The Subtle Sophistry of Watsons Sermons before Queen Mary, Sermon 2 (2 of 5)

The Subtle Sophistry of Watsons Sermons before Queen Mary · Sermon 2 (2 of 5)

p. 39But your onelyonly aſſertion without proofe, is ſufficient to perſwade an obedient Catholike. &c.Watſons obedient Catholikes. You accompt for obedient Catholikes, ſuch onelyonly as will captiuate all their ſenſes, and beléeue all that you ſay and doe to be good and godly: and folow you whether ſoeuer you leade them, though they ſée plainely that you go before them into the bottomleſſe pit of hell.

Wel, let vsus ſée nowe, how you can conuince by arguments, p. 40thoſe that will not obediently ſay white is black, light darkeneſſe, and good euill: for ſuch you call heretikes, that denie the Church, and impugne the doctrine and determination of the ſame.

WATSON. Diuiſion. 22But to our purpoſe, that the oblation of Chriſtes body and bloud in the Maſſe is the ſacrifice of the Church, and proper to the new teſtament, I ſhall proue it you by the beſt arguments that we hauehave in our ſchole of diuinity, that is to ſay, firſt by the inſtitution of our ſauiour Chriſt, then by the prophecy of Malachy the prophet, thirdly by the figure of Melchiſedech in the olde law, and this ſhall I doe not expounding the ſcriptures after mine owne head, but as they hauehave bene taken from the beginning of the moſt auncient and Catholike fathers in all ages.

1. Cor. 11.1 Cor 11This ſacrifice was inſtituted by the commaundement of Chriſt, ſaying to his Apoſtles, do this in my remembrance.

Our new men laugh at vsus where we ſay, that this commaundement of Chriſt doth proue the oblation of the ſacrament. But we pittie them, that ſet ſo light by that they are bounden to beleue, and can not diſprooue, ſeeming euidently not to regarde and way the fact of Chriſt, and their obedience to his commaundement.

When Chriſt ſayde, doe this: by this worde (this) muſt needes be vnderſtanded all that he did, concerning the inſtitution of this ſacrament. Let vsus now ſee what Chriſt did.

Firſt he did cōſecrate his precious body & bloud by bleſſing the bread, ſaying, this is my body, this is my bloud, for if this conſecration be not comprehended vnderunder this worde (Hoc, this) then hauehave we no commaundement nor authoritie to conſecrate this ſacrament, & ſo ſhould we be vſurpers to doe that thing we hauehave no warrant to ſhewe for vsus in holy ſcripture. But without doubt, this is ſo plaine, that we nede ſay no more of it, except we ſhould vtterly denie this ſacrament, and the whole miniſtration of it, which (I think) no man doth.

Secondarily, Chriſt did offer, that he did conſecrate p. 41which appeareth by theſe his wordes: This is my body, which is giuen for you. And although this oblation may be proued ſufficiently otherwiſe, yet to my ſimple iudgement there ſeemeth to be no light argument in this worde (Datur is giuen): for ſeing the ſcripture ſayth, it is giuen for vsus, and not to vsus, as Zwinglius and our great Archebiſhop his Diſciple would hauehave it, we muſt needes vnderſtande by (giuen for vsus) offred for vsus, ſo that in this place and many other to giuegive is to offer.

And although it be true, that Chriſt was giuen and offered for vsus to the father, vponupon the croſſe the next day folowing, yet becauſe the worde (Datur) is in Greeke in all the Euangeliſtes, where it is expreſſed in the preſent tenſe, and alſo eueryevery ſentence is true for the time it is pronounced, therefore me thinke I may certainely conclude, becauſe Chriſt ſayth, datur pro vobis, is giuen for you, that euen then in the ſupper time he offered his body for vsus to his father.

Thirdly, Chriſt did deliuer to his diſciples to be eaten and dronken, that he had before conſecrated and offered, Math. 29.and this appeareth by his words. Take, eate, and drinke ye all of this. The firſt and the thirde which be the conſecration and receauing, be out of all controuerſie confeſſed of all men.

The ſecond which is the oblation, is of late brought in queſtion, which I hauehave partly proued by the plaine words of ſcripture, as it ſeemeth to me, ſo that I may well reaſon thus: Chriſts action is our inſtruction (I except his wonderfull workes and miracles) ſpecially when his commaundement is ioyned vntounto it. But Chriſt in his ſupper offred himſelfe verily and really vnderunder the formes of bread and wine after an impoſsible maner, and commaunded vsus to doe the ſame, till his ſecond comming: me thinke therefore, that the Maſſe we doe and ought to doe ſacrifice, & offer Chriſt vntounto his father, which oblation is the externall ſacrifice of the Church, and proper to the new teſtament.

p. 42CROWLEY. The beſt arguments of the Popes diuinitie ſchoole.Nowe to your purpoſe. &c. you will proue by the beſt arguments in your diuinitie ſchole: that Chriſts body and bloud offered in the Maſſe, is the ſacrifice of the Church. &c. And as it appéereth: the beſt arguments of your ſchoole, are theſe thrée. The inſtitution of Chriſt, the prophecie of Malachie, and the figure of Melchiſedech. Well, I truſt the reader ſhall in that which foloweth, ſée howe well you doe performe your promiſe.

Doe this in my remembraunce (ſayth Chriſt) that is, offer vp this in my remembraunce (ſay you) and except you be deceyued: Chriſt hath in theſe words, inſtituted the ſacrifice of y^e Maſſe.

Your newe men you ſay, doe laugh at you. &c. And you doe pittie them. &c. Bilyke you hauehave a delight to be laughed at: for you hauehave in the wordes folowing, giuen more occaſion to be laughed at, as ſhall appéere in this aunſwere.

Watſons pittie. Luc. 23.Luke 23Your pittie is much like that which was in the women of Ieruſalem: when they wept to ſée the miſerable eſtate of Chriſt, which was condemned to die, being an Innocent.

Watſon will make his newe mayſters laugh.When Chriſt ſayde, doe this. &c. All that Chriſt did: muſt néedes be vnderſtanded by this worde (this) and therefore you will ſée what Chriſt did. Firſt he conſecrated his precious bodye and bloud. &c. Might not your new men thinke you, iuſtly laugh at you: when you alledge that for your purpoſe, that maketh moſt againſt you? doe this ſayth Chriſt. What ſhall we doe? ſay you. Take bread ſaith Chriſt. And when you hauehave giuen thanks: breake it and diſtribute it, and eate it, for it is my bodye. Then take the cup, and when ye hauehave giuen thankes: drinke ye all of it, for it is my bloud of the new teſtament, which is ſhed for manye for the remiſſion of ſinnes. Thus farre according as Mathewe wryteth.

What ground hauehave you in theſe wordes, for the inſtitution of the Maſſe? He doth not ſay, prepare you miniſtring garments of a ſtraunge faſhion. Neyther doth he bid you make thoſe garments holye. He ſpeaketh no word of your halowed aultare, Superaltare, Cup, or Corporaſſe cloth. He maketh no mention of your thinne ſtertch cake, nor of myxing water with your wine. He hath no worde of your manifolde croſſings, turnings, and p. 43halfe turnings, with the reſt of the Apiſhe toyes whereof your Maſſe doth conſiſt. But he tooke bread and wine,What Chriſt did at his laſt ſupper. ſuch as the preſent occaſion did offer. And he gaue thankes to his heauenly father: and did preſently diſtribute the ſame to thoſe Diſciples of his that were then preſent, commaunding them all to eate and drinke thereof in the remembraunce of his death and paſſion, as often as they ſhould thinke it méete by a ſacrament to celebrate the remembrance thereof. Aſſuring them that in ſo doing, they ſhould be partakers of his body and bloud, to the nouriſhing of their ſoules and bodies to euerlaſting lyfe.

Here is a playne inſtitution of the holye communion of the body and bloud of our ſauiour Ieſus Chriſt: but for your tranſubſtantiating conſecration that you vſe in your Maſſe, here is no warrant at all. By your owne iudgement therefore, your Antichriſtian Clarkes are but vſurpers, hauing no warrant in the worde of God, to ſhewe for your doings in this point. The matter therfore is not ſo playne on your ſide: as you would hauehave men thinke it to be.

The lyke foundation you hauehave founde to builde your oblation vponupon. Chriſt hath ſayd: Which is giuen for you. And to your ſimple iudgement: there ſéemeth no little argument, in this word Datur, is giuen. &c. And therfore you conclude: that Chriſt did at his laſt ſupper, euen in the ſupper time, offer his body for vsus to his father.

Mathew, and Marke, make no mention of this Datur, Mat. 26. Mar. 14.Matt 26Mark 14that you builde vponupon. Bilyke therefore, it is not ſo great a matter as you would make of it. For if the church can hauehave no ſacrifice but that which is builded vponupon Datur, it is to be thought that Mathew and Marke knewe nothing of the Church ſacrifice.

But in Luke you finde Quod pro vobis datur, which is giuen for you, not to you, as Zwynglius and Cranmer his Scholer, would hauehave it. You conclude therefore, that giuen for vsus, muſt néedes ſignifie, offred for vsus. So that in this place and many other (but you name not one) to giuegive, is to offer.Many places but none named. And becauſe all the Euangeliſtes hauehave it in the Gréeke expreſſed in the preſent tenſe. &c. you thinke you may certainely conclude, becauſe Chriſt p. 44ſayth Datur pro vobis, is giuen for you: that euen then in the ſupper time, he offered his body for vsus to his father.

Firſt, I muſt ſay vntounto you, that when you ſhall ſhewe vsus, thoſe places, wherein, to giuegive is to offer: then we will weigh them, and if we ſhall finde that true which you affirme here, we will ſay as you ſay, that Chriſt did in his laſt ſupper offer vp his body to his father. Till that time, you muſt pardon vsus.

1. Cor. 11.1 Cor 11Saint Paule ſayth. Quod pro vobis frangitur, which is broken for you. It were ſtraunge if we ſhould ſay, that broken doth ſignifie offered, in this place and many other, and be not able to ſhew any one place where it is ſo vſed. And it is manifeſt by y^e hiſtories of the Goſpel: that Chriſts body was not broken vponupon the croſſe. For it was prophecied, that there ſhould no bone of him be brokē.

And although this be expreſſed in the preſent tenſe, and eueryevery ſentence is true for the time it is pronounced:The ſpeakers meaning, is the truth of the ſentence ſpoken. yet may you not conclude as you doe certainly and ſay, that Chriſt offred his body in his ſupper. For the truth of the ſentence, is in that meaning that doth by other partes of ſcripture, appéere to be the meaning of the ſpeaker.

Chriſtes body was giuen for vsus, when he became man that he might dye for vsus, when he was giuen ouer into the power of his enimies which ſought his lyfe, when he went vp to Ieruſalem, declaring before hande to his Diſciples, that he muſt there be crucified: and when Iudas had bargayned with the highe prieſts, to deliuer him to them.

When Chriſt was giuen and his body broken for vsus.And when our Sauiour chriſt was cruelly dealt with by the Iewes in any condition: then was his body broken for vsus. Thus are theſe ſentences true for the time they were pronounced: and yet, neyther doth giuen ſignifie offred, nor broken ſignifie, torne in péeces.

Thirdly (you ſay) chriſt did deliuer to his Diſciples to be eaten and dronken:Watſon hath ouerſhot himſelfe to farre. that which he had before conſecrated and offered. Here you hauehave ouerſhot your ſelfe, a great deale to farre. For if Chriſt had offered and conſecrated before he gaue to hys Diſciples: we may aſke what he offered, and with what wordes he conſecrated. If he did conſecrate with theſe wordes, this is p. 45my body: this is my bloud: then could he offer to his father none other thing but bread and wine, before he had giuen the ſame to his Diſciples. For he ſpake not thoſe wordes, tyll he had both broken the bread and delyuered it and the wine to his Diſciples. If conſent of the Euangeliſtes, both in the Gréeke and Latine doe giuegive vauntage as in Datur, giuen, you would faine it ſhould: then muſt it of force giuegive vauntage here, for none of them doth place the words otherwiſe. And you your ſelfe hauehave affirmed before: that with thoſe wordes Chriſt did conſecrate.

Yea, though you woulde denie it, and affirme that Chriſt did conſecrate by his almightie power, vſing ſome other wordes of bleſſing. Yet your ſchoole men will not ſuffer you.Parte. 3. queſt. 75. Art. 7. For Thomas Aquinas ſayth. Dicendum eſt, quod haec conuerſio, ſicut dictum eſt, perficitur per verba Chriſti, quae à ſacerdote proferuntur: ita quod vltimum inſtans prolationis ver borum, eſt primum inſtans in quo eſt in ſacramento corpus Chriſti. We muſt ſay, that this conuerſion, as it is ſayde, is finiſhed by the wordes of Chriſt, pronounced by the prieſt: ſo that the laſt inſtant of the pronouncing of the wordes, is the firſt inſtant wherin the body of Chriſt is in the ſacrament.

Nicholaus de Orbellis, Richardus, Scotus, and the reſt:The ſchoole Doctors ouerthrowe Watſons aſſertion. be all of the ſame minde in this matter. Wherfore me thinketh, I may certainely conclude, euen vponupon your owne wordes, that if Chriſt offered to his father, before he brake and gaue to hys Diſciples: he offered none other thing but bread and wine, and therefore not his body and bloud.

Now, let vsus ſée, what reaſon it is, that you thinke you may well make for the proofe of this ſacrifice in the Maſſe.The value of Watſons reaſon. Chriſtes action, is our inſtruction. But Chriſt did this, and commaunded vsus ſo to doe. Ergo in the Maſſe, we doe and ought to doe ſacrifice. &c. Your Maior and Minor, are proued both falſe: Ergo, your concluſion, is not worth a couple of Walnuts.

And for further proufe that Chriſt offered himſelfe in his laſt ſupper: WATSON. Diuiſion. 23I ſhall alledge vntounto you the authoritie of the Church, and the conſent of the fathers in this point, which ought to ſuffiſe any chriſten man.

p. 46Ireneus. li. 4.Ireneus wryteth in his fourth booke, that Chriſt taking the creature of bread and gyuing thankes ſayde. This is my body, and likewiſe confeſsing the cup to be of his bloud. Noui teſtamenti nouam docuit oblationem, quam Eccleſia ab Apoſtolis accipiens in vniuerſo mundo offert deo, de quo in duodecim Prophetis Malachias ſic praeſignificauit, Non eſt mihi voluntas in vobis. &c. He taught the newe oblation of the newe teſtament, which oblation the Church receauing of the Apoſtles, doth offer to God throughout the whole worlde, whereof Malachy one of the twelue prophets did prophecie. I hauehave no will and pleaſure in you. &c.

What can be more playne then that Chriſt in his laſt ſupper in the miniſtration of the bleſſed ſacrament did teache his Apoſtles the newe oblation of the newe Teſtament, and his Apoſtles taught the Church the ſame that they receaued, and the Church doth contynually vſe to offer the ſame to God in eueryevery place?

This authoritie the wordes being ſo manifeſt, and the author ſo auncient and ſubſtantiall, can not be auoyded with all their cauillations.

Saint Cyprian alſo the bleſſed Martyr wryteth thus. Si Chriſtus ſummus ſacerdos ſacrificium Deo patri ipſe primus obtulit, Ciprian. li. 2. epiſt. 3.& hoc fieri in ſui cōmemorationem praecepit, vti que ille ſacerdos vice Chriſti verè fungitur, qui id quod Chriſtus fecit imitatur. If Chriſt the high prieſt did firſt himſelfe offer a ſacrifice to God his father, and commaunded the ſame to be done in his remembrance verily that prieſt doth truely occupy the office of Chriſt, that by imitation doth the ſame thing that Chriſt did.

This holy Martir teacheth vsus, that Chriſt did firſt offer himſelfe to his father in his ſupper, and alſo commaunded vsus to doe the ſame. Why ſhould any man doubt of that, that in the beginning of the Church the holy Martyrs did, and taught without all doubt.

Heſichius. lib. 2. cap. 8.Heſichius alſo that floriſhed in the time of Gratian the Emperour wryteth thus. Prius figuratam ouem coenans cum Apoſtolis, poſtea ſuum obtulit ſacrificium, & deinde ſicut ouem ſemetipſum p. 47occidit. Chriſt in his ſupper did firſt eate the figuratiue lambe with his Apoſtles, then he offered his owne ſacrifice, and after that he kylled himſelfe lyke a lambe.

By this ſaying that Chriſt kylled himſelfe, is ment, that Chriſt voluntarily did offer himſelfe to the death, ſuffring the Iewes to kill him whome he might hauehave withſtanded: but to our purpoſe. It is plaine that beſide the bloudy oblation vponupon the croſſe, and alſo beſide the figuratiue oblation of himſelfe in the paſchall lambe, he alſo did offer himſelfe miſtically in the celebration of the ſacrament, which is the very point that we go about to prooue, and is manifeſtly proued by this auncient author.

Damaſcen ſayeth: In noctè in qua ſeipſum obtulit, Damaſcenus. li. 4. Cap. 14.teſtamentum nouum diſpoſuit. In that night when he offered hymſelfe, he did ordeyne and inſtitute the newe Teſtament. Marke that he ſayth, he offered himſelfe in the night, the oblation vponupon the croſſe was in the midde day, which is a diſtinct offering from that in the night. And Theophilactus ſayeth: Tunc immolauit ſe ipſum ex quo tradidit diſcipulis corpus ſuum. Theophilactus in Math. Cap 28.It is manifeſt that then he offered himſelfe, when he deliuered to his diſciples his body: teaching vsus, that Chriſt in his miſticall ſupper offered himſelfe to his father. To this ſaint Auguſtine beareth witneſſe, wryting thus. Vnde ipſe dominus etiam quos mundauit à lepra, ad eadem ſacramenta miſit, Auguſt. de baptiſmo. li. 3. cap. 19.vt offerrent pro ſe ſacrificium Sacerdotibus, quia nondum eis ſucceſſerat ſacrificium quod ipſe poſt in eccleſia voluit celebrari pro omnibus illis: For which cauſe our Lorde himſelfe ſent them whome he had made cleane from their lepre to the ſame ſacraments (of the olde Teſtament) that they ſhould offer to the prieſtes a ſacrifice for themſelues, bicauſe as yet that ſacrifice did not ſucceede to them, which Chriſt would hauehave celebrate in his Church in ſtede of all them. Way theſe wordes well, and ye ſhall perceaue, that they can not be vnderſtand of the ſacrifice of Chriſt vponupon the croſſe, which was but once offered, and can not be continually celebrate and vſed of the Church, nor yet of the ſacrifice of thankeſgyuing, which ſuccedeth not p. 48the other, but was before and with the other: and therfore they proue playnely, that thys one ſacrifice of the new Teſtament that ſuccedeth the multitude of the olde ſacrifices, is onelyonly the ſacrifice of Chriſts body and bloud in the bleſſed Maſſe which he hath ordeyned to be daylie frequented in his Church to the worldes ende.

Dioniſius Ariopagita. Specul. cap. 3.What ſhould I alledge moe authors? Will ye yet heare one of the eldeſt, I meane Dioniſius Areopagita S. Paules ſcholer, and Byſhop of Athens, he wryteth thus: Quocirca reuerenter ſimul & expontificali officio poſt ſacras diuinorum operum laudes quòd hoſtiam ſalutarem (quae ſupra ipſum eſt) litet, ſe excuſat, ad ipſum primo decenter exclamans, tu dixiſti, hoc facite in meam commemorationem. Wherefore the Byſhop reuerently and according to his paſtorall office, after the praiſe and commendation of Gods workes and benefites, he doth excuſe himſelfe, that he doth take vponupon him to offer that ſacrifice of our ſauiour which is farre aboue his degree and dignitie, crying firſt vntounto him decently.

Lord thou diddeſt commaunde, ſaying: Doe this in my remembraunce. If there were no more but this one authoritie, it were ſufficient to proue, that the prieſt doth offer the body of Chriſt, which is the ſacrifice of our ſauiour in the Maſſe, and that hee offereth it by the expreſſe commaundement of Chriſt, ſaying. Doe this in my remembraunce, and that he offereth that thing, which is farre exceeding his degree, which can be nothing elſe, but the body of Chriſt.

Therefore leauing for ſhortneſſe of time all other authorities, which with little labour I could bring in for this purpoſe, me thinke I may well conclude, that the oblation of Chriſtes body and bloud in the Maſſe is the very ſacrifice of the Church, both by the inſtitution of Chriſt declared by his expreſſe commaundement, which we are all bounden to obey, and alſo by his owne example in offering himſelfe vnderunder the formes of bread and wine, which wee prieſts are bounden to folow, as the ſcripture which I hauehave p. 49alledged, doth euidently proue, the true ſenſe whereof is as is recyted not priuate, proceeding from mine owne braine, but catholike, confirmed by the conſent of the Church, able to proue & conuince any one man, that hath nothing to ſay to the contrary but his bare nay.

To proue that Chriſt offered himſelfe in his laſt ſupper:CROWLEY. Ireneus. lib. 4. Capit. 32. ye alledge matter out of the auncient fathers. And firſt out of Ireneus. For aunſwere wherevnto I referre the reader, to that aunſwere that I hauehave made to the ſame text, cyted in the fourth diuiſion of your former Sermon.

And for aunſwere to that which you cite out of Cyprian, I referre the reader to that which I hauehave aunſwered to matter that you hauehave in the ninth diuiſion of that Sermon,Cyprian. lib. 2 Epiſt. 3. cyted out of the ſame Epiſtle.

Iſychius by the report of Iohn Tritemius, Iſychius. lib. 2 Capit. 8.flouriſhed in the dayes of the princes Arcadius and Honorius: ſomewhat after the dayes of the Emperour Gratian, in whoſe time you ſay, he flouriſhed. But your care is, to cauſe him to ſéeme as auncient as may be. But if you had read him thorow, and weighed him well: you would neuer hauehave cited him for your purpoſe. For he doth in many places make manifeſtly againſt you.

In the place that you doe nowe cite:Papiſticall libertie vſed by Watſon. you doe vſe your olde ſlight. That is, you leaue out, that which goeth before, and that which foloweth, and ſhould ſhewe the meaning of the wryter: And bicauſe Secundò, ſéemeth not to giuegive you that auauntage, that you deſire to hauehave: you are bolde to thruſt Deinde, in place thereof, ſaying thus. Et deinde ſicut ouem. &c. Where the Author hath, Et ſecundo. &c.

But that the reader may be able to iudge of the Authors meaning: I will let him ſée thoſe wordes that you hauehave ſo ſlylie ſlipped ouer. His wordes be theſe. Nihil autem ad perfectum duxit lex: ſubintroductio autem maioris ſpei quae data eſt, in hac nos ſpe conſtituit. Veruntamen, ſacrificium hoc, eam quae dicta eſt maior Spes, per quam ſemper propinquamus ad ſeruiendum Deo, innuit. Cur autem Aries ſecundus, hic nunc Aries nominatur? Quia videlicet, prius figuratam ouem p. 50cum Apoſtolis caenans Dominus: poſtea ſuum obtulit ſacrificium, & ſecundo ſicut ouem ipſe ſemetipſum occidit, quod demonſtrant ſequentia. Poſuerunt que Aaron & filij eius manus ſuas ſuper caput eius. Quem cum immolaſſet Moſes. Neceſsariè ſimul cum Aaron filij eius, ſuper Caput Arietis manus imponunt: quia communem caenam feſtiuitatis paſchalis, cum ſuis Chriſtus diſcipulis celebrauit. &c. The lawe hath brought nothing to perfection, but y^e ſecret bringing in of a greater hope, which is giuen vsus: hath ſet vsus in this hope. But this ſacrifice doth note vntounto vsus, that hope, which is called the greater hope, whereby we do alwaies approch to ſerue God. And why is this Ramme nowe named the ſecond Ramme? Forſooth, bicauſe the Lorde ſupping with his Apoſtles: did firſt offer the figuratiue Lambe, and afterwarde he did offer his owne ſacrifice, and did ſecondarily kill himſelfe euen as a ſhéepe, which thing, the wordes that followe doe declare. And Aaron and his ſonnes, did put their hands vponupon the head of that Ramme. Which when Moſes had offered: the ſonnes of Aaron did of neceſſity ſet their hands vponupon the head of the Ramme with Aaron, bicauſe Chriſt did celebrate a common ſupper of the feaſt of Eaſter with his Diſciples. &c.

Now let the reader conſider how faithfully you handle this place of Iſychius. He expounding the eyght Chapter of Leuiticus, What is ment by the ſecond Ram.doth (when he commeth to thoſe words. Obtulit & Arietem ſecundum. &c.) declare that that ſecond Ramme, did ſignifie our Sauiour Chriſt. Who after he had with his diſciples, celebrated a common ſupper of the ſolemnization of the paſſouer, eating with them the figuratiue Lambe: did, as it were, kyll and offer vp himſelfe vponupon the croſſe, bicauſe he gaue himſelfe into the handes of his enimies that faſtined him to the croſſe, which Iſychius calleth our ſauiour Chriſtes owne ſacrifice. And you (M. Watſon) will néedes hauehave vsus thinke, that our Sauiour did after the offering and eating of the paſſouer, offer his owne ſacrifice in bread and wine, and afterward offer himſelfe on the croſſe, and that Iſychius meaneth ſo to teach in the words that you cite. And to cauſe the words, the better to ſéeme to ſerue for your purpoſe: you doe in the place of the Aduerbe Secundo, vſe Deinde: which all wiſe and learned men doe know to be but homely dealing. p. 51But that Iſychius was not of your minde concerning the ſacrifice of the Church: the reader may well ſée,Iſychius li. 1. Capit. 1. by that which he wryteth in his firſt booke and firſt Chapter. His wordes be theſe. Quia ſacrificia Deus à nobis pro noſtra ſalute vult, non ipſe ea opus habens: ſatis nos Paulus commonefacit. Ait enim. Obſècro ita que vos fratres, per miſericor diam Dei, vt exhibeatis corpora veſtra hoſtiam viuam, ſanctam, Deo placentem, racionabile obſequium veſtrum. Ergo placens ſacrificium Deo, corporum noſtrorum mortificatio eſt: ſimul enim in eo lucramur, & quod à peccato abſtineamus, & quod virtutes acquirimus. Paule doth ſufficiently certifie vsus, that God hauing no néede thereof: will hauehave ſacrifices of vsus, for the health we hauehave receyued. For he ſayth. I beſeech you therefore brethren, euen by the merciemercy of God: that you would giuegive your bodyes, a ſacrifice, quick, holy, and acceptable to God, which is your reaſonable ſeruing of God. The mortification of our bodies therefore: is the ſacrifice that pleaſeth God. For we doe therein, both winne that we may abſtaine from ſinne, and alſo that we obtaine vertues.

By theſe wordes it is moſt manifeſt,Iſychius doth not agree with Watſon. that Iſychius vnderſtood not that place that you hauehave taken for your theme, as you do ſhewe your ſelfe to vnderſtand it. And that therefore he was not of ſuch minde in the other place that you cite out of him for your purpoſe: as you would faine hauehave men thinke that he was. He knewe no mo ſacrifices of Chriſt but one, which was offered on the Croſſe once for al, wherof the Paſſouer lambe was a figure, and our ſacrament is a remembraunce. And the mortification of our bodies, is the ſacrifice of thankeſgiuing, that God doth continually require at our handes.

As for your Damaſcenus, although Iohn Tritemius, Tritem. de Eccleſ. ſcrip. Damaſc. li. 4. Capit. 14.would faine hauehave him ſéeme more auncient: yet Iohn Patriarcha Hieroſolomitanus, writing his life, ſayth that he liued in the dayes of Leo Iſaurius, which was .720. yeares after Chriſt. His authoritie therefore, can not be ſo waightie, that it might enforce vsus to graunt, that all that he writeth is true, though he diſſent both from the writinges of other more auncient fathers, and ſcriptures alſo. As in that Chapter out of which you cite his wordes, and in many other places of his writings, he doth moſt p. 52manifeſtly.

But let vsus ſée howe honeſtly you applie his wordes that you cite. Marke, ſay you, that he ſaith, he offered himſelfe in the night. &c. I would gladly be ſhort in theſe your vnhanſome handlings of that which you cite for your purpoſe: but I can not ſuffer the Reader to lacke thoſe wordes that do giuegive light to that which you do ſo ſubtilly cite. Damaſcenus ſayth thus. Cibus vero ipſe panis vitae, Dominus noſter Ieſus Chriſtus, qui ex Coelo diſcendit. Nam ſuſcepturus voluntariam pro nobis mortem, in nocte in qua ſeipſum obtulit: teſtamentum nouum diſpoſuit ſanctis Diſcipulis & Apoſtolis, & per ipſos, omnibus alijs in ſeipſum credentibus. &c. Certes, that foode which is the bread of life, is our Lorde Ieſus Chriſt, which came downe from heauen. For when he would for our ſakes, take vponupon him a voluntarie death. He did in the night wherein he offered himſelfe, diſpoſe to his holy Diſciples and Apoſtles, and by them to all other that beleue in him, a newe teſtament.

Watſons fallace opened.He offered himſelfe in the night, ſay you, but the oblation on the Croſſe was in the mid day: Ergo, they be diſtinct oblations. All that doe vnderſtand what Logicke meaneth, do know wherin the fallace of this Argument is, he offered himſelfe to death, and he offered himſelfe in death. Howe the firſt can be called a ſacrifice, I would gladly learne: otherwiſe then the obedience of a Chriſten man to do the will of God, may be called a ſacrifice. But that will not ſerue your purpoſe here. For you muſt hauehave thys firſt offering to be a Maſſing ſacrifice propiciatorie: both for the quicke and the deade. Whether Damaſcenus can iuſtly be taken to meane ſo here: I referre to the iudgement of the indifferent Reader.

But this I muſt tell you, that in the ſame place, he fighteth agaynſt your opinion of Datur, it is giuen, for he ſayth Frangetur, it ſhall be broken. Wherby it is manifeſt, that he meaneth there, of the ſacrifice that was made on the Croſſe, and not of a ſacrifice then preſently offred: as you would hauehave vsus think that he ment.

Theophilact. in Mat. 28.Matt 28Theophilactus, a writer of like antiquitie and integritie of iudgement with Damaſcenus, hath ſayd (ſay you) Tunc immolauit. &c. The Reader ſhall ſée the wordes that go before, and then p. 53let him iudge, howe theſe ſerue your purpoſe. He ſayth thus. Poſſum tibi & aliam cauſam dicere, quomodo tres dies & tres noctes numerentur. Attende igitur. Quinta veſpera fecit Dominus Coenam, & Diſcipulis dixit Accipite, commedite, hoc eſt enim corpus meum. Et ita quia poteſtatem habebat ponere animam: manifeſtum quòd tunc immolauit ſeipſum, ex quo tradidit corpus ſuum. I am able to ſhewe thée another reaſon alſo: how the thrée dayes and thrée nightes may be numbred. The Lord made his ſupper the fift day at éeuen, and he ſayd to his Diſciples: take, eate, this is my bodie. And ſo becauſe he had power to leaue his life: it is manifeſt that he did then offer himſelfe, euen from that time wherein he gaue his body to hys Diſciples.

Bicauſe (ſayth he) our Sauiour had power to leaue his life at his pleaſure: it is manifeſt that euen then he offered himſelfe, when (ſay you) he deliuered to his diſciples his bodie: but, to ſay as Theophilactus writeth, euen then, from that time wherein he gaue his bodie. &c.

To proue that Chriſt had bene thrée dayes and thrée nights in the graue, when he aroſe from death:Theophilact. ſeketh ſhiftes where none nedeth. Theophilactus vſeth this ſhift, affirming that Chriſtes death began at his ſupper, ſo that by this mans iudgement, he was but a deade man, when he ſtoode & anſwered before Pilate and the reſt. One other ſuch ſhift he vſed before in the ſame Chapter, ſaying that the darckneſſe that happened by the Eclips that was at the time when Chriſt gaue vp the ghoſt, muſt be taken for a night: and the time that was betwéene that darkneſſe and the naturall night, for a day. But other more auncient then he, and of better credite: hauehave affirmed and well proued, that by the figure Synecdoche (wherby the part is named for the whole) the prophecie may be well vnderſtanded to be fulfilled. Which figure is verye much vſed of the Prophets.

Wherefore, I may conclude, that Theophilact goeth about to teache vsus that thing that other men hauehave taught vsus before his time, in better order then he doth: and that you woulde make vsus beleue that he teacheth vsus that, which he neuer ment to teache.

p. 54But myſdoubting the credite of Theophilact: you bring in Auſten for a witneſſe, of that which you ſaye Theophilact hath taught. His wordes be theſe. Vnde ipſe Dominus. &c. For which cauſe our Lord himſelfe. &c. I néede not to trouble the reader with manye wordes, in prouing that you hauehave done great wrong to Saint Auſten: in that you bring him in as a witneſſe of your falſe doctrine. I will onelyonly adde to that which you hauehave cited out of him: thoſe fiue wordes that doe immediately folowe the ſame. By which fiue wordes: the Reader may eaſily vnderſtand, howe well ye do apply ſaint Auſtens wordes to your purpoſe.Auſten againſt Watſon in the ſame place that he cyteth. The fiue words be theſe. Quia illis omnibus ipſe prenunciabatur. Bicauſe that by all thoſe ſacrifices: he himſelfe was ſhewed or ſpoken of before. Yea, the learned reader, that wil read that place of ſaint Auſten, ſhall eaſily perceyue: that it maketh manifeſtly agaynſt you. For as the ſacrifices of the olde teſtament, were not the ſacrifices of the Scribes and Phariſeis, but Gods, although abuſed by them: ſo are not the ſacramentes of Chriſt your ſacraments, though you hauehave abuſed them, but they are Chriſtes, and therefore we do, according to ſaint Auſtens doctrine, take them to vsus in ſuch ſort as Chriſt did inſtitute them, leauing to you all thoſe fond ceremonies that you hauehave inuented, to furniſhe oute Chriſtes ſacraments after your faſhion. Which when you hauehave clouted togither, you call your bleſſed Maſſe. Which, not Chriſt, but Antichriſt: hath ordeyned to bée dayly frequented in hys Church, ſo long as God will ſuffer it ſo to be.

Dioniſius Areopagita. Cap. 3. Specul.But Dioniſius Areopagita, was Paules ſcholer. &c. He ſayth thus Quocirca reuerenter ſimul. &c. For the authoritie that this Dioniſius is of: I hauehave ſayd ſomething in the aunſwere to 33. diuiſion of your former Sermon. It forceth not much what his opinion is in this matter: although you woulde hauehave vsus to thinke, that his authoritie alone is ynough. But let vsus ſée howe you handle him in citing his wordes for your purpoſe. You folow not the Greke: but that rude and corrupt tranſlation, that goeth abroade vnderunder no name. I muſt therefore trouble the Reader with the Gréeke text: enterpreting the ſame after the true ſignification and vſe of the wordes. Dioniſius hath ſayde thus in p. 55Gréeke. foreign. Which in Latine is thus.Watſon had no leaſure to looke in the Greeke. Quocirca reuerēter ſimul & ſacerdotaliter, poſt ſacros Hymnos de admirabilibus dei operibus: pro ſacrificio pro ipſis ſe excuſat, prius ad eum piè exclamans. Tu dixiſti, hoc facite in meam reminiſcentiam. In Engliſhe it is thus. Wherefore he (that is to ſay, the chiefe Miniſter) doth both reuerendly and prieſtly, after the holye Hymnes concerning the merueilous works of God, excuſe himſelfe for the ſacrifice that is offered for them, firſt crying out vntounto him after a godly maner. Thou haſt ſayd, do this in the remembrance of me.

The Tranſlatour that you folow, knewe not bylyke, that foreign being ioyned with the Genitiue caſe, doth not ſignifie ſuper, or ſupra, aboue, but Pro, for: neyther coulde he put difference betwene foreign and foreign: the one being the Accuſatiue caſe ſinguler, and the other, the genitiue caſe plurall. And therefore he tranſlateth ſuper ipſum: in ſtede of pro ipſis. Aboue him, in ſtede of for them. And you folowing his folly: doe conclude. That the thing that is aboue the degrée of the prieſt: muſt nedes be the bodie of Chriſt. Thus you ſée how one folly bringeth in another.

As you did therfore, for ſhortneſſe of time, leaue al other authorities: ſo it might hauehave béene more for your honeſtie, to hauehave left this alſo, and to hauehave concluded with S. Paule to the Hebrues. Per ipſum ergo offeramus hoſtiam laudis ſemper Deo, Hebr. 13. The concluſion that Watſō might with more honeſtie hauehave made.Heb 13id eſt fructum labiorum confitentium nomini eius. Beneficentiae autem & cōmunicationis, nolite obliuiſci, talibus enim hoſtijs, conciliatur Deus. Through him therfore, let vsus alwayes offer vntounto God, the ſacrifice of prayſe: that is the fruite of lips that do prayſe his name. Forget not louing liberalitie, and the making other partakers of the giftes you hauehave receyued, for with ſuch ſacrifices is God pleaſed.

But ſhameleſly, you boaſt, that you hauehave proued both by the inſtitution of Chriſt, and the conſent of the Church: that the Maſſe is the very ſacrifice of the Church, where as the Reader may by that which I hauehave aunſwered, eaſily perceyue, that you hauehave both the inſtitution of Chriſt, the conſent of the auncient p. 56Church, and all good reaſon agaynſt you, and nothing for you, but the bare aſſertion of your ſelfe and ſuch as you be.

WATSON Diuiſion. 24Beſide the inſtitution which were ſufficient for thys matter, ſeing in the doctrine of faith, the proofe dependeth vponupon the weight of one place, and not vponupon the number of many: yet I ſhall alledge vntounto you the prophecie of Malachy, where it is prophecied before, that God would refuſe and reiect the ſacrifices of the Iewes, and that hee would call vntounto his grace and mercy the Gentiles, in whoſe church there ſhould be one pure and cleane ſacrifice, ſucceeding all the other, and offered in eueryevery place, which can be none other but this one pure ſacrifice of Chriſtes bodye in the Maſſe. Malachias. 1.The place is this. Non eſt mihi voluntas in vobis, & munus non ſuſcipiam de manu veſtra: ab ortu enim ſolis vſus que ad occaſum magnum eſt nomen meum in gentibus, & in omni loco ſacrificabitur & offeretur nomini meo oblatio munda. I hauehave no will and pleaſure in you, and I will receaue no offering or rewarde of your hande. For from the ryſing of the Sunne to the ſetting, my name is great amongs the Gentiles, and in eueryevery place there ſhall be ſacrifice done, and a pure and cleane oblation ſhal be offered to my name.

This place is very plaine for the deteſting of the Iewes, the reiecting of their ſacrifices, for the vocation of the Gentiles, and for the pure and one ſingular ſacrifice, that amongſt them ſhall be offered to almightie God in eueryevery place in ſteede of the other. This muſt needes be the ſacrifice of the Maſſe, or elſe let them that ſay nay, ſhew of what other that place is ment. And in very deede ſome hauehave beſtowed all their wit and learning, writhing and racking this place to make it ſerue to ſome other ſacrifice beſide the Maſſe, but it will not bee, the truth hath euer preuayled. Some hauehave drawne it to the ſpirituall inwarde ſacrifices of good mens hearts: but in the vnderſtanding they be ouerthrowne, for the place ſpeaketh preciſely of one ſacrifice, and the other ſpirituall ſacrifices be many, and ſo many as p. 57there be harts of good men to offer them. And yet ſpeaketh alſo of one pure and cleane ſacrifice, but all the righteouſneſſe of man is vnperfite, vnpure, vncleane, and compared to a filthy cloth of a ſick woman, and it ſpeaketh of ſuch one pure ſacrifice as ſhould ſuccede and follow in the place of the other ſacrifices of the Iewes, which God reiecteth and abrogateth.

But the inwarde ſpirituall ſacrifices of good men hauehave bene offered and vſed before the lawe, in the lawe, and after the lawe, from the time of Adam till the worldes ende. Wherfore it is not poſsible, that this place ſhould be directly and only vnderſtanded of the ſpirituall ſacrifices. There be other alſo that wreſt it, and would hauehave it meane onelyonly of the bloudy ſacrifice of Chriſt vponupon the croſſe. But that can not be, the wordes be ſo plaine to the contrary. For although that be one and pure ſacrifice, yet it was not offred in eueryevery place, as Malachy ſayth it ſhall, and alſo it was offered onelyonly among the Iewes vponupon the mount of Caluarie, where the prophet ſayth, this ſacrifice he ſpeaketh of, ſhall be offered in eueryevery place among the Gentiles.

Therefore to conclude, this is a playne prophecie, declaring the will of God to hauehave all the ſacrifices of the Iewes to ceaſe, and in the Church of his newe people the Gentiles to hauehave this one pure ſacrifice of Chriſts body and bloud in the Maſſe to be frequented in eueryevery place, wherewith he is well pleaſed and contented.

And in this ſenſe Ireneus taketh it, Ireneus. lib. 4. Capit. 32.whoſe wordes in Latine I alledged a little before, that Chriſt confeſsing the cup to be of his bloud, did teach the newe oblation of the newe teſtament, which the Church receyuing of the Apoſtles, offered to God throughout the worlde, of the which Malachie one of the twelue prophetes did ſpeake before. I hauehave no will nor pleaſure in you, and ſo forth. As I hauehave recyted before, manifeſtly declaring that the olde people ſhould ceaſe to offer to God, and that the newe people ſhall offer vntounto him one pure ſacrifice in eueryevery place.

p. 58Chryſoſtome alſo ſayth. Et in omni loco ſacrificium offeretur nomini meo, Chryſoſt. in Pſalm. 95.Ps 95& ſacrificium purum. Vide, quàm luculenter, quam que dilucide, myſticam interpretatus eſt menſam, quae eſt incruenta hoſtia. And in eueryevery place a ſacrifice ſhall be offered to my name, and that a pure ſacrifice. See howe euidently and how plainly he doth interpret the miſticall table, which is the vnbloudy ſacrifice. I neede not to open this place any more, being ſo plaine as it is.

Auguſt. contr. Iudaeos.Saint Auguſten writing againſt the Iewes ſayth thus. Aperite oculos tandem aliquando, & videte ab oriente ſole vſus que ad occidentem, non in vno loco, vt vobis fuit conſtitutum, ſed in omni loco offerri ſacrificium Chriſtianorum: non cuilibet Deo, ſed ei qui iſta praedixit, Deo Iſrael. Open your eyes at laſt you Iewes, and ſee from the ryſing of the ſunne to the ſetting not in one place as it was ordeyned amongs you, but in eueryevery place to be offered the ſacrifice of chriſten men, not to eueryevery God, but to him that prophecied theſe before the God of Iſraell.

The lyke ſayings he hath wryting vponupon the .106. Pſalme, and in his booke Contra Aduerſarium legis. li. Capit. 20. which I omit, leaſt I ſhould be tedious to you, and to curious in ſo plaine a matter.

CROWLEY. Both the inſtitution and the prophecie make againſt Watſon.Beſides the inſtitution, which maketh agaynſt you: you do now alledge the prophecie of Malachie: which maketh nothing for you. So handſomly do you handle your ſelfe, in prouing that you entende.

In mine aunſwere to the fourth diuiſion of your former Sermon: I hauehave ſufficiently opened the meaning, both of Malachie and Ireneus. I néede not therefore in this place to write any further aunſwere. What men they be that hauehave beſtowed all their wit and learning, in writhing and racking this place of Malachie, to make it ſerue to ſome other ſacrifice beſide y^e Maſſe: you do not tell vsus here. Wherefore, I néede not to ſpende anye time in examining their doyngs therein.

Hierome in Malach. 1.Mal 1Saint Hierome was no wryther nor racker, I am ſure: and yet he expounding this place of Malachie ſayth thus. Et nequaquam p. 59taurorum, hircorum que ſanguinem: ſed thymiama, hoc eſt, ſanctorum orationes Domino offerendas. &c. Not the bloud of Bulles and Goates, but ſwéete odours, that is the prayers of holy men, ſhall be offered to the Lord. &c.

But Chryſoſt. wordes vponupon the Pſalme. 95. Chryſoſt. in Pſalm. 95.Ps 95are ſo plaine that they néede no more opening, ſay you. Sée, ſayth he, howe plainely Malachie the Prophet, doth interpret the miſticall Table, which is the vnbloudie ſacrifice. Well, the reader ſhall ſée the wordes that folow immediately in the ſame place. Thymiama verò purum, appellat ſacras preces, quae poſt hoſtiam offeruntur. Hic enim ſuffitus Deum refocillat. Non is qui à terrenis radicibus ſumitur: ſed qui a puro corde exhalatur. And he calleth the holy prayers that are offered after the ſacrifice, pure incenſe. For this ſwéete perfume is a refreſhing to God. Not that which is taken from the rootes that grow in the earth: but that which is breathed out of a pure hart.

In mine aunſwere to the ninth diuiſion of your former ſermon: I hauehave noted out of this ſame Chryſoſtome, in his .17. Chryſoſt. in Epiſt. ad Heb. ho. 17.Homily vponupon the Epiſtle to the Hebrues, that the fathers vſed to cal the ſacrament of the bodie of Chriſt a ſacrifice, and yet they vnderſtood it to be but a remembraunce of that ſacrifice that Chriſt offered on the Croſſe once for all.

Of which ſacrifice, that ſame Chryſoſtome wryteth in this ſame Homily that you cite vponupon the .95. Pſalme, ſaying. Omnino magnus erat & modo carens, numerus ſacrificiorum in lege: quae omnia, noua gratia ſuperueniens, vno complectitur ſacrificio, vnam ac veram ſtatuens hoſtiam. The number of ſacrifices in the lawe was verie great, and without meaſure: which the grace that is come vponupon vsus, doth comprehend all in one ſacrifice, appoynting but one true ſacrifice. That this is ſpoken of that one ſacrifice, that Chriſt did offer on the Croſſe once for all: is plaine by that which doth immediately folowe. For he ſayth. Habemus autem & nos in nobis ipſis, varias immolationes. &c. And we alſo hauehave in our ſelues, ſundrie offerings, which do not procéede according to the lawe: but are ſuch as be ſéemeth for the Euangelicall grace. Wilt thou knowe theſe ſacrifices which the Church hath, when the Euangelicall ſacrifice doth without bloud, without ſmoke, without Altare and p. 60other ceremonies aſcende vp vntounto God, and what the pure and vndefiled ſacrifice is? Hearken to the holy ſcripture, which doth plainly expounde vntounto thée, this difference and varietie. The firſt ſacrifice therefore, is that which I hauehave ſpoken of before, that ſpirituall and miſticall ſacrifice, whereof Paule ſayth thus. Be yée folowers of God, as dearely beloued children, and walke in louelove, euen as Chriſt hath loued vsus. &c.

What ſacrifices y^e church offereth to God.And after this he maketh a ſhort reherſall of all thoſe ſacrifices, that the Church of Chriſt hath to offer to God, and he ſayth thus. Habes igitur primum ſacrificium illud ſalutare donum, ſecundum Martyrium, tertium deprecationis, quartum iubilationis, quintum iuſticiae, ſextum elemoſinae, ſeptimum laudis, octauum compunctionis, nonum humilitatis, decimum praedicationis. Thou haſt therefore the firſt ſacrifice, which is that healthfull ſacrifice, the ſecond martyrdome, the thirde of prayer, the fourth of reioyſing after victorie, the fift of righteouſneſſe, the ſixt of almoſe, the ſeuenth of prayſe, the eight of inward ſorrow for ſinne, the ninth of humilitie, the tenth of preaching.

By this it is manifeſt, that when Chryſoſtome ſpeaketh of one ſacrifice that comprehendeth all the ſacrifices of the olde lawe: he meaneth that one ſacrifice that Chriſt did offer in his owne perſon once for all. And when he ſpeaketh of thoſe ſacrifices that the Church hath to offer to God: he meaneth of ſuch as be offered without bloud, without ſmoke, without Altare, and without other ceremonies. He meaneth therefore nothing leſſe, then to maintaine your maſſing ſacrifice.

Auguſt. cont. Iudeos.The wordes that you cite out of Auſten contra Iudaos: make nothing for you. For he ſpeaketh there of that ſacrifice: that I hauehave here declared Chryſoſtome to ſpeake of. As doth right wel appéere by that which foloweth in the ſame booke. For he ſayth. Accedite ad eum qui ante oculos veſtros glorificatur, ambulando non laborabitis: ibi enim acceditis, vbi creditis. Come vntounto him that is glorified in your preſence, it ſhall not be painefull for you to walke, for you do come vntounto him euen there, where ye doe beleue. And againe he ſayth. Come let vsus walke in the light of the Lorde: becauſe his name is great among the Gentiles. And in the place p. 61that you ſay you omit, leaſt ye ſhould be tedious. &c. S. Auſten ſayth thus. Incenſum enim, quod grece thymiama, Auguſt con… aduerſ. legis. lib. 11. cap. 20.ſicut expoſuit Iohannes in Apocalipſi, orationes ſunt ſanctorum. &c. For the incenſe, which in Gréeke is called Thymiama, as ſaint Iohn doth expound it in his Reuelations: are the prayers of the Saintes. Leaſt I therefore ſhould be tedious, and to curious in ſo plaine a matter: I omitte much that might be brought againſt your aſſertion: both out of Auſten in the places that you hauehave here cited, and other of his workes, and alſo out of the reſt of the fathers.

Ye hauehave heard the thing proued by the Goſpell, by the Prophet, WATSON Diuiſion. 25.nowe heare the proofe of the figure taken out of the lawe. The Pſalme ſayth. Tues ſacerdos in aeternum, ſecundum ordinem Melchiſedech. Pſal. 109.Ps 109Thou art (meaning Chriſt) a prieſt after the order of Melchiſedech.

Melcheſedech was a prieſt of the moſt higheſt God, as appeareth both by his wordes and factes, in that he bleſſed Abraham, and alſo receyued tythes of him, whoſe oblation was breade and wine, which he offered to God meeting with Abraham comming from the ſpoyle of the kings.Gene. 14.Gen 14

As for ſuch fond cauillations, as ſome make for that the booke ſayth, non obtulit, ſed protulit, I let paſſe, as thinges nothing furthering their purpoſe, nor yet hindring ours.

This is plaine by ſaint Paule, that eueryevery Biſhop and Prieſt is ordeyned to offer ſacrifice. Hebr. 8.Heb 8If Chriſt our ſauiour be a Prieſt, and that after the order of Melchiſedech, as the Pſalme, and ſaint Paule do witneſſe, Pſal. 109.Ps 109then it muſt nedes folow, that Chriſt had ſome thing to offer, which is nothing but himſelfe, and to no creature but to God, which he was himſelfe, ſeing eueryevery ſacrifice is that honour that is due only to God And that he offered himſelfe after the order of Melchiſedech, which muſt be vnderunder the formes of breade and wine. For that was the order and maner of Melcheſedech. Which kinde of offering he neuer made, except it were in his laſt ſupper, and for that cauſe and reaſon we may conclude that Chriſt in his ſupper did offer himſelfe to his p. 62father for vsus, not by ſhedding of his bloud by death, which was the order and maner of Aarons offering, but without ſhedding of his bloud vnderunder the fourmes of bread and wine which was the order of Melchiſedech.

And that this is not my priuate collection, but the minde of all the auncient fathers, I ſhall with your pacience recite their ſentences.

Cyprian li. 2. Epiſt. 3.Saint Ciprian ſayth, Qui magis Sacerdos Dei ſummi, quam dominus noſter Ieſus Chriſtus qui ſacrificium deo patri obtulit, & obtulit hoc idem quod, Melchiſedech, id eſt, panem & vinum, ſuum ſcilicii corpus & ſanguinem. Who is more the Prieſt of the higheſt GOD then our Lord Ieſus Chriſt who offered a ſacrifice to God the father, and offered the ſame that Melchiſedech did, that is to ſay, bread and wine, that is to ſay his body and bloud.

And a little after he ſayth: Qui eſt plenitudo veritatem praefiguratae imaginis adimpleuit. Chriſt which is the fulneſſe fulfilled the truth of this image that was figurate before.

By theſe places of Ciprian we learne, that Melchiſedech and his offering were figures of Chriſt, and his offering in his ſupper, and like as Melchiſedech offered breade and wine, ſo Chriſt being the truth offered his bodie and bloud vnderunder the formes of bread and wine. And leaſt anye man ſhould be offended with that Cyprian ſayth, hoc idem quod Melchiſedech, the ſame that Melchiſedech. Heare what ſaint Hierom ſayth more plainely. Quomodo Melchiſedech obtulit panem & vinum, ſic & tu offeres corpus tuum & ſanguinem, verum panem & verū vinum. Hiero. in Pſal. 109.Ps 109Like as Melchiſedech offered bread and wine: ſo thou ſhalt offer thy body and bloud, the true bread, and the true wine.

The other was the figuratiue breade and wine, this is the true breade and wine, the truth of that figure, not the ſame in ſubſtance, but the ſame in myſterie.

Paula Epiſt. ad Marcellā.The ſame ſaint Hierome among his Epiſtles hath an Epiſtle of the godly matrone Paula ad Marcellam. wherein be theſe wordes. Recurre ad Geneſim & Melchiſedech Regem Salem. Huius principem inuenies ciuitatis, qui iam tunc in tipo Chriſti panem & p. 63vinum obtulit, & miſterium Chriſtianum in ſaluatoris ſanguine & corpore dedicauit. Returne (ſayth Paula) to the booke of Geneſis and to Melchiſedech the king of Salem, and thou ſhalt find the prince of that Citie, which euen then in the figure of Chriſt offered bread and wine, and did dedicate the miſtery or ſacrament of the Chriſtians in the bloud and bodye of our ſauiour.

Marke in this moſt manifeſt place the oblation of the figure, which is breade and wine, and the oblation of the truth, which is the miſterie of vsus Chriſten men, the bodie and bloud of our ſauiour Chriſt.

And it is to be noted, what is ment by this word (order) which ſaint Hierome expoundeth thus. Hiero. queſtio in Geneſim.Myſterium noſtrum in verbo ordinis ſignificauit, nequaquam per Aaron irrationabilibus victimis immolandis, ſed oblato pane & vino .i. corpore & ſanguine domini Ieſu. By this worde (order) he did ſignifie and expreſſe our miſterie, not by offering of vnreaſonable and brute beaſtes as Aaron did, but by the oblation of bread and wine, that is to ſay, the bodie and bloud of our Lord Ieſus.

After this fathers minde, order is taken for the maner of offering, not by ſhedding of bloud, but vnbloudily, as we offer Chriſtes bodie and bloud in our miſtery. For Chriſtes offering, concerning the ſubſtaunce of it was but one, but concerning the order and maner it was diuerſe, vppon the croſſe after the order of Aaron, in the ſupper after the order of Melchiſedech. For ſo ſaint Auguſtine ſayth: Auguſt. in Pſalm. 33.Ps 33Coram regno patris ſui, id eſt, Iudaeorum mutauit vultum ſuum, quia erat ibi ſacrificium ſecundum ordinem Aaron, & poſtea ipſe de corpore & ſanguine ſuo inſtituit ſacrificium ſecundū ordinem Melchiſedech Before the kingdome of his Father, that is to ſay the Iewes, hee chaunged his countenance, for there he was a ſacrifice after the order of Aaron, & afterward he did inſtitute the ſacrifice of his bodie and bloud, after the order of Melchiſedech.

Marke the diuerſitie and diſtinction of theſe two offerings of Chriſt, not in ſubſtaunce but in order, that is to ſay, the maner: and that Chriſt did inſtitute the ſacrifice of p. 64his bodie and bloud to bee offered of vsus after the order of Melchiſedech, which thing he expreſſeth more plainely in an other booke expounding a place of Eccleſiaſtes. Non eſt bonum homini niſi quod manducabit & bibet, Auguſt. De Ciuitate Dei. li. 17. Cap. 20.ſaying thus. Quid credibilius dicere intelligitur, quam quod ad participiationem menſae huius pertinet, quam & ſacerdos ipſe mediator noui Teſtamenti exlabit ſecundum ordinem Melchiſedech de corpore & ſanguine ſuo? Id enim ſacrificium ſucceſsit omnibus illis ſacrificijs veteris teſtamenti quae immolabantur in vmbra futuri. What is more credible we ſhould thinke he ment by thoſe wordes, then that pertayneth to the participation of this table, which Chriſt himſelfe a prieſt and mediatour of the newe Teſtament doth exhibet after the order of Melchiſedech of his bodie and bloud? For that ſacrifice did ſuccede all the other ſacrifices of the olde Teſtament, which were offered in the ſhadowe of this to come.

What can be playner then this to ſhewe the figure of our myſtery to be abrogated, and the truth which is our ſacrifice in the bodie and bloud of Chriſt in fourme of bread and wine to ſucceede.

Oecumenius in Epiſt. ad Hebreos.But to ende this matter, heare one place playneſt of all which Oecumenius hath vponupon this place of Saint Paule. Tu es ſacerdos in aeternum &c. in theſe wordes. Significat ſermo, quod non ſolum Chriſtus obtulit incruentam hoſtiam (ſi quidem ſuū ipſius corpus obtulit) verum etiam qui ab ipſo fungentur ſacerdotio, quorum Deus pontifex eſſe dignatus eſt ſine ſanguinis effuſione offerent. Nam hoc ſignificat (in aeternum.) Neque enim de ea quae ſemel à deo facta eſt oblàtio, & hoſtia dixiſsit inaeternum, ſed reſpiciens ad preſentes ſacrificos, per quos medios Chriſtus ſacrificat & ſacrificatur, qui etiam in myſtica coena modum illis tradidit huiuſmodi ſacrificij. The worde meaneth, that not onelyonly Chriſt offered an vnbloudy ſacrifice, for he offered his owne bodie, but alſo that they which vnderunder hym vſe the function of a prieſt (whoſe Biſhop he doth vouchſafe to be) ſhall offer without ſhedding of bloud. For that ſignifieth the worde (euermore.) For concerning that oblation and ſacrifice, which was once made of God, he would neuer ſay (euermore.) But hauing an eye to thoſe prieſtes, p. 65that be now, by whoſe mediation Chriſt doth ſacrifice and is ſacrificed, who alſo in his myſticall ſupper did by tradition teach them the maner of ſuch a ſacrifice.

This authoritie if it were any thing doubtfull, I would ſtand in it to open ſuch poyntes, as were conteyned therin but being ſo manifeſt as it is, it nedeth no more, but to deſire the hearer or reader to wey it, and he ſhall ſee this matter we go about to proue, fully reſolued both by the inſtitution of Chriſt in his laſt ſupper, and alſo by the figure of Melchiſedech in the olde lawe. This aucthorities although there bee manye mo, yet I thinke them ſufficient, and I thinke thereby the matter ſufficiently proued.

Neyther by the Goſpell, nor by the prophet hauehave ye proued,CROWLEY. the thing that you tooke in hande to prooue: no more doth that which you would hauehave your Auditorie harken to here, proue the figure taken out of the olde lawe, in ſuch ſort as you affirme it.

Saint Paule, writing to the Hebrues:Hebr. 7.Heb 7 goeth about to diſwade them from the vayne confidence they had in the ſacrifices and ceremonies of Moſes lawe, and to perſwade them to put their truſt in that one only ſacrifice that Chriſt had made, offring himſelfe once for all. And leaſt they ſhould reiect his doctrine as hauing no ground in the holy ſcriptures: he putteth them in minde of Melchiſedech, who was a figure of Chriſt. And of his prieſthood: which was alſo a figure of Chriſtes prieſthood. Firſt, he was a figure of Chriſt (ſayth ſaint Paule) in that he was called Melchiſedech, which is by interpretation,The minde of Paule in making mention of Melchiſedech. the king of righteouſneſſe, and the king of Salem, which is, the king of peace. And in that he was a prieſt of the moſt high God, and hath neyther beginning nor ende of dayes noted in the holy hyſtories: his prieſthood ſéemed to be an euerlaſting prieſthood. And therefore (ſayth ſaint Paule) he is lykened to the ſonne of God that is euerlaſting, and hath an euerlaſting prieſthood, and is alwayes able to ſaue them that ſeeke ſaluation at his hande, bicauſe he lyueth euer to make interceſſion for vsus.

This is the minde of ſaint Paule, as may eaſily appéere, to p. 66as many as will with indifferent mindes read that which he hath written in the ſeuenth Chapter of his Epiſtle to the Hebrues. But contrary to this meaning, doe you moſt wylfully gather: that Melchiſedech was a figure of Chriſt and of his prieſthood, in that he vſed to offer to God, a ſacrifice of bread and wine. This you ſuck out of your owne fingers, and out of the dugs of ſuch dreaming Doctors as you your ſelfe are: although you would ſéeme to hauehave learned al that you ſpeake, in the ſchoole of Cyprian Auſten, Hierome, and ſuch other auncient and learned fathers.

Cyprian li. 2. Epiſt. 3.Cyprian ſayth, Qui magis Sacerdos Dei ſummi &c. Here doth Cyprian affirme that Paule hath written to the Hebrues, concerning Chriſts prieſthood and ſacrifice. If Melchiſedech were a prieſt of the moſt high God, bicauſe he offered ſacrifice to God: why ſhould not Chriſt be a prieſt of the ſame high God, ſeing he hath offered ſacrifice to the ſame high God alſo? And if Melchiſedech did offer bread and wine:Iohn. 6.John 6 Chriſt did the ſame, for he offred his owne body and bloud, which is lyuely bread and wine, the foode that féedeth into euerlaſting lyfe. When this place is well weighed: what aduantage can you hauehave by it, to prooue that Chriſt offered himſelfe to his heauenly father, in the bread and wine of his laſt ſupper? The reader may ſée more of this, in that which I hauehave aunſwered to the ninth and tenth diuiſions of your former Sermon.

As touching the vnderſtanding of the wordes a little after, where Cyprian ſayth. Qui eſt plenitudo. &c: I referre the reader to the wordes that folow a little after them. Where Cyprian vſeth the wordes of wiſedome ſpoken by Salomon,Prouerb. 9. in this wyſe. Qui eſt inſipiens declinet ad me & indigentibus ſenſu dixit. Venite & edite de meis panibus, & bibete vinum quod miſcui vobis. Vinum mixtum declarat, id eſt Calicem Domini aqua & vino mixtum, prophetica voce denunciat, vt appareat in paſsione dominica id eſſe geſtum, quod fuerat praedictum. Wiſedome (ſayth Salomon) ſent forth hir ſeruauntes, ſaying. Let him that is fooliſhe, turne in vntounto me. And to ſuch as lack vnderſtanding ſhe ſayde. Come and eate of my bread, and drinke the wine that I hauehave mixed for you. Shée declareth (ſayth Cyprian) that the wine is mixed. That is to ſay, ſhée doth with p. 67the voyce of prophecie declare, that the Lordes cup is mixed with water and wine: that it might appéere that in the Lordes paſſion, that thing was done in déede, which had bene told of before.

By theſe words of Cyprian, it appéereth plainely: that the cauſe why he woulde hauehave water mixed with the wine in the celebration of the Lordes ſupper, was to ſhewe that the prophecie which Salomon vttered in the perſon of wiſedome, was fulfilled in the paſſion of Chriſt, when water and bloud did iſſue out of his ſide. And alſo to imitate the example of Chriſt: who (as Cyprian ſuppoſeth) did not drinke wine without the mixture of water. His whole purpoſe therfore in this Epiſtle,Cyprians purpoſe in his Epiſtle to his brother. being to diſproue the doing of thoſe which vſed to miniſter with water without wine: he ſought for many figures in the olde Teſtament, which might ſéeme to be prophecies of Chriſtes miniſtration in his laſt ſupper. And he applyeth them to proue: that water alone could not ſerue to ſignifie that which Chriſt would hauehave to be ſignified by it. And (as in ſuch caſe it may eaſily happen) when he findeth a figure, wherein mention is made of ſuch mixture: he imagineth that Chriſt mixed water with the wine, and he conceyueth in his minde, that the wine muſt ſignifie Chriſt, and the water, the people. And ſo he maketh as great a matter of the omitting of the water, as he did before, of the leauing out of the wine. Not remembring, that he had at the firſt applied to his purpoſe, Noes drinking of wine, and Mechiſedechs bringing forth of bread and wine: where there is no mention at all, of water mixed wyth the wine.

But as I hauehave written in mine aunſwere to the .24. diuiſion of your former Sermon: let vsus not forget the wordes of Eraſmus, in the Epiſtle that he wrote before the workes of Hilarius: Eraſmus in Epiſtola ad Lectorem Hilarij.which are theſe. Nemo, quantumuis eruditus & oculatus. &c. There is no man be he neuer ſo well learned and circumſpect, that doth not ſlip, and in ſome point ſhewe himſelfe to lack ſight, that no man ſhould forget them to be men: and that we ſhould read them with choiſe, with iudgement, yea and with fauour alſo, as men. Wordes worthy to be printed in memorie, and practiſed in the reading of all mennes wrytings.

p. 68Nowe, fearing leaſt ſome man ſhould miſtake the wordes of Cyprian when he ſayth.Hiero. in Pſal. 109.Ps 109 Hoc idom quod Melchiſedech: you cite the interpretation that ſaint Hierome maketh vponupon the pſalme .109. to proue that Chriſt offering his owne body and bloud in his laſt ſupper, did offer the ſame thing that Melchiſedech did, not in ſubſtaunce, but in miſterie. I wyll let the reader ſée, what Hierome hath written: immediatly before and after the words that you cite. Firſt he ſayth thus. Superfluum eſt nos de iſto verſiculo velle interpretari: cum ſanctus Apoſtolus ad Hebreos pleniſsime diſputauit. Ipſe enim ait. Iſte eſt Melchiſedech, ſine patre, ſine matre, ſine generatione. Et interpretatur ibi diligentiſsimè: quare ſine Patre. &c. It is a thing ſuperfluous, for vsus to go about to make an interpretation of this verſe, ſeing that the holy Apoſtle hath in his Epiſtle to the Hebrues, reaſoned this matter at the full. For he ſayth. This (that is to ſay Chriſt) is Melchiſedech: Wherein Chriſt is like Melchiſedech.without father, without mother, and without generation. And he doth there moſt diligently enterprete: wherefore he is without father, without mother, and without generation. And all eccleſiaſticall perſons doe ſay. That Chriſt is ſayde to be without father in that he is man, and without mother, in that he is God. Let vsus therefore interprete this onelyonly: thou art a prieſt for euer after the order of Melchiſedech. Let vsus onelyonly declare this thing. Wherfore he hath ſaid: after y^e order. According to the order, is as much as to ſay. Thou ſhalt not be a prieſt according to the Iewiſh ſacrifices: but thou ſhalt be a prieſt after the order of Melchiſedech. And then follow thoſe words that you hauehave cyted. Quomodo enim. &c. And immediatly after thoſe wordes he ſayth. Iste Melchiſedech, ista myſteria quae habemus dedit nobis. &c. This Melchiſedech, hath giuen vsus theſe myſteries that we hauehave. It is he that ſayde. He that eateth my fleſh and drinketh my bloud. He hath giuen vsus his ſacrament: after the order of Melchiſedech.

No indifferent reader can iudge, that ſaint Hierome meaneth here to teach, that Chriſt did at his laſt ſupper, offer his body and bloud, vnderunder the formes of bread and wine, as you affirme. But as Melchiſedech did offer bread and wine, ſo Chriſt ſhould offer vponupon the croſſe, hys owne body and bloud (which is the true p. 69bread and true wine) and giuegive vsus a ſacrament, to be frequented in the remembraunce thereof.

But in that Epiſtle, that Paula and Euſtochium wrote vntounto Marcella: You hauehave found a moſt manifeſt place.Paula & Euſtoch. ad Marcellam. Recurre ad Geneſim, & Melchiſedech (ſay they) &c. Here I muſt tell you, that where you doe in the Engliſhe make Melchiſedech, the Datiue caſe, and in the Latine, put the point Periodus, after Salem: you ſhew your ſelfe not to vnderſtand the grammaticall ſenſe, which is thus. Returne to the booke Geneſis, and thou ſhalt finde, that Melchiſedech king of Salem, was Prince of thys Citie, which euen then. &c.

Men of your ſort, are very néere driuen:Watſon is neere driuen. when they alledge womens wordes or wrytings, for proofe of matters ſo diuine, as is that which in this Sermon you treate of. But graunt it were Saint Hierome himſelfe, that wrote that Epiſtle: might not Melchiſedech offer bread and wine in a figure of Chriſt, and dedicate the myſterie of Chriſtians: but it muſt néedes folow, that Chriſt did at his laſt ſupper, offer his owne body and bloud vnderunder the formes of bread and wine, as you doe affirme? I thinke none that is learned in Logick will graunt that argument.

But (as you hauehave ſlightly touched before) the booke hath not Obtulit, but Protulit. He brought forth bread and wine.Watſon maketh light of that which he is not able to waigh. As lightly as you let paſſe, the reaſons that men make againſt your opinion, by the vauntage that the text gyueth being Protulit, and not Obtulit: neyther you nor any of your ſort, ſhall euer be able to aunſwere, otherwiſe then by calling them fond cauillations, as you doe.

In the Latine, theſe two Verbes are ſometime vſed, both in one ſignification: but Profero, is neuer found in that ſignification, that you and ſuch other doe vſe Offero, when you ſpeake of Melchiſedechs comming forth to méete Abraham, and offering him bread and wine, to refreſhe himſelfe and his companie withall.

The Hebrue interpretors, who doe beſt know the ſignification of the wordes of that tongue, wherein that hyſtory was firſt written: doe teach that it was the maner in thoſe dayes, for ſuch as remayned at home in peace, to come forth againſt them that p. 70returned from battayle with victorie, bringing with them bread and wine, to refreſhe the wearie Souldiours withall, and ſo receyue them friendly.

Antiquit. li. 1 Capit. 18.Ioſephus, a Iewe borne, and ſo well learned in the Iewes lawes, and hiſtories, that he was able to write a continuall hiſtorie of the antiquitie, lawes and ceremonies of the Iewes, and of their warres: doth when he commeth to this part of the hiſtorie, write thus. Suſcipit que cum rex Melchiſedech, quod ſignificat rex iuſtus, & erat vti que , & ſine dubio talis: ita vt propter hanc cauſam, etiam Dei ſacerdos eſſet Solimorum, quam Ciuitatem poſtea Hieroſalymam vocauerūt. Miniſtrauit autem iſte Melchiſedech, Abraham exercitui xenia, & multam abundantiam rerum oportunarum ſimul exhibuit: & ſuper epulas eum collaudare caepit, & benedicere deum, qui ei ſubdiderat mimicos. Abraham verò dante ei etiam decimas ſpoliorum, munus accepit. And hée was receyued of king Melchiſedech, which ſignifieth a righteous king, and verily and without all doubt he was ſuch a one: ſo that for that cauſe he was alſo Gods prieſt in the Citie Solyma, which Citie men did afterwarde call Hieroſolyma. And this Melchiſedech did miniſter gifts to the armie of Abraham: and he did alſo giuegive them great abundaunce of things néedefull. And as they were at meat: he began to prayſe him, and to bleſſe God, which had ſubdued his enimies to him. And when Abraham gaue him the tythes of the ſpoyle: he receyued the gift.

Hiero. ad Euagrium. Iohn. 3.John 3Saint Hierome in his Epiſtle ad Euagrium, doth proue that the Citie Salem, whereof Melchiſedech was king: was not that which was afterward called Hieruſalem, but that Salem that is mencioned in the Goſpell, where Iohn baptized bicauſe there was plentie of water there. He doeth therefore diſproue, not onelyonly Ioſephus, but alſo all Chriſten writers: for that they ſuppoſe Melchiſedech to hauehave béene king of that Citie, which was called Hieruſalem after his dayes, but in his dayes Salem.

He alloweth the iudgement of thoſe which doe ſuppoſe that Melchiſedech was the firſt ſonne of Noe, and that he liued after Abrahams death .35. yeares at the leaſt (which is eaſie to be ſeene by the ſupputation of the yeares from the byrth of Sem, to the p. 71death of Abraham, which is .565. yeares, and the whole tyme of Sems life, is .600. yeares) but fayling ſomewhat in the ſupputation, he ſayth that Sem liued after Abraham .40. yeares.

He alloweth alſo the opinion of Ioſephus and other, which thinke that Melchiſedech brought forth bread and wine, to refreſhe Abraham and his ſeruauntes, in their returne from the ſlaughter of the kinges. Yea, and for this matter that you make ſo light of, he citeth the Hebrue text: tranſlating the Hebrue verbe Hotzi, Protulit, not obtulit, thereby making his iudgement of that place manifeſt.

If you can proue that Hierome or any other wryter, hauehave in this place vſed obtulit in any other ſenſe, then protulit is here vſed in the plaine text: I muſt be bolde to vſe Hieroms owne wordes againſt himſelfe and the reſt. In his Commentarie vponupon Math he ſayth: Hoc quia de ſcripturis non habet authoritatem, In Math. 23.Matt 23eadem facilitate contemnitur, qua probatur. Becauſe this thing hath none authoritie of the ſcripture: it is as eaſily contemned, as alowed. And in his Apologie of his bookes againſt Iouinian he ſayeth.Apolog. lib. aduerſ. Ioui. Commentatoris officium eſt, non quid ipſe velit, ſed quid ſentiat ille quem interpretatur exponere. Alioqui, ſi contraria dixerit: non tam interpres erit, quam aduerſarius, eius quem nititur explanare. Certe, vbicun que ſcripturas non interpretor & libere de meo ſenſu loquor: The dutie of a good interpreter.arguat me cui libet, durum quid dixiſſe contra nuptias. It is the duetie of one that doth comment vponupon the wrytings of other, to expound, not what he himſelfe luſteth: but what the meaning of him is, whome he doth enterpret. Otherwiſe, if he ſhall ſay contrarie: he ſhall rather be an aduerſarie, then an interpretour of him whome he would explane.

Truely, whenſoeuer I doe not interpret the ſcriptures, but doe fréely vtter mine owne meaning: let him that luſteth reprehend me, as one y^t hath vttred ſome hard ſaying againſt mariage.

Yet one other place you cite out of Hierome, Hiero. queſt. in Geneſim.to vnderprop your Popiſhe prieſthood withall. Myſterium noſtrum. &c. By thys worde (order) he did ſignifie. &c. If you had bene diſpoſed to deale plainely, you would hauehave ioyned the former part of the Oration with the latter: and not hauehave picked out the latter to ſerue your p. 72purpoſe: leauing out the firſt.

Melchiſedechs bleſſing declared.Saint Hierome ſayth that the Apoſtle ſaint Paule, in his Epiſtle to the Hebrues, making mention of Melchiſedechs being without father and mother: doth referre it vntounto Chriſt, and by Chriſt, to the Church of the Gentiles. For (ſayth he) the glorie of eueryevery head, is referred to the members, bicauſe one that was not circumciſed, did bleſſe Abraham that was circumciſed: and in Abraham he bleſſed Leui, and by Leui, he bleſſed Aaron of whome the prieſthood did afterwarde come. Whereof he would hauehave vsus gather, that the prieſthood of that Church that was not circumciſed: did bleſſe the circumciſed prieſthood of the Synagoge. And then folow the wordes that you ſhould hauehave cyted. Quod autem ait, Tu es ſacerdos in aeternum ſecundum ordinem Melchiſedech: Myſterium noſtrum in verbo ordinis ſignificatur. &c: as you hauehave cyted. Our myſterie is ſignified (ſayth ſaint Hierome) but you tell not vponupon what occaſion he ſayde ſo. Where as the Apoſtle ſayth (ſayde ſaint Hierome) thou art a prieſt after the order of Melchiſedech: our myſterie is ſignified in the worde, order. Not by Aaron in offering vp ſacrifices of vnreaſonable beaſtes: but by bread and wine that was offered, that is the bodye and bloud of the Lorde Ieſus. Thus farre ſaint Hierome.

You muſt néedes graunt, that our myſterie, is our coupling togither into members of one body in Chriſt, wherof ſaint Paule ſpeaketh to the Epheſians. When he ſayth. Myſterium hoc magnum eſt, Epheſ. 5.Eph 5ego autem dico in Chriſto & Eccleſia. This myſterie is great ſayth Saint Paule: but I ſpeake it of Chriſt and the congregation. Of the ſame ſpeaketh ſaint Auſten in his Sermon Ad Infantes. Where he ſayth thus. Vos estis corpus Chriſti & membra: Si ergo vos eſtis corpus Chriſti & membra: myſterium veſtrum in menſa Domini poſitum eſt, Citatur à Beda in collect.myſterium Domini accipitis. Ad id quod eſtis, amen reſpondetis. &c. You are the body and members of Chriſt. If you therefore be the body and members of Chriſt: your myſterie is ſet vponupon the Lordes table, you receyue the Lordes myſterie. To the thing that you your ſelues are, you aunſwere Amen. And in aunſwering you doe ſubſcribe.

This myſterie was not ſignified by Aarons ſacrifices (ſayth p. 73ſaint Hierome): but by the bread and wine, that Melchiſedech brought forth to refreſhe Abraham and his Souldiours withall.1. Cor. 10. Auguſt. in Ioh. Tract. 26.1 Cor 10 Which bread and wine was the body and bloud of the Lord Ieſus: euen as the Manna that fell from heauen, and the water that iſſued out of the rock were the ſame.

Your application of this place of Hierome, might well hauehave bene ſpared therfore: if you had dealt plainly with your auditory. For it is now manifeſt to the reader: that ſaint Hierome ment nothing leſſe, then to teache that Chriſt offered himſelfe once at two times, and after two orders:The order of Melchiſedech declared but he buyldeth vponupon ſaint Paules wordes, who ſayth that Chriſt was not a prieſt to offer after Aarons order, but after the order of Melchiſedech, an eternall and euerlaſting ſacrifice.

Now muſt Auſten help you to patch out this matter.Auguſt. in Pſal. 33. & De Ciuit. Dei li. 17. cap. 20.Ps 33 VponUpon the tytle of .33. Pſalme, he ſayth thus. Coram Regno Patris ſui. &c. And vponupon this ſentence of Eccleſiaſtes, Non eſt bonum homini. &c: he ſayth thus. Quid credibilius dicere. &c.

If ſaint Auſten ſhould in theſe two places teach, as in your application, you doe beare your Auditorie in hande that he doth teache:Watſon would hauehave Auſten teach falſe doctrine. then were his doctrine moſt falſe and contrarie to the Euangelicall hyſtorie. For where as the Goſpell ſayth, that Chriſt did inſtitute the ſacrament of his body and bloud, the night before he ſuffered: ſaint Auſten muſt ſay (if you apply his words aright) that he did firſt ſuffer, and then inſtitute the ſacrament of his body and bloud afterward.

But I will not for your pleaſure conceyue ſuch an opinion of Auſten: for I know he was farre from that ſhamefull errour and open falſhood. He taught truely, that in the time of the olde lawe among the people of the Iewes: Chriſt was a ſacrifice after the order of Aaron, for by eueryevery bloudy ſacrifice, was the death of Chriſt plainely ſet forth, to as many as had eyes to looke, and ſe thorow the ſhadow of the law. But after al thoſe ſacrifices that were offered, in the ſhadow of a thing to come: he prepared a ſacrifice after the order of Melchiſedech, that is euerlaſting, and that of his owne body and bloud, which is the foode that féedeth into euerlaſting lyfe.

p. 74And that this is ſaint Auſtens meaning: is playne by that which in the booke that you cite, De Ciuitate Dei, he addeth to the wordes that you cite. His words be theſe. Propter quod etiam vocem illam in pſalmo triceſimo & nono, eiuſdem mediatoris per Prophetam loquentis, agnoſcimus ſacrificium & oblationem noluiſti, corpus autem perfeciſti mihi, quia pro illis omnibus ſacrificijs & oblationibus, corpus eius offertur, & participantibus miniſtratur. Wherfore (ſayth ſaint Auſten) We doe acknowledge that voyce of the ſame Meditatour, ſpeaking by the Prophet in the Pſalme .39. in this wyſe: thou haſt not deſired ſacrifice and oblation, but thou haſt made me a perfite bodye, for his body is offered in ſtede of all thoſe ſacrifices and oblations, and is miniſtred to ſuch as be partakers thereof.

The continual offering of Chriſt.This ſacrifice, bicauſe it is eternall after the order of Melchiſedech, is ſtill preſently offered by the Meaditor Chriſt: who is both the prieſt and ſacrifice, and continually miniſtred, to them that be partakers thereof by faith, by that ſpiritual maner of miniſtration, whereby ſpirituall lyfe, is miniſtred from the head Chriſt to his members the Church.

But nowe, to ende this matter: your Auditorie muſt heare one place more, which is playneſt of all. Oecumenius hath ſaid, Significat ſermo. &c. If I might vſe ſuch libertie in cyting places, as you doe in this: I could eaſily finde plaine places ynough to proue whatſoeuer I luſted to take in hande. Where the author hath ſayde Significat ſermo, quod licet Chriſtus non obtulerit carentem ſanguine hoſtiam (ſiquidem ſuum ipſius corpus obtulit) attamen qui ab ipſo fungentur ſacerdotio. &c. The ſignification of this ſaying is: that although Chriſt did not offer a ſacrifice without bloud (for he offered his owne body) yet ſhall thoſe that ſhall after him execute the office of prieſthood (whoſe high prieſt God doth vouchſafe to be) offer without bloud. For that is ſignified by this ſaying. For euer. &c.

Theſe be the wordes of Oecumenius: as Hentenius hath tranſlated them out of the Gréeke. But you had promiſed your Auditorie a playner place then this was beyng thus tranſlated. For this is playne againſt all that you hauehave done before, in proouing that our Sauiour Chriſt did offer himſelfe without bloud. p. 75For this felow being thus tranſlated, ſayth: Although Chriſt did not offer a ſacrifice without bloud. &c.

Well therefore, to make the place plaine in déede, you hauehave amended the tranſlation, I trowe, and you hauehave ſayde: Significat ſermo, quod non ſolum Chriſtus obtulit incruentam hoſtiam (ſiquidem ſuum ipſius corpus obtulit) verum etiam qui ab ipſo. &c. The word meaneth, that not onelyonly Chriſt offered an vnbloudy ſacrifice (for he offered his owne body) but alſo they that ſhall vnderunder him vſe the function of a prieſt (whoſe Byſhop he doth vouchſafe to be) ſhall offer without ſhedding of bloud. Well, eyther you,Oecumenius belyed in tranſlating. or your friend Hentenius hauehave belyed the Gréeke. For here is playne contradiction. The one ſayth. Hath not offred: and the other ſayth, hath offered. Wherfore, it muſt néedes folow, that the one hath made a lye. And peraduenture if the Gréeke might be ſéene and well viewed: you might be founde falſe harlots both (for Hentenius was a Louaniſt. &c.) For who ſo readeth the reſt that Oecumenius hath collected out of other wryters that were before his time, and patched togither into one commentarie vponupon the Epiſtle to the Hebrues: he ſhall hauehave but little occaſion to thinke that Oecumenius could be of ſuch minde concerning the meaning of theſe wordes, Tu es ſacerdos in aeternum, thou art a prieſt for euer: as in this place that you cite, he ſheweth himſelfe to be, when he ſayth, Chriſt could not be ſayde to be a prieſt for euer, but in reſpect of thoſe ſacrifycing prieſtes that are now, by whoſe meanes he doth ſtill offer and is offred. For vponupon the tenth Chapter and theſe wordes, Singulis annis, he ſayth thus. An ne nos ſemper offerimus hoſtias ſanguine carentes? ſed vnius eiuſdem que mortis Chriſti memoriam facimus, & vnum Chriſti corpus, ſemper edimus. Doe we alwaies offer ſacrifices that hauehave no bloud? But we doe make a memoriall of that one and the ſelfe ſame death of Chriſt, and doe alway eate one body of Chriſt. And vponupon the worde Perpetuò, he ſayth: Quum vna perpetuò ſufficiat. Seing y^t one ſacrifice may ſuffice for euer. And vponupon theſe wordes. In certitudine fidei, In the certainty of fayth: he ſayth thus. Quoniam autem nihil eſt poſt haec viſibile: ne que templum, id enim eſt caelum, ne que Pontifex, is eſt Chriſtus, ne que victima, haec corpus eſt ipſius: neceſsaria in poſterum eſt fides. Verum quia contingit p. 76credere ſimul & haeſitare, ait. In certitudine fidei. Hoc eſt, vt certiſimus de his. Oecumenius his meaning made plaine.Bicauſe that hence forth there is nothing viſible, neither temple, for that is heauen, neyther high prieſt, for that is Chriſt, neyther ſacrifice, for that is his bodye: fayth is from this tyme forward neceſſarie. But bicauſe it doth happen, that a man doth at one time, both beleue and doubt: he ſayth in the certaintie of fayth, that is that we may be certaine of theſe things.

Many ſuch ſayings as this are in that Commentarie: wherefore, corrupting of the Author in tranſlating may be ſuſpected: as well on the behalfe of Hentenius, as you, although your doing doe more appéere then his. But graunt that Oecumenius hauehave written in Gréeke: euen as you hauehave reported him in Latine. Is he knowne to be of ſuch antiquitie and authoritie in the Church: that his gloſe muſt be of more authoritie & credit, then the playne wordes of the text? Saint Paule ſayth. Iam non eſt oblatio pro peccatis. There is nowe no oblation for ſinnes. Seing Chriſt hath by one oblation made perfite, ſuch as be ſanctified: what néedeth there any more offering for ſinne? For the cauſe of the continuaunce of the offering, was the imperfection of the offerings, which could neuer take away ſinne, but alway put the offerers in minde of one that was to come, who ſhould be able by one oblation once offered, fully to take away the ſinnes of the whole worlde.Oecumenius may hauehave no credite againſt ſaint Paule.

Your Oecumenius therefore, being a great many of hundred yeres after ſaint Paule (as may iuſtly be gathered, by that he wrote after ſo many of the Gréeke wryters as he nameth in his booke) ſhould nowe be credited in that which he wryteth contrarie to ſaint Paule, if that ſhould be beleued as taught by him, which you would ſo fayne maintaine by his wordes.