Discussion of the Popish Doctrine of Transubstantiation, Part 2 · Division 6

Discussion of the Popish Doctrine of Transubstantiation · Part 2 · Division 6

p. 106Diuision 6.

HIs next ground for ouerthrowing our literall vnderstanding of Christs wordes and reall presence of his true N. P.bodie and blood in the Sacrament, is an vnlearned and slender manner of proouing our Sauiours large discourse in S Iohn. 6. p. 107not to bee at all vnderstood of sacrament all manducation, but spirituall eating his flesh and blood by beleeuing in him. And first hee quareleth at Pope Nicholas manner of speech, making Berengarius in the abiuration of his heresie to affirme not onelyonly the signe, but the body it selfe of Christ to bee handled by the Priests hands, and rent and bruised with the teeth of the faithfull, &c. Which manner of speech was purposely by Pope Nicholas in a Councell of learned Doctors devised to make this slippery shifting hereticke make a direct and plaine confession of his faith concerning our Sauiours being present in the hands of the Priest consecrating the Sacrament, and mouthes of such as receiue him impassible now in his owne corporall nature glorified, and vncapable of renting or any kinde of corporall mutation, as being not with the sacramental signes also quantitatiuely extended, but indiuisibly and after a spirituall manner existing, yet really handled and receiued as Angels in assumpted bodies are said to bee seene, and felt, and as S. Iohn Baptist likewise Ioh. 1. said he saw the holy Ghost, when hee onelyonly saw a Doue the signe of his presence, &c. which manner of speech is not v…usuall with the holy Fathers. Thou seest him, (saith S. Chrysostome speaking of Christ in the Sacrament) Thou touchest him, Thou eatest him, &c. Which is the same in sense which Pope Nicholas affirmeth, onelyonly hee explicateth somewhat more particularly the diuision and fraction of the sacramentall formes containing the very bodie and blood of Christ, vnderunder them all and each particle of them entirely and vndeuidedly remaining. Insomuch as Iohn Husie falsely wont by our Aduersaries to be claimed for Patron and faithfull witnesse of their doctrine, singeth thus in certaine verses of Christs presence and manner of being receiued in the Sacrament, which hee with vsus to his dying day constantly beleeued, as now also his disciples doe after him;

Non est panissed est Deus

Qui in cruce pependisti

Non augetur consecratus;

Nec diuisus in fractura,

Homo liberator meus:

Et in carne defecisti:

Nec cōsumptus fit mutatꝰ;

Plenus D…us iu statura.

p. 108It is not bread, but God and Man my Redeemer, who hanged on a Crosse, and died in flesh for me. Hee is not encreased on multiplied by Consecration, nor diuided in breaking of the Host, but God full in stature. So likewise S. Andrew in his passion authentically (as llLib. 2. de Euchar.Bellarmine proueth) written by the Clergie of Achaia present thereat, told the Procounsul Egeus; I dayly offer to God, who is one and omnipotent, not the flesh of Buls & blood of Goats, but the immaculate Lambe vponupon the Altar, whose flesh when all the multitude of faithfull people hath receiued, the Lambe sacrificed integer perseuer at ac viuus; doth liue and remaine entire, &c. So as Pope Nicholas doctrine vnderstood of Christs flesh being eaten in the Sacrament, needeth not Gratians Glosse to saue it from hereticall blaspemy and the danger of a worse opinion then Berengarius renounced, vnlesse hee had taught Christs flesh in it selfe to hauehave beene torne with teeth and bloodily eaten, as the Capharnites imagined; and mmS. Aug. in Psal. 98.Ps 98the Gentile persecutors were went to obiect against poore Christians, that they did eate the flesh of a certaine man in their synaxes and meetings; calling them men eaters, &c. to wit, because they did eate bread and drinke wine consecrated by the miraculous force of Christs wordes into his naturall flesh and blood; as Saint Iustine that holy Martyr and great Christian Philosopher told Aurelius the Emperor in his second Apologie for Christians; where hee describeth (as much as it was fit for him to open the heauenly mysteries of our faith to the Gentiles) the whole order of the Sacrifice and distribution of the Sacrament as it is now celebrated by vsus: this being the new Oblation of the New Testament, as nnLib. 2. c. 32.S. Irenaeus tearmeth it, instituted by Christ in his last Supper, and that cleane Sacrifice which Malachie foretold should succeed in place of the Iewish Sacrifices, and be offered by the Gentiles in all places.

IN the next place I proceede to discusse the wordes of T. G.our Sauiour concerning the eating his flesh and drinking his blood. Iohn 6.

p. 109Where first I quarell (he saith) at P. Nicholas his maner of speech deuised purposely (as this mine Aduersary here informeth vsus) in a Coūcell of learned Bishops to make a slippery shifting heretike, make a direct and plain confession of his faith concerning the reall presence. His words are, as I hauehave related thē, that the very body of Christ in the Eucharist is broken with the Priests hands, and torn in pieces with mens teeth, not sacramētally only, but sensually. Which palpable absurdities, and carnall and Capernaiticall assertions this Defendant would faine salue if hee could; (but he sheweth himselfe therein but a sorry Quackesaluer.)

1. By citing (besides some of his owne counterfaits, of which more anone) a saying of S. Chrysostome, affirming that the faithfull see, and touch, and eate Christ in the Eucharist: which neither they nor we deny; nor is it ought to the purpose, vnlesse Chrysostome should also say, that hee is eaten in such sort as Pope Nicholas averreth, not sacramentally onelyonly, or spiritually, but euen sensually: so hee saith. For so ttGalat. 3. 1.Gal 3:1the Galathians also saw him crucified (as the Apostle telleth them) in their sight: and some of the Ancients say that euen uuQuotidiè nascitur Christus. Hieron. nomine in Ps. 86. Quotidiè nobis crucifigitur: quotidiè resurgit. Idem in Psal. 95. Quod Bern. explicatius, in vigil. nativ. ser. 6. Immolatur adhuc quotidiè, donec mortem eius annuncia… us: … videtur, dum natiuitatem eius fideliter repraesentamus.Ps 86Ps 95at this day he is crucified.

2. By telling vsus that Christs glorified bodie is incapable of renting: which if it be so, how saith Pope Nicholas that it is torne in pieces? This is a strange manner of saluing him, to tell vsus that that cannot be done, which he in precise tearmes saith is vsually done. And marke here (I pray you how these men **Quod Cardano S…al. de su…ti…. exerc. 149. More Cingarorum in Alpinis mercatibus intus foras mitt…nt corrigiolam.play fast and loose with vsus. They tell vsus, when wee presse them with the indignitie of the thing, that Christs bodie cannot bee bruised now or broken: and this is (it seemeth) when they speake mystically or shiftingly, as hee speaketh. But when they make a plaine and direct confession (for so hee saith Pope Nicholas did when hee thus spake, and no formes are more exact, saith p. 110``Nullae sunt exactior…s formulae loquendi in materia fide…, quàm eae, quibus vtuntur, qui haeresin abiurant Bellar. de imag. c. 22.Bellarmine, then those formes of abiuration are) then they acknowledge that according to their saith and beliefe (if they beleeue at least as they speake, and doe not dally with vsus and delude vsus) Christs very bodie is sensually rent and torne in pieces in the Sacrament.

3. By granting that if he had taught that Christs flesh in it selfe were torne with teeth, &c. it were indeed hereticall blasphemie. And what other thing (I pray you) doth Pope Nicholas affirme, when he saith that **Non solum sacramentum, sed verum corpus & sanguinē Christi in veritate sensual…ter, & non in sacramento tantum tracta …i & frangi Durand. ex Nicol. in ration. diuin. l. 4. p. 2. ad 6. p. can.Christs very bodie not in the Sacrament onelyonly, but in very truth and sensually is torne in pieces with mens teeth? This is not to excuse him, but to accuse and condemne him both of heresie and blasphemy.

4. By affirming that the Popes wordes need not Gratians Glosse to saue them from any such imputation. Yet Gabriel Biel a great Schooleman (whom wee rather beleeue) freely confesseth that Pope Nicholas in so saying uuVeritatem excessit Gabr. Biel in Can Miss. lect 80.exceeded the truth; (as another Glosse on Gratian also xxGloss. ad Grat de consecr dist. 2. c. vtrum.else-where acknowledgeth) and while he sought to shun one error ranne into another: wherein **Quae nec Roffensis cō tra Oecolamp. l. 2. c 12. nec Caietanus lib. de coena Domini ab errore liberare potuerunt. Canus loc. Cōmun. l. 5. c. 1.others also of their owne writers dare not defend him. So that the Pops sitting in his Chaire, yea and in Councell too, with all his learned Bishops, like himselfe, round about him, consistorially to censure and to determine truth in matter of faith, may yet erre for all his infallibility, so much & so oft b…agged of. And it was not vnwisely done of Bellarmine to let this passe, yyDe Pontif. Rom. lib. 4.where he relateth and refuteth as well as he may, the seuerall errors and heresies that their Popes are charged with.

§▪ 2. Heere by the way (though little to the present purpose, to wit, the cleering of Pope Nicholas) that hee may fill vp his Discourse with some shew of allegations;

1. Hee telleth vsus that Iohn Husse was of their iudgement concerning the Sacrament; and alledgeth a sorry Rome to prooue it; which whence hee hath, I know not, nor am able to say, what Husse sometime held: But sure I am that in the Councell of Constance one of the Articles, p. 111wherewith he was charged, and for which condemned, and (contrary to the Emperours safeconduct granted him) perfidious… burnt, was aaConcil. Constant. Sess. 15. art. 17.the deniall of Transubstantiation as a deuice inuented to delude simple people with: and the teaching and maintaining as well publikely as priuately that the substance of bread, and materiall bread, remained after Consecration in the Sacrament; deposed by many that had heard him, and that had argued about it with him.

2. He citeth a few Fathers, some forged, as the Author of the Passion of S. Andrew; some falsified, as that of Iustine Martyr; (which shall by and by be examined) some saying nothing but what wee will willingly yeeld him, as both Irenaeus, and that also out of the apocryphall Story of S. Andrew: which howsoeuer he saith that Bellarmine (which is his wonted manner of proofe) hath proued to be authenticall: Yet neither are his proofes pregnant; no iust antiquitie being produced for it; and by bbTo which adde Card. Baronius Annal. Tom. 1. ann. 44. nu. 42. & 43. & ann 69. num. 34. acknowledging as much.others of their owne (as we shewed before) it is confessed to be apocryphall: and, if we may beleeue Bellarmine himselfe, there is some grosse vntruth in it. For this vncertaine Author affirmeth that S. Andrew was not nailed with nailes, but with cords eyed to the crosse, (as their counterfeit ccAbdias Babylon. histor. lib. 3.Abdie also saith) that he might liue the longer in paine, as he did preaching two daies together as he hung there aliue: Whereas, if ddBellarm. de cult. Sanct. l. 2. c. 27.Bellarmine may be beleeued, it was not so, but he was with nailes fastned, as eeIoh. 20. 25.John 20:25Christ was, to the Crosse.

But to leaue that, as saying nothing that we neede sticke at; no more then we doe at ought that out of Irenaeus is alleadged. I may not let passe his falsifying of Iustine Martyr; whom hauing so little occasion to alledge here, he may well seeme for no other end to hauehave alleadged, but to falsifie what he saith of this Sacrament; in which kinde he hath the best gift one of them that euer I knew any. Iustine Martyr (saith he) in his 2. Apologie, where, as far as was fit, &c. he describeth the whole order of p. 112the Sacrifice and distribution of the Sacrament as it is now celebrated by vsus, telleth Antoninus the Emperour that they did therein eate bread and drinke wine conuerted by the miraculous force of Christs words into his naturall flesh and blood. Now heare Justines owne words: Hauing spoken before of Baptisme: After this (saith he) is there bread and a cup of water and wine presented to the Prelate of the brethren: Who receiuing the same sendeth vp praise and glory to the Father of all, by the name of the Sonne and the holy Ghost; and at large giueth thankes to him for being vouchsafed to be by him reputed worthy of these things. And when he hath ended his prayers and thankes-giuing, all the people answer, Amen. Now when the Prelate hath giuen thankes, and all the people hauehave answered, those that we call Deacons, giuegive to each one of those that be present to partake of ffEucharisticatum. i. sanctificatum & benedictum. Bellarm. de Euchar. l. 1. c. 10.the blessed Bread, and wine and water, and they carry of it to those that be not present. And this foode is with vsus called the Eucharist; which none may partake of but those that beleeue, hauehave beene baptised, and liue as Christ taught. For we receiue not these things as common Bread and Wine; but in like maner as Christ our Sauiour being by the word of God incarnate had flesh and blood, so hauehave wee beene taught that the foode ggEucharistiam factum. Ibid. l. 2. c. 4.blessed by the word of prayer that is from him, whereby our blood and flesh by a change are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Iesus Christ incarnate. For so in the Gospels hauehave the Apostles deliuered that Iesus enioyned them, hauing taken the bread and giuen thankes to say, Doe this in remembrance of me; This is my Body: And taking the Cup likewise, and hauing giuen thankes to say; This is my blood; and to giuegive it to such onelyonly.

Now first tell me (I pray you) where there is any mention of a Sacrifice in Iustine, distinct especially from the Sacrament, that this corrupter of all almost that he dealeth with, should say; Iustine describeth the whole order of the Sacrifice and distribution of the Sacrament. True it is that the Fathers tearme the Lords Supper oft a Sacrifice; (as we also in our Liturgie:) partly in regard of the p. 113hhVnde & Eucharistia dicitur. Iansen concord. cap. 131. Vide Aug. epist 120. & Euseb. demonstr. Euang. l. 1. c. 10.spirituall Sacrifice of praise therein offred; and partly because it is a liuely representation and commemoration of Christs Sacrifice iiHeb. 13. 15.Heb 13:15once offred on the Crosse; (as their kkLombard. sent. l 4. d. 22.Master of the Sentences himselfe explaineth it;) and partly also because llTertull. contr. Marc. l. 4. Ambr. in Luc. c. 1. Gaudent. in Exod. tract. 2. & Aug. contr. Faust. l. 6. c. 5. & l. 20. c 21. & contr. advers. leg. & proph. c. 18.Luke 1it succeedeth in the roome of the Passeouer, and those other Sacrifices, that in the old Testament were offred. But that they euer dreamed of any other Sacrifice distinct and diuers from the Sacrament, no Papist shall euer be able to prooue. Nor either out of our Sauiours words, or Iustines report can be gathered.

2. Obserue how iustly Iustine describeth the whole order of this Sacrifice and distribution of the Sacrament, as it is celebrated by them. Yea, marke and iudge (I pray you) whether his description of it come neerer vntounto ours or vntounto theirs.

1. Where are all those crossings and bendings, and …ringes, and turnings, and eleuations, and adorations, and mimicke gestures, and apish sooleries that their Masse-bookes enioyne?

2. As well the cup as the bread is giuen to all present; which Iustine also saith that Christ enioyned them to giuegive; and which Pope Gelasius mmDiuisio vnius eiusdem mysterii sine grandi sacrilegio non potest provenice. Gelas. Pp. apud Grat. de consecr. d. 2. c. …ōperimus.saith cannot be seuered from the Bread without great Sacriledge. Whereas with them the people may not meddle at all with it.

How many toyes are there in theirs that are not touched at all in Iustine? And againe, what is there in Iustines relation, that is not found in our Protestanticall (as he tearmeth it) communion? that sending of it home ordinarily onelyonly excepted, which neither they themselues vse ordinarily when they celebrate, and the danger of repaire hindring accesse (it seemeth) then occasioned.

3. Where doth Iustine say, as this corrupt corrupter reporteth him, that they eate bread and drinke wine conuerted by the miraculous force of Christs words into his naturall flesh and blood? No one word in him of a miraculous conuersion, nor of their being the naturall flesh and blood of Christ. There is mention indeede of a change, and that a p. 114naturall change, not of the creatures into Christs naturall flesh and blood, but of the blessed foode, Or the foode made the Eucharist (as nnDe Eucharist. lib. 2. c. 4.Bellarmine translateth it) into our flesh. Which words though ooBellarm. ibid.Bellarmine would faine wrest awry, because they wring him, yet no Grammer will admit any other sense of them. From whence it is apparent that the blessed foode that Iustine speaketh of, is not really, but symbolically and figuratiuely Christs body. For ppEucharistia nutriri substantiam corporis nostri, nihil absurdius fingi potest. Bellarm. Ibid.there can nothing be deuised more absurd (saith Bellarmine) then that the Substance of our bodies should be nourished with Christs flesh. But our flesh and blood (and that, I hope, is the substance of our Bodies; as Irenaeus also expressely speaketh) are nourished (saith Iustine) by the blessed foode, or by the Bread and Wine made the Eucharist, and that qqforeign. N. P.by a * Ex quibus augetur carnis nostrae Substantia. Iren. l. 4 c. 5.change of the things receiued. The blessed foode therefore that Iustine speaketh of, is not really Christs naturall Body, as this mis-reporter and mis-expounder of him affirmeth.

NEither can euer the Minister prooue his ensuing Assertion, that Christs corporall presence in the thing eaten must necessarily inferre and enforce a corporall and carnall manner of eating him, vnlesse his bodie had therein a corporall extensiue and sensible manner of existing; which is by no Catholike Author affirmed; and so no hainous and vnseemely thing is in such a manner of receiuing Christs body committed: For auoiding whereof we should be enforced to runne to a figuratiue interpretation of our Sauiours speeches, Ioh. 6. So as to exclude the reall receiuing of our Sauiours flesh and blood in the Sacrament; as out of an obscure place of S. Austin, cited by him page 7. and fully ooLib. 2. de Euchar.answered by Cardinall Bellarmine, hee falsely gathereth; the place proouing no more but that our Sauiours speech concerning the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood is figuratiue so farre forth as that his flesh was not carnally to be eaten, but after a Sacramentall and inuisible manner, as the signes of bread and wine doe containe them; the chiefe end of his being so receiued by vsus being indeed to communicate with Christs passion, and p. 115profitably to lay vp in our memories that his flesh was wounded for vsus, as S. Austin in that place affirmeth. Whose ppVide apud Bellarm. l. 2. de Euchar.plaine places for the reall receiuing of our Sauiours body and blood in the Sacrament my superficiall Aduersarie taketh no notice of, but as Eeles louelove rather to hide themselues in durt then to swim in cleere waters; so are hee and his companions glad to hide themselues and their hereticall nouelties, in darke and obscure places of the holy Fathers, not regarding their pregnant and plaine testimonies for vsus, and against them, vnanswerably in other places expressed.

§ 3. AT length he pleaseth to recollect himselfe and T. G.returne to the matter in hand. Christs corporall presence (saith he) in the thing eaten, doth not necessarily inferre and enforce a corporall and carnall manner of eating him, vnlesse his body had therein a corporall, extensiue and sensible manner of existing.

To passe by these mysticall and metaphysicall tearmes, wherewith he and his Associates are wont to enwrap and inuolue themselues, like Eeles in mire and mud (as himselfe speaketh) that their absurd and senselesse doctrines, or dotages rather, may not be discerned; nor to insist vponupon the implication of contradiction, when he saith that Christs body is corporally, that is, bodily present in the Eucharist, and yet hath there no corporall, that is, bodily existence: a bodie bodily present, and yet not bodily existing; like the Marcionites riddles in Tertullian; A man no man; Flesh no flesh; r Vide Tertull. de carn. Christi, & contr. Marc. lib. 4. & 5.a body no body; blood no blood: or, A body; but not as a body; with blood, but not as blood; in a place, but not as in a place; with qualities, but not qualitatiuely; with quantitie, but not quantitatiuely. Such strange fancies and prodigies are these mens braines possest with.

1. If the one doe not follow vponupon the other, Pope Nicholas was much to blame, when he inferred thereupon that Christs very body was sensually (that is as much, if not more then corporally) chewed and eaten in the Eucharist.

p. 1162. If it be true that Bellarmine telleth vsus, that ssCarnaliter in nobis manere per Eucharistiam, Bellarm. de Euchar. l. 2. c. 12.by the Eucharist Christ remaineth carnally in vsus: which he citeth also, but with a foule hand, and **Per Eucharistiam.some of his owne words foisted in, as a saying of S. Hilaries: then sure he must needs carnally be eaten of vsus. And to see how inconstant error is, and how contrary to it selfe: one while he saith that there is ttManducatio corporalis. Ibid.a corporall eating of Christs body in the Sacrament; as their common tenent is: (and how is he not then corporaelly eaten?) and that Christ carnally thereby abideth in vsus: And yet againe another while; out of Athanasius, that uuManducationem corporis Christi non debere carnaliter accipi. Ibid. c. 11the eating of Christs body is not carnally to be taken, nor is xxCarnali modo. Ibid. c. 14.in a carnall manner to be vnderstood.

In a word; 1. Either Bread or Christs body must needs be corporally eaten in the Eucharist: but not bread, if we beleeue them; for there is none there: and to say that meere accidents onelyonly are chewed and fed vponupon is most senselesse and absurd: It remaineth therefore that Christs body, if that alone be there, be corporally eaten there, as Pope Nicholas before affirmed.

2. Either Christs flesh is eaten there corporally, or spiritually onelyonly. If corporally, why doth this fellow sticke at it, and is so loath to acknowledge it? If spiritually onelyonly, why vrge they those passages of Iohn 6. to prooue … corporall and bodily manducation of Christs body in the Eucharist? And so come we to examine that place by them so much and so oft vrged to prooue such a carnall eating of Christ.

§ 4. Here this profound and learned Doctor telleth vsus, that his superficiall Aduersarie hath in an vnlearned and slender manner endeauoured to prooue that our Sauiours discourse there is not to be vnderstood of Sacramentall Manducation, but of spirituall eating his flesh and blood by beleeuing in him.

I propound two Propositions to be prooued.

1. That the words are not to be vnderstood of any such corporall eating and drinking, as they hold.

2. That Christ doth not in that whole discourse speake of p. 117the Sacrament of the Eucharist, which was not as yet instituted, but of such spirituall feeding on Christ, as is performed, not in the Sacrament onelyonly, but out of it also.

The former I prooue by a plaine place of S. Augustine; which this Aduersarie, referring vsus still for an answer to Bellarmine, (from whom he borroweth the most that he hath) saith is an obscure place, and is pleased a little after to tearme it no better then durt, which wee Protestants, like Eeles, desire to hide our selues in.

1. Were it not an absurd thing for Augustine to speake …bscurely there, where he giueth rules for the opening and right vnderstanding of places obscure? where should he speake more plainely and perspicuously then there; where his maine aime is to make things cleere?

2. This shifters answer borrowed from Bellarmine is but a bare shift; to wit, that the place prooueth no more, but that our Sauiours speech concerning the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood is figuratiue so far forth, as that his flesh was not carnally to be eaten, and in a bloody manner, as flesh sold in the shambles is wont to be eaten, &c. As if flesh bought in the shambles vsed to be eaten raw and in bloody manner. Here is a deale of durt indeede and mud raised to trouble Augustines cleere water. The Question is whether our Sauiours words be to be vnderstood properly or figuratiuely. yyNon possunt figuratè accipi sed propriè. Bellarm. de Euchar. l. 1. c. ….They say properly; and not figuratiuely: Augustine saith figuratiuely; and so consequently, not properly: which is as much as is here required. zzCaro Christi verè ac propriè manducatur. Bellarm. de Euchar. …. 1. c. 11.Christs body (saith Bellar mine) is with the body properly eaten in the Eucharist. But it is no proper, but a figuratiue eating, saith Augustine, that Christ speaketh of Iohn 6. It is no such eating of Christs body therefore, as they imagine to be in the Eucharist. Yea so contrary to them, and so pregnant for vsus is that passage of Augustine, that in Fulbertus his workes, where those words of his are related, they hauehave with a foule insertion branded them for aaFacinus vel flagitium videtur iubere. Figura est ergo, …icet hereti…us, &c. Apud Fulbertum in excerp…is post Se…m …o tr. Iud. p. 168.hereticall.

Yea but (saith mine Aduersarie) there are many plaine places in Augustine, cited by Bellarmine, for the reall receiuing p. 118of Christ; which my superficiall Aduersarie taketh no notice of. Bellarmine is still much in this mans mouth; and the superficialnesse of his silly and vnlearned Aduersarie. But this (I am sure) is a very vnlearned, slender and superficiall proofe of points questioned, to turne his Reader ouer still for satisfaction to some other. Yet I will doe him the couttesie, since he telleth vsus of other plaine places in Augustine to present him with one of them, though such an one (it may be) as will not easily goe downe with him. Augustine speaking of this place in Iohn on Psal. 98. saith that Christ hauing vsed those words, bbIoh 6. 35.John 6:35Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood, you hauehave no life in you. When some vnderstood them ccStultè carnaliter.foolishly and carnally, he taught them to vnderstand them ddSpiritaliter intelligere.spiritually; saying, eeIoh. 6. 63.John 6:63It is the Spirit that quickneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speake are Spirit and life. As if he should hauehave said; vnderstand you spiritually what I hauehave spoken. ffNon hoc corpus quod videtis manducatur, iestis & bibituri illum sanguinē quem fusuri sunt qui me crucifigent.You are not to eate that body which you see, and to drinke that blood which they will shed that shall crucifie me. ggSacramentum aliquod vobis commendaui: spiritualiter intellectum viuificabit vos. Etsi necesse est illud visibiliter celebrari, oport…t tamen inuifibiliter intelligi. N. P.I hauehave commended a kinde of Sacrament vntounto you; which being spiritually vnderstood will quicken you. Though it must be visibly colebrated, yet is it inuisibly to be vnderstood. Thus Augustine in plaine tearmes: and yet if we beleeue these men, the very same body of Christ that was then seene, and that very same blood that was shed on the Crosse is orally eaten and drunke in the Eucharist.

ANd surely if the Authoritie of holy Fathers might preuaile with the Minister further then himselfe listeth, he cannot be so ignorant as not to know that all the auncient Doctors expounding or treating of Christs words, Ioh. 6. hauehave literally vnderstood them of the Sacrament, as learned qqTolet in c. 6. Ioan.Tolet, rrSaunders in lib. de illo cap.Saunders, ssBellarm. lib. 1. de Euchar.Bellarmine, and other of our diuines hauehave particularly prooued; collecting from them inuincible Testimonies also, to prooue the verity of our Sauiours body and blood really in the Sacrament conteined and receiued: Insomuch as S. Austin affirmeth S. Iohn purposely to hauehave emitted p. 119all mention of the Sacrament in our Sauiours last Supper, because he had in the 6. Chap. of his Gospell so particularly expressed the promised excellency and heauenly fruits thereof: and many euident and vnanswerable Arguments are by Catholike expositors of that Chapter made to prooue the same; which with silence my Aduersarie ouerpasseth. First, (for example) our Sauiour from the 31. to the 60. verse of that Chapter maketh a difference betwixt the gift which his Father had giuen to the Iewes louing the world so as to giuegive his onelyonly begotten Sonne for it, and the gift which himselfe meant to giuegive to them, speaking of the one as a gift already past; but of the other as of a gift afterwards to bee giuen vntounto them. Secondly, He compareth the eating of his flesh to the Israelites eating of Manna in the desert; which was a corporall food really eaten by them. Thirdly, If by eating his flesh and drinking his blood our Sauiour meant no other thing then that they should beleeue in him, it had beene a strange course in him, who so thirsted after the saluation of soules by an obscure manner of speaking to driue away so many, such persons especially as had formerly followed him, without any word added, which might open this obscure doctrine vntounto them; as Card. Tollet excellently relateth there the whole processe of our Sauiours doctrine.

§ 5. MY second Proposition is, that Christ in that T. G.whole Discourse Iohn 6 doth not speake of the Eucharist.

That Augustine and diuers others of the ancient Fathers doe expound it of feeding on Christ, yet not corporally, but spiritually in the Sacrament (for so hhIansen. harmon. Euang. cap. 59. Sed & Gabr. Biel i… Can. Miss. lect. 36.Bishop Iansenius also ingenuously confesseth that Augustine holdeth it to be vnderstood of seeding on Christ spiritually, not corporally; yea and so **De comestione sacramentali ait Dominus; Accipite & comedite; Hoc est corpus meum: de comestione spirutuali dicit; Nisi manducaueritis carnem filii hominis, &c. non habebitis vitam in vobis. Innocent. Pp. apud Durand in ration. diuin. l. 4. p. 2. ad p. 6. Can. & Biel in Can. lect. 36,Pope Innocent himselfe, witnesse Durand, p. 120and Biel, and ““Magister apud Bonauen. in l. 4. sen. d 9. q. 1.Peter Lombard also, witnesse Bon… uenture, expound it:) I deny not; nor doth it at all impeach our cause in the maine point here in question of Christs corporall presence. Yet the rather herein wee are inforced (together with diuerse Popish writers) to depart from them in that their exposition; so farre forth as they vnderstand the same as directly speaking of the Eucharist, (as for the one moitie of that discourse also euen **See below Bellar. de Eucharist. l. 1. c. 5.Bellarmine himself doth) in regard of some erronious consequences that they were by that meanes enforced vntounto, which euen the Papists themselues now condemne, and for other weighty reasons, as in my first writing I shew.

Yea but Catholique Expositors (saith this Answerer) by many euident and vnanswerable Arguments hauehave prooued that it is so to be vnderstood; which his Aduersarie also (saith hee) euerpasseth with silence.

And say I, A Catholique Expositor (in their language) to wit, Corn. Iansenius (no Iesuite now, for so this Answerer hath informed me, and yet) a Bishop of Flanders, in a worke of his by common consent of the learned among them well approoued of (they are the Popes owne Censurers wordes of it) hath by euident and vnanswerable Arguments prooued that it cannot so bee vnderstood; which this mine aduersarie also ouerpasseth with silence: And the like also doth Frier Ferus: and Gabriel Biel at large in the place aboue recited.

But hee will at length (I hope) say somewhat himselfe.

1. Our Sauiour (saith he) maketh a difference there betweene the gift which his Father had …iuen the Iewes, and the gift that himselfe ment to giuegive, speaking of the one as past, of the other as to come: This out of Bellarmine.

I maruell where this man learned his Logicke. He neuer is luckie in the framing of his Consequences. There is a difference betweene the gift that God the Father had giuen; and the gift that Christ would giuegive: Ergò Christs wordes must needs be vnderstood of his corporall presence in p. 121the Eucharist. How hang these things together? or by what nec…ssity of consequence doth the one follow from the other?

For first, Are they diuerse gifts that God the Father had giuen and that Christ would giuegive? then the wordes are not meant of Christs corporall presence in the Eucharist. For therein the very same Christ that the Father gaue is giuen to the faithfull, as we say, spiritually; to both faithfull and vnfaithfull, as they affirme, corporally. And therfore the gift is not diuers, as he saith, but the selfe same.

2. If hee say that the gift is diuers in regard of the diuers manner of giuing: who knoweth not that Christ, who had beene giuen by his Father (and yet by himselfe also) in his incarnation; was after iiMat. 20. 28. Ephes. 5. 2.Matt 20:28Eph 5:2giuen also by himselfe (and yet kkRom. 4. 23. and 8. 32.Rom 4:23Rom 8:32by his Father also) in his passion. So their owne Iansenius expoundeth his words, that llQuam & in mortem dabo. Iansen. vbi sup.he would giuegive his b… die also vntounto death: and Frier Ferus that mmIn mortem ad crucem. Fe…us in Ioan. 6.John 6hee would giuegive it vntounto death on the Crosse: for nnIllic coquetur panis iste. Fer. ibid.there (saith hee) was that bread to bee basked: and there that flesh of his (saith Bonauenture) was to be boyled. Yea so Gregory of Valence, My flesh that I will giuegive, ppQuam dab… 1. quā …fferam pro mund… vita. Greg. de. Val. de sacr. Mis. 1. 1. c. 3.that is, that I will offer for the life of the world: Where (thinke we) but on the Crosse?

2. Christ (saith he) compareth the eating of his flesh to the Iewes eating of Manna; which was a corporall food really eaten by them: and he must needs therefore speake of the Eucharist. Bellarmine was not so absurd indeed as to o In cruce facta est de…octio ca…is, &c. Bonauen. in sent. l 4. c. 9. q 2.argue on this manner. As if the Manna were not also a spirituall type of Christ: and Christ might not as well compare the type with the truth; as the type with the countertype; the type of the Manna qq1 Cor. 10. 3.1 Cor 10:3a spirituall food then really taken with the spirituall eating of Christ that was therin figured.

Or … …f he might not compare our spirituall feeding on him with some corporall food really eaten (which both here and else-where it is confessed, as shal presently be shewed, that he doth) and yet not mention the Sacrament of the Eucharist at all.

p. 122Bellarmine saith indeede that rrBellar. de Euchar. li. 1. c. 5.Christ compareth there with the Manna his bodie, not as it is receiued by faith alone, (and then belike by Bellarmines grant it is truely so also receiued, euen out of the Sacrament) but as in the Sacrament it is receiued. But how doth he proue it?

1. From the Apostle, where ss1 Cor. 10. 2, 3.1 Cor 10:21 Cor 10:3hee compareth Baptisme with the red Sea, and Manna with the Eucharist.

But how doth this follow; The Apostle doth so there: therefore our Sauiour doth so heere? especially considering how diuers the scope of either in either place is. The Apostles scope is to shew that tt1 Cor. 10. 1, 2, 3, 4.1 Cor 10:11 Cor 10:21 Cor 10:31 Cor 10:4the old Israelites had as good and as sure outward pledges of Gods fauour and louelove as wee Christians now hauehave; and yet ““Vers. 5-12.were not spared when they prouoked him to wrath, for all that. Our Sauiours scope is to prooue that the spirituall food of his flesh, which uuIoh. 6. 27.John 6:27he there tendred them and aduised them to seeke after, was much more excellent and of farre greater vertue and efficacie, then the Manna that their Fathers did once eate in the Wildernesse. For, that xxVide quae ex Cyri…lo Iansen. concord. cap. 59.that (considered as corporall food) was it selfe corruptible, and could not yyIoh. 6. 49.John 6:49preserue them that eate of it from death, whereas this was zzVers. 27.food incorruptible, and being spiritually fed on would cause them aaVers. 50. 51.to liue for euer. For the Apostles purpose therefore it was necessary to consider the Manna as a Sacrament and to compare the Eucharist with it, as with our Baptisme hee had paralleled the Red Sea before. But for our Sauiour so to do there was no necessity at all: Nor indeed doth he consider the Manna there as a Sacrament, no more then the Iewes did, that there mentioned it to him; nor doth hee speake cught of the Sacrament where hee speaketh of the Manna, as bbBellarm. de Euchar. l. 1. c. 5. & 7. see below.Bellarmine also himselfe acknowledgeth. His speech to them occasioned by the ccVers. 26.bread that they had eaten of, and ddVers. 31.the Manna that they spake of, is the very like to that other speech of his to the Samaritane woman, occasioned by eeIoh. 4. 7 10.John 4:7the water that hee had asked of her; ffVers. 13. 14.He that drinketh of this water shall thirst againe; but he that drinketh of the p. 123water that I shall giuegive him, shall neuer thirst more, &c. Which had it been considered, would easily hauehave assoyled those difficulties, that (as ggVide Iansen. in Ioan. 6. 49.John 6:49Iansenius obserueth) so much troubled Augustine, and Caietan, yea and Iansenius himselfe too. Nor was there any necessity that the bread of the Eucharist should bee more mentioned in the one place, then the drinke of it in the other.

2. Because hhQuia corpus Domini vt sumitur sola fide, non defuit veteribus. Bellar. ibid.Christs bodie, as by faith it is receiued, was not wanting to those of old time, that liued before Christs Incarnation.

What hee giueth vsus heere wee take, that Christs body was by faith receiued euen before hee was incarnate. But how prooueth this that Christ therefore spake there of a sacramentall eating of it? and not rather that he called home those his carnall followers, from the corporall feeding, either on iiIoh. 6. 26.John 6:26the bread that they had eaten of, or the kkVers. 31.Manna that they mentioned, and llVers. 34.would faine still hauehave been fed with, that they might liue without labour, not to an eating of sacramentall bread, which they would not hauehave much misliked, but to that ttVers. 27.spirituall feeding, uuVers 50, 51.which as well their holy forefathers, as all true and faithfull Christians now, were eternally saued by. Yea this may be confirmed by Bellarmines owne grants: Who first confesseth this as xxConstat in magna parte capitis de Eucharistia non agi. Solū quaestio est de illis verbis, Panis quem ego dabo, &c. & sequentibus Bellarm, de Euchar. l. 1. c. 5.a certaine truth, that there is no mention at all of the Eucharist in all that our Sauiours discourse, before those wordes, (which were spoken after hee had done yyVers. 3, 49.speaking of the Manna) zzVers. 51.The bread that I will giuegive is my flesh, that I will giuegive for the life of the world. 2. Hee granteth expresly that those wordes, aaVers. 35.I am the brad of life; hee that commeth to me shall not hunger, &c. doe bbNon pertinent ad Sarramentum propriè Ibid. c. 7.not properly belong to the Sacrament. 3. He obserueth ccTriplicis panis mentio fit. Bellar ibid.a three fold bread spoken of by our Sauiour: the first, that ddPanis materialis.materiall bread, eeVers. 11. 12.that Christ had fed them withall: the second ffSecundum panem dicit seipsum esse.spirituall bread, ggVers. 33. 41, 51.himselfe incarnate, hhVerse 27.which hee p. 124wisheth them to get, and must iiVers. 29. 35.by faith be apprehended, that it may feed and refresh …s: the third (hee might well hauehave said kkVers. 49.M…nna, which he omitteth, termed also llVers. 31. ex P… l. 78. 24, 25.bread there, but) mmPanis Eucha…st cus. Ibid.the sacramentall bread (saith he) expressed in those wordes. nnVers. 51.the bread that I will giuegive, is my fl…sh that I will giuegive for the life of the world: as if this were not the same spirituall bread that hee spake of before. 4. Being pressed with this that there is no bread at all in the Eucharist o De pane quē da…u…us erat in coena. Ibid. c. 6.(as they say) ^k & therfore it cannot be the sacramentall bread that is there spoken of, neither can it bee meant of the bread that Christ was to giuegive in the Supper, as hee elsewhere had said: he saith that ppNon significat panem triticeum. Ibid. c. 7.bread there signifieth not wheaten bread, qqNec corpus Christi absolutè.nor Christs body absolutely, but rrCibum generatim.meate or food in generall: and so the sence of it is this; The bread, that is, the meate, that I will giuegive, is my flesh it selfe, that is to be crucified and staine for the saluation of mankind. And he addeth that ssPan…s, i. cibus, &c. Ibid.peraduenture our Sauiour called his flesh sometimes bread, to shew that vnderunder the species of bread it was to be eaten. So that all the force of Bellarmines Argument is but meerely coniecturall, and dependeth vponupon a peraduenture, which hee cannot certainely auerre. But t Fortasse ideò carnem suam aliquoties panem appellauit, &c. Ibid.without all peraduenture hee affirmed before that the bread of which our Sauiour said; uuIoh. 6. 32.John 6:32My Father giueth you the true bread from heauen; and xxVerse 33.The bread of God is hee that came from heauen and giueth life to the world: and yyVers. 35.I am the bread of life; hee that commeth to mee shall neuer hunger; and hee that beleeueth in mee shall neuer thirst: and zzVers. 41.I am the bread that came downe from heauen: and againe, aaVers. 48.I am the bread of life: and bbvers. 50.This is the bread that came downe from heauen, that whosoeuer eateth thereof should neuer die: and ccvers. 51.I am the liuing bread that came downe from heauen: if any man eate of this bread hee shall liue for euer: that the bread I say, of which hee said all this, was not the Encharist, or the sacramentall bread, and none of all this directly and properly concerneth it. And well may wee put it out of peraduenture, that the bread of which our Sauiour saith ddvers. 51.it is his flesh that he wil giuegive for the life of the p. 125world, and eevers. 54.whosoeuer eateth of it, hath life euerlasting; ffvers. 53.which no man also can hauehave without it; is no other then that of which hee had before said, that ggvers. 35. 48.it is himselfe, and that hhvers. 33.it giueth life to the world, and iivers. 50. 51.life euerlasting to eueryevery one that eateth of it: the rather also for that our Sauiour himselfe so informeth vsus when he saith, (not kkTransitum facit ad panem Euchar. Bell. ibid.passing as Bellarmine would hauehave it from a second bread to a third, but more particularly expressing what the second bread was, and repeating more fully what before hee had said) mmvers. 51.I am the liuing bread that came downe from heauen: … vers. 35, 41, 50.if any man eate of this bread, hee shall liue for euer: nnvers. eodem.and the bread that I will giuegive (what bread, thinke we, but the same that he was euen then speaking of? which yet was ooBellar. vbi sup. c. 5. & 7.none of the sacramentall bread, saith Bellarmine) is my flesh that I will giuegive for the life of the world. Those ensuing passages therefore are not meant of the sacramentall bread or the Eucharist, no more then the former. But leaue wee Bellarmine, and returne we to this our Defendant, whom we are principally now to deale with.

His last Argument out of Tolet is not so much for the Eucharist, as against the spirituall eating Christs flesh and drinking his blood by faith. If our Sauiour had meant nothing but that they should beleeue in him, it had been a strange course by such an obscure manner of speaking ppIoh. 6. 66.John 6:66to driue away so many that had formerly followed him and beleeued in him, without any word added that might open this darke doctrine.

To omit that here againe he departeth from Augustine, who qqAug. in Ioa. tract. 26.saith thus expresly; Our Lord being about to giuegive the holy Ghost called himself bread exhorting vsus tobeleeue in him. rrCredere in eum, hoc est manducare panem viuum.For to beleeue in him is to eate that liuing bread. He that beleeueth in him feedeth on him, ssQui credit in eum, manducat. In…sibiliter sa…r, quin invisibiliter renascitur: iuf us nouus in…us est: vbi novell…r, ibi satiatur.he is fatted inuisibly, because he is inuisibly bred againe: he is there filled, where he is renewed. And again, ttSang… em fuderunt cum saeuire…t, biberunt cum crederent. Aug … Ioan. tr. 1. Saeuieutes …ude…u…t, credentes biberunt. de temp. 74. & de verb. Dom. 59.They that shed Christs blood, drank his blood whē they beleeued in him; and uuC…edendo biberunt, quem saeuiendo fuderunt. Idem. in Ioan. tr. 8.they drank it by beleeuing in him.

p. 1261. It pleased our Sauiour sometime, as to xxIoh. 3. 3.John 3:3Nicodemus, and to yyMath 13. 10, 13, 14.Matt 13:10Matt 13:13Matt 13:14the people oft-times, to speake things in obscure Parables, which yet to them he did not explicate. ““See Chrys. on Ioan. hom. 46.Nor may any taxe the wisedome of Christ without impiety for so doing. Yea **Sic oportebat vt diceretur, quod non ab omnibus intelligeretur. Aug. in Ioan. tr. 27.so (saith Augustine) he spake that here which he would not hauehave all to vnderstand.

2. Those that went away from him vponupon it, were (as our Sauiour himselfe intimateth) zzReade Ioan. 6. vers. 26. 36, 64, 69, 67, 69.John 6:26John 6:36John 6:64John 6:69John 6:67such as followed him onelyonly to be fed; and did not beleeue in him.

3. If his meaning had beene that they were to eate of his very flesh it selfe miraculously made of bread, as these men would make vsus beleeue, had it not beene as obscure and as difficult for them to hauehave conceiued it?

4. It is not true that our Sauiour added nothing to explicate himselfe. Augustine in the place before cited **Exponit quomodo id fiat quod loquitut; & quid sit manducare corpus cius & sanguinem bibere. Aug. in Ioan. tr. 26. Citante etiam Biele in Can. Iect. 36. Beda in 1 Cor. 11. & Fulbert. in excerpt. Exposuit modū attributionis & doni sui. Aug. ibid. 27.1 Cor 11sheweth that he did. And both in the beginning, when aaIoh. 6. 32. 33John 6:32John 6:33hee first told them of this bread: and ^d they desired him euer to giuegive them of it; he maketh them answer in these words; ccVers. 35.I am the bread of life: Hee that commeth to me shall neuer hunger; and he that beleeueth in me shall neuer thirst: and in the processe of his speech againe, ddVers. 47.Uerely, verely, I say vntounto you, Hee that beleeueth in mee, hath life euerlasting: Whereby eeIansen. harmon. cap. 59.saith Iansenius, they might well hauehave vnderstood, in what manner hee would giuegive them his flesh to eate. Who also thence gathereth (agreeably to Augustine and other of the Ancients) that **Idem esse manducare se, & credere in se. Et Biel. Idem est in Christum credere, & in Christum ite: & qui credit in Christum, incorporatur Christo; & per hoc manducat Christum.it is all one to feed on Christ, and to beleeue in him: As also in the Conclusion and shutting vp of all, when hee saw how they mistooke him: ““Verse 63.It is the spirit that quickneth, the flesh availeth nothing: the wordes that I speake are spirit and life. In which wordes saith ff…ansen vbi sup.the same Iansenius (out of Chrysostome, Theophylact, and b Vers. 34.Augustine) hee sheweth how they should vnderstand what before he had said.

p. 127MY Aduersaries Arguments to the contrary are meerely N. P.topicall, and prooue nothing. For first it is false, that the faithfull Iewes before Christ did sacramentally receiue our Sauiour as well as we: which hee barely affirmeth and prooueth not, page 7.

Secondly, those words of Christ, Except yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of Man and drinke his blood, you shall not hauehave life in you; was a precept respectiuely giuen and onelyonly obliging such persons to an actuall receiuing of the Sacrament as they were to whom it was vttred; such persons (to wit) as are by age capable of Sacramentall manducation. And surely if Christs words be onelyonly vnderstood, as my Aduersarie would hauehave them, of spirituall eating Christ by faith, they must necessarily import a precept more impossible to be fulfilled by children then sacramentally to receiue him. For sooner may children receiue the Sacrament, especially drinke of the consecrated Chalice (as anciently in the Greeke and Latine Churches they were went to doe) then actually beleeue in him.

His next Argument pag. 8. maketh more (if this Minister had wit to discerne the force thereof) against his owne exposition of Christs words, then it doth against our vnderstanding of them. For as all that receiue Sacramentally Christs flesh and blood, are not saued; no more are all that spiritually and by faith eate him. This being sufficient for the veritie of our Sauiours speeches that the Sacrament is ordained to produce those excellent and heauenly effects which Christs promises there import in the soules of such as worthily receiue it; and such centrarily as come vnworthily thereunto receiue death and iudgement to themselues by it.

As for those few Catholike writers who hauehave denied Christs words in that 6. Chap. of Saint Iohn to hauehave beene vnderstood at all of Sacramentall manducation; I answer, that their number is not great, and their authoritie of no weight at all against a numberlesse multitude of ancient Fathers and moderne Doctors of better note contrarily vnderstanding them; yeelding better reasons for that their literall p. 128true explication, and easily soluing all hereticall Obiections gathered from the literall sense of our Sauiours words in that Chapter against our communion vnderunder one kinde and other points of Catholike doctrine. And sithence my Aduersaerie will not sticke to contemne these very Authors in their other knowne Catholike doctrines, why doth he so highly value and mainely vrge them in this opinion, wherein without any hereticall intention or obstinacie of Iudgement they differ from vsus?

§ 6. AT length he commeth to refute mine Arguments; T. G.which he saith are topicall, and prooue nothing.

My first Argument is this:

None are saued but such as so feede on Christ, as is there spoken of. But many are saued that neuer fed on Christ in the Eucharist; as the Fathers before Christ; the children of the faithfull that die infants, &c. Ergò it is not spoken of the Eucharist.

To this he answereth.

1. That I barely affirme that the Iewes before Christ did sacramentally receiue Christ as well as we, but I prooue it not. It is true; I say obiter that they fed on Christs flesh spiritually as well as we now doe: though that be no part of mine Argument. And I adde a place or two of Augustine for the proofe of it grounded on the Apostles words, 1. Cor. 10. 3, 4. Which seeing that this shifter ouerslippeth, let him heare Bishop Iansenius himselfe (not to goe any further) relate a little more at large, to wit, that ggIansen. ibid. Boni manna manducando viuificati sunt: eo quod sub visibi… illo cibo etiam spiritualiter manducauerunt ve…um panem vitae per manna significa…um quem & nos ede…do viuificamur.the good Iewes in the old Testament were quickned by eating of Manna, because vnderunder that visible foode they also spiritually did eate the true Bread of Life by Manna signified. Or if Iansenius will not serue, let him heare their great Albert; hhAlbert. Magn. de Sacram. Euchar. serm, 17 Modus manducationis triplex, Sacramentalis tantûm, spiritualis tantùm, sacramentalis & spiritualis simul.There is (saith he) a three-fold eating of Christ; p. 129sacramentally onelyonly, spiritually onelyonly, or sacramentally and spiritually both. In the first sort **Omnes saluandi ab origine mundi.all that euer were saued did eate: in the second sort euill Christians eate him in the Sacrament: in the third sort, good communicants onelyonly. And againe, alleadging those words of the Apostle; iiIdem ibid. se…m. 18 omnes …oni veteres in Manna cibum inuisibile. n. s…. Christum spiritu…ter in…exerunt, crediderunt, gustauerunt, &c.All those good Auncients in the Manna vnderstood beleeued and tasted Christ himselfe, and were thereby saued. And this no Papist (I suppose) will be so absurd as to deny. But this is but a by-matter, no part of the maine Argument; and therefore I forbeare here to insist further on it.

2. That is as impossible for children to eate Christ by faith spiritually, as to receiue him sacramentally in the Eucharist.

Not to runne out into more Questions then needs must at the present, I answer:

1. Many yong ones die, though at yeeres of discretion, when in ordinary course they may well hauehave faith, and beleeue actually, yet ere they be admitted to the Eucharist: and yet is not their saluation at all thereby preindiced.

2. By the doctrine of their Church euen kkB…llarm. de Bapt. l. 1. c. 11. ex Concil. Tr…dent. sess. 7. can. 13. Et Biel. in Can Miss lect 36. De pueris eti…m quod spiritualiter manducant corpus Christi in susceptione baptismatis, patet de consecr. dist. 2. Quia passusInfants hauehave an habite of faith infused into them in Baptisme.

3. Neither is it a thing impossible for the Spirit of God by an extraordinary manner to worke faith in such infants as are to be saued dying before yeeres of discretion; no more then it was to regenerate Iohn Baptist llLuk. 1. 15.Luke 1:15in his mothers wombe: of whom Gregorie therefore saith that he was mmPrius quam nasceretur renatus Gr…g. mor. lib. 3. cap. 4.new bred yet vnborne.

4. The speech is of the same latitude and extent at least with those other; nnIoh. 6. 47. & 3. 18.John 6:47John 3:18whosoeuer beleeueth in me, hath life eternall: And, ooIohn 3. vers. 36John 3:36Whosoeuer beleeueth not in the Sonne of God. shall neuer pp…tam, pro viuere; vti videre mortem pro mori. Psal. 89. vers. 48. & Iohn 8. 51.Ps 89:48John 8:51liue, but qqIoh. 3. vers. 18. Mark. 16. vers. 16.John 3:18Mark 16:16shall be damned: and the like; which comprehend those onelyonly, to whom it appertaineth actually p. 130to come vntounto Christ, and to beleeue in him, rrIansen. vbi sup.saith Iansenius. And that is enough for my purpose.

§ 7. My second Argument was thus framed.

All that so feede on Christ, are eternally saued: our Sauiour so ssIoh. 6. 50, 51, 58.John 6:50John 6:51John 6:58saith.

But many feede on the Eucharist that are eternally damned.

Ergò Christ speaketh not there of orall eating in the Eucharist.

Now this Argument (saith he) if I had wit to discerne the force of it, maketh more against vsus then against them. And why so? Forsooth, because all are not saued that spiritually and by faith feede on Christ. This is like B…llarmines bold assertion, that ttAliquos credentes in Christum in aeternum perire, quod ante moriantur, quam à Sacerdote absolui potuerint. Bellarm. de poenit. l 3. c. 2.some that beleeue in Christ perish eternally, because they die before they can hauehave a Priest to assoile them. And what is this but to say that all that doe truly beleeue in Christ are not saued? Yea what is this (not to repeate all the allegations both of Scripture and Fathers produced for the proofe of the Proposition, which he purposely passeth ouer, not being able to answere) but to giuegive our Sauiour himselfe and the holy Ghost the lye, who so oft say; uuIoh. 3. 14, 15, 16, 18, 36. & 6. 47. & 7. 39. Rom. 10. 11. &c.John 3:14John 3:15John 3:16John 3:18John 3:36John 6:47John 7:39Rom 10:11Whosoeuer beleeueth in him shall be saued.

Nor is it sufficient (as he addeth) for to verifie our Sauiours speeches that the Sacrament is ordained to produce such effects in the Soules of such as worthily receiue it, though the contrary befall those that doe vnworthily rēceiue it. For (to answer them againe in the words of one of their owne Authors) our Sauiours words imply manifestly xxManducationis & potus certum effectum. Iansen. concord. c. 59.a certaine effect (as he speaketh) not a matter that may be: (as Augustine and Cyril also in the places cited by me there shew,) whereupon also he concludeth that yyHinc manife stum euadit, non omnes. &c. Idem ibid.it is apparent thence that all are not there said to eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his blood, that receiue the Sacraments of Christs body and blood.

§ 8. To their owne Authors, Cardinals, Schoelemen, Canonists, publike Professors, or Readers of Diuinity in their Vniuersities, (aaFeius in Ioan. 6. & Mathias Doring in replic. super. Lyr. in Psal. 110.John 6Ps 110 Friers I might hauehave said too,) and in steed p. 131of Iesuites (being better informed by him) I now say, Bishops, which will not much mend the matter.

1. Hee answereth that they bee but few in number, and their authoritie of no great weight, in regard of those that hold the contrarie. Yet one of their owne Bishops (though of an other mind himselfe) confesseth, that there are bbEx ipsis Catholicis perm…lti …unt, qui totum is…um sermonem ad spiritualem manducationem referunt: Sebastian Oxoniens. Epi…c. ad part. 3. Thom. q. 76. nu. 28.very many of them that are of this iudgement. But had there beene but one or two of them (especially of note, as some of them were) of some one sort, it might well hauehave weighed much on our side. For ccforeign. Isidor. Pesus. ep. 228. l. 2.the witnesse of an aduersarie is of no small weight. How much more, when so many of all sorts, of so speciall repute, shall so vniformely speake for vsus, and herein accord with vsus?

2. He demandeth of his Aduersarie, why he doth so highly value them and mainely vrge them herein, when in other points he will not sticke to contemne them. Had he any wit in his adle braine, he would neuer hauehave asked this idle Question It is as if in a Law-suite, because a man taketh hold (as he may well doe) of somewhat that falleth from his Aduersaries, or is granted him and confessed by them, because it furthereth his owne cause, he were therefore bound to beleeue or admit all that euer they say to the preiudice of his right. The greater differences are betweene them and vsus, yea in the present controuersie concerning the manner of Christs presence in the Sacrament, the lesse cause there is to suspect that they should speake partially for vsus; and the greater cause to suppose they were by euidence of truth enforced to confesse that, that should take away some of those grounds, whereby the cause that themselues stiffely maintained, is ordinarily vpheld.

3. He addeth in the end: These men herein without hereticall intention, or obstin…cie of iudgement differed from vsus. Whom he meaneth by that, VsUs, I leaue to himselfe to explaine: And the lesse hereticall their intention was (as he vnderstandeth hereticall) the lesse suspition there is of collusion or any purpose therein to gratifie vsus; and p. 132so much the stronger therefore is their testimonie for vsus. **Confessio propria testimo…is quibusnis; …estesque non familiares domesticis praeferuntur. Menoch. lib. 2. a…b. cas. …26. & Althus. dicaeolog. l. 3. c. 45.The testimonie of a meere stranger, or no well-willer to the cause maketh it to be of more moment. But when he speaketh of obstinacie of iudgement, he glaunceth at a secret in their Church, which I shall in a word or two take occasion hereby to discouer. It is no matter what a man hold or maintaine among them, so long as he acknowledgeth the Popes Supremacie, the maine pillar of their faith, and submit himselfe and his workes wholly to his censure, and so be ready to vnsay what he saith, when he will hauehave him so to doe. For his censure indeede alone is that which they call commonly the censure of the Church. And to this purpose they confesse that many of their writers hauehave held the very same points, for which they condemne vsus now as Heretikes, of whom yet they say that they were not Heretikes, because they submitted themselues to this Censure. I will adde an instance or two hereof out of Bellarmine.

1. In this very particular; he confesseth that ddBellarm. de Euchar. lib. 1. cap. 5.many of the Authors before mentioned expound that 6. Chap. of Iohn as the Heretikes doe: but they submit themselues (saith he) and their writings to the Censure of the Councels and Popes; which the Heretikes doe not.

2. In the present controuersie, Durandus held not a Transubstantiation, but a transformation in the Sacrament: eeIdem ibid. lib. 3. cap. 13.which opinion (saith he) is hereticall; and yet was hee no Heretike; because he was ready to yeeld to the iudgement of the Church.

3. Ambrose Catharines opinion of the Ministers intention in the Sacrament, differeth not (ffIdem de Sacram. in Gen. lib. 1. cap. 27. saith he) for ought I see, from the opinion of Chemnicius and other Heretikes, saue that he in the end of his booke submitteth himselfe to the Apostolike Sea and Councel.

4. Durandus in the point concerning merite of workes ggIdem de iustific. lib. 3. cap. 16.held as we now doe, that no reward was due to them but out of Gods meere liberalitie, and that it were temerarious and blasphemous to say, that God were vniust, if he should not p. 133so reward them: And yet was he also no Heretike for the cause before-mentioned.

And thus are we at length arriued (after much winding to and fro, while wee follow a shifting wind) at the end of the former part of my Discourse: wherein hath beene shewed, beside other Arguments, confirming the same, by the confession of their owne Authors, that those places of Scripture doe not enforce any such corporall presence of Christ in the Sacrament as Papists maintaine, which they commonly produce to prooue it.