauen: And yet aljbonc as Uidlejf had brought r^x /r-fij, forth this plac€,as though he had done a great fcatc, and fully performed his promife, for proofcof the authority , maicfty , and verity of fcripturc> he beginncth prefently to excufe himfelfe, foi: that he hath no more ftore, (ay- ingc. TheYC be mt mny places ef fcripuye , thnt do sonfime this th'mgeiyncyther kyt greatly materiail, foj, yx u inofigh yf there be any 9fie plaine ttfimony fyr tin fam^. Lo whervntp this vaunt of the authori- tyxttiaiefty , and verity of holy fcriptur^s is come, to witt » to one place, vndfsrftood and interpreted after his owne meaninge alone, ^igainft the vnderftandingc of all antiquity. And though he go about afterwards to fcrape na piaccs togcather diHcrs other parings of fcriprure, a^K^gc^ nothingc at all to thepurpof ^ as, 7owp)allmt ^^J^u/tAn breake any bone ofhu: Ugyou^ this m my remembrance: labour f0r the meate thatperifbeth notitbu it the tvorke ^''f^'^^l* 9fGQdy thattheybeleeue inhimtphomehehath [ent: tIaZJ.^' he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blmdydweUeth inmeandlmhimy and fome other hke places: yet as yow fee by his owne confefsion, they are not plaine places, and confequently his vauntinge of authority, maiefty and verity of fcriptures, commeth to iuft nothinge indeed, but only to words and wynde. Lett vs fee what he bringeth for his other foure grounds and headfprings. 6. The fecond is, the mojl certayne tefilmcnyes of Rtdhya fc- th mnmm CatMike fathers. This we iliall exa fi^il^^f^ 3^0 A revietp of ten fuhUke mine afcervvards whcii we hauc confidered qf the other three, yec may \ ovv markc by the way, that he vfcth heere alfo the fuperlatiue degree, of mojt cenaynetefimonyes ^ which cer- tainty of teltnnonves vow Ihali find after- ward, to be like his matefl/ of fcrtptures, already alleaged. VVherforeietvs fee his third ground. s^tdieyii 5. The third ground ( faith he ) is the nature of Th^c nl- the Sacranenc , which confiftcfh in three tureof t things: vnlty^nutrittonAndconueYfion, And then crmc. lie explaneth himfelfc thus : that asm bread one loafeUm^deafmanygYaynei, p ftgnrjieth this Sacra- ment thai we are aU one myfticaU bod; in Cbriji. And ^giine, Asbreadnourifheth our body \ fodoththebodj qJChrtfl noUYuh our foule. And thirdly. As bread is turned into our fubjlance, fo are \m turned into Chr'tfii fuhflance. All which three effeHs canrot be ftgnificil (i\ith he) by thy Sacrament , )f there be Jranfub-^ ^ fiantiation , and r,o nature cf bread left , and therfore therecanbenoTrahfuhJlanitation. 7. This is Uixx^tr Kidleyesdccpc diuinity about the nature ot this Sacrament: but yf yow reade that which we haue noted before in our cyghc obf^ruarion , concerninge the true de- ^' * finicion and nature of a Sacrament indeed; yow will (ee that this was great limpHcity in him (though accordinge to his hereticali groLid,that the Sacrametsdoe notgiue grace) tolcaue out the princip^^ll effcA figninediii the SAcrament, which is grace , for that a Sa- crament is deiined : A vlfible figne of inutfible grace nceaucd tberbr. This Sacrament alfo is a h'gne Chrifts body there prefent ynder the . ^ formes 'Dijputatms, ahout EeUglen. Chaf . i6t formes ot bread and vvyne : vec deny we not but chat thefe other three e{fe6i$ alio of vni- ty 5 nutrition andconuerfioo rij^y beiigniiied therby , as in hkc manner the deach and pa(^ fioi? of our Sauiour^ wherof this Sacrament is a memoriail and comrnertior^rion : neyther doth the Tunfubfiantimon of the bread nito the body of Chriil:, iett or take away thefe ligni- fications , for To much as to make this Sacra- mentj there is taken bread and wyne 5 hich naturally doth lignific thefe efFeds 6f vnion^ nutrition, and conuetfioo, which Rtdlej/htQit mentioncth, though yt be not neceflary, that the fubftance of the faid bread and wyne iliould ftill remayiie 5 but only there formes and accidents, which do fignific and are fignes to our fenfes, as much as yf the fubftances themfekies of bread and wyne were prefent. As for example the brafen ferpent , did as Fox fnuch reprefent and was a figne of Chrirt in ^^^^ i'efpe(ftof the analogic betwene Chnltanda true ferpent, as yf he had had the (ubftance of a true ferpent, whereof he had but only the forme and lliape • and fo are the outward formes of bread and wyne,afcer the words of coniecration , fufficient to reprefent viito vs the Analogy that is betweene feedmge the body,and feedinge the foulcTnity ofgraines, and vnity of Chrifts myfticall body which is hisChurcho 8. And thus much of Ridleyes third ground which impugneth Tranfubflantiauon which ground ( as yow fee ) is fo weake and feeble^ i' as he ^6% A revUiff $/ ten fublikf as he that fliall build thcron, is like to come to;i miferabie ruyne of his owne faluation. But much more ridiculous is his fourth ^fd^adt Z^^^^^^^ vctered in thefe words: The fGurth f^T^ ground (faith he) u the abhominable herefieof Eu^ fccieiitf*'^ ^'/^^fcfr. th4t majf enfueof Tfdnfubjiamiatien. Thus ^ * hefaichinhispolicion, hue icu vs hearc him afcerward in his probation , which is not muchljf g^r rhen h s prop^iirion, for thus he wry ret h ; Thtjf vvhtch [ay that Cbrift is carnally fre^^ fern in the Euchan^ft do take from him the yenty of mam nature. Euuches gyaunied thedtuyne nature in Chr.fi, but humxyne nature ke dcnjed. And is noc cms agoodiy proofe oi great a charge? Ndi) is nprrh^sa goodly ground and head- Ipringe ofproofei^ ' Conlidcr I pray yo w how thefe m^^cers do hangc cogeather. Euttches he- ^ ^ ^ refy was, as yovv may fee in the letters of SrLdop Leo chQnrl\s and in the Councellof Calcedon-y co^,c - au ch^c Chrifts fleili htiwQ ioyned ro his diumity was turned mro the lame, and fonottwodi- ftinctnaturesremayned, but one only made of them both. And ho w doth this herefiel pray yow , follow of our dottrine of Tran- fu.^lUntiation ! Euttches faid that the diuinc and humayne natures in Chrift were con- founded togeathcr,and of two made but one: we fay that they remayne diftinct , and do condemne Eatkhes for his opinion, and by our Church he was rirltaccurfed and anathema- tized for the fame : Eutiches faid , Chrifts hu- mayn: nacure was rurnt d into his diuine-, wc fay only that bread and wyne is turned into ^ Chrifts Chriftsfleniand bloud : what likeneflc hath fhis with Bunches hQTcGe ? Bm (faith Eidlej) we io uks fiom Chrljl the verity ofmrns nature . This is a tidion and fooIilTi caiumniation^as before yp w haue heard, and confequently deferucth no further refutation. 9. The fifth groundj u (faith he) the mofifure j^idUyts ^: leleefeof themick pfeur faith z He afcended into f^^l"^^^^ hemen. This ground yf yow remember hach chrifts bynouerthrowne before, and abandoned by ^ffcn^®«* Ridley himftlfe in his Oxford- di^utdt ton, where he graunted- that hf did not fo ftraitly tye Chrifl in beauen (to vfe his owne words) but that he may come downe on earth at his plea fur e. And aga i n e f^^j* Z"^* in another piacc of the laid ciifputation: What isis- ktteth but that Chrifiyf yt pleafe him , and when yt fleafeth him , may be in heauen and in earth ? &Cm And yet further to Do^or Smith that asked him thisqueftion ; Both he fo fitt at the right hand of his Father , that be doth neuer fore fake the fame? Ridley aunfwcrcd: ^ay I do not hynd Chrifl in ^eauen fo flraitly . By which aunfweres yow fee , that this whole principall ground and head-fpringe of Ridleyes arguments againft TranfuhpmtlationM quite ouerthrowne. For yf Chriftin fleih after his afccniion may be alfo on earth when he will, as Ridleyh^tvz graun- tcth> then is it not againft the article of our Creed (l\e afcended into heauen,) tobcleeue, that not withftandinge his afcenfion , he may be alfo on earth in the Sacrament* And albeit Kidley do cytc heere certayne places of S.Au^ ^ufiine, th^t dp fcemc to fay : that Chrift after 3^4- revletp of ten fuhUke his afcenlTon is no more conucffant amonge vs vpon earth^yet that is not to be vnderftood of his being in the Sacrament, which is a fpi- rituall manner of being, but of his corporal! manner of conuerfatibn, as he lined vifibly among his difciplcs before his afcenlion. And this is fufficient for difcufsion of this fifth ground, wherof thecheefe particulars haue byn handled in diuers places before. Sflion^of^^' Now then will wereturne tohisfccond the Fa- ground againe, i^f the moft certajne teftimorrftsof t'horityes ^,^^ci^^t<^athoU^^ And firlt he allca- aiieaged gath Saint Dton)^fm Areafagita, for that in fome places of his works he callerh yt bread And ^reop, in the like o? Saint Ignatius to the Thiladelfhians, which we deny not, for S. Vaul alfo calleth yt fo, as before we hiue iTiew^ed : butyetliich bread, as in thefame place he declareth to be I. CsK ri. the true body of Chrift, fayinge : that which receauethyt vnworthily ,f)albe guilty of the hedy and bloudofchrijl, addi'ngefor his reafon mn dijuii- cam corf us Domini, for not difcerninge the body ^^T'^d Lord there prefent . And fo S, Ignatius Vhudeiy^, in the verv felfe-fame place faith : that pis the fiesh and hloud of Cbrifi , as yow may read in that Epiitle. II. After thefehe citeth Irenxtu whqk words are: Eucharlfliaex duAbmrebt{^conJfan$,teYrena& ealefii , which lUdle/ tranilatcth thus : Sacra- „ menfall bread conliftinge of two natures „ earthly and heauenly : But by Matfler Ridleya^ leaue Eucharij^ia in this place is fraudulently ttanflated by him Sacramentai bread, except he mean^ Bijputathns, ahout Relighn, Chap. 6. rheaneas wedo, and as trenm did, that yt was the body of Chrift , but called bread for that y t was made of bread : For that Iren^us in the very fame place, wry ting againft heretiks asketh thisqueftion : Quomodd c&nfiabit eis , eum ^renjih.^z panm mquogratua^iZ fmt^ corftuep Domini fui? l^l^^l^'^* HowlTiall yt be made eitident to thefe here- tiks, that this bread ^ in which thanks haue byn giuen, is the body of their Lord? VVher- to he aunfwered, and proucth the fame by diuers arguments : fo as no place of any Fa-* ther could haue byn alleaged mbre againft himfelfe, then this is by Kidley. And as for that he faith , that the Eucharift confiiteth of two natures, earth-ljf^nd heauenlj, he roeaneth euidentljf ^ hy the heauenly nature, the true bo-- dyof Chrift, and by the earthly nature, the externallfymboIls/orrnes,and accidents. And fo much of him. 12. And the felfe-fame thinge do meane tw.^/^/; both Theoderete znd Gelafim, beere alfoby him ^-G^i^f /I alleaged , as vfinge the like phrafes ^ that the tamt^^ natures of bread and wyne do temaynej^ which they vnderftand of thcexternalhfym^ ' bolls, formes and accidents. For as forthej ieallpefence, they do both of themafSrmeyc in the fame places by fii^i/^fj^aUeaged, And fo this iTiall fuffice for this place , there being nothing els worthy aunfw^ringc. And now yf yow confider, what variety of plaine and perfpicuous authoritycs haue byn alleaged by vs before, both out of the difputations and otherwife^ for confirmation of the Catholike bdeef^i ^66 AyevieW of ten puhtike belcefebf the reall prefe^ce and Trdhfubjlmid^ tion, yow will eafiiy fee what broJieu wares thefe bee ^ which Protcftants bringe forth to the concrary , aud how fondly this fecond ground ofkidlejfcs proofes is intituled by him- Fox />4(f. the moft certame teftimQnyes of the auncitnt CathoUk^ Fathers: who after my tuigemnt (laith he) dbfuf^- clentlj declare this matter. And I will not greatly llandagainft him, for that the mans iudgc-^ ment being perucrted by herefie, faction and Ambition of chofe tymesj any thitige would feeme fufficient to hint to draw him to that byas, whervntD himfelfeinclyned. And thus much of this article. About the third Article of the Sacrifice of the Majfe. §. z. 15. For that there was little or nothingedi- fputed of this third articlejcyther in Cambridge^ Oxford^ or London, except only a little againft Latymer, as prcfently we fliall fee, I hauc thought beft to betake me only to V^idleyes de- termination in this matter : he beginneth the fam-T thus : ^ow in the Uter conclufton, concerninge the facrifice , hecaufe yt dependeth vpoh thejir^ (to Z^^- witt of the ff.i//- prefcnce) I will m few words de^ dare what I thinkf \ foryf we once a^rn in thaty the whole controuerfie in the other wtll foone he at an end. Mr.rke hecre good reader thac Ridley conizi- feih ihis cuatroueriie of tlae focnticc to de- Dtjpuidtim, Mm ttVtgt^n. Chap. 6. ^67^ pend of chc reaU-frefence , which ualUptfenci being fo fubftancially proued before , asyo w hauc heard, little doubt can be made of thisj yet will Ridlej tell vs what he thinkerh goodly ground for vs to hanp.^: our foulcs on) which is> that there is no facrifice at all , but that of Chrift vpon the Croffe, and he will tell vs alfo his grounds for fo rhinkinge : TiPO things {(iith he) there be , which do per fuadettie , to loi^ 'ihik Witt, certajnepUces of fcnptme, and cert^iym tefit" monyes bj the Fathers. So he. And as for (cri- ptures, he allcageth no one, but our of the Epiftletothe Hd^^es^hat Chti^ entredvnce fer (fiU into the holy- place , and ohtayned for v< ereruaU re^ demption. And again e . That Chrifi was once coffered Htb. totake away the ftnnesof many. And yet furttv;r: that With 0m offeringe hemadeperfed for euerthofe that are fan8^ed. And haumge cyted thclc places, he maketh this conciution . Thefe fcri^ ftures do perfuade me to beleeue, that there ism other Mat ion of Cbrifi (albeit I am not Ignorant there are many facrifw ) but that which vyoi once made vpoti the Croffe. 14. Heete now yow may fee the fdrcc df i pafsionate iudgement j and how little doth fuffice to perfuade a man to any hercfie, that is incliiied thervntb of himfelfe. I would aike of Ridley hecre, how chaunccth yt that S. Cfcrjr- fofiome, S.BafiU, S. Ambrofe, S.Cyriil, S Hietome^ Augufiine and other Fathers cyted betore fa aboundantly, and pcrfpicuouflv affirming the dayly facrifice of the maffe.and diAinguiiliing between^ Cruentum & incrmntumfactiplt^^ndthatJF///gf«ri/ whcrin Ghriftsfa- cred body, the fame that was offered on the Croffe^is offered againe dayly both For quicke and dead by Chriftian Catholike Priefls on the Altar, n^ight make a whole Treacife ther- of , and I remitt the reader to Hiermymm Tor- ^^^^^^^ renfts his coilecSrion, called Conjepo Augufimana, confei^ where throughout a ik or 12. paragraphes,i.e jj^'''^^^* doch fet dow4ie large authorityes moft plaine and euident out of the faid Fathers works. Andyt isinough fo| vs at this tymC; that Latj^ mer being preifed in his difputations with di- uers of thefe authorityes aunfwered : lam net a[ham4,UAc\^9tvledg€m)lgm and thefe tefit 1325. mny.e$ are mere then I can be are away,. And after againe being further prelTed with the mofl: euident authorityes of S. Augufime.znd S.Cbry- [ofteme in particular , atfirrr*inge that the facri- fice of the mafiTe is propitiatory both for quicke and dead , he aunfwered : The Doihrs might he deceaued in fome points , though not in all things : I beleeuethem when they fty vveU. And yet further. 1 am of their faith when they fay tpeli. J'^'^-pox/^.^ firre my felfe tomy L. of Canterhtiryes beoke vvholy 1326. heerm. And yet againe c I haue fatd when thy fay ^70 A review often pub. Di^.ahout Tteh Chap, 6^ well and hrtnge the fcriptares for them, I dm 0J their faith. And further, Augujllne requireth not to be be^ leeuid. So h^. And by this yow may fee what accompt they make both of S. Augtifltfie and other Fathers, notwithftandinge for a iliew, fometymes they will cy te fomc places out of them little to the purpole , but being witting in their ownc confcicnces, that really and fubftantially they make againft them , they fhift them of finally in this order as yow haue heard 9 and will beleeue and teach only as pleafeth thcmfelues , which is the peculiar pride and willfuUhiiofherefie, from which Cod deliuer vs; And with this I end thi§ whole Treatil^a F I N I S>