Answer to a Jesuit in Ireland, Treatise · Section 2

Answer to a Jesuit in Ireland · Treatise · Section 2

p. 44OF THE REAL PRESENCE.

HOw farre the real presence of the bodie of Christ in the Sacrament, is allowed or disallowed by us, I have at large declared in an aaSerm. a… Westminst. before the house of Commons. ann. 1620.other place. The summe p. 45is this: That in the receiving of the blessed Sacrament, we are to distinguish betweene the outward and the inward action of the Communicant. In the outward, with our bodily mouth wee receive really the visible elements of Bread and Wine: in the inward, wee doe by faith really receive the bodie and bloud of our Lord, that is to say, wee are truely and indeed made partakers of Christ crucified, to the spirituall strengthning of our inward man. They of the adverse part have made such a confusion of these things, that for the first, they do utterly denie, that after the words of consecration there remaineth anie Bread or Wine at all to be received: and for the second, do affirme, that the bodie and bloud of Christ is in such a maner present, under the outward shewes of bread and wine, that whosoever receiveth the one (be he good or bad, beleever or unbeleever) doth therewith really receive the other. We are therfore here put to prove, that Bread is bread, and Wine is wine: a matter (one would thinke) that easily might be determined by common sense. That which you see (saith bbQuod ergo vidistis, Panis est & Calix: quod vobis etiam oculi vestri renunciant. August. in Sermone de sacram. apud Bedam▪ in 1. Cor. 10. & Ratrannum de corp. & sangu. Dom. vel in Sermone de Verbis Domini: ut citatur ab Algero, lib. 1. de Sacram. cap. 5.1 Cor 10S. Augustine) is the Bread and the Cup: which your very eyes doe declare unto you. But because we have to deale with men, that will needs herein be senselesse; wee will for this time referre them to ccTertull. in lib. de Animâ, cap. 17. cui titulus: De quinque sensibus.Tertullians discourse of the five senses, (wishing they may be restored to the use of their five witts againe:) and ponder the testimonies of our Saviour Christ, in the sixt of Iohn, and in the words of the Institution, which they oppose against all sense, but in the end shall finde to be as opposit to this phantasticall conceit of theirs, as anie thing can be.

Touching our Saviours speech, of the eating of his flesh, and the drinking of his bloud, in the sixth of Iohn; p. 46these five things specially may be observed. First, that the question betwixt our Adversaries & us, being not, Whether Christs bodie be turned into bread, but whether bread be turned into Christs bodie; the words in S. Iohn, if they be pressed literally, serve more strongly to prove the former, then the latter. Secondly, that this Sermon was uttered by our Saviour, above a yeare before the celebration of his last Supper, wherein the Sacrament of his bodie and bloud was instituted: at which time none of his hearers could possibly have understood him to have spoken of the externall eating of him in the Sacrament. Thirdly, that by the eating of the flesh of Christ, and the drinking of his bloud, there, is not here meant an externall eating or drinking with the mouth and throate of the bodie, (as the ddIoh 6.52.John 6:52Iewes then, and the Romanists farre more grossely then they, have since imagined:) but an internall and a spirituall, effected by a lively faith and the quickning spirit of Christ in the soule of the beleever. For eeforeign. Basil. in Psalm. 33.Ps 33there is a spirituall mouth of the inner man, (as S. Basil noteth) wherewith hee is nourished that is made partaker of the Word of life, which is the bread that commeth downe from heaven. Fourthly, that this spirituall feeding upon the bodie and blood of Christ, is not to be found in the Sacrament onelyonly, but also out of the Sacrament. Fiftly, that the eating of the flesh, and the drinking of the b…ood here mentioned, is of such excellent vertue, that the receiver is thereby made to remaine in Christ, and Christ in him, and by that meanes certainly freed from d…ath, and assured of everlasting life. Which seeing it cannot be verified of the eating of the Sacrament (whereof both the godly & the wicked are partakers:) it proveth, not onelyonly that our Saviour did not here p. 47speake of the Sacramentall eating; but further also, that the thing which is delivered in the externall part of the Sacrament, cannot be conceived to be really, but sacramentally onelyonly, the flesh and blood of Christ.

The first of these may be plainly seene in the Text: where our Saviour doth not onelyonly say, I am the bread of life, vers. 48. and, I am the living bread that came downe from heaven, vers. 51. but addeth also in the 55. verse. For my flesh is meate indeed, and my bloud is drinke indeed. Which words being the most forcible of all the rest, & those wherewith the simpler sort are cōmonly most deluded, might carry some shew of proofe, that Christs flesh & blood should be turned into bread & wine; but have no maner of colour to prove, that bread and wine are turned into the flesh and blood of Christ. The truth of the second, appeareth by the four…h verse: in which we finde, that this fell out not long before the Passeover; and consequently, a yeare at least before that last Passeover, wherein our Saviour instituted the Sacrament of his Supper. Wee willingly indeed do acknowledge, that that which is inwardly presented in the Lords Supper, and spiritually received by the soule of the faithfull, is that verie thing which is treated of in the sixth of Iohn: but wee denie that it was our Saviours intention in this place, to speake of that which is externally delivered in the Sacrament, and orally received by the Communicant. And for our warrant herein, wee need looke no further then to that earnest asseveration of our Saviour in the 53. verse: Verily, verily I say unto you; Except yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his blood, ye have no life in you. Wherin there is not onelyonly an obligation laid upon them for doing of this, (which in no likelyhood could be intended p. 48of the externall eating of the Sacrament, that was not as yet in being:) but also an absolute necessitie imposed, non praecepti solùm ratione, sed etiā medij. Now to hold, that all they are excluded from life, which have not had the meanes to receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper: is as untrue, as it is uncharitable. And therefore manie of the Papists themselves, as Biel, Cusanus, Cajelan, Tapper, Hessels, Iansenius, and others, confesse, that our Saviour in the sixth of Iohn did not properly treat of the Sacrament.

The third of the points proposed, may be collected out of the first part of Christs speech, in the 35. and 36. verses. I am the bread of life: hee that commeth to mee, shall never hunger; and he that beleeveth on me, shall never thirst. But I said unto you, that yee also have seene me, and beleeve not. But especially, out of the last, from the 61. verse forward. When Iesus knew in himselfe that his Disciples murmured at it, hee said unto them; Doeth this offend you? What then if you should see the Sonne of man ascend up where hee was before? It is the spirit that quickneth, the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speake unto you are spirit and life. But there are some of you that beleeve not. Which words Athanasius (or whosoever was the author of the Tractate upon that place; Quicunque dixerit verbum in filium homi…is) noteth our Saviour to have used; that his hearers might learne, ffforeign. A…hanas.that those things which hee spake, were not carnall but spirituall. For how many could his bodie have sufficed for meat, that it should be made the food of the whole world? But therefore it was that he made mention of the Sonne of mans ascension into heaven, that he might draw them from this corporall conceit; and that hereafter they might learne, that the flesh which he spake of, was celestiall p. 49meat from above, and spirituall nourishment to be given by him. For the words which I have spoken unto you (saith he) are spirit and life. So likewise Tertullian: ggEtsi carnem ait nihil prodes…e, ex materiâ dicti dirigendus est sensus. Nam quia durum & intolerabilē existimaverunt sermonem ejus, quasi veré carnem suam illis edendam determinâsset: ut in spiritu disponeret slatum salutis, praemisit; Spiritus est qui vivificat. atque ita subjunxit: Caro nihil prodest, ad vivificandum scilicèt. Tertull de Resurrect. carnis. cap. 37.Although he saith that the flesh profiteth nothing, the meaning of the speech must be directed according to the intent of the matter in hand. For, because they thought it to be a hard and an intolerable speech, as if he had determined that his flesh should be truly eaten by them: that hee might dispose the state of salvation by the spirit, hee premised; It is the spirit that quíckneth. and so subjoyned; The flesh profiteth nothing, namely to quicken. &c. hhQuia & sermo caro erat factus, proinde in causam vitae appetendus, & devorandus auditu, & ruminandus intellectu, & fide digerendus. Nam & paulò antè carnem suam panem quoque coelestem pronuntiârat; urgens usquequaque per allegoriam necessariorum pabulorum, memoriam patrum, qui panes & carnes Aegyptiorum praeverterant divinae vocationi. Idem ibid.And because the Word was made flesh, it therefore was to be desired for causing of life, and to be devoured by hearing, and to be chewed by understanding, and to be digested by faith. For a little before he had also affirmed that his flesh was heavenly bread: urging still by the Allegory of necessary food, the remembrance of the fathers, who preferred the bread and the flesh of the Egyptians before Gods calling. Adde hereunto the sentence of Origen: iiEst & in novo Testamento litera quae occidit eum, qui non spiritualiter ea quae dicuntur adverterit. Si enim secundùm literam sequaris hoc ipsum quod dictum est; Nisi manducave…itis carnem meam, & biberitis sanguinem meum occidit haec litera. Orig. in Levit. cap. 10. …om 7.Lev 10There is in the New Testament also a letter which killeth him that doth not spiritually conceive the things that be spoken. For if according to the letter you do follow this same which is said; Except yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his blood: this letter killeth. And those sayings which everie where occurre in S. Augustines Tractates upon Iohn: kkQuomodo in coelum manū mittā, ut ibi sedentē teneā? Fidē mitte, & tenuisti. Aug. in Evang. Iohan. Tract. 50.How shall I send up my hand unto heaven, to take hold on Christ sitting there? Send thy faith, and thou hast hold p. 50of him! llVt quid paras…dentes & ven…rem? C…ede, & manducàsti. Id. ibid. Tracta…. 25.Why preparest thou thy teeth and thy belly? Bele…ve, and thou hast eaten. mmCredere enim in eum, hoc est mandu…a…e panem vivum. Qui credit in eum, manducat. Invisibiliter saginatur, quia invisibiliter renascitur. Infans intus est, novus intus est: ubi novellatur, ibi satiatur. Id. ibid. Tractat. 26.For this is to eate the living bread, to beleeve in him. He that beleeveth in him, eateth. He is invisibly fedd, because he is invisibly regenerated. He is inwardly a b…be, inwardly renewed: where he is renewed, there is he nourished.

The fourth proposition doth necessarily follow upon the third. For if the eating and drinking here spoken of, be not an externall eating and drinking, but an inward participation of Christ, by the communion of his quickning spirit: it is evident, that this blessing is to be found in the soule, not onelyonly in the use of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, but at other times also. It is no wayes to be doubted by anie one (saith S. nnNulli est aliquatenùs ambigendum, tunc unumquemque fidelium corporis sanguinisque Dominici participem fieri, quando in baptismate membrum Christi efficitur: nec alienari ab illius pan…s calicis que consortio, etiamsi antequàm panem illum comedat & calicem bibat, de hoc seculo in unitate corporis Christi constitutus abscedat. Sacramenti quippè illius participatione ac beneficio non privatur, quando ipse hoc quod illud sacramentum significat, invenit. August. in Serm ad in…ante… ▪ de sacram. apud Bedam, in 1. Cor. …0.Augustine) that every one of the faithfull is made partaker of the body and bloud of our Lord, when he is made a member of Christ in Baptisme: and that hee is not estranged from the communion of that bread and cup, although before he eate that bread, and drinke that cup, hee depart out of this world, being setled in the unitie of the body of Christ. For he is not deprived of the participation and the benefite of that Sacrament, when hee hath found that which this Sacrament doth signifie. And hereupon wee see, that diverse of the Fathers doe apply the sixth of Iohn, to the hearing of the Word also: as, ooClem. Ale…andr. P…dagog. lib 1. cap. 6.Clemens Alexandrinus, ppOrigen. in L…vit. cap. 10 homil. 7.Origen, Eusebius Caesareensis, and others. We are said to drinke the blood of Christ (saith qqBibere autem dicimur sanguinem Christi, non solùm sacramentorum rit…, sed & cùm sermones ejus recipimus, in quibus vita consistit sicut & ipse dicit: Verba quae locutus sum, spiritus & vita est. Origen. in Numer. cap. 24 hom. 16.Origen) not onelyonly by p. 51way of the Sacraments, but also when we receive his word, wherein consisteth life. even as hee himselfe saith· The words which I have spoken, are spirit and life. VponUpon which words of Christ, Eusebius paraphraseth after this maner: rrforeign. Euseb. lib. 3. Ecclesiasticae Theologiae, contra Marcellum Ancyranum. MS. in publicâ Oxoniensis Academiae Bibliothecâ: & in privatis virorum doctissimorum, D. Richardi Montacutij & M. Patricij Iunij.Doe not thinke that I speake of that flesh wherewith I am compassed, as if you must eate of that; neither imagine that I command you to drinke my sensible and bodily blood: but understand well, that the vvords which I have spoken unto you, are spirit and life. So that those very words and speeches of his, are his flesh and blood; whereof who is partaker, being alwayes therewith nourished as it were with heavenly bread, shall likewise be made partaker of heavenly life. Therefore let not that offend you, saith he, which I have spoken of the eating of my flesh and of the drinking of my blood; neither let the superficiall hearing of those things which were said by me of flesh and blood, trouble you. For these things sensibly heard, profite nothing: but the spirit is it, which quickneth them that are able to heare spiritually. Thus farre Eusebius: whose words I have layd down the more largely, because they are not vulgar.

There remaineth the fift and last point: which is oftentimes repeated by our Saviour in this Sermon. as in the 50. verse: This is the bread which commeth downe from heaven, that a man may eate thereof, and not dye, and in the 51: If any man eate of this bread, hee shall live for ever. and in the 54: Who so eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternall life. and in the 56: He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in mee, and I in him. and in the 58: This is that bread which came downe from heaven: not as your fathers did eate Manna, and are p. 52dead: hee that eateth of this bread, shall live for ever. Whereupon Origen rightly observeth the difference that is betwixt the eating of the typicall or symbolicall (for so he calleth the Sacrament) and the true bodie of Christ. Of the former, thus he writeth: ssQuod sanctificatur per verbum Dei & per obsecrationem, non suápte naturâ sanctificat utentem. Nam id si esset, sanctificaret etiam illum, qui comedit indigné Domino: neque quisquam ob hunc esum infirmus aut aegrotus fuisset, aut obdormisset. Nam tale quiddā Paulus demōstrat, quū ait: Propter hoc inter vos infirmi, & male habētes, & dormiunt multi. Origen. in Matt. 15.Matt 15That which is sanctified by the word of God and by prayer, doth not of it own… nature, sanctifie him that useth it. For if that were so, it would sanctifie him also which doth eate unworthy of the Lord: neither should any one for this eating be weake, or sicke, or dead. For such a thing doth Paul shew, when he saith: For this cause many are weake and sickly among you, and many sleepe. Of the latter, thus: ttMult… porrò & de ipso Verbo dici possent, quod factum est caro, verusque cibus, quē qui comederit, omnino vivet in aeternum; quem nullus malus potest ed ere. Etenim si fieri possit, ut qui malus adhuc perseveret, edat Verbum factum carnem, quum sit verbum & panis vivus, nequaquàm scriptum fuisset: Quisquis ederit panem hunc, vivet in aeternum Id. ibid.Many things may be spoken of the Word it selfe, which was made flesh, and true meate; which whosoever eateth, shall certainly live for ever: which no evill person can eate. For if it could be, that he who continueth evill, might eate the Word made flesh (seeing hee is the word and the bread of life) it should not have beene written: Whosoever eateth this bread, shall live for ever. The like difference doth S. Augustine, also upon the same ground, make betwixt the eating of Christs bodie sacramentally and really. For having affirmed, that wicked men uuNec isti dicendi sunt manducare corpus Christi. quoniam nec in membris computandi sunt Christi. August. de Civit. Dei, lib 21. cap. 25.may not be said to eate the body of Christ, because they are not to be counted among the members of Christ: hee afterward addeth. xxDenique ipse dicens, Qui manducat carnem meam, & bibit sanguinem meum, in me manet, & ego in eo; ostendit quid sit non sacramento tenus, sed reverà manducare corpus Christi, & ejus sanguinem bibere: hoc est enim in Christo manere, ut in illo maneat & Christus. Sic enim hoc dixit, tanquàm diceret: Qui non in me manet, & in quo ego non maneo, non se dicat aut existimet manducare corpus meum, aut bibere sanguinem meum. Id. ibid.Christ himselfe saying, He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh p. 53my bloud, remaineth in mee, and I in him, sheweth what it is, not sacramentally but indeed, to eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his bloud: for this is, to remaine in Christ, that Christ likewise may remaine in him. For hee said this, as if he should have said: He that remayneth not in me, and in whom I do not remaine; let not him say or thinke, that he eateth my flesh or drinketh my bloud. And in another place, expounding those words of Christ here alledged; hee thereupon inferreth thus: yyHoc est ergo manducare illam escam, & illum bibere potum; in Christo manere, & illum manentem in se habere. Ac per hoc qui non manet in Christo, & in quo non manet Christus, proculdubio nec manducat spiritaliter carnē ejus, nec bibit ejus sanguinē, licèt carnaliter & visibiliter premat dentibus sacramentum corporis & sanguinis Christi: sed magis tantae rei sacramentū ad judicium sibi manducat et bibit, quia immundus praesumpsit ad Christi accedere sacramenta. Id. in Evangel. Iohan. Tract. 26.This is therefore to eate that meate, and drinke that drinke; to remaine in Christ, and to have Christ remayning in him. And by this, he that remaineth not in Christ, and in whom Christ abideth not, without doubt doth neither spiritually eate his flesh, nor drinke his bloud: although he do carnally and visibly presse with his teeth the Sacrament of the bodie and bloud of Christ; and so rather eateth and drinketh the Sacrament of so great a thing for judgement to himselfe, because that being uncleane hee did presume to come unto the Sacraments of Christ.

Hence it is that we finde so often in him, and in other of the Fathers, that the bodie and bloud of Christ is communicated only unto those that shall live, and not unto those that shall dye for ever. zzHic est panis vitae. Qui ergò vitam manducat, mori non potest. Quomodo enim morietur, cui cibus vita est? Quomodo deficiet, qui habuerit vitalem substantiam? Ambr. in Psal. 118. octonar. 18.Ps 118He is the bread of life. He therefore that eateth life, cannot dye. For how should he dye, whose meat is life? how should he fayle, who hath a vitall substance? saith S. Ambrose. And it is a good note of Macarius: that, as men use to give one kinde of meate to their servants, and another to their children; so Christ who aaforeign. Macar. Aegypt. homil. 14.created all things, nourisheth p. 54indeed evill and ungratefull persons: but the sonnes which he begat of his owne seed, and whom he made partakers of his grace, in whom the Lord is formed, he nourisheth with a peculiar refection and food, and meat and drinke, beyond other men; giving himselfe unto them, that have their conversation with his Father. as the Lord himselfe saith: He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloud, remayneth in me, and I in him, and shall not see death. Among the sentences collected by Prosper out of S. Augustine, this also is one. bbEscam vitae accipit, & aeternitatis poculum bibit, qui in Christo manet, & cujus Christus habita…or est. Nam qui discordat à Christo, nec carnem ejus manducat, nec sanguinem bibit: etiamsi tantae reisacramentum ad judicium suae praesumptionis quotidie indifferenter accipiat. Prosp. senten…. 339.He receiveth the meat of life, and drinketh the cup of eternitie, who remaineth in Christ, and whose inhabiter is Christ. For he that is at discord with Christ, doth neither eate his flesh nor drinke his bloud: although, to the judgement of his presumption, he indifferently doth receive everie day the sacrament of so great a thing. Which distinction betweene the Sacrament and the thing whereof it is a sacrament, (and consequently betweene the sacramentall and the reall eating of the bodie of Christ,) is thus briefely and most excellently expressed by S. Augustine himselfe, in his exposition upon the sixt of Iohn. ccHujus rei sacramentum de mensâ Dominicâ sumitur; quibusdam ad vitam, quibusdam ad exitiū. Res veró ipsa, cujus sacramē tum est, omni homini ad vitam, nulli ad exitium, quicunque ejus particeps fuerit August. in Iohan. tractat. 26.The sacrament of this thing, is taken from the Lords Table; by some unto life, by some unto destruction: but the thing it selfe whereof it is a sacrament, is received by every man unto life, and by none unto destruction, that is made partaker therof. Our conclusion therfore is this:

The bodie and bloud of Christ, is received by all unto life, and by none unto condemnation.

But that substance which is outwardly delivered in the Sacrament, is not received by all unto life, but by manie unto condemnation.

Therefore that substance which is outwardly delivered in the Sacrament, is not really the bodie and bloud of Christ.

p. 55The first proposition is plainly proved by the Texts which have been alledged out of the sixth of Iohn. The second is manifest, both by common experience, and by the testimonie of the Apostle, 1. Cor. 11. vers. 17, 27, 29. We may therefore well conclude, that the sixth of Iohn is so farre from giving anie furtherance to the doctrine of the Romanists in this point, that it utterly overthroweth their fond opinion, who imagine the bodie and bloud of Christ to be in such a sort present under the visible formes of bread and wine, that whosoever receiveth the one, must of force also really be made partaker of the other.

The like are we now to shew in the words of the Institution. For the better clearing whereof, the Reader may be pleased to consider, first, that the words are not; This shall be my body: nor, This is made, or, shall be changed into my body: but, This Is my body. Secondly, that the word THIS, can have relation to no other substance, but that which was then present, when our Saviour spake that word; which (as wee shall make it plainly appeare) was Bread. Thirdly, that it being proved that the word This, doth demonstrate the Bread; it must of necessitie follow, that Christ affirming that to be his BODY, cannot be conceived to have meant it so to be properly, but relatively and sacramentally.

The first of these, is by both sides yeelded unto: so likewise is the third. For this is impossible, saith the Glosse ddHoc tamen est impossibile, quòd panis sit corpus Christi. De consecrat. dist. 2. cap 55. Panis est in altari. Gloss.upon Gratian, that bread should be the bodie of Christ. And it cannot be, saith Cardinall eeNon igitur potest fieri, ut vera sit propositio, in quâ sub…ectum supponit pro pane, praedicatum autem pro corpore Christi. Panis enim & corpus Domini res diversissimae sunt. Bellarmin. de Eucharist. lib. 3. cap. 19.Bellarmine, that that proposition should be true, the former part whereof designeth Bread, the latter the Body of Christ: for asmuch p. 56as Bread and the Lords Body be things most adverse. And therefore hee confidently affirmeth, ffIbidē scripsi… Lut…erus, verba Evangelistae, Hoc est corpus meum, hunc facere sensum, H… panis est corpus meum: quae sententia aut accipi debet tropicé, ut panis sit corpus Christi significativé; aut est plané absurda & impossibilis. nec enim fieri potest ut panis sit corpus Christi. Id. lib. 1. de Eucharist. cap 1.that if the words, This is my body, did make this sense, This bread is my body: this sentence must either be taken tropically, that bread may be the body of Christ significatively; or else it is plainly absurd & impossible for it cannot be, saith he, that bread should be the body of Christ. Doctor ggMatth. Kellison, Survey of the new Religion, lib. 8. chap. 7. sect 7.Kellison also in like maner doeth freely acknowledge, that If Christ had said, This bread is my body; wee must have understood him figuratively and metaphorically. So that the whole matter of difference resteth now upon the second point: whether our Saviour, when hee said This is my body, meant anie thing to be his Bodie, but that Bread which was before him. A matter which easily might be determined, in anie indifferent mans judgement, by the words immedia…ly going before. Hee tooke bread, and gave thankes, and brake, and gave it unto them, saying: This is my bodie which is given for you; this do in remembrance of mee. (Luk. 22.19.) For what did hee demonstrate here, and said was his Body, but that which he gave unto his Disciples? What did hee give unto them, but what he brake? What brake hee, but what he tooke? and doth not the Text expressely say, that he tooke bread? Was it not therefore of the Bread, he said; This is my Body? And could Bread possibly bee otherwise understood to have beene his Bodie, but as a Sacrament, and (as hee himselfe with the same breath declared his owne meaning) a memoriall thereof?

If these words be not of themselves cleare enough, but have need of further exposition: can we looke for a better, then that which S. Paul giveth of them, 1. Cor. 10.16. The bread which we breake, is it not the communion p. 57of the bodie of Christ? Did not S. Paul therefore so understand Christ, as if he had said; This bread is my body? And if Christ had said so; doth not Kellison confesse, and right reason evince, that hee must have beene understood figuratively? considering that it is simply impossible, that Bread should really be the Bodie of Christ. If it be said, that S. Paul by Bread, doth not here understand that which is properly Bread, but that which lately was bread (but now is become the bodie of Christ:) we must remember, that S. Paul doth not onelyonly say The bread, but The bread which vvee breake. which breaking, being an accident properly belonging to the bread it selfe, and not to the bodie of Christ (which being in glorie, cannot be subject to anie more breaking) doth evidently shew, that the Apostle by Bread understandeth Bread indeed. Neither can the Romanists well denie this, unlesse they wil denie themselves, and confesse that they did but dreame all this while they have imagined that the change of the bread into the bodie of Christ, is made by vertue of the sacramentall words alone, which have not their effect untill they have all beene fully uttered. For the Pronoune THIS, which is the first of these words, doth point to somthing w^ch was then present. But no substance was then present but bread: seeing by their owne grounds, the bodie of Christ commeth not in, untill the last word of that sentence, yea and the last syllable of that word, be completely pronounced. What other substance therefore can they make this to signifie, but this bread only?

In the institution of the other part of the Sacrament, the words are yet more plaine, Matth. 26. vers. 27.28. He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, p. 58Drinke yee all of it. For this is my blood of the new Testament: or, (as S. Paul and S. Luke relate it) This cup is the new Testament in my blood. That which hee bidd them all drinke of, is that which hee said was his blood. But our Saviour could meane nothing but the Wine, when he said, Drinke ye all of it: because this sentence was uttered by him before the words of consecration, at which time our Adversaries themselves doe confesse, that there was nothing in the cup but wine, or wine and water at the most. It was wine therefore which he said was his blood: even the fruite of the Vine, as he himselfe termeth it. For as in the deliverie of the other cup before the institution of the Sacrament, S. Luke (who alone maketh mention of that part of the historie) telleth us, that hee said unto his Disciples; hhLuk. 22.18.Luke 22:18I will not drinke of the fruit of the Vine, untill the kingdome of God shall come: so doth S Matthew and S. Marke likewise testifie, that at the deliverie of the Sacramentall cup, when he had said, This is my blood of the new Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes; hee also added: iiMatth. 26.29. Mark. 14.25.Matt 26:29Mark 14:25But I say unto you, I will not drinke henceforth of this fruit of the Vine, untill that day that I drinke it new with you in my Fathers kingdome. Now seeing it is contrary both to sense and saith, that Wine or the fruite of the Vine, should really be the blood of Christ; there being that formall difference in the nature of the things, that there is an utter impossibilitie that in true proprietie of speech the one should be the other: nothing in this world is more plain, than when our Saviour said it was his blood, he could not meane it to be so substantially, but sacramentally.

And what other interpretation can the Romanists themselves give of those words of the institution in S. p. 59Paul? kkforeign. 1 Cor. 11.25.1 Cor 11:25This cup is the new Testament in my blood. How is the cup, or the thing contayned in the cup, the new Testament, otherwise then as a Sacrament of it? Marke how in the like case the Lord himselfe, at the institution of the first Sacrament of the old Testament, useth the same maner of speech, Genes. 17.10. llforeign. Gen. 17.10.Gen 17:10This is my Covenant, or Testament (for the Greeke word in both places is the same:) and in the words presently following, thus expoundeth his owne meaning. mmforeign (vel, foreign. Gen. 17.11Gen 17:11It shall be a SIGNE of the Covenant betwixt me and you. And generally for all Sacraments, the rule is thus laid downe by S. Augustine, in his Epistle to Bonifacius: nnSi enim Sacramēta quandam similitudinem earum rerum quarum sacramenta sunt non haberent, omninò Sacramēta non essent Ex hâc autem similitudine plerum que etiam ipsarum rerum nomina accipiunt. Sicut ergo secundùm quendam modum sacramentum corporis Christi corpus Christi est, sacramentū sanguinis Christi sanguis Christi est; ita-sacramentū fidei fides est. Aug. epist. 23.If Sacraments did not some maner of vvay resemble the things wherof they are Sacraments, they should not be Sacraments at all. And for this resemblance they doe of oftentimes also beare the names of the things themselves. As therefore the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ, is after a certaine maner the bodie of Christ, and the sacrament of Christs blood is the blood of Christ; so likewise the sacrament of faith, is faith. By the sacrament of faith hee understandeth Baptisme; of which he afterward alledgeth that saying of the Apostle, Rom. 6.4. Wee are buried with Christ by baptisme into death: and then addeth. ooNon ait, Sepulturā significamus: sed prorsus ait, Consepulti sumus. Sacramentū ergo tantae rei non nisi ejusdē rei vocabulo nuncupavit. Id ibid.He saith not, We signifie his buriall; but hee plainly saith, Wee are buried. Therefore the sacrament of so great a thing hee would not otherwise call but by the name of the thing it selfe. And in his Questions upon Leviticus: ppSolet autē res quae significat, ejus rei nomine quā significat nuncupari. sicut scriptum est: Septē spicae, septē anni sunt▪ (non enim dixit; Septem annos significant) &, septem bo…es, septem anni sunt: & multa hujusmodi. Hinc est quod dictū est: Petra erat Christus Non enim dixit, Petra significat Christū; sed tāquā hoc esset, quod utique per substantiā non hoc erat, sed per significationē. Sic & sanguis, quoniā propter vitalē quandā corpulentiā animā significat, in sacramentis anima dictus est Aug. in Levit. quaest 57.The thing that signifieth p. 60(saith he) useth to be called by the name of that thing which it signifieth. as it is written: The seven eares of corne, are seven yeares; (for hee said not; they signifie seven yeares:) and the seven Kine are seven yeares: and many such like. Hence was that saying: The Rocke was Christ. For he said not, The Rock did signifie Christ; but as if it had beene that very thing, which doubtlesse by substance it was not, but by signification. So also the blood, because for a certaine vitall corpulencie which it hath, it signifieth the soule; after the maner of Sacraments it is called the soule. Our argument therefore out of the words of the institution, standeth thus:

If it be true, that Christ called Bread his bodie, and Wine his blood: then must it be true also, that the things which bee honoured with those names, cannot be really his bodie & blood, but figuratively and sacramentally.

But the former is true. Therefore also the latter.

The first proposition hath bene proved by the undoubted principles of right reason, and the cleare confession of the adverse part: the second, by the circumstances of the Text of the Evangelists, by the exposition of S. Paul, and by the received grounds of the Romanists themselves. The conclusion therefore resteth firme: and so wee have made it cleare, that the wordes of the Institution do not only not uphold, but directly also overthow the whole frame of that which the Church of Rome teacheth, touching the corporall presence of Christ under the formes of Bread and Wine.

If I should now lay downe here all the sentences of the Fathers, which teach that that which Christ called his Body, is Bread in substance, and the Body of the p. 61Lord in signification and sacramentall relation: I should never make an end. Iustin Martyr, in his second Apologie to Antoninus the Emperour, telleth us, that the bread and the wine, even that qqforeign. Iustin. Apolog. 2.sanctified food wherewith our blood and flesh by conversion are nourished, is that w^ch we are taught to be the flesh and blood of Iesus incarnate. Irenaeus in his 4^th book against heresies, saith, that our Lord rrQuomodo autem justé Dominus, si alterius patris existit, hujus conditionis, quae est secundùm nos, accipiens panem, suum corpus esse confitebatur; & temperamentum calicis suum sanguinem confirmavit. hen. lib. 4 cap 57.taking bread of that condition which is usuall among us, confessed it to be his body: & ssCalicem, qui est ex eâ creaturâ quae est secundùm nos, suum sanguinē confessus est. Id lib. 4. cap. 32.the cup likewise contayning that creature which is usuall among us, his blood. And in his fift book he addeth: ttEum calicem qui est creatura, suum sanguinem qui effusus est, ex quo auget nostrùm sanguinem; & eum panem qui est á creaturâ, suum corpus confirmavit, ex quo nostra auget corpora. Quando ergo & mixtus calix & fractus panis percipit verbum Dei, fit Eucharistia sanguinis & corporis Christi, ex quibus augetur & consistit carnis nostrae substantia. Id. lib. 5. cap 2. edit. Colon an. 1596.That cup which is a creature, he confirmed to be his blood which was shedde, wherby he increaseth our blood; and that bread which is of the creature, to be his body, wherby he increaseth our bodies. Therefore when the mixed cup and the broken bread doth receive the word of God, it is made the Eucharist of the blood and body of Christ, whereby the substance of our flesh is increased and doth consist. Our Lord, saith Clemens Alexandrinus, uuforeign. Clem. Alexand. Paedagog. lib. 2. cap. 2.did blesse vvine, vvhen hee said; Take, drinke, This is my blood, the blood of the Vine. Tertullian: xxAcceptum panem & distributum discipulis, corpus suum illum fecit, Hoc est corpus meum dicendo, id est, figura corporis mei. Tertull. advers. Marci…n. lib. 4. cap 40.Christ taking bread and distributing it to his Disciples, made it his body, saying, This is my body, that is, the figure of my body. Origen: yyIlle cibus qui sanctificatur per verbum Dei, perque obsecrationem, juxta id quod habet materiale, in ventrem abit, & in secessum ejicitur: caeterùm juxta precationem quae illi accessit proportione fidei fit utilis, efficiens ut perspicax fiat animus, spectans ad id quod utile est. Nec materia panis, sed super illum dictus sermo est, qui prodest non indigné Domino comedenti illum. Et haec quidem de typico symbolicóque corpore. Origen. in Matth. cap. 15.Matt 15That meate which is sanctified by p. 62the word of God and by prayer, as touching the materiall part thereof goeth into the belly, and is voyded into the draught: but as touching the prayer which is added, according to the portion of faith it is made profitable; enlightning the minde, and making it to behold that which is profitable. Neyther is it the matter of bread, but the word spoken over it, which profiteth him that doth not unworthily eate thereof. And these things I speake of the typicall and symbolicall bodie; saith Origen. In the Dialogues against the Marcionites, collected for the most part out of the writings of Maximus (who lived in the time of the Emperors Commodus and Severus) Origen, who is made the chiefe speaker therein, is brought in thus disputing against the Heretickes: zzforeign; Orig. Dial. 3.If Christ, as these men say, were without bodie and blood: of what kinde of flesh, or of what body, or of what kinde of blood did hee give the bread and the cup to be Images of, when he commanded his Disciples by them to make a commemoration of him? S. Cyprian also noteth,aaQuâ in parte invenimus calicem mixtū suisse quem Dominus obtulit, & vinum suisse, quod sanguinem sun̄ dixit. Cypr. epist. …. sect. 6, that it was Wine, even the fruit of the Vine, which the Lord said was his blood: and that bbNec corpus Domini potest esse fa…ina sola, aut aqua sola; nisi utrumque adunatum fuerit & copulatū, & panis unius compage solidatum. Id. ibid. sect. 10.floure alone, or water alone, cannot bee the bodie of our Lord, unlesse both be united and coupled together, and kneaded into the lumpe of one bread. And againe; that ccNam quando Dominus corpus suum panem vocat de multorum granorum adunatione congestum; populum nostrum, quem portabat, indicat adunatū: & quando sanguinem suum vinum appellat, de botris atque acinis plurimis expressum atque in unum coactum, gregem item nostrū significat, cōmixtione adunatae multitudinis copulatum. Id. epist. 76. sect. 4.the Lord calleth bread his body, which is made up by the uniting of many cornes: and wine his blood, which is pressed out of many clusters of grapes, and gathered into one liquor. Which I finde also word for word in a maner, transcribed in the Commentaries upon the Gospels, attributed unto ddTheoph. Antioch. in Evang. lib. 1. pag. 152. tom. 2 Bibliothec. Patr. edit. Colon.Theophilus Bishop of Antioch. Wherby p. 63it appeareth, that in those elder times the words of the institution were no otherwise conceived, then as if Christ had plainly said; This bread is my body, and, This wine is my blood: which is the maine thing that wee strive for with our Adversaries; and for which the words themselves are plaine enough. the substance whereof we finde thus laid downe in the Harmonie of the Gospels, gathered, as some say, by Tatianus, as others, by Ammonius, within the second or the third age after Christ. eeMox acceptopane, deinde vini calice, corpus esse suum ac sanguinem testatus, manducare illos jussit & bibere; quòd ea sit futurae calamitatis suae mortisque memoria. Ammon. harmon. Evang. tom. 3. Biblioth. Patr. pag. 28.Having taken the bread, then afterward the cup of wine, and testified it to be his body and blood, hee commanded them to eate and drinke thereof; forasmuch as it was the memoriall of his future passion and death.

To the Fathers of the first three hundred yeares, we will now adjoyne the testimonies of those that flourished in the ages following. The first whereof shall be Eusebius: who saith that our Saviour ffforeign. Euseb. lib. 8. Demonstrat. Evangel. in fine cap. 1.delivered to his Disciples the symboles of his divine dispensation, commanding them to make the Image of his owne body; and ggforeign. Id. ibid.appointing them to use Bread for the symbole of his Body. and that we still hhforeign. Id. l…b. 1. Demonstr. cap. ult.celebrate upon the Lords table, the memory of his sacrifice, by the symboles of his body and blood, according to the ordinances of the New Testament. Acacius, who succeeded him in his Bishopricke, saith that iiPanis vinumque ex hâc materiâ vescentes sanctificat. Acac. in Gen. 2. Graec. caten. in Pentate…ch Zephyro interp.Gen 2the bread and wine sanctifieth them that feed upon that matter: acknowledging thereby, that the materiall part of those outward elements do still remaine. In the Church, saith kkforeign. Macar. Aegypt. homil. 27.Macarius, is offered bread wine, the type of his flesh and blood: and they which are partakers of the visible p. 64bread, doe spiritually eate the flesh of the Lord. Christ, saith S. llIn typo sanguinis sui non obtulit aquam, sed vinum. Hieronym. lib. 2. advers. Iovinian.Hierome, did not offer water, but wine, for the type of his blood. S. Augustine bringeth in our Saviour thus speaking of this matter. mmNon hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis, & bibituri illum sanguinem, quem susu…i sunt qui me crucifigent. Sacramentum aliquod vobis commendavi: spiritualiter intellectum vivisicabit vos. Augustin. in Psalm. 98.Ps 98You shall not eate this bodie which you see, nor drinke that blood which they shall shed that will crucifie mee. I have commended a certaine Sacrament unto you: that being spiritually understood vvill quicken you. The same Father in another place writeth, that nnAdhibuit ad convivium, in quo corporis & sanguinis sui figuram discipulis commendavit & tradidit. Id. in Psal. 3.Ps 3Christ admitted Iudas to that banquet, wherein he commended and delivered unto his Disciples the figure of his body and blood: but (as he elsewhere ooIlli manducabant panem Dominum: ille panem Domini contra Dominum. Id. in Evang. Iohan. tract. 59.addeth) they did eate that bread which was the Lord himselfe; hee the bread of the Lord against the Lord. Lastly: the Lord (saith ppNon enim Dominus dubitavit dicere, Hoc est corpus meum; cùm signum daret corporis sui. August. contr. Adimant. cap. 12.he) did not doubt to say, This is my body; when he gave the signe of his body.

So the Author of the Homily upon the 22. Psalme, (among the workes of Chrysostome:) qqIstam mensam praeparavit servis & ancillis in conspectu corum, ut quotidie in similitudinem corporis & sanguinis Christi, panem & vinum secundùm ordinem Melchisedec, nobis ostenderet in sacramento In Psal 22 Chrysost. tom. 1Ps 22This table hee hath prepared for his servants and hand-maydes in their sight: that he might every day, for a similitude of the body and blood of Christ, shew unto us in a sacrament bread and wine after the order of Melchisedec. And S. Chrysostome himselfe, in his Epistle written to Caesarius, against the heresie of Apolinarius: rrSicut enim antequàm sanctificetur panis, panem nominamus: divinâ autem illum sanctificante gratiâ, mediante sacerdote, liberatus est quidem ab appellatione panis, dignus autem habitus est Dominici corporis appellatione, etiamsi natura panis in ipso permansit: & non duo corpora, sed unum Filii corpus praedicatur sic & hîc divinâ i…undante corporis naturâ (vel potiùs, divinâ naturâ in corpore insidente: Graecé enim foreign hîc legitur▪ in MS. Bibliothecae Florentinae exemplari, unde ist… …ranstulit Perus Martyr) unum filium, unam personam, …traque haec fecerunt. Chrysost. ad Caesarium monachum.As before the bread be sanctified, we call it bread; but when Gods grace hath sanctified it by p. 65the meanes of the Priest, it is delivered from the name of bread, and is reputed worthy the name of the Lords body, although the nature of the bread remain still in it; and it is not called two bodies, but one body of Gods sonne: so likewise here, the divine nature residing in the body of Christ, these two make one sonne, and one person. In the selfe same maner also doe Theodoret, Gelasius, and Ephraemius proceed against the Eutychian heretickes. Theodoret for his part, layeth downe these grounds. That our Saviour ssforeign. Theod. dialog. 1. foreign, fol. 8. edit. Rom. ann. 1547.in the deliverie of the mysteries called bread his body, and that which was mixt (in the cupp) his blood. That ttforeign. Ibid.hee changed the names; and gave to the body the name of the symbol or signe, and to the symbol the name of the body. That hee uuforeign. Ib.honoured the visible symboles with the name of his bodie and blood; not changing the nature, but adding grace to nature. And that xxforeign. Ib.this most holy food, is a symbol & type of those things whose names it beareth, to wit, of the body and blood of Christ. Gelasius writeth thus: yyCerta sacramenta quae sumimus corporis & sanguinis Christi, divina res est, propter quod, & per eadem divinae efficimur consortes naturae; & tamen esse non desinit substantia, vel natura panis & vini. Et certé imago & similitudo corporis & sanguinis Christi, in actione mysteriorum celebrantur. Satis ergo nobis evidenter ostenditur, hoc nobis in ipso Christo Domino sentiendum, quod in ejus imagine profitemur, celebramus, & sumus: ut sicut in hanc, scilicèt in divinam transeant, sancto spiritu perficiente substantiam, permanente tamen in suae proprietate naturae; sic illud ipsum mysterium principale, cujus nobis efficientiam virtutemque veraciter repraesentant, &c. Gelas. de duab. natur. in Christo, contra Eutychen.The sacraments which we receive, of the body and blood of Christ, are a divine thing, by meanes whereof wee are made partakers of the divine nature: and yet the substance or nature of bread and wine doth not cease to be. And indeed the image and the similitude of the bodie and blood of Christ are celebrated in the action of the mysteries. It appeareth therefore evidently enough unto us, that wee are to hold the same opinion of the Lord Christ himselfe, p. 66which we professe, celebrate, and are, in his Image. that as (those Sacraments) by the operation of the holy Spirit, passe into this, that is, into the divine substance, and yet remaine in the propriety of their owne nature: so that principall mysterie it selfe, whose force and vertue they truely represent, should be conceived to be. namely, to consist of two natures, divine and humane; the one not abolishing the truth of the other. Lastly, Ephraemius the Patriarch of Antioch, having spoken of the distinction of these two natures in Christ, and said, that zzforeign (Schottus the Iesuite translateth this, & sensibilis essentiae non cognoscitur: which is a strange interpretation, if you marke it) foreign. Ephraemius de sacris Antioch…ae legib. lib. 1. in Pho…ij Bibliothecâ, cod. 219.no man having understanding, could say, that there was the same nature of that which could be handled, and of that which could not be handled, of that which was visible, and of that which was invisible; addeth. And even thus, the body of Christ which is received by the faithfull, (the Sacrament he meaneth) doth neither depart from his sensible substance, and yet remayneth undivided from intelligible grace. and Baptisme, being wholly made spirituall, and remayning one, doth both retaine the propertie of his sensible substance, (of water, I meane) and yet looseth not that which it is made.

Thus have wee produced evidences of all sorts, for confirmation of the doctrine by us professed touching the blessed Sacrament: which cannot but give sufficient satisfaction to all that with anie indifferencie will take the matter into their consideration. But the men with whom wee have to deale, are so farre fallen out with the truth; that neither sense nor reason, neither authoritie of Scriptures or of Fathers, can perswade them to be friends againe with it: unlesse we shew unto them, in what Popes dayes the contrarie falshood was first devised. If nothing else will give them content: p. 67we must put them in minde, that about the time wherein Soter was Bishop of Rome, there lived a cousening companion, called Marcus; whose qualities are thus set out by an ancient Christian, aaVet. author, citatus ab Irenaeo, lib 1. cap. 12who was famous in those dayes, though now his name be unknowne unto us.

foreign,

foreign,

foreign,

foreign,

foreign.

foreign

foreign,

foreign.

Where first hee chargeth him to have beene an Idolmake… ; then hee objecteth unto him his skill in Astrologie and Magicke, by meanes whereof, and by the assistance of Satan, hee laboured with a shewe of miracles, to winne credite unto his false doctrines, amongst his seduced disciples: and lastly hee concludeth that his father the Divel had imployed him as a forerunner of his antithean craft, or his antichristian deceiveablenesse of unrighteousnesse, if you will have it in the Apostles language. For he was indeed the Divels forerunner, both for the bbApoc. 9.20, 21.Rev 9:20Rev 9:21idolatries and sorceries which afterward were brought into the East, and for those ccApoc. 18.3, 23.Rev 18:3Rev 18:23Romish fornications and inchantments wherewith the whole West was corrupted, by that man of sinne, dd2. Thess. 2.9.2 Thess 2:9whose comming was foretold to be after the working of Satan, with all power and signes, and lying wonders. And that we may keep our selves within the compasse p. 68of that particular, which now wee have in hand: wee finde in Irenaeus, that this Arch-heretick made speciall use of his juggling feates, to breed a perswasion in the mindes of those whom hee had perverted; that in the cup of his pretended Eucharist, he really delivered them blood to drinke. For eeforeign. Irenaeus, lib. 1. cap. 9.fayning himselfe to consecrate the cups filled with wine, and extending the words of Invocation to a great length, he made them to appeare of a purple and redd colour: to the end it might be thought, that the Grace which is above all things, did distill the blood thereof into that cup by his Invo…ation. And even according to this precedent we finde it fell our afterwards, that the principall and most powerfull meanes whereby the like grosse conceit (of the gutturall …ating and drinking of the bodie and blood of Christ) was at the first fastened upon the multitude, and in processe of time more deeply rooted in them, were such delusions and fained apparitions as these: which yet that great Schooleman himselfe, Alexander of Hales, confesseth to happen sometimes, either by ffHumanâ procuratione, vel fortè diabolicâ operatione. Alex. Halens. Summ. Theolog. part. 4. quaest. 11. memb. 2. artic. 4. sect. 3.…he procurement of man, or by the operation of the divell. Paschasius Radbertus, who was one of the first letters forward of this doctrine in the West, spendeth a large chapter upon this point: wherein he telleth us, ggNemo, qui Sanctorum vitas & exempla legerit, potest ignorare, quòd saepè haec mystica corporis & sanguinis sacramenta, aut propter dubios, aut certé propter ardentiùs amantes Christum, visibili spécie in agni formâ, aut in carnis & sanguinis colore monstrata sint: quatenùs de se Christus clementer adhuc non credentibus fidem faceret: ita u… dum oblata frangitur, vel offertur hostia, videretur agnus in manibus & crnor in calice, quasi ex immolatione profluere. ut quod latebat in mysterio, patesceret adhuc dubitantibus in miraculo. Paschas. de corp. & sangu. Dom. cap. 14.that Christ in the sacrament did shew himselfe oftentimes in a visible shape, eyther in the forme of a Lamb, or in the colour of flesh and blood, so that while the hoste was a breaking or an offering, a Lamb in the Priests hands, and blood in the Chalice should be seene as it p. 69were flowing from the sacrifice, that what lay hid in a mysterie, might to them that yet doubted be made manifest in a miracle. And specially in that place hee insisteth upon a narration, which he found in gestis Anglorum, (but deserved well to have been put into gesta Romanorum for the goodnesse of it) of one Ple…gils or Plegilus a Priest; how an Angell shewed Christ unto him in the forme of a childe upon the Altar, whom first hee tooke into his armes and kissed, but eate him up afterwards, when he was returned to his former shape again. Whereof arose that jeast which Berengarius was wont to use: hhSpeciosa certé pax nebulonis; ut cui o…is praebuerat basium, dentiū inferret exitiū. Guilielm. Malmesbur. de gestis Reg. Anglor. lib. 3.This was a proper peace of the knave indeed, that whom hee had kissed with his mouth, hee would devoure with his teeth.

But there are three other tales of singular note; which though they may justly strive for winning of the Whetstone with anie other, yet for their antiquitie have gained credite above the rest: being devised, as it seemeth, much about the same time with that other of Plegilus, but having relation unto higher times. The first was had out of the English Legends too, as iiIo Diac. vit. Greg. lib. 2. cap. 41.Iohannes Diaconus reporteth it in the life of Gregory the first: of a Romane Matron, who found a piece of the sacramentall bread turned into the fashion of a finger, all bloodie, which afterwards, upon the prayers of S. Gregory, was converted to his former shape againe. The other two were first coyned by the Grecian lyars, and from them conveyed unto the Latines, and registred in the booke which they called Vitas patrum: which being commonly beleeved to have beene collected by S. kkSanctus Hieronymus presbyter, ipsas Sanctorum Patrum Vitas Latino edidit sermone. Paschas. Radbert. in epist. ad Frudegard. Consule libros Carolinos, de Imaginib. lib. 4. cap. 11.Hierome, and accustomed to be read ordinarily in everie Monasterie; gave occasion of further spred, and made much way for the progresse of this mysterie of p. 70iniquitie. The former of these is not onelyonly related there, llInter sententias Patrum, áe P…agio Roman…e ecclesiae d…acono Latiné versas, libell. …8. cui …i…lus de Providentiâ vel Proevidentiâ: sive, ut in P…o…ij …iblio…hecâ habetur, …od. 98. foreign.but also in the Legend of Simeon Metaphrastes, (which is such another author among the Grecians, as Iacobus de Voragine was among the Latines) in the mmTom. 4. Surij, pag 257. edit. Colon an. 1573.life of Arsenius: how that a little childe was seene upon the Altar, and an Angell cutting him into small piec…s with a knife, and receiving his blood into the Chalice, as long as the Priest was breaking the bread into little parts. The latter, is of a certaine Iew, receiving the Sacrament at S. Basils hands, converted visibly into true flesh and blood: which is expressed by Cyrus Theodorus Prodromus, in this Tetrastich.

foreign

foreign.

foreign,

foreign.

But the chiefe author of the fable was a cheating fellow, who, nnNomen Amphilochii ad mentiendum accepit. Baron. tom 4. an. 369. sect. 43.that hee might lye with authoritie, tooke upon him the name of Amphilochius, S. Basils companion, and set out a booke of his life ooScatens mē daciis, Id. ibid. an. 363. sect. 55.fraught with leasings: as Cardinall Baronius himselfe acknowledgeth. S. Augustines conclusion therefore may here well take place. ppRemovean…ur ista vel figmenta mendacium hominū, vel portenta fallacium spirituū. Aut enim non sunt vera quae dicuntur, aut si haereticorum aliqua mira facta sunt, magis cavere debemus: quòd cùm dixisset Dominus quosdā futuros esse fallaces, qui nonnulla signa faciendo etiam electos si fieri posset fallerent; adjecit vehementer commendans, & ait, Ecce praedixi vobis. August. de unitat. Eccles. cap. 16.Sir 16Let these things be taken away, which are eyther fictions of lying men, or wonders wrought by evill spirits. For eyther there is no truth in these reports, or if there be any strange things done by hereticks, we ought the more to beware of them: because, when the Lord had said, that certaine deceivers should come, who by doing of some wonders should seduce (if it were possible) the very elect, he verie p. 71earnestly commended this unto our consideration, and said; Behold, I have told you before. yea and added a further charge also, that if these impostors should say unto us of him, qqMatt. 24.26.Matt 24:26Behold he is in secret closets, wee should not beleeve it: which whether it be appliable to them who tell us, that Christ is to be found in a Pixe, and thinke that they have him in safe custodie under Locke and Key; I leave to the consideration of others.

The thing which now I would have further observed, is onelyonly this; that, as that wretched heretick who first went about to perswade m…n by his lying wonders, that he really delivered wine unto them in the cup of the Eucharist, was censured for being foreign, an Idol-maker· so in after ages, from the Idol-makers and Image-worshippers of the East it was, that this grosse opinion of the orall eating and drinking of Christ in the Sacrament, drew it first breath; rrRom. 1.27, 28.Rom 1:27Rom 1:28God having for their idolatrie, justly given them up unto a reprobate minde, that they might receive that recompence of their errour which was meete. The Popes name in whose dayes this fell out, was Gregory the second: the mans name who was the principall setter of it abroach, was ssDamascen. Orthodox. sid. lib. 4. cap. 14.Iohn Damascen; one that laid the foundation of Schoole-divinitie among the Greeks, as Peter Lombard afterwards did among the Latins. On the contrarie side, they who opposed the Idolatrie of those times, and more especially the CCCXXXVIII. Bishops assembled together at the Councell of Constantinople, in the yeare 754. maintayned, that Christ ttforeign.chose no other shape or type under heaven to represent his incarnation by, but the Sacrament; which uuforeign.he delivered to his ministers for a type and a most effectuall commemoration therof; xxforeign.commanding the substance of bread to be offered, which did p. 72not any way resemble the forme of a man, that so no occasion might be given of bringing in Idolatry. which bread they affirmed to be the bodie of Christ, not foreign but foreign, that is, (as they themselves expound it) yyforeign.a holy and zzforeign &c. So a little after it is called foreign, and foreign.a true image of his naturall flesh.

These assertions of theirs are to bee found in the aaConcil. gener. tom. 3. pag. 599.600. edit Rom.third Tome of the sixth Action of the second Councell of Nice, assembled not long after for the reestablishing of Images in the Church. where a pratchant deacon, called Epiphanius, to crosse that which those former Bishops had delivered, confidently avoucheth that none of the Apostles, nor of the Fathers, did ever call the Sacrament an image of the bodie of Christ. Hee confesseth indeed that some of the Fathers (as Eustathius expounding the Proverbs of Salomon, and S. Basil in his Liturgie) doe call the bread and wine foreign, correspondent types or figures, before they were consecrated: bbforeign. Ib. pag. 601.but after the consecration (saith hee) they are called, and are, and beleeved to be the body and blood of Christ properly. where the Popes owne followers, who of late published the Acts of the generall Councells at Rome, were so farre ashamed of the ignorance of this blind Bayard; that they correct his boldnesse with this marginall note. ccforeign. Ibid. in margine.The holy gifts are oftentimes found to be called antitypes, or figures correspondent, after they be consecrated: as by Gregory Nazianz. in the funerall Oration upon his sister, and in his Apologie; by Cyrill of Ierusalem in his fifth Cateches. Mystagogic. and by others. And wee have alreadie heard, how the author of the Dialogues against the Marcionites, and after him Eusebius and Gelasius, expressely call the Sacrament an image of Christs bodie: howsoever this peremptorie Clerke denieth, that ever anie did so. By all which it may easily p. 73appeare, that, not the oppugners, but the defenders of Images, were the men who first went about herein to alter the language used by their fore-fathers.

Now as in the daies of Gregory the third this matter was set afoot by Damascen in the East: so about a hundred yeares after, in the Papacie of Gregory the fourth, the same began to be propounded in the West, by meanes of one Amalarius, who was Bishop, not (as hee is commonly taken to be) of Triers, but of Mets first, and afterwards of Lyons. This man writing doubtfully of this point; otherwhiles followeth the doctrine of S. Augustine, ddAmalar. de Ecclesiastic. offic, lib. 1. cap. 24.that Sacraments were oftentimes called by the names of the things themselves, and so the Sacrament of Christs bodie was secundùm quendam modum, after a certaine maner the bodie of Christ: otherwhiles maketh it a part of his eeHic credimus naturam simplicem panis & vini mixti, verti in naturam rationabilem, scilicèt corporis & sanguinis Christi. Id. li. 3. cap. 24.beleefe, that the simple nature of the bread and wine mixed, is turned into a reasonable nature, to wit, of the body and blood of Christ. But what should become of this bodie, after the eating therof, was a matter that went beyond his little witt: and therefore, said he, ffIta veró sumptum corpus Domini bonâ intentione, non est mihi disputandū utrùm invisibiliter assumatur in coelum, aut reservetur in corpore nostro usque in diem sepulturae, aut exhaletur in auras, aut exeat de corpore cū sanguine, aut per os emittatur; dicente Domino, Omne quod intrat in os in ventrem vadit & in secessum emittitur. Idem, in epistolâ ad Guitardum, MS. in Biblioth. Colleg. S. Benedict. Cantabrig. cod. 55.when the bodie of Christ is taken with a good intention, it is not for me to dispute, whether it be invisibly taken up into heaven, or kept in our body untill the day of our buriall, or exhaled into the ayre, or whether it go out of the body with the blood, (at the opening of a veyne) or be sent out by the mouth; our Lord saying, that every thing which entreth into the mouth goeth into the belly, and is sent forth into the draught. For this, and another like foolerie de ggId. de Ecclesiastic. offic. lib. 3. cap. 35.triformi & tripartito corpore Christi, of the three parts or kindes of Christs body (which p. 74seeme to be those ineptiae de tripartito Christi corpore, that Paschasius in the end of his Epistle intreateth Frudegardus not to follow:) he was censured in a hhFlorus in Actis Synod. Carisiac. MS. apud N. Ranchinum, in Senatu Tolosan… Regium Consiliarium. Vid. Phil. Morn. de Miss. lib. 4. cap. 8.Synod held at Carisiacum: wherein it was declared by the Bishops of France, that iiPanis & vinū efficitur spiritualiter corpus Christi. &c. Mentis ergo est cibus iste, non ventris: nec corrumpitur, sed permanet, in vitam aeternam. Ibid.the bread and wine are spiritually made the body of Christ; which being a meat of the mind, and not of the belly, is not corrupted, but remayneth unto everlasting life.

These dotages of Amalarius, did not only give occasion to that question propounded by Heribaldus to Rabanus, wherof we have spoken kkSupr. pag. 16.heretofore; but also to that other of far greater consequence: Whether that which was externally delivered & received in the sacrament, were the verie same body which was borne of the Virgin Mary, & suffered upon the Cr…sse, & rose again from the Grave. Paschasius Radbertus (a Deacon of those times, but somewhat of a better and more modest temper then the Greek Deacon shewed himselfe to be of) held that it was the ve…ie same; and to that purpose wrote his book to Placidus, of the Body & Blood of our Lord: wherein (saith a Iesuite) llGenuinū Ecclesiae Catholicae sensum ita primus explicuit, ut viam caeteris aperuerit, qui de eodē argumento multi postea scripsere. Iac. Sirmond. in vitâ Radberti.he was the first that did so explicate the true sense of the Càtholick Church, (his owne Romane he meaneth) that he opened the way to those manie others, who wrote afterwards of the same argument. Rabanus on the other side, in a writing directed to Abbot Egilo, maintayned the contrarie doctrine: as hath before beene noted. Then one Frudegardus, reading the third book of S. Augustin de doctrinâ Christianâ, and finding there, that the eating of the flesh and drinking of the blood of Christ was a figurative maner of speech, began somewhat to doubt of the truth of that which formerly he had read in that foresaid Treatise of Paschasius: which moved Paschasius to p. 75write againe of the same argument, as of a question wherein he confesseth mmQuaeris enim de re ex quâ multi dubitant and againe. Quamvis multi ex hoc dubitent, quomodo ille integer manet, & hoc corpus Christi & sanguis …sse possit. Paschas. epist. ad Frudegard.many were then doubtfull. But neither by his first nor by his second writing was hee able to take these doubts out of mens mindes: and therefore Carolus Calvus the Emperour, being desirous to compose these differences, and to have unitie setled among his subjects, required Ratrannus (a learned man of that time, who lived in the Monasterie of Corbey, whereof Paschasius was Abbat) to deliver his judgement touching these points. nnQuod in Ecclesiâ ore fidelium sumitur corpus & sanguis Christi, quaerit vestrae magnitudinis excellentia, in mysterio fiat, an in veritate, &c. & utrùm ipsum corpus sit, quod de Mariâ natum est, & passum, mortuum & sepultum, quodque resurgens & coelos ascendens, ad dextram Patris consideat? Ratrann. sive Bertram. in lib. de corp. & sangu. Dom. edit. Colon. ann. 1551. pag. 180.Whether the body and blood of Christ which in the Church is received by the mouth of the faithfull, be celebrated in a mysterie or in the truth; and whether it be the same body, which was born of Mary, which did suffer, was dead and buried, & which rising againe and ascending into heaven sitteth at the right hand of the Father? Whereunto he returneth this answer: that ooPanis ille vinumque, figuraté Christi corpus & sanguis existit. Ibid. pag. 183.the bread and the wine are the body and blood of Christ figuratively; that ppNam secundùm creaturarum substantiam quod fuerunt ante consecrationem, hoc & posteà consistunt. Ib. pag. 105.for the substance of the creatures, that which they were before consecration, the same are they also afterward; that qqDominicum corpus & sanguis Dominicus appellantur; quoniam ejus sumunt appellationem, cujus existunt sacramentum. Ibid. pag. 200.they are called the Lords bodie and the Lords blood, because they take the name of that thing, of which they are a sacrament; & that rrVidemus itaque multâ differentiâ separari mysterium sanguinis & corporis Christi, quod nunc á fide…ibus sumitur in Ecclesiâ, & illud quod natū est de Mariâ virgine, quod passum, quod sepultum, quod resurrexit, quod coelos ascendit, quod ad dextram Patris sedet. Ibid. pag. 222.there is a great difference betwixt the mysterie of the blood and body of Christ, which is taken now by the faithfull in the Church, and that which was borne of the Virgin Mary, which suffered, which was buried, which rose again, which sitteth at the right hand of the Father. All which hee p. 76proveth at large, both ssAnimadvertat (clarissime Princeps) sapientia vestra, quòd positis sanctarū Scripturarum testimoniis, & sanctorum Patrū dictis evidentissimé monstratum est; quòd panis qui corpus Christi, & calix qui sanguis Christi appellatur, figura sit, quia mysterium: & quòd non parva differentia sit inter corpus quod per mysterium existit, & corpus quod passum est, & sepultum, & resurrexit. Ibid. pag. 228.by testimonies of the holy Scriptures, and by the sayings of the ancient Fathers. Wherupon Turrian the Iesuite is driven for pure need, to shift off the matter with this silly interrogation. ttCaeterùm, Bertramum ci…are, quid aliud est, quàm dicere, haeresim Calvini non esse novam? Fr. Turrian. de Eucharist. contra Volanum, lib. 1. cap. 22.To cite Bertram (so Ratrannus is more usually named) what is it else, but to say, that the heresie of Calvin is not new? As if these things were alledged by us for anie other end, then to shew, that this way which they call heresie is not new, but hath been troden in long since, by such as in their times were accounted good and Catholick teachers in the Church. That since they have been esteemed otherwise, is an argument of the alteration of the times, and of the conversion of the state of things: which is the matter that now we are inquiring of, and which our Adversaries (in an evill houre to them) doe so earnestly presse us to discover.

The Emperour Charles, unto whom this answer of Ratrannus was directed, had then in his Court a famous countrey-man of ours, called Iohannes Scotus: who wrote a booke of the same argument, and to the same effect that the other had done. This man for his extraordinarie learning, was in England (where hee lived in great account with King Alfred) surnamed Iohn the wise: and had verie lately a roome in the uuMartyrolog. Rom. IV. ID. Novemb. edit. An…uerp. ann. 15…6.Rom 4Martyrologe of the Church of Rome, though now he be ejected thence. Wee finde him indeed censured by the Church of Lyons and others in that time, for certaine opinions which he delivered touching Gods foreknowledge and predestination before the beginning of the world, Mans freewill and the concurrence thereof with Grace in this present world, and the maner of the punishment of reprobate Men & Angels in the world to come: but we finde not anie where, that his book of the Sacrament p. 77was condemned, before the dayes of ^x Lanfranc; who was the first that leavened that Church of England afterward with this corrupt doctrine of the carnall presence. Till then, this question of the reall presence continued still in debate: and it was as free for anie man to follow the doctrine of Ratrannus or Iohannes Scotus therein, as that of Paschasius Radbertus, which since the time of Satans loosing, obtayned the upper hand. Men have often searched, and doe yet often search, how bread that is gathered of corne; and through fires heate baked, may be turned to Christs bodie; or how wine that is pressed out of manie grapes is turned, through one blessing, to the Lords blood: saith yyHomilia Paschalis, Anglo-Saxonicé impressa Londini, per Io. Daium: & MS. in publicâ Cantabrigiensis Academiae Bibliothecâ.Aelfrick Abbat of Malmesburie, in his Saxon Homily, written about 650. yeares agoe. His resolution is not onelyonly the same with that of Ratrannus, but also in manie places directly translated out of him: as may appeare by these passages following, compared with his Latin layd downe in the margent.

zzIlle panis qui per Sacerdotis ministeriū Christi corpus efficitur, aliud exteriùs humanis sensibus ostendit, & aliud interiùs fidelium mentibus clamat. Exteriùs quidē panis, quod antè fuerat, forma praetenditur, color ostenditur, sapor accipitur: ast interiùs Christi corpus ostenditur. Ratrann. sive Bertram. de corp. & sangu. Dom. pag. 182.The bread and the wine which by the Priests ministery is hallowed, shew one thing without to mens senses, and another thing they call within to beleeving mindes. Without they be seene bread & wine both in figure and in taste: and they be truely after their hallowing Christs body and his blood by spirituall mysterie. aaConsideremus fontem sacri baptismatis, qui fons vitae non immerito nuncupatur. &c. In eo si consideretur solummodo quod corporeus aspicit sensus, elementum fluidum conspicitur, corruptioni subjectum, nec nisi corpora lavandi potentiam obtinere. Sed accessit sancti Spiritus per Sacerdotis consecrationem virtus; & efficax facta est non solùm corpora verumetiam animas diluere, & spirituales sordes spirituali potentiâ dimovere. Eccè in uno eodemque elemento, duo videmus inesse sibi resistentia. &c. Igitur in proprietate humor corruptibilis, in mysterio veró virtus sanabilis. Sic itaque Christi corpus & sanguis superficie tenus considerata, creatura est, mutabilitati corruptelaeque subjecta: si mysterii veró perpendis virtutem, vita est, participantibus se tribuens immortalitatem Ibid. pag. 187 188.So the holy font water p. 78that is called the well-spring of life, is like in shape to other waters, and is subject to corruption: but the holy Ghosts might commeth to the corruptible water through the Priests blessing; and it may after wash the body and soule from all sinne, by spirituall vertue. Behold now we see two things in this one creature: in true nature that water is corruptible moisture, and in spirituall mysterie hath healing vertue. So also if we behold that holy housel after bodily sense, then see wee that it is a creature corruptible and mutable. If we acknowledge therein spirituall vertue, then understand we that life is therein, and that it giveth immortalitie to them that eate it with beleefe. bbMultâ differentiâ separantur, corpus in quo passus est Christus, et hoc corpus quod in mysterio passionis Christi qu…tidiè à fid…libus celebratur …bid. pag. 212. & 22….Much is betwixt the bodie Christ suffered in, and the body that is hallowed to housel. ccIlla namque caro quae c…ucifixa est, de Virginis carne facta est, ossibus & nervis compacta, & humanorum membrorum lineamentis distincta, rationalis animae spiritu vivificata in propriam vitam & congruentes motus. At veró caro spiritualis, quae populum credentem spiritualiter pascit, secundùm speciem quam gerit exteriùs, frumenti granis manu artificis consistit, nullis nervis ossibusque compacta, nullâ membrorum varietate distincta, nullâ rationali substantiâ vegetata, nullos proprios potens motus exercere. Quicquid enim in eâ vitae praebet substantiam, spiritualis est potentiae, & invisibilis efficientiae, divinaeque vi…tutis. Ibid. pag. 214.The body truely that Christ suffered in, was borne of the flesh of Mary, with blood and with bone, with skin and with sinewes, in humane limbs, with a reasonable soule living: and his spirituall body, which we call the housel, is gathered of many cornes, without blood and bone, without lim, without soule; and therefore nothing is to be understood therein bodily, but spiri…ually. Whatsoever is in that housel, which giveth substance of life, that is spirituall vertue, and invisible doing. ddCorpus Christi quod mortuum est & resurrexit, & immortale factum, jam non moritur, & mors illi ultrà non dominabitur, aeternum est, nec jam passibile. Hoc autem quod in Ecclesiâ celebratur, temporale est, non aeternum; corruptibile est, non incorruptum, &c. dispartitur ad sumendum, & dentibus commolitum, in corpus trajicitur. Ibid. pag. 216.217.Certainly Christs body which suffered death and rose from death, shall never dye henceforth, but is eternall and unpassible. That housel is temporall, not eternall, corruptible & dealed into sundry parts, chewed betweene teeth and sent into the belly. p. 79eeEt hoc corpus, pignus est & species: illud veró ipsa veritas. Hoc enim geritur, donec ad illud perveniatur: ubi veró ad illud perventum fuerit, hoc removebitur. Ib. pag. 222.This mysterie is a pledge and a figure: Christs bodie is truth it selfe. This pledge wee doe keepe mystically, untill that we be come to the truth it selfe; and then is this pledge ended. Christ hallowed bread and wine to housel before his suffering, and said: This is my body & my blood. ffVidemus nondū passum esse Christum, &c. Sicut ergo paulò antequàm pateretur, panis substantiam & vini creaturam convertere potuit in propriū corpus quod passurum erat, & in suum sanguinē qui pòst fundendus extabat: sic etiā in deserto manna & aquam de petrâ in suam carnē & sanguinem convertere praevaluit &c. Ibid. pag. 193.Yet he had not then suffered: but so notwithstanding hee turned through invisible vertue, the bread to his owne body, and that wine to his blood: as he before did in the wildernesse, before that he was borne to men, when he turned that heavenly meate to his flesh, and the flowing water from that stone to his owne blood. ggManducavit & Moses manna, manducavit & Aaron, manducavit & Phinees, manducaverunt ibi multi qui Deo placuerunt; & mortui non sunt. Quare? Quia visibilem cibum spiritualiter intellexerunt, spiritualiter esurierunt, spiritualiter gustaverunt, ut spiritualiter satiarentur. Ibid. pag. 217. ex August. in Evang. Iohan. tractat. 26.Moses and Aaron, and manie other of that people which pleased God, did eate that heavenly bread, and they died not the everlasting death, though they dyed the common. They saw that the heavenly meate was visible and corruptible: and they spiritually understood by that visible thing, and spiritually received it.

This Homily was appointed publikely to be read to the people in England, on Easter day, before they did receive the communion. The like matter also was delivered to the Clergie by the Bishops at their Synods; out of two other writings of the same hhIm…ress. Londini cum Homiliâ Paschali: & MS. in publicâ Oxoniensis Academiae Bibliothecâ▪ & Colleg. S. Benedict. Cantabrig.Aelfrick: in the one wherof, directed to Wulfsine Bishop of Shyrburne, we reade thus. That housel is Christs bodie, not bodily but spiritually. Not the body which he suffered in, but the bodie of which he spake, when he blessed bread and wine to housel the night before his suffering; and said by the blessed bread, This is my body: and againe by the holy wine, This is my blood which is shed for many in forgivenesse of p. 80sinnes. In the other, written to Wulfstane Archbishop of Yorke, thus. The Lord which hallowed housel before his suffering, and saith that the bread was his owne bodie, and that the wine vvas truely his blood; halloweth daily by the hands of the Priest, bread to his body and wine to his blood in spirituall mysterie, as wee reade in bookes. And yet notwithstanding that lively bread is not bodily so, nor the selfe same body that Christ suffered in: nor that holy vvine is the Saviours blood which was shed for us, in bodily thing, but in spirituall understanding. Both be truely, that bread his body, and that wine also his blood, as was the heavenly bread, which vve call Manna, that fedde fortie yeares Gods people; and the cleare water, which did then runne from the stone in the vvildernesse, vvas truely his blood: as Paul wrote in one of his Epistles.

Thus was Priest and people taught to beleeve, in the Church of England, toward the end of the tenth, and the beginning of the eleventh age after the Incarnation of our Saviour Christ. And therefore it is not to be wondered, that when Berengarius shortly after stood to maintaine this doctrine, iiSigebert. Gemblac. & Guiliel. Nangiac. in Chron. an. 1051. Conrad. Bruwilerens. in vitâ Wolphelmi, apud Surium, April. 22.manie both by word and writing disputed for him: and not onelyonly the English, but also all the French almost & the Italians (as kkFlor. histor. ann. 1087.Matthew of Westminster reporteth) were so readie to entertaine that which hee delivered. Who though they were so borne downe by the power of the Pope (who now was growne to his height) that they durst not make open profession of that which they beleeved: yet manie continued, even there where Satan had his throne, who privately employed both their tongues and their penns in defence of the truth; as out of Zacharias Chrysopolitanus, Rupertus Tuitiensis, and others I have llDe Christian. Eccles. success. & stat. edit. ann. 1613. pag. 190.191.192. et 208.elsewhere shewed. Vntill at length, in the p. 81yeare 1215. Pope Innocent the third, in the Councell of Lateran, published it to the Church for an oracle: that mmCujus corpus & sanguis in sacramento altaris sub speciebus panis & vini veraciter continentur; trāssubstantiatis pane in corpus, & vino in sanguinem potestate divinâ. Concil. Lateran. cap. 1.the body and blood of Iesus Christ are truely contayned under the formes …f bread and wine; the bread being transsubstantiated into the bodie, and the wine into the blood, by the power of God. And so are wee now come to the end of this controversie: the originall and progresse whereof I have prosecuted the more at large, because it is of greatest importance, the verie life of the Masse and all massing Priests depending thereupon. But this prolixitie shall be some wayes recompensed by the briefer handling of the points following: the next whereof is that