A Sparing Restraint of Many Lavish Untruths, Part 2 (2 of 5)

A Sparing Restraint of Many Lavish Untruths · Part 2 (2 of 5)

p. 46The B: of Saris.

If he make reconing of this worde dayly, where shall the Pope and Cardinals stande, that scarce sacrifice once in the yeare.

Harding.

The .50. vntruth. These Cardinals say Masse most dayes, and this Pope eueryevery day.

Dering.

Their kingdome is falling, therefore bylike they vnderprop it with so many Masses. But if it be so: Lorde how hath that adulterous citie multiplied hir whordomes? Well may the preachers say ouer hir, as the Prophets ouer Ierusalem. Wherfore should you be striken any more? The whole head is sicke, and the whole hart is heauie. There is nothing in hir but p. 47woundes, and swelling, and sores full of corruption.

The B. of Saris.

But the meaning of Hippolytus seemeth be these, that all faithfull people in this respect be priests, and bishops, like as Saint Peter also calleth them.

Harding.

The .51. vntruth. It seemeth not so.

Dering.

Why séemeth it not so? bicause, sayth maister Harding, neyther I take it so, nor any other Catholike.Reioin. fo. 59. But Maister Iuell thinketh so, and so do all good christians, and therefore it séemeth so. This is a proper vntruth.

Harding.

The .52. vntruth. Saint Peter calleth not the people by that name.

Dering.

Now sure good reader truth among these men is perished,Ier. 7.28.Jer 7:28 and gone out of theyr mouthes. Saint Peter sayth maister Harding, nameth not the people bishops, yet he nameth them priestes. Maister Harding graunteth now if it were no otherwise, maister Iuell saide true, bicause he nameth them priests. But Saint Peter nameth them by an higher name, and therfore confesse that they may be named bishops. He calleth them foreign, a kingly priesthoode.1. Pet. 2.5.1 Pet 2:5 And foreign, a holy priesthoode. And it is sayde in the Apocal. Christ hath made vsus foreign kings and priests vntounto God,Apo. 1.6. euen vntounto his father. As for Hippolytus worde foreign, let not maister Harding thinke that Maister Iuell taketh Saint Peter to attribute that name vntounto p. 48the lay people. Let the word go vntounto Hippolytus, from whom it came, it is neyther in Saint Peter, nor in the whole Testament. It is attributed neyther to the priestes, nor to the Bishops. This is maister Iuels saying. The priest, and the lay man, concerning the name priest, are one, and no difference of name giuen to eyther foreign in their proper significations, that is priestes I gladly leaue to maister Harding, and his felowes. It is giuen to no mortall men in the newe testament, But to Iupiters priest. Acto. 14. OnelyOnly our Sauiour Christ is our high priest, and that for euer after the order of Melchisedech, and without blasphemie against him, the name can bée no more giuen vntounto man,Ebre. 8.3. Ebre. 7. for as much as eueryevery priest is appointed to offer sacrifice. But he alone hath made that one sacrifice, whereby we are clensed for euer. And this Paule gathered well of the offering that Abraham made vntounto Melchisedech, writing that in Abraham Leui himselfe was giuen vp for tythe, being then in his fathers loynes, when that offering was made. So that in the appointed time, when Christ should be reueled, an euerlasting priest after the order of Melchisedech,Ebre. 7.10. the Leuiticall priesthoode shoulde be then ended, and no perticular men should be seperated any more to serue in our tabernacle, that is, to be the preachers of Christes gospell, and dispensers of his misteries, but eueryevery one is like accepted before God, all spirituall priestes before him. And as the publike minister shall aunswere for the sinnes of the people, if he do not tell them Gods threatnings against all iniquitie: so the father shall answere for the sonne, the maister for the man, the husbande for the wyfe,Apoc. 7.3. Leuit. 19.17.Rev 7:3Lev 19:17 and one christian man for another, if we beare not the name of our father written in our forehead, and openly in all places reforme one anothers offences, and suche as are vnderunder our rule, if wée doe not bring them vp in the feare of the Lorde. God for his merciemercy sake giuegive vsus hys grace, that we may consider our calling, which no doubt wée would doe, if we were well instructed, and deliuered from M. p. 49Hardings filthie priesthood, which beareth vsus in hand, y^t with Pardons, and Indulgences, and Massing abhominations, they could doe away our sinnes. And further who knoweth not, that the oblations, ceremonies, sacrifices, feastes, priesthoode, and all other rites, and customes of the olde law, were figures, and are verefied in Christ.1. Co. 5.8. 1. Co. 6. Rom. 12.1 Cor 5:81 Cor 6Rom 12 So Paule calleth Christ our Passeouer, newnesse, and sinceritie of life, our vnleauened bread, our bodies, our temple, our wickednesse, our leauen, the fruite of our lips, our offering, our selues, our sacrifice. So Saint Peter calleth Christ, our corner stone, his children, the liuing stones, their profession, the holy temple,1. Pet. 21 Pet 2 and their obedience, a kingly priesthoode.

The B. of Saris.

Some of them hauehave saide, the people are doggs, and swine.

Harding.

The .53. vntruth. I say not so.

Dering.

Maister Harding calleth them swine in plaine wordes, he sayth further, they are vnreuerent, & of an impure life.Art. 15. fo. 155 Againe he sayth, they are curious, rashe, vnreuerent, contemptuous in all holy things. Now to ioyne all these,Confu. Ap…l. par. 5. cap. 3 Diui. 4. that the people are vnreuerent, impure, curious, rashe, & contemptuous swine, it is as much I thinke, as if he called them doggs, and swine. How be it, whether tearmes soeuer he vsed, they are vnreuerent, impure, rashe, contemptuous, and swinish sayings, and if he had bene ashamed of them, he would not for so slender an vntruth, hauehave called those wordes againe to memorie. But the common saying is, past shame, and past grace.

The B. of Saris.

The .7. deuis. Yet now must their negligence be the rule of Christs religion.

p. 50Harding.

The .54. vntruth. I say not so.

Dering.

Looke well on maister Iuels wordes, thou shalt sée maister Harding is not named. Againe consider this maner of speaking, thou shalt sée this vntruth hath no groūd but ignorance. Maister Harding doth confesse, that his priuate Masse were not good, in case the people were more diligent to receyue, but considering their vndeuocion, it is not méete, that the dayly sacrifice should cease. This maister Iuell reporteth as a thing very absurd, that the negligence of the people shoulde be the rule of Christes religion. And what is here vntrue? who is so ignorant, that knoweth not, to make any such vain saying by repetition the more contemtuous, that it is vsuall to chaunge the wordes? Well knew M. Harding, that the learned here would soone espie his doing, but he accounteth it a small matter to deceiue those, whom he taketh as vnreuerent swine. &c.

The B. of Saris.

But now the priest may say two, three, or mo Masses in a day, yea although he hauehave none to receyue with him.

Harding.

The .55. vntruth. Priestes say not many Masses in one day.

Dering.

Surely good reader lies are good cheape, & soone made, where this is one. The Decretals were wont to be a sufficient warrant, for the vsage in the Popes ministerie. Wil now maister Harding be so sawcy to controll the Pope? Doth he not know that this saith Pope Gregorie, Decret. de mis. celebr. cap. 3. & tetesphorus Papa.excepto die natiuitatis, & causa necessitatis, sufficit sacerdoti semel in die celebrare, except p. 51on Christmasse day, and the cause of necessitie, it is sufficient to say one Masse a day. Here we sée some dayes mo Masses than one were occupied, and sure though one Masse be one to many. Yet considering that thrée do signifie the thrée tymes, before the lawe, vnderunder the lawe, and the tyme of grace,De Miss. cele. ca. 3. in glossa. where Masses go for good, me thinketh thrée eueryevery day would do wel. And again bicause the Pope saith, y^t if néede be we may say mo Masses in one day,Decret. & glo. vt supra. and the gl…se doth enterpret néede to be eyther for honestie sake, or for profit, sure such Masses as be eyther honest, or profitable, should euer for charitie sake be thrise iterate. Yet I confesse that Pope Alexander, and this gloser do not well agrée in profite. For he sayth,De conse. dist. 1. sufficit. qui vero pro pecunia presumunt vno die facere plures Missas non estimo euadere damnationem, but he that for mony shall presume in one day to make many Masses, I thinke he can not escape damnation. And yet notwithstanding this Popes censure, the gloser will not relent,In gloss. vt su. but without addicion of necessitie he sayth flatly. They may say one Masse for the dead, an other for the day. Mary for cause of controuersie in this matter, Pope Gregorie make… this prouiso. So he poure no wine on his fingars after he hath receyued at the first Masse,Decre. de miss. celeb. ex parte. least in licking them againe, some drop should go downe his throte, and so he should breake his fast. But I will let passe these high points disputed in their Canon law, and greatest doctors, and of this, that is sayd, I desire the christian reader to iudge, whether these wordes are vntrue, that a priest may saye two or thrée Masses in one day.

The. B. of Saris.

Concerning consecration he doth great wrong to charge vsus with the breach of it, before hee him selfe, and other of his side are better resolued, wherein consecration standeth. For Scotus, and Innocentius the .3. say that this word, benedixit, worketh consecration.

p. 52Harding.

The .56. vntruth. VVe are resolued herein.

The .57. vntruth. Scotus and Innocentius say it not.

Dering.

Maister Harding to make his vntruthes very common, vseth such Logick as is very rare. Where the antecedent & argument do hang togither, he maketh them both vntrue. Wel may this doing hauehave credite among the simple: but when the learned doe sée it, they do easily say, that these vntruthes hauehave more consideration of number, than regarde of good matter, and substance. But let vsus take them, as they be, the folly of the vntruthmaker shall the more appeare. We are sayth maister Harding fully resolued herein, that is, wherein consecration standeth. It is pitie that his worde hath not the Popes priuiledge, that it might not erre. He neuer wanteth audacitie to denie at aduentures, whatsoeuer mislyketh him. He sayth in consecration we are all agréed,In 4. sent. q. 6. art. 1. but Marcilius one of his owne doctors saith, it is not so. Whether of these say true, it shal appeare hereafter. We agrée, sayth maister Harding, that consecration of the bread, and wine, is wrought by these wordes, hoc est corpus meū, this is my body, and hic est sanguis meus, this is my bloud. And of this iudgement is their Pope holye patriarche,Sess. vlt. in fine concil. in antididag. in Io…. tr. 80. de sacra li. 1. cap. 5. Saint Peter Lumbarde: yet the whole counsell of of Florence say, consecration is wrought with all the wordes togither, as they lye. The chapter of Coleine say, these words are not sufficient without the Canon of the Masse. Saint Augustine sayth, it is wrought with the word of fayth, which we preach. Saint Ambrose saith, these wordes, accipite, comedite, take, and eate, are part of consecration. So hauehave these men, the councell of Florence, the chapter of Coleine, Saint Augustine, and Saint Ambrose against them. Now let vsus sée how they agrée among themselues. Scotus sayth in finall resolution. p. 53Dico breuiter, ꝙ non est nobis traditum certitudinaliter, an ad formam cōsecra…ionis sanguinis partineant aliqua verba post illud, sanguis meus, In. 4. sen. dist. 8. qu. 2.vel an aliquot illorū sequentiū vl que illuc, hoc facite▪ &c. Ideo periculosum est hoc asserere, de quo sufficiens authoritas non habetur. I say briefly that we hauehave no assurance at all, whether any other wordes appertaine vntounto consecration of the bloud, after this is once said, this is the cup of my bodie, or whether the residue wordes following be part of consecration, or no, vntill it is sayd, take and drinke. &c. Therefore it is daungerous … affirme anye thing, where you hauehave no sufficient authoritie. And it followeth in Scotus, and by this it is manifest,Quae verba sunt deforma. they speake vndoscretly, which say it is necessary to know in eueryevery sacrament, what are the precise, and very words of consecration. He saith further. Let no man say, I will vse these precise wordes, simplicitie is much surer. And vponupon this he remoueth a doubt, that if the priest should say this is my body, and say nothing of that which gooth before, we ought not to worship it, but on this condicion, if it be consecrate.Cont. Ga. Biel in expos. can. Missae. And these are Scotus verye wordes, iudge now whether he agrée with Peter Lumbarde, or whether he be resolued, what to say, or whether Maister Harding be not past shame, that so boldely writeth of all the men that euer wrote, maister Iuel might worst hauehave alleaged Scotus. And that all Catholike be fully resolued in this.Reioi. fo. 70. b For a larger proufe, let vsus yet examine it a little further. Gabriel Biel expounding the Canon of the Masse,fol. 71. a part. 4 ouer these wordes benedixit, fregit, he writeth: ouer benedixit, consecrando: ouer fregit, non panem, sed panis speciem, In vita chr. par. 2. ca. 76 In officio miss. li. 8. cap. ….so by Biels opinion, Christ did consecrate with benedixit, he blessed. Ludulp de Saxonia, and Ihnocentius 3. agréeth with Gabriel Biel. Thomas, and Bonauentura say, that Christ spake these words twise, hoc est corpus meum, and so consecrated by them when he pronounced them first secretly. Then thus farre M. Hardings doctors doe not well agrée. Alexander de ales knoweth p. 54not well what to say, he sayth in one place Christus dixit bis. Christ spake the wordes of consecration twise. Afterward he sayth, consecrauit, nos quo modo nescimus, he did consecrate, we know not howe.Parte. 4.9.33. mem. 2. & deinceps. Lastly he sayth, virtus erat in manibus, there was a secrete power in his handes. This Doctor is much like Scotus, he knoweth not what to say. Marciliꝰ saith, how Christ did cōsecrate, doctores diuersimode dicunt doctors are of diuers minds. Some sayd he consecrated without pronouncing any wordes. Thus eueryevery man speaking his fansie, not guided by the worde of God, they walke in darknesse, and can not tell whither they go. But Maister Harding will say, though they can not agrée, how Christ did consecrate, yet they are fully agréed, how themselues doe consecrate. This as is before aleaged out of Scotus, is not true. But before I shew their diners opinions, I would demaund of some of maister Hardings friendes, howe a good conscience may be satisfied, concerning this matter. How Christ did consecrate, as appeareth, they do not agrée, and so much maister Harding graunteth,In. 4. sent. disl. 8. vt supra. and vponupon this Scotus sayth. Intendebant narrare rem gestam, non tradere formam consecrationis. The Euangelists intended to set forth the storie, not to leaue vntounto vsus any forme of consecration. And Marcilius sayth, nullus Euangelistarum nèc etiàm Apostolus videtur hanc formam vidisse. In. 4. sent. q. 6 art. 1.None of the Euangelists, neyther yet the Apostles séeme to hauehave gyuen our forme of consecration. Here I make this reason. The Scriptures beare witnesse of Christ, and how his body was made, but the scriptures beare no witnesse of consecration, therefore by their consecration his body is not made. Againe, consecration being of such force, that they themselues confesse their host should no time be worshipped, but with condicion, if it be wel consecrate, and yet this consecration is not taught vsus by the scriptures: howe is the saying of our sauiour Christ true, that the holy ghost should teach vsus all truth, or how hath Saint Luke fulfilled his promise, that sayd he would write of p. 55all things euen from poynt to poynt. Againe,Luke. 1.2.Luke 1:2 where maister Harding sayth, and commonly his other doctors holde, that Christ did consecrate by these wordes, this is my body, if they wil stand to that, for ought y^t I sée, they ouerthrow their owne Masse. Christ did breake y^e breade before he spake those words, as appeareth by all the Euangelists, and by Saint Paule, but they holde it vp whole, and bid vsus worship, and after at more leysure, they breake it in péeces. But to what purpose should I examine their doings. God deliuer vsus from that crooked and froward generation. Now for tryall of maister Harding his vaunts, I will alleage some of his doctors, that thou mayst know, whether they are agréed about their own consecration. The common opinion is, consecration is wrought by these wordes, this is my body.In 4. sent. q. 6. art. 1. But Mercillius sayth that enim is part of consecration, and that the Church was so taught by Saint Peter. Gabriel Biel and his companions say, that enim is not necessarye for the consecration,in a…sent. dist. 8: q. 3 but for him that doth consecrate, and he that leaueth it out, should sinne deadly, and yet Mathew, Marke, Luke, and Paule, all foure did leaue it out, I trow without deadly sinne. The Decretals teach vsus,De cele. Miss. quae sinisti. that all, which is in the canon of the Masse, though it be not in the scripture, yet we must take it as receyued from the Apostles. And so the matter shall be fully discussed. That is of consecration which the Canon appointeth.De cons. dist. 2. panis est & quia corpus. Gracian alleaging S. Ambros, maketh the priest to say in the person of Christ, all these wordes, accipite, comedite. &c. so alleaging, that for the consecration, he maketh these sixe wordes of consecration, take, eate, this is my body. He sayth likewise alleaging Eusebius. Nowe for the consecration of the cup, M. Harding sayth these are the wordes, this is my bloud. Nay sayth Gabr. Biel, In can. Miss.forma indubitata, the vndoubtfull forme is this, this is the cup of my bloud, and sayth boldly, sufficienter & plene significant conuersionem, fully and sufficienly they work consecration. Yet vponupon better aduice, writing vponupon the maister of the p. 56sentences, he sayth, forma consecrationis specierum vini necessaria, In 4. sent.& precisa, ex scriptura canonica non est sufficienter determinata. The forme of consecration of the wine, what is precise and necessarie, the canonicall scriptures hauehave not sufficiently determined it. By this it is plaine that M. Hardings doctors will not all agrée, except you take them in their good moode. Biel sometime will not sticke in it, you shall hauehave consecration wherein you will, another tyme he is flatly resolued and sayth out of doubt thus it is. And least maister Harding should wrangle with his wordes, himselfe maketh full resolution of his meaning and sayth further, dubium est an aliqua verba preter illa, hic est calix sanguinis mei, sint de necessitate consecrationis, there is a doubt whether any wordes beside these, this is the cup of my bloud, be of necessitie of consecration. And being not able to determin such a learned question, he sayth this is certaine, say all the words in the Canon of the Masse, and consecration is among them. Here thou séest, good reader, this man, that is one place maketh no bones at it, but sayth out of question it is thus, in another place he cryeth peccaui, and for his lyfe dareth not affirme one word, and yet did Gabriel knowe as much of consecration as M. Harding doth.In 4. sent. dis. 8. q. 2. But let vsus heare other. Scotꝰ as is already said, knoweth not what is the exact forme, and saith that the Grekes vse an other forme, than we do. And here by the way, note that M. Harding findeth great fault with Maister Iuel, for alleaging the Gréeke Church, and sayth they were but certaine Scismatikes, yet Scotus alleageth the same, and accounteth them as Catholikes, but so is maister Harding prepared in a burning desire to gainsay M. Iuell, that he often falleth out with his owne friend. But let this passe. Thus Scotus concludeth, that if the priest entend to doe, as the Church doth, and reade all the wordes distinctly, he doth consecrate, though he know not how.In 4. sent. dis. 8. q. vnic. art. 4 Frauncis de Mairon an other of maister Hardings doctors, sayth that these fiue wordes, hic est calix sanguinis p. 57mei, this is the cup of my bloud, work consecration, yet again in the same article, mouing a doubt of the same matter, he answereth thus, some say it is so, but Scotus sayth nay. Marcilius sayth, it is probable, these are the wordes of consecration.In 4. sent. q. 6. art. 1. part. 2. Hic est calix sanguinis mei. But I will determine nothing in so high a matter. And after for a ful declaratiō that they can not agrée among themselues, he sayth. Hoc nō est expressum per canonē, aut sedem Apostolicam, it is not determined, neither by the Canon, nor by the Apostolicall seate. Thomas Aquinas sayth, all these are the words of consecration.3 par. summae q. 78. art. 3. Hic est calix sanguinis mei veteris, & noui testamenti, misterium fidei, qui pro vobis, & pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum, this is the cup of my bloud of the new, and old testamēt, the misterie of fayth, which shall be shed for you, & for many. Bonauenture sayth,In 4. sen. dist. 8. q. 3 art. 2. these latter wordes are not of consecration, but they doe expresse the qualitie of the thing turned. Clingius, a late wryter, and a chiefe doctor of M. Hardings side, sayth the wordes of consecration be these, this is my bodye, and hic est sanguis meus. &c. this is my bloud. &c.Sin. doct. chr. cath. tit. 103. When he hath not what to say, he turnes it ouer with. &c. After in the same title he sayth absolutely, these are the wordes, this is my body, and bloud, and in them is all the substance of the Masse. But againe he sayth in an another place,De Miss. prec. &. c. lib. 4. ca. 28. hic est sanguis meus noui testimenti &c. this is my bloud of the new testament, and so forth, and there he sayth all that followeth is the chiefe substaunce of the Masse, and that all those wordes are spoken in the person of Christ, and so consequently be part of consecration. He sayth further, that the words of consecratiō,An ab haeret. &. c. li: 3. ca. 35 de Miss. prec. &. c. lib. 4. ca. 28. being pronounced by any vnméete person, do worke nothing, and that it was neuer shewed by any signe, or miracle, that a lay man might consecrate. Yet maister Harding sayth, that God shewed a miracle vponupon certaine shepheards, which sang these wordes, and knew not what they ment,Ar. 16. diui. 6 and they consecrated vnwares. Thus maister Harding passeth not, so hée p. 58may saye somewhat to be at some dissention, euen with hys friendes, and thus much of this. Let the reader examine these places, and he shall sée whether maister Hardings worde be a good warrant, that in consecration they all be full agréed. And sure this great disagréement is so much the more blameable, for as much as if they woulde hauehave followed their supreme head the Pope: there had bene no controuersie in this matter. For by his censure, the very words of the canon in the Masse, are the wordes of consecration, vsed both by Christ, and hys Apostles, although none of the Euangelists hauehave expressed them.Decre. de cele. Miss. quae sinisti. cap. 6. These are the popes wordes. Credimus ergo quod formam verborum, sicut in canone reperitur, & a christo apostoli, & ab ipsis eorū acciperint successores. We do surely beleue that that forme of wordes which are in our Canon, the Apostles receyued of Christ, and there successors of them. If this sentence might preuaile, then the case of consecration had ben cléere. But it is well, if the Popes friendes will not beleue him. For my part I meane not to purchase him any credit.

57Now resteth the .57. vntruth to examine, whether Scotus, and Innocentius doe say that benedixit, he blessed, worketh consecration. Maister Harding standeth stiffely in it, and doth aduenture his credite, that they say it not, and being to much inflamed against Maister Iuell, he writeth with a good countenance, that of al the men, that euer wrote, he had least cause to bring Scotus for his purpose, and that he is very rashe in so doing. And if thou wilt beleue him, for a cleare iustifying of this vntruth, he sayth, that Scotus, and Innocentius neuer said that benedixit worketh consecration. Surely good Reader these desperate assertions might well make thée thinke, that thy bishop had deceyued thée. But be not yet to hastie of beliefe, be simple as the done, but be wise as the serpent, yea, euē as the Romish serpent, that hath so well prouided for his yong ones. His Prelates may not be accused without .72. witnesses. Let not thou a good bishop be discredited with one slaūderous p. 59tongue. His priestes may not be controlled of any lay man, be he neuer so religious.Decre. tit. 2. de const. ca. 10. Let not thou Gods minister be blamed of an Apostata, yea, and as though they were not yet prouided for well ynough,Nancl. vol. 2 chr. onol gen. 4 Con. Lat. ca. 42. sic epistulus anteri, anacleti Zepherini, fabiani, Euar. fas. temp. &c. Pope Euaristus ordeyned that the people should not accuse them at all. Yea, and that whole Laterane councell vponupon good warrant of that saying of S. Paule, the seruant standeth, or falleth vntounto his lord, by authoritie of that sacred assemblie, they exempt them from such temporall iurisdiction. Then let vsus be somewhat ware in defence of a Godly Bishop, that maister Hardings bolde reprehensions may not proue him faultie.

Scotus, and Innocentius, saith Maister Iuell, doe say that benedixit worketh consecration. That is a false lye sayth M. Harding. Then vppon good tryall let the truth appeare, and let vsus here what the Authors themselues say. Scotus in déede sayth thus, verba consecrationis sunt quatuor, hoc est corpus meum. There are 4. wordes of consecration, this is my bodye. If Scotus had said no more, then maister Harding had alleaged all. But it followeth a little after, sed haec verba, hoc est corpus meum prolata sine praecedentibus, non significant hoc absolute. But these words pronounced without the other wordes going before, do not absolutely signifie this, that consecration is done. Loe Scotus sayth not as maister Harding reporteth him, that consecration is wrought by these foure, but saith he there is no consecration if the wordes afore which are the blessing, be left out. And now to auoyde all vaine cauilling about these words. G. Biel sayth, speaking of the same matter. Quid si verba praecedentia omitterentur. Respōdetur, licet hic Scotus sit alterius opinionis tamen hoc communiter tenent doctores, quòd haec quatuor sola sufficiunt ad effectum cōsecrationis. What if the words going afore be omitted, it is aunswered though Scotus be here of an other opinion, yet the common sentence of doctors is, these foure are sufficient. Here besides the manifest words of Scotus, G. Biel is also a witnesse p. 60that as maister Iuell sayth, this is the common opinion, but Scotus thinketh, that the wordes going before are necessarye. If then Scotus owne wordes, and G. Biel witnesse are better proufe of Scotus meaning, than Maister Hardings imagination: it is true that the consecration is wrought by the whole blessing. And this other saying before alleaged by M. Harding must be thus qualified, that in that place, he saith those are the especiall words. Thus is Scotus saying auouched, by maister Harding disalowed, by his owne plaine words, and by the testimonie of Biel.

Concerning Innocentius, whether he thought consecration was wrought by benedixit, he blessed: if Maister Harding had regarded his owne credite, he would not hauehave denied it. The whole troupe of his doctours doe so alleage his opinion. First Scotus saith.In. 4. sent. d. 8. q. 3. art. 3. Sacerdos profert illa verba, quasi materialiter, quia recitat ea, sicut a Christo dicta, vt patet per rationem praecedentē in Canone. Christus autem, quādo illa dixit, non transubstantiauit panem in corpus, quod probatur ex verbis illius Canonis, quia ibi praemittitur benedixit. Vnde dicetur, quòd per illam benedictionem praecedentem consecrauit, non per ista verba, hoc est corpus meum. Cui concordat Innocentius. Deoff. Miss. par. 3. ca. 6 &. 14.Concerning the thirde article, it is saide; that the priest speaketh those wordes as the matter of consecration, bicause he recyteth them euen as they were spoken of Christ, as it appeareth by that, which goeth before in the Canon. But Christ, when he saide those wordes, did not transubstantiate the breade into his body, as lykewise is proued by the Canon. For there it is sayde before, he blessed, whereof it is sayde, that by that blessing he did consecrate, not by those other words, this is my body, and of this opinion is Innocentius in his booke of the office of the Masse .3. part. the .6. Chapt. and the .14. Here hast thou Innocentius auouched, and his opinion confirmed by Scotus. Now for the thirde point of this vntruth. Where Maister Harding saith if Maister Iuell had p. 61any mo, he would hauehave named them. May it please him to reade aapar. 4. q. 33.Alexander de Ales, bbquol. 2. fin.Okam, cc4. pa. sū. d. 8.Gotfrey, ddin 22. luc.Albertus Biel, eein 4. sen. di. 8Marcilius, & diuers other of his owne doctors. Either he must accuse them all as lyers, or there are other of this opinion. Thus we sée these great exclamations whereto they fall, that in one title he cannot iustifie one vntruth. But whether maister Iuell had mo to alleage, or no, reade his defence of the Apologie, thou shalt sée. fo. 208.

The B. of Saris.

Cardinall Bessarion Bishop of Tusculum, writeth thus.

Harding.

The .58. vntruth. He vvriteth not so.

Dering.

If shamelesse lying were punished in Loueine, then no doubt maister Harding would be more ware what he wrote. Now as may be thought, impunity hauehave made him confident. Let the booke be iudge of this vntruth.

The B. of Saris.

How be it, by what soeuer wordes consecration is made, it standeth no… in abolishing of natures, as maister Harding teacheth.

Harding.

The .59. vntruth. I teach not so.

Dering.

Certainly good reader this vntruth is very straunge. M. Harding is a great mainteiner of transubstantiation in al his doing, yet here to get one vntruth, he is content to forsake it. I doe not teach sayth he, that consecration consisteth in the chaunging of natures. If it be so, then by consecration the nature p. 62of bread doth not chaunge into the nature of christs flesh, to this I gladly yéelde. Would God maister Iuell said here vntruely.

The B. of Saris.

Consecration is in conuerting the Elements to a godly vse, as we see in the water of Baptisme.

Harding.

The .60. vntruth. The consecration of the water in baptisme is farre different from the consecration of the Eucharist.

Dering.

Accedat verbum ad elementum sayth Saint Augustine, & fit sacramentum. Let the worde come vntounto the element, and it is a sacrament. Saint Augustine here maketh no difference at all, he biddeth not consecrate the one with whisperings, the other with open voice, as maister Harding biddeth, he teacheth no difference of grace in them both, as Maister Harding teacheth. Likewise Saint Ambrose sayth. non aqua omnis sanat, Li. 1. de sacra. cap. 5.sed quae habet gratiam Christi, not all water healeth, but that which hath the grace of Christ. And againe, water healeth, if the holy ghost doe come downe, and sanctifie it. And againe, water healeth, if the voyce of the father be heard from heauen. So this operation of the trinity is the vertue, and the consecration of the water. This like operation doth make the bread, and wine, to be our heauenly food, as M. Harding must néedes graūt, so the consecration of either both is one. If he say the wordes of consecration must be pronounced by the minister, whereby, as by a meane, God doth poure his grace vpō vsus, and ioyneth vsus vntounto him: I confesse it is so, and those wordes are these, take, eate, this is my body. So in baptisme after our prayers made vntounto god, we pronounce the words of cōsecration, wherby we know that gods mercy doth p. 63sanctifie vsus, and the bloud of his sonne doth washe away oure sinnes, and those wordes are these. I baptise thée in the name of the father, of the sonne, and of the holy ghost. So we sée thus farre the consecration in either sacrament is one. If he make any difference in the wordes, for the maner of speaking, in that it is sayd, this is my body. Saint Paule speaketh likewise of baptisme that it is lauacrum regenerationis, Tit. 3.5.Titus 3:5the washing of our new birth, now lay these all togither. By the Eucharist we be ioyned vntounto Christ,1. Cor. 5.8.1 Cor 5:8 kéeping the feast of our pasouer with the vnleauened bread of sinceritie, and truth. By baptisme we be sanctified and clensed,Ephe. 26. by the washing of water through the worde. The Eucharist is sanctified by the heauenly wordes spoken of the minister in the person of our sauiour Christ: so the water doth washe away our vncleannesse by being baptised in the name of the father, of the sonne, and of the holy ghost. The Eucharist for the high, and dreadfull misterie of the body of Christ, by sayth féeding our soules, is called the body, the water for the heauenlye operation which God worketh in washing away the naturall vncleannesse in which we are borne, is called the regeneration. And therefore the consecration of them both can not be diuers. M. Harding after his maner may a little dasell simple eyes, but his conscience doth beare him witnesse, that this doctrine is true. But here I must confesse, that the popish consecrations, if maister Harding doe meane of them, do differ much the one from the other, and both from Christes institution, as I hauehave shewed in the epistle. So Maister Iuell speaking of the sacraments of christs Church, and saying consecration is lyke in both, sayth not vntrue, though the iuglings of the antichristian Sinagogue are neuer so diuers.

The B. of Saris.

This is well noted, and opened by Saint Augustine. Tract: in Ioh: 80.

p. 64Harding.

The .61. vntruth. This is not opened by Saint Augustine:

Dering.

Maister Harding by like thinketh, he is disputing with one of his popish doctors, what hoc signifieth, in hoc est corpus meum, and therefore he asketh, what it is Saint Augustine hath opened. Sure not this popish consecration. For he neuer heard of it, but this spirituall chaunge of the elements to be come of creatures ordeyned for the body, salues whereby our mindes are healed. And thus is your vntruth aunswered.

The .B. of Saris.

The worde of fayth which we preach, saith Augustine, not the worde which we whisper.

Harding.

The .62. vntruth. Saint Augustine sayth not so.

Dering.

Well sayd Anaxagoras. Stande-stiffely to this opinion. Sure snow is not white. What though it séeme so? S. August. saith it not. What if the word be there thrée, or foure tymes for fayling? Say on still, saint Augustine sayth it not. Some of your friendes perhaps wil beleue you. But my God I thank, I am none of those. And you that will not be deceyued good christian people hearken, Saint Augustine sayth not, sayth M. Harding, the worde which we preach. And to proue this true he alleageth many lines out of the same place, in which lines it is not. But, ò singularem impudentiam. Antonie out of doubt was neuer so past shame. He sayth, Saint Augustine hath not, which we preach, and thus he alleageth Augustines wordes, verbo dei sine dubio, vt mundare possit, consecratur, p. 65& baptismus, if it were no otherwise, yet this worde of God must be preached, for how else shoulde it be heard,Ro. 10.Rom 10 and so engraffe fayth. But now Saint Augustines wordes are otherwise, hoc est verbum fidei, quod praedicamus, saith he, thys is the word of fayth, which we do preach, with which word doubtlesse baptisme is cōsecrated, that it may purifie vsus. That which Saint Augustine saith hoc est &c. this is the worde of fayth, which we preach, Maister Harding turneth thus verbo fidei, by the worde of fayth. What clipping, what nipping, what altering is this? O if maister Harding had such a vauntage, how would he turne his phrases? How would he sport himself, with reperitions of corrupting the fathers? Well thou séest this is no vntruth. Reade his Reioinder, and conferre it with Saint Augustine, thou shalt soone discrie his behauiour. Here hast thou christian reader to note, that Saint Augustine saith the worde doth consecrate, non quia dicitur, sed quia creditur, not bycause it is spoken, but bycause it is beleued. Therefore according to Saint Augustine, this popish consecration is gone, they néede not feare that by common vse the wordes should be contemned, or vnwares they should work straunge miracles. Without fayth they hauehave no vertue. What these wordes be, I tolde thée in the .60. vntruth, out of S. Ambrose, in the Eucharist, accipite, comedite, hoc est corpus meū, take, eate, this is my body. In baptisme, baptize them in the name of the father, and of the sonne, and of the holy ghost.

The B. of Saris.

And whereas he sayth further, that we hauehave no maner oblation in our communion, he should not himselfe speake manifest vntruth, hauing taken vponupon him, as he sayth, to reforme falsched.

Harding.

The .63. vnt. I say not that you hauehave no maner of oblation.

The .64. vnt. I say not I hauehave takē vpō me to reform falshed.

p. 66Dering.

Here are two vntruthes, the one shamelesse, the other witlesse. First saith he, I say not, you hauehave no maner of oblation, yet these are his owne very wordes. Where as in Christes institution concerning this sacrament, thrée things are conteyned,Art. 1. diui: 8 the sacrament, the oblation, and the participation, wherin consisteth the substance of the Masse, they hauehave quite abrogate the other two, and left a bare communion. Nowe these being his wordes, sure this vntruth is shamelesse. The second vntruth is, in denying, that he sayth, he doth reforme falshed, and this is it, which I sayd is witlesse.

The B. of Saris.

We offer vp vntounto God our selues, our soules, our bodyes, and almes for the poore, prayses, and thankes giuing▪ &c. which the olde fathers say, is the sacrifice of the new testament. We offer vp as much, as Christ commaunded vsus to offer.

Harding.

The .65. vntruth. They say not so. The .66. vntruth. You offer not vp the bodie, and bloud of Christ.

Dering.

Were not maister Hardings behauiour alwayes notable: in these vntruthes he might else séeme to passe himselfe. For proufe that the olde fathers sayde this spirituall sacrifice was the sacrifice of the new testament, Maister Iuell alleageth Tertullian thus.Cont. Iudeos. The pure sacrifice that Malachie speaketh of, that should be offered vp in eueryevery place, est predicatio Euāgelii vsus que ad finem mundi, is the preaching of the Gospel, vntil the ende of the worlde.Contra Mar. lib. 4. Againe, that sacrifice is simplex oratio de conscientia pura, and a deuout prayer of a pure conscience, Then he alleageth Eusebius, De demōst. li.that y^e same sacrifice is foreign, the sacrifice and incence of prayer. Last of all he p. 67alleageth Ierom, expounding the same place, dicit orationes sanctorum domino offerendas esse in omni loco. The prophet meaneth hereby, that the prayers of holye people should be offered vntounto God in all places, to these places Maister Harding bringeth but his bare nay, and aunswereth not one worde, but for proufe of his vntruth concludeth thus, you should hauehave done well to hauehave named these olde fathers,Reioin. fo. 83. and to hauehave alleaged their owne words for your credit sake, who could speak thus shamelessely that had any shame in him. Maister Iuell here nameth both Tertullian, and Eusebius, and quoteth the places where these sayings are to be founde. And in the 559. leafe of his Replie, reciteth their very wordes. Yet sayth M. Harding this is false, he should hauehave alleaged some doctors, by like his heade was so full with the number of these vntruthes, that he could not sée their names. If these thrée doctors séeme to maister Harding to be but fewe, or if therefore he could not sée them: a little to helpe his eye sight, it shall not be tedious to alleage mo. Iustinus Martyr sayth,Ad tripbonē. these sacrifices of christians are onelyonly perfite, and acceptable vntounto God, preces, & gratiarum actiones, prayers, and thankesgiuing. And againe, the prophets do not promise that the bloudie sacrifices shal be renewed, but they promise vsus, veras ac spirituales oblationes, laudis, at que gratiarum actionis, true, and spirituall sacrifices of prayse and thankesgiuing. Clemens Alexandrinus sayth,Strom. li. 7. speaking of prayer, that, that is optimum, & sanctiss. sacrificium, the best and most holy sacrifice. Againe,Strom. li. 5. Sacrificium Deo acceptum est, corporis, eius que vitiorū seperatio. Is est verus re vera dei cultus, the sacrifice that God accepteth is to set a part all vice from our bodie, that is in déede, the verye true worshipping of God. Tertullian sayth, we doe sacrifice: but so as God hath commaunded, that is, pura prece, In apologetico.with a pure prayer. Athenagoras an olde writer sayth thus,In Apolog. pro christia. quid ego sacrificia, & holocausta curem. &c. what should I care for sacrifice, or burnt offerings, of which God hath no néede, he requireth p. 68for him an vnbloudie sacrifice, that is, that we offer, and giuegive a reasonable soule vntounto him. These are ynowe for M. Harding to sée, or he will sée none, be they neuer so many. It all shoulde be alleaged, that witnesse this onelye to be sacryfice of christian men, it would fill a whole volume, but if M. Harding can shew but one to proue, that the priest offereth vp Christ vntounto his father, this shall not onelyonly goe for vntrue, but we wil all subscribe vntounto his religion. For this other vntruth, that we offer not vp the bodie, and bloud of Christ, when M. Harding can proue that Christ hath so commaunded vsus, this shall be vntrue. Here marke maister Harding for all his narrow search for vntruthes, yet ouerskippeth a couple, that M. Stapleton hath espied one of Saint Basil, an other of Saint Cyril. Beleue them both if thou wilt swim in errors.

The B. of Saris.

But sayth maister Harding, we make no mention of the sacrifice…

Harding.

The .67. vntruth. I say not so.

Dering.

What meaneth maister Harding by this vntruth? Is there any distinction to be brought betwéene oblation,Art. 1. diui. 8. and sacrifice? He sayth expressely we do not so much as once name the oblation, & oblation, & sacrifice differ no more, then ensis, & gladius, then a brake, and a fearne bush, or any two wordes, which expresse one thing. Then if M. Hard. say we name not the oblation, he sayth we name not the sacrifice, & this he must néedes confesse, except he will wrangle about the worde. Sure as the common saying is, in this vntruth, is neither rime, nor reason.

The .B. of Saris.

He calleth Christes ordinance a bare communion.

p. 67Harding.

The .68. vntruth. Your Communion is not Christes ordinance.

Dering.

Before Maister Harding note this vntruth any more, I would wish after so many Maister Iuels requestes he should at last bring some scripture, or doctor, or generall counsell, or some example of the primitiue Church to proue it. His worde weyeth ouer light, in so great a matter. For our discharge we doe, and say euen as Christ did, and sayde, and more we dare not, bicause that is perfite. They make many apishe toyes of their owne, neyther can the reuerence of that high mysterie bring them to any obedience.

The .B. of Saris.

Euen now maister Harding sayd, there were three things in Christes institution, consecration, oblation, participation, nowe he sayth, the number of communicants is no part of Christes institution, thus he falleth out with himselfe.

Harding

The .69. vntruth. I fall not out with my selfe.

Dering.

What can be more contrarie, than to say participation is of Christes institution, and againe, partakers, that is number of communicants, are not of Christs institution? In the lords cause, we will speake as the lord speaketh, heauen, and earth we call to witnesse, whether this be not contrarietie. Yet M. Harding, and I trow euen onelyonly maister Harding, is so bolde to note this for an vntruth. But the vntruth is sufficientlye aunswered in that the indifferent reader may sée the wordes.

p. 70The B. of Saris.

I may not nowe dissemble the value of maister Hardings argument. Christ, sayth he, ordeyned the sacrament after consecration, and oblation done, to be receyued, and eaten, ergo the number of communicants in one place, is no part of Christes institution.

Harding.

The .70. vntruth. This is not my argument.

Dering.

Here Maister Harding and his friend Stapleton doe not well accorde. For Maister Harding skippeth one vntruth concerning the number of communicants, Replie. fo. 20. diuis. 3. which maister Stapleton maketh the .22. vntruth. And least we should thinke it little worth, he maketh the same againe the .23 vntruth, and for a full conclusion shutteth also the .24. vntruth in it. Yea, and though it stand here for .3. vntruthes, yet as if al they were not sufficient, he made it once afore the .19. vntruth. So much maister Stapleton maketh of one vntruth, which maister Harding accounteth not worth numbring. But the matter is not great, he loseth nothing here, that he will not finde in an other place. As touching this vntruth, these are M. Hardings verie wordes. Concerning the number of communicants in one place,Diuis 8. that they iangle so much of, it is no part of Christes institution. For Christ ordeined the sacrament after consecration. &c. Nowe turne these wordes in forme of argument, and they stand euen as maister Iuel placeth them, Christ did ordeine the sacrament after consecration. &c. ergo the number of communicants is no part of Christes institution. If these be Maister Hardings owne wordes, as sée the booke, and thou thy selfe shalt iudge, thou canst not be so simple, but thou must néedes sée this argument is no worse than himselfe hath made it. But bicause in this place he also p. 71fashioneth one: and in great confidence of his owne cunning, writeth in the Margent of his booke (an argument proponed to M. Iuell to be considered,) I will doe him no wrong in chaunging his woords, but for that louelove which I hauehave to M. Iuels profession, in his behalfe I will as I can consider of it after his owne making. But first I must aduertise thée before he setteth vp his mishapen building, he layeth the foundation of an ill fauored stomacke: and saith by M. Iuel, that it is easie for a scoffer, to scoffe at arguments framed of his owne scoffing head. And so it is easie for an euill speaker in defence of his wicked Doctrine, to reporte vnchristianly of Gods minister, where suche vnquiet passions do leade away vnderstanding. It may be, he may finde fauorers: but where the God of peace hath engraffed more moderation, truthe shall not be preiudiced with suche vntrue behauior. Muche other frothe ensueth in great plentie, before we come to the proposed reason, euen as a rotten wound defileth many clothes that are about it, but let it be troden out with silence, that cannot be remembred without muche loth somnesse. At the last he commeth to his argument, & after his owne graue considerations, thus it is fourmed. What so euer is beside Consecration, Oblation,Reioinder. Fol. 96. and Participation, is beside Christes institution. The number of Communicants in one place, is beside these thrée. Ergo, the number in one place is no parte of Christes institution.

Of this argument M. Harding boasteth much, and in any case will hauehave M. Iuel yelde vntounto the Conclusion. But softe M. Harding, extorcion is no conclusion. If you will enforce a graunt, whether it be made or no, you can by that be neuer the neare your purpose. Therefore for as muche as you hauehave set forthe your argument, (as you say) to be considered, you séeme very vnconstant, so soone againe to claime the conc…usion. But you s…y, if we wil not yelde vntounto the reason, we must denie the Minor or second proposition. True it is the Minor p. 72is false, but we are not yet come at it. The Maior that you thinke so sure, is made of false and vnlawfull stuffing, as by this consideration, that you require, shall well appeare. The proposition is this. What so euer is beside Consecration, Oblation, and Participation, is beside Christes institution, first this is false, and teacheth wicked doctrine. For preaching out of the Lords death vntill he come,1. Co. 11.26. Luc. 22.1 Cor 11:26Luke 22 is a parte of Christes institution. And our sauiour biddeth, do this in the remembraunce of me, that is with due celebration of all my benefits bestowed vponupon mankind, which must then be preached vntounto the people. And if it be not so done, then Christes institution, notw^t standing M. Hardings argument, is flatly broken. Nowe as this preaching out the Lords death, is of Christes institution, and yet not rehersed in this first proposition, wherby this prosition is shewed false: so those other things, which are rehersed in it, as M. Harding meaneth them, are none of them of Christes institution. By cōsecration he meaneth the pronoū cing of these words, this is my body, which must be done as y^e Masse boke straightly chargeth,Rubrica. in can. miss. bothe secretely, and with one breath. By oblation he meaneth Christes reall body to be offred vp vntounto the father. By Participation, he meaneth that the priest alone may take it at the Altare, and no one of these is of Christes institution. Nay they all are contrary vntounto it. So that this proposition wheron he groundeth his argumēt, wanteth somewhat, and therefore is not true, that which it hath is altogether corrupt, and therefore it containeth muche pernicious doctrine. First as touching Consecration, S. Augustine saith, as is alleaged in the .56. vntruth, y^• it is wrought verbo fidei, by the worde of faith, which we preache. So saithe Iustinus martir,Iust. mar. Apol. 2. Ire. lib. 5. that it is sanctified, per verbum precationis, & gratiarum actionis, by the word of prayer, and thankes giuing. Irenaeus saith, quando mixtus calix, & fractus panis percipit verbum Dei, fit Eucharistia corporis, & sanguinis Christi, when the cuppe mingled with wine and water, and the bread being broken, hath the preaching of the woord of God ioyned vntounto p. 73it, then it is the Eucharist, and this was the only Consecration .200. yeres after Christ, neither any where any other mentioned: except in M. Hardings Decretal Epistles, which neither are of credite, nor yet teach good religion. This same maner of Consecration is taught vsus by Cyprian, Dyonisius, Alexandrinus, Ambrose, Augustine, and suche other,Cyp. li. 3. ep. 1 Dyon. ep. ad. ixistum. Amb. de sacra. lib. 4. cap. 5. as liued within the first .600. yeares after Christ. Although I graunt (as appeareth by diuers recordes) many solemnities of the Masse were farre spread through superstition, yet this exacte kinde of close Consecration is muche yonger. This Oblation likewise, as it was then vnknowne, so now it is of all Christians to be detested, that a mortall man should offer vp the immortall God, as I hauehave already shewed in the Epistle. For Participation bicause maister Harding can not proue his Priuate Masse, within the sixe hundreth yeares, and the woord doeth enforce, that it is no Participation, except there be a number to take their partes, I thinke it appeareth sufficiently, that in a Popishe Masse they hauehave no manner Participation, or Communion, so we sée this Maior is all together false, before we come at the Minor. Now if we will further examine the Minor, we shall finde it false also, altogither without salte or sauor, for thus it is in effecte. The number of Communicantes is no parte of the Communion, which is bothe a very childishe, and grosse absurditie. For how is there a Communion, where is no Communicantes? Thus thou séest good Reader, this argument is not yet good. But the better to consider of it, bicause maister Harding will néedes hauehave it considered: let vsus take the view of it once againe. This is the argument. What so euer is beside Oblation, Consecration, and Participation, is no parte of Christes institution. But the number of Communicantes in one place, is beside these thrée. Ergo, the number is not of Christes instition.

p. 74What may be said of this whole argument, I hauehave already forewarned thée. Now let vsus hear what M. Harding saith to it him selfe. There is nothing héere saith he to be denyed, but the Minor, what, if it were so? What is now the Minor? Read the Reioinder, thus he saith. It is denyed in the Minor, that the number of Communicantes together in one place is of Christes institution.Reioinder. Fol. 97. Why? how now M. Harding? is this the best argument you can make? Marke good Reader, this must be the Minor. The number of Communicants together is no parte of Christes institution. Lay now the Maior to it, and the argument ariseth thus. What so euer is beside Consecration, Oblation, and Participation, is no part of Christes Institution. The number of Communicants is no part of Christes institution. The Conclusion is as before. Ergo, the number of Cōmunicants is no part of Christes institution.

Did euer M. Iewel father vponupon M. Harding suche a misshapen argument? This is his owne, or else he belieth him selfe, when he saith that this is his Minor. But suche sleights he can vse to vnwinde him selfe out of danger. A pretie conueyaunce of a litle forgerie among the ignorant, might hauehave escaped blame. But I wil not iudge M. Harding, God knoweth whether he did it of purpose or no. This in déede should hauehave ben his Minor. But the Communion of many togither, is beside these thrée, so the Communion might hauehave bene without Communicants, which is a great absurditie, and so consequently M. Hardings argument very euil. As touching further triall of this vntruth, his wrangling is not worth the consideration. Only as he hath set forthe his argument, to proue a number of Communicants no part of Christes institution, so he shall giuegive me leaue to propone likewise some arguments, for proofe that the Lordes supper may not be celebrate by one alone. First thus we argue. Math. 26.Matt 26Christ said, take ye, eate ye, drink ye all, do ye this. But this is spoken to many. Ergo, there must be a number.

p. 75To this argument M. Harding maketh this answer. You must get you better proofe,Reioinder. Fol. 97. or else admit the Conclusion of my argument. A man would thinke he were a craking souldier, that is thus well pleased with his owne doing, but if with this craking custome,Ter. in Eunuch. Act. 5. scae. vlt. Exod. 12 4. 1. Co. 5.7.Acts 5Exod 12:41 Cor 5:7 he hauehave not gotten the craking qualities, he shall heare other argumentes, though there can be none better. It was not among the Iewes, lawfull to eate the Pascall Lambe without a sufficient number. Ergo, the flesh of our sauiour Christ, who is our Passeouer, must not be eaten by the Priest alone.

Likewise it may be said of the gathering of Manna in the morning, and of the drinking of the rocke. I doubt not,Exod. 16 21.Exod 16:21 but here M. Harding can make a spedy answer, with many comparisons betwene the figure, and the truthe, but the good conscience may easily iudge. Beside this S. Paule him selfe dothe giuegive vsus in this case a very good argumēt, he saith.

My brethrē. When you come togither to eate, tary one for another.1. Co. 11.33.1 Cor 11:33 Ergo, we must not receiue alone.

The bread which we breake,1. Co. 10.16.1 Cor 10:16 is the Communion of the body of Christ. Ergo, there must be a number at the breaking of it.

And for a full proofe of this matter, Christ sayth. I hauehave earnestly desired to eate this Passeouer with you before I suffer. Ergo, Luk. 22.15.Luke 22:15the Priest must not eate it alone.

Thus we sée what we are taught by the scriptures cōcerning the number of Communicants, and of what value M. Hardings argument is, which he himself hath made after his owne fashion. Whereby thou maist the better iudge, what is to be thought of all those other which M. Iewel ascribeth vntounto him.

The B. of Saris.

There is not one peece hereof, that either is true in it selfe, or agreeth with other.

p. 76Harding.

The .71. vntruth. Some part of it is proued to be true.

Dering.

The argument which M. Iuel saithe, hath no piece either true, or hanging of an other. Is thus before alleaged. The Sacrament must be receiued after Consecration. Ergo, a number is not necessary.

Héere saith M. Harding. This is true y^• the sacrament must be receiued after Consecration. But how doeth he proue it. Sure with no reason, but a great deale of railing, saying that M. Iuel is led with the sprite of malice, & that he will reuoke this,Reioinder. Fol. 96. when he is in his right minde. Or if he will not, let him take manducate & bibite, eate ye & drink ye, out of the gospel. As touching M. Hardings railing, bicause his mouth is no slā der, I wil let it passe. His reasō is this, if cōsecration must not be before y^e Communion, then let manducate & bibite, be takē out of the gospel. One that had so long disputed of good arguments should now hauehave taken héede how he had made one so ill. This will in no wise holde, except you turne him contrary and so ouerturne M. Hardings cause with his owne proofe. For before y^e Euangelists speake the words of Consecration, this is my body, they say all take and eate, so that this foloweth very well, if Consecration must be before receiuing: then take manducate and bibite out of the Gospel. For in the Gospell they are placed before. How M. Hardings argument hangeth, if Consecration be not before the Communion, then take manducate & bibite out of the Gospell, neither M. Harding him self, nor all his Doctors are able to tell vsus. And this did Gabriel Biel sée well inoughe, who considering this place of the Euangelists, that they were bid take and eate before the woords of Consecration pronounced, he doeth not as M. Harding doeth,Biel in can. mis. lec. 36. speake neither rime, nor reason, only to mocke the people. But he saith plainly that the common opinion p. 77is, Christ spake not as the Euangelists report, take, eat, this is my body, but quite contrary, this is my body, take eate, thus hath Biel found a figure foreign to set the cart before the horse, and so maketh his religion to agrée with the gospell. Now as touching this vntruthe, where M. Harding saith so boldly, that the bread must hauehave these wordes, this is my body, pronounced ouer it before it be receiued, first he hath Mathew, Marke, Luke and Paule against him, who all bid first eate and then pronounce these wordes. Againe it is confessed by Gabriel Biel, that we must thinke Christe spake otherwise than the Euangelists reporte his words, or else they could not agrée with their Masse, this is a sufficient discharge of this vntruthe. A good Christian before he sée better aucthoritie, will beleue as the Gospell teacheth, that we must first take it and eate it, before it be Christes body, so shall he sone sée the Idolatrie of a Popishe Masse.

The B. of Saris.

If Christe instituted the Sacrament, to the intent it should be first consecrate, and then receiued of a companie. &c.

Harding.

The .72. vntruthe. This is a very grosse falsifying of my words.

Dering.

These are M. Hardings owne wordes in this Diuision. Christ ordained y^e Sacrament after Consecration done, to be receiued & eaten. Of these words saith M. Iuel, as is before alleaged, if Christ. &c. if I should héere aske of the indifferent Reader, wherin is this grosse falsifying, sure he could easily espie it. But somewhat to helpe the Readers vnderstanding, this it is, where M. Harding hath to be receiued and eaten, M. Iuell saith to be receiued of a companie, if this be as it is in déede, no fault, whereto is this vnseasonable crying out of falsifying? But if it shall séeme to be a fault, then know, p. 78that where M. Iuel alleageth M. Hardings owne wordes, he printeth them in a distinct letter: but this saying which so grieueth M. Harding, is in the common letter of M. Iuels words, wherby master Harding might hauehave wel vnderstand, had he not bene disposed to wrangle, that master Iuel alleaged them not as his expresse words, but rather sheweth how he should hauehave made his saying plaine, and this he proueth by authoritie of Bessarion and Gabriel Biel, that after Consecration the sacrament be not receiued onelyonly, as maister Harding sayth, but receiued of a company, which word, as it must, so being expressely written, master Harding did directly reason against himselfe.

The B. of Sarisb.

The .9. diuision. Here vnawares he seemed to confesse that his Masse, whatsoeuer substance it bear, it is void both of good order, and also of congruence.

Harding.

The .73. vntruth. I confesse no such thing.

Dering.

You séeme to confesse it▪ sayth M. Iuel. Whether you doe or no, let your words witnesse. You say you are not bound to folow Christes example in order and congruence. Nowe we may infer Christes order is only good, therefore you folow no good order, or congruence. This is but a single vntruth.

The B. of Saris.

The matter being so weightie, and not yet throughly beleued. &c.

Harding.

The .74. vntruth. It hath bene beleued.

Dering.

When you proue this, sure M. Iuel will subscribe, you p. 79may make eueryevery word in his booke as vntrue as this. For he hath not one worde, that soundeth towarde your religion, if this may be noted for vntrue, to say your Massing worshippings hauehave neuer bene throughly beleued, you may note many moe vntruthes in this Replie. For there is not one line that alloweth the Masse. Read the next vntruthe.

The B. of Sarish.

The olde fathers call that the daily Sacrifice, that Christ made once for all vponupon the Crosse.

Harding.

The .75. vntruthe. The olde fathers call not the Sacrifice of the Crosse the daily Sacrifice.

Dering.

M. Iuel doth alleage Aug. secund. Luc. serm. 28. Ierom. in. 1. Co. ca. 5. Germanus in Eccle. rerum theoria. Irenae. lib. 4. cap. 34. Tertul. aduer. Iudaeos. Amb. in. 1. ad Tim. cap. 2. Examine the aucthorities, and sée M. Hardings answere, so thou shalt best iudge. If I should enter into it, it would require a long aunswere, and nothing necessary. What the Doctors wryte, M. Iuel is thought to know, as wel as M. Harding. First reade and then iudge. This is againe the .132. vntruthe. And bicause we are againe fallen into mention of this Sacrifice, which M. Harding said euen now, hath bene throughly beleued, let vsus examine that vntruthe, and trie if M. Harding be found true in his workmanship. It hath bene throughly beleued saith he, that the Priest doth offer vp to God the body and bloud of Christ vnbloudely, in the remembraunce of that one bloudy Sacrifice of Christ. Reade of this in the Epistle the .31. leafe, thou shalt hauehave it fully discussed: only in this vntruth, bicause the question lieth rather, whether it hath bene beleued, than whether the saying be true, let vsus a little consider of Christ him selfe, & his Apostles, whether they hauehave beleued it. First p. 80Christ in no one worde did giuegive vntounto his Churche any commission of suche maner sacrifycing. Christ saith often, I giuegive vp my soule, I Sa…rifice my selfe, no man doth it but I: but vntounto his Disciples he saith,Joh. 10. Ioh. 7. Ioh. 13.John 10John 7John 13 quo ego vado, vos non potestis venire. Whither I goe, ye can not come. By which wordes he taketh from them all power to Sacrifice him, euen as it was afore tolde by Daniel, that after Christ was once offred, the Sacrifice and the Oblation should cease.Dan. 9.27.Dan 9:27 Not a word written wherby it may be gathered that we may offer vp Christ. And doth M. Harding thinke, that in so weightie a matter as the remission of our sinnes, that any thing is required of vsus, which is not commaunded vsus? It appeareth then in the time of Christ this was not beleued. Did the Apostles beleue it after Christ? S. Paule saith: in that he died vntounto sinne, he died but once:Ro. 6. Heb. 10.Rom 6Heb 10 againe: by one Oblation he made his perfite for euer: and againe, wher is remission of sinne, there is no more sacrifice for sinne. Then by S. Paule there is nowe no daily sacrifice for sinne, except by Christes deathe we will that our sinnes be not forgiuen.1. Co. 11.1 Cor 11 Againe, S. Paule will hauehave vsus folowe Christes example in the administration of Christes supper, who teacheth vsus of no Oblation for quicke and dead. Againe, the sacrifice cannot be made without a speciall priesthode, but the Apostles doe teache vsus that all suche Priesthode is abrogate.Heb. 1. Peter. 2. Apo. 1.5.1 Pet 2 If at any time the name of Oblation be mentioned in this age, it is euer meant spiritually. As is plaine Ro. 12. & .16. Phil. 2. 1. Peter .2. for the real Sacrifice S. Peter is plain. Christ hath caried our sinnes in his body vponupon the woode,1. Peter .2. and by his stripes we be healed, and the effects of that one Sacrifice once made, are purging of the sinnes of the whole world. 1. Pe. 2. & .3 1. Ioh. 2. &. 3. Ro. 4. Ephe. 1. eternall redemption. Gal. 2. Ephe. 1. Rightuousnesse. Ro. 3.4.8. 2. Cor. 5. Sāctificatiō. Eb. 10. Peace. Ro. 5. Ioy of the spirite. Ro. 4. Gal. 5. Newnesse of life. Rom. 6. 1. Co 5. LoueLove of our neighboure. 1. Ioh. 3. Eternall life. 1. Ioh. 5. Ro. 6. then neither Christ nor his Apostles euer beleued it: for the estate of the primatiue Churche how it beleued, M. Harding p. 81hath nothing to say, but referreth vsus to the .xvij. Article of his former booke, héere good Reader my labor is wel eased: for séeing my Lord of Sarisburie hath answered al that matter, who so wil be confirmed in that truthe, he can go I think, to no mortall man to be more strengthned.

The B. of Saris.

It pleaseth M. Hard. to alledge the one end, and conceale the other.

Harding.

The .76. vntruthe. The .10. diuis. I conceale not the other.

Dering.

If M. Harding doe alleage bothe these ends of the Sacraments, that is. To ioyne vsus vntounto God, & to ioyne vsus one with an other, then let this be vntrue, if he do not, then for my pore skil me thinketh he concealeth it.

The B. of Saris.

M. Harding saith the Communion signifieth not the Communicating of many together.

Harding.

The .77. vntruthe. I say not so.

Dering.

Héere M. Harding and M. Stapleton do agrée so iumpe in one vntruthe, that it appeareth euidently their religion is either very vniforme, or at least they hauehave bene both instructed in one schole. Thus saith M. Harding.Diuis. 10. The Cōmunion is not so called, bicause many, or as M. Iuel teacheth, the whole congregatiō receiued together in one place. These words M. Iuel reporteth thus. He saith, the Cōmunion is not so called of the Communicating of many together. This is vntrue saith M. Har. I say not so: this is vntruth saith M. Sta. he saith not so.Stap. the .27. vntruthe. p. 82I require héere of thée, good Christian Reader, to viewe the woords well, and finde out any fault if thou canst. Surely I thinke, thou canst finde none, like as sure it is M. Iuel did thinke of none. But these two pair of Egles eyes, what hauehave they espied? Forsothe wher M. Harding saith, it is not called the Communion of Communicating togither in one place, M. Iuel thus reporteth it, it is not called the Communion of Communicating togither, and leaueth quite out in one place which maketh all the matter, this distinction of Communicating together, and Communicating together in one place, bicause it is somewhat straunge, these men should hauehave done well to hauehave proued it by some Doctor. Sure M. Harding if he may goe for a Doctor, he teacheth vsus plainely in an other place, that to Communicate together, is to Communicate in one place. For thus he writeth, but that they should Communicate together,Reioinder. Fol. 97. that is to say, in one place, that we deny. By this Doctor it appeareth, that together, and in one place is all one, and then this can be no vntruth.

The B. of Saris.

How be it in plaine speche, it is not the receiuing of the Sacrament, that worketh our ioyning with God.

Harding.

The .78. vntruthe. The worthy receiuing worketh this effect.

Dering.

Doth it so? Are we not ioyned to God before we eate the Sacrament?Ephe. …. S. Paule saith, Elegit nos in ipso. He hath chosen vsus in Christ, before the foundations of the worlde were laid, muche more are we his before we receiue the sacrament. Concerning sacraments, the same Apostle sayth of Abraham. Signum accepit circumcisionis. &c. After he receiued the signe of Circumcision,Rom. 2.4.Rom 2:4 as the seale of the righteousnesse of y^e faith, which he had when he was vncircumcised. And shall we be p. 83taught now, that they be no more seales, and witnesses, but causes of our iustification? God kéepe vsus from suche spiders, that gather poison of so swéete floures. And that thou maist take the more héede of this mannes doctrine, I must first tell thee, that for proofe of it, he bringeth not one worde of Scripture, but pretendeth the aucthority of Chrysostome and Cyril. I would answere the aucthoritie for suche Doctors, saue that the labor were long, and not necessary. For I will declare out of the Scripture, that the doctrine is hereticall, and thereby thou shalt be satisfied, and maist further imagine that these holy Fathers names are too muche abused. In this vntruthe of M. Hardings, he teacheth two points of Doctrine, the one, that by, and thorow the worthy receiuing of the Sacrament, we be ioyned vntounto God, the other, that the Sacraments are not only seales and pledges, but also they containe grace. Now let vsus sée how these two Articles agrée with the worde of God. And first, whither the receiuing of the Sacrament do ioyne vsus vntounto God, and as M, Harding saith, putteth also into vsus life immortall. Our Sauior Christ in the Gospell after S. Iohn, doth often tel his Disciples, how they are made one with God, yet in that holy Gospel, as in all other scriptures, there is not one worde that telleth vsus we be made one with him by receiuing the Sacrament. But contrarily by plaine words we be taught, what vertue this Sacrament hath, that it is onelyonly a signe of that grace, which we hauehave receiued, as shall appeare héereafter. In the sixthe chapter of Iohn, where Christ reproueth the fleshly hearers of his worde, and calleth them to a true beliefe in him, the Iewes make this answere. What signe shewest thou then, that we may sée it? Our Fathers did eat Manna. &c. Héere is first shewed what the Iewes thought of Manna, not that by it they were ioyned to God, or receiued grace, but that it was a signe, a token, and a pledge of their frée election, how they were a peculiar people vntounto God. This Manna being a figure of this Sacrament of the body, and bloud of Christ, now lest vntounto the Churche. Christ p. 84maketh this aunswere, I am the bread of life, he that commeth to me shall not hunger,Ioh. 6.35.John 6:35 and he that beleueth in me, shall not thirst for euer. By this we learne, that to beleue in Christ is to hauehave euerlasting life, and as Manna was a signe to the Israelites, so the Communion of the body and blood of Christ is a signe to vsus, that this promisse shall be made sure. It is written in the Prophet:Esay. 54.13.Isa 54:13 and all thy children shall be taught of the Lord: of this saying our sauior Christ teacheth vsus how we be ioyned vntounto him, and sayth. No man can come to me, except the father which sent me draw him.Ioh. 6.44.John 6:44 And to this ende it is written by the Prophet Ieremie. After those dayes sayeth the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts,Ier. 31.33.Jer 31:33 and I will be their God, and they shalbe my people. Of this we learne, that if we come vntounto Christ, the Father must draw vsus: if we be his people, he must be our inward teacher: if we be vnited vntounto him, he must first come and dwell in our hearts: whereby it is plaine, that we must be first engrafted in Christ, before we can worthely receiue his holy Sacramentes. Furthermore it foloweth in S. Iohn, he that eateth my fleshe,Ioh. 6.36.John 6:36 and drinketh my bloud, dwelleth in me, and I in him. Therefore we must dwell in him, and he in vsus, or we can not eate his body, and drink his bloud. And the wicked which dwel not in him, can not receiue him. Again, where our Sauior Christ doeth teache very largely how we be ioyned vntounto him, and become one with him, euen as his Father and he is one, he sheweth that this societie doeth come vponupon vsus of his Fathers frée mercy apprehended by Faithe of his woorde. And for declaration of this frée mercy, he reporteth it oftentimes, that we are giuen vntounto him of his Father, as: manifestaui nomen tuum ijs quos dedisti mihi, I hauehave made knowne thy name vntounto those which thou hast giuen me,Ioh. 17.6.John 17:6 and: tui erant & mihi dedisti eos, and: omnia quae dedisti mihi a te sunt, and: serua eos quos dedisti mihi. All things that thou hast giuen me, are from thée. Kéepe them that thou hast giuen me. They were thine, and thou hast giuen them me. And that we p. 85should know that to be giuen to Christ, is to be ioyned vntounto him, he addeth vt sint vnum sicut nos, that they may be one as we are one. This is also proued by all suche places of Scripture, as shew that we be saued by grace. Thus we sée our ioyning vntounto God, is first to be giuen vntounto Iesus Christe of his Fathers owne good will. And this is on Gods behalfe, the eternall secrete purpose whereby we be made his. The other way whereby we be made his, is Faithe of his worde, when by inspiration of the holy Ghost, we apprehend in Christ the frée louelove of his Father, and that héereby we be ioyned vntounto God: it is in like manner often declared by the Scripture. Now are you cleane (saith Christ) through the word which I hauehave spoken vntounto you.Ioh. 15.3. Ioh. 17.8.John 15 And in an other place I hauehave giuen vntounto them the woords which thou gauest me, and they hauehave receiued them, and hauehave knowne surely that I came out from thée, and hauehave beléeued that thou hast sent me. Likewise Ioh. 16.27. & Ioh. 17.14. I hauehave giuen them thy worde. Againe sanctifie them with thy truthe, thy worde is the truthe. And to the ende we should all know this instruction were oures, our Sauior saith further, I pray not for these alone, but for them also which shall beleue in me through their worde. And now for proofe that this is our ioyning vntounto God, it foloweth that they all may be one, as thou, O Father, art in me, and I in thée, euen that they may be also one in vsus. This manner of ioyning vsus vntounto God, was shewed vntounto Iacob in that vision where he saw a ladder reaching from the earthe to heauen, and Angels going vp and downe,Gen. 28.12.Gen 28:12 teaching vsus that Christ was likewise the ladder by whome we climed vp, and were ioyned to his Father. This was likewise shewed in the thirde of Mathevve, where the Heauens are opened,Math. 3.Matt 3 and the holy Ghost descended vponupon Christ, signifying that he hath reconciled heauen and earth, and ioyned vsus againe vntounto God, and we by faith made partakers of that benefite. Thus we sée the manner of our ioyning vntounto God, first in his eternal secrete purpose, after apprehended of vsus by faithe. Now p. 68this standing thus, that the promise might be certaine vntounto all the séede, God hath sealed this hope with the body & bloud of Christ, that we being partakers of those heauenly mysteries, might assure our conscience of his eternall mercy, that the gates of Hell should no more preuaile against vsus. Thus are our Sacraments, signes, tokens, warrantes, gages, pledges of our saluation, and doe not, as M. Harding teacheth, ioyne vsus vntounto God, but he sayth further, they poure into vsus life immortall, and dothe boldly affirme it, yet we may not beleue him, without great preiudice to Christ himselfe. I tel you plaine saithe M. Harding, they put into vsus eternall life, but Christ saith, I know that Gods commaundement is euerlasting life, and to put it out of doubt what commaundement he meaneth, he saith in an other place, this is eternall life, that they know thée to be the only very God,Iohn. 12.50.John 12:50 and whom thou hast sent Iesus Christ. Then faith ioineth vsus vntounto God, faithe putteth in to vsus life.Iohn. 17.3.John 17:3 Not in all Gods word there is one line, whereby it may appeare this is wrought by the Sacrament. Now resteth the second point to be considered, whether the Sacraments containe grace, and in déede, hinc illae lachrymae. Hereof maister Harding complaining, came as the common Prouerbe is, foreign. Whē he heard y^e name of Sacraments, he could not but gape after this Popish heresie. This is a religious article in the Popes kingdome, that Sacraments doe giuegive grace, but what they doe, it is sufficiently already declared, beside that their names doe sufficiently beare witnesse of their efficacie. They be called Testaments, or couenaunts, which cannot be the thing it selfe, but the pledge of our iustification. In Baptisme, if Christ doe not baptise with fire, and with the holy Ghost, the water of regeneration doth not auaile. Therfore S. Paule saith: ye that are baptised into Christ,Math. 3.11.Matt 3:11 hauehave put on Christ. By which one sentence all M. Hardings doctrine is ouerthrowne. For neither the water ioyneth vsus vntounto God,Gal. 3.27.Gal 3:27 neither yet giueth vsus grace, but that is wrought only by our faith in Christ. And therfore p. 87S. Paule writeth of Circumcision, that Abraham was first iustified, and after receiued the signe of Circumcision,Rom. 2.4.Rom 2:4 as this seale of the rightuousnesse of faith, which he had whē he was vncircumcised. By all this it is manifest, that grace is first giuen vsus fréely from aboue, and then the Sacrament is lefte vntounto vsus as a warrant that Gods promisse shall be fulfilled. Thus we sée, that touching the Sacramentes M. Iuel saithe nothing otherwise than the Scripture teacheth, and the vntruthe that M. Harding would so faine note, is nothing else but his owne heresie. And now, for as muche as M. Harding hath called vsus into so long a discourse of Gods Sacraments, I desire of thée good Christian reader, to marke indifferently the great difference in this behalf, betwene the Christian and the papall Religion, & thou wilt soone, as I doubt not, abhorre their great deprauing of Christes institution, which in that sinagoge is so miserably rent in pieces, that scarce any parte of it is kept inuiolate. Christ did institute his supper for this 1purpose, that he might Communicate with his disciples.Luc. 22.15.Luke 22:15 They appoint their Masses, that they may receiue alone. Christ in 2his supper was the only offerer, they in their Masses will offer as wel as he. Christ blessed with giuing thanks, they blesse 3with making Crosses. Christ did Consecrate with the preaching 4of the word of faithe, they doo Consecrate with whisperings and breathings. Christ said, take and eate, this is my 5body, they say neither take nor eate, yet it is his body. Christs 6Disciples sate downe and eate it, they bid vsus fall downe and worship it. Christ said, he would drinke no more of the fruite 7of the vine, they say there is no fruit of the vine at all. Christ 8saithe drinke ye all of this, they say drinke no man but the Priest alone. Christ saith, doe this in my remembraunce, that 9is, shew forthe my death vntill I come, they of Christes death and passion doe not preache a worde. I will prosecute this repugnancie no further. It greueth me to remember their opē sacriledge. God turne their hearts, and giuegive them vnderstanding, that they may once know, and confesse that his Religion p. 88may not thus be framed to mannes fansie, so in the latter day when they shall be accomptable for their doings, they may be vnblameable in the sight of the highest.

The B. of Saris.

He saith Communion is so called, of that we Communicate togither.

Harding.

The .79. vntruthe. He saith not together.

Dering.

It is a very strange propertie, not to be ashamed to speake manifestly against the knowne signification of any worde, it is muche more straunge to speake against it, placed in suche a sentence where of force the signification must be graunted, but it is moste straunge of all, and in manner a singulare impudencie to note it for any vntruthe in one, that will not so shamelesly speake without reason as an other dothe. Such an vntruthe as this, is it which now we hauehave in hand: foreign is well knowne to signifie to Communicate together in the same time and place. And in this sentence foreign. Héere to say it can signifie any other thing, it is very ignorant boldenesse. But to note it for an vntruthe as maister Harding dothe, it is bothe to be past shame and past grace. The worde is well knowne, that foreign and foreign do signifie a cōmunitie of any thing together, and therefore they be called foreign, which may hauehave felowship with the Congregation and foreign to be in felowship with any man. And bicause that Mercurie is sayd to be the messenger of the Pagane goddes to tell their errandes from them to any man, therefore he is called foreign hauing a proper name of his proper office, in that by him the Ethnikes did thinke they were made partakers of their gods counsell, by which the propertie of this worde appeareth. And p. 89consider good Reader what manner of Communion it is that M. Harding would make when the Priest saith Masse in the Church, and calleth no body vntounto him, yet he sayth that al the Priestes in the world which say Masse at the same time doe Communicate with him, and be made one body of Christe togither. Héere I aske of M. Harding how he agréeth with S. Paule y^t saith we are one bread & one body,1. Cor. 10.1 Cor 10 bicause we all are partakers of one bread. Marke reader because we eate of one bread, we become one body saith S. Paule. Bicause we say Masse at one time, we become one body saith M. Harding, though we eate not at all of the same breade. Sure these two Doctoures doe not agrée. S. Paule saith moreouer the bread which we break, is it not the Cōmunion of the body of Christ, M. Harding saith, though we breake not the same bread, but be eche one of vsus by our selues at our altares, yet it is the Communion of the body of Christ. Thus we sée S. Paule and M. Harding teache not bothe one Doctrine. But it is no meruaile they are not guided bothe with one spirit. S. Paule speaketh truthe, and M. Harding falshead, S. Paule the worde of God, and master Harding his owne fansies, as for this Communion of M. Hardings, it was neuer knowne in the Church of God. I remember there is a great bragger in Martial, maketh euen suche an other, he had euer in his mouth foreign. All things are common among frendes: but saying thus so often when he would neuer bestow any thing among his neighbors, the Poet saith this is a very straunge Communion. Das nihil & dicis Candide, foreign. So it goeth with M. Harding, he euer saith of his Masse it is common, it is common, but he saith it only, he calleth no man vntounto him. Sure say what he will, this is but craking Candidus his Communion, God be praised that we are deliuered from it. And thus it appeareth it is no vntruthe, to say foreign, is to Communicate together▪ as well bicause the worde it selfe is plaine, as for that the scripture teacheth that the Communion must be so administred.