Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 1 · Book 1 · Part 37
The seuen and thirtieth Chapter, maketh a brieefe recapitulation of thinges before written, with the application of them toHesk. the proclamation of the aduersarie, and so concludeth the first booke.
It were but vaine labour, especially for me, that professe such breuitie,Fulk. to repeate the answers and declarations made before, that not one of these Lordes of the higher house, whom he nameth, fauoureth his bill, of the carnall presence, or the sacrifice of the masse in such sense, as he and his fellowes take it. But whereas he is so loftie once againe, to ioyne issue with the proclaymer, & that as he hath done alwayes hitherto, vponupon the negatiue, I will not refuse him. And yet by the way I must admonish the Reader, how vnreasonably he dealeth, that ioyneth all his issues vponupon the negatiue, whiche sometime is harde, sometime is vnpossible to be proued, whereas the Bishop, whom he calleth the proclaimer, ioyneth issue with them vponupon the affirmatiue, which if euer it was holden, is more probable to finde proofe in antiquitie. Whereas if I might hauehave libertie to ioyne vponupon the negatiue, I would bring in fiue hundreth propositions, that are false, and yet neuer a one expressely denied of the olde writers, because there neuer happened any controuersie aboute suche matters in their times. But to his issue. If he can bring any one sufficient authoritie, that shall directly say, that the Church may not offer the body of Christ, in such sorte as it doeth, I will giuegive him the victorie.
First here he reiecteth the authoritie of the Apostle to the Hebrues, saying, it is but wrested, which is as direct, as nothing in the worlde can be more direct, that Christ offered himselfe, and that but once, and by that one oblation hath made perfect for euer, them that are sanctified. But he shal heare Chrysostome vponupon the same scripture Hebr. 10. Aufer… primum, vt sequens statuat, &c. He taketh away the former, that he might establish that whiche followeth. Beholde againe the aboundance. This sacrifice sayeth he, is but one, but those sacrifices are many: for therefore they were not strong, because they were many. But tell me what need is there of many, when one is sufficient? Therefore whereas they were many, and alwayes offered, he sheweth, that they were neuer purged. For as a medicine when it is strong and effectuall to giuegive health, and able to driue away, all sicknesse, being but once laide to, worketh the whole at once. If therfore being but once laide to it hath wrought the whole, it sheweth the vertue thereof, in that it is not laid to any more: & this is the effect of it, yt it is laid on no more but once. But if it be always laid to, it is a manifest token, yt it preuailed nothing. For this is the vertue of that medicine, yt it is but once laid on, and not oftentimes: euen so in this case. By what meanes were they always healed, by ye same sacrifices? For if they had ben deliuered from al their sins, there should not hauehave bene offered sacrifice throughout eueryevery day. For they were appointed, yt they should be always offred for al the people, both at euening & in ye day. Therfore, that was an accusation of sinns, not a discharge: for ther was made an accusatiō of weaknes, not a shewing of strength. For bicause ye first sacrifice was of no force, the second was likewise offered, & bicause that also profited nothing, an other was offered also: wherefore this is but a conuiction of sinnes. For in yt they were offered, there is a conuiction of sinnes, but in that they were always offred, there is a conuiction of infirmitie But contrariwise in Christ, the sacrifice was but once offered. For what neede was there of medicines, when there is no more wounds remaining? For this cause, you wil say, he cōmanded that it should always be offered, bicause of infirmitie, that there might be also a remēbrance of sinnes: What then do we… Doe we not offer eueryevery day? we offer truely, but for a remembraunce which we make of his death, and this is but one sacrifice, not many. Howe is it one and not many? Bicause it was offered but once, and it was offered in the holy of holies: but this sacrifice is an exemplar of that, we offer the same alwayes. For we do not nowe offer one lamb, to morrowe an other, but the same thing alwayes. Therfore this sacrifice is but one. For else by this reason, bicause it is offred in many places, are ther many Christs? No, but one Christ is eueryevery where, both here being perfect and there being perfect, euen one body. For as he which is eueryevery where is one bodie, and not many bodies: so also it is one sacrifice. And hee is our highe Priest, which offered the sacrifice which purged vsus: the same do we also offer nowe, which then truely being offered, can not be consumed. Howbeit, that which we doe nowe, is done truely, in the remembraunce of that which was done then. For this do ye (saith he) in remembraunce of me. We make not an other sacrifice as the high Priest, but alwayes the same, but rather we worke the remembrance of the same. This place of Chrysostome sheweth, both that the Church neither doth, nor may offer the body of Christ in such sort as the Papistes say, that is really and carnally, and for the sinnes of the quicke and the dead: and also howe the Church is saide to offer the sacrifice of Christes body, namely, when she celebrateth the remembrance thereof.
After this holy issue ioyned, M. Heskins rayleth vponupon Cranmer, which in his first booke hath not one Doctour or Counsel to alledge, but only a litle false descant vponupon a scripture or two, as the proclamer in his Sermon. What reading Cranmer and Iewell, were able to shewe in the Doctours and Counsels, is so well testified by their owne learned workes vntounto the world, that it can not by such an obscure doctour as M. Hesk. is, be blemished or darkned.
But M. Heskins hath such store of testimonies for the sacrifice of the Masse, to proue that Christ is offred therin, yt beside those which he hath alredy cited, he wil ad three or foure to this recapitulation. First he nameth Iustinus Martyr, in his dialogue against ye Iewes. Where he alledgeth his wordes truncatly, leauing out the beginning▪ which declareth that Iustine maketh all Christians Priestes and offerers of the sacrifice of thankesgiuing in the celebration of the Lordes supper. His wordes are these. foreign foreign. Euen so we which by the name of Iesusas al (shal be one man in God the maker of al things) hauing put off our filthy garments, that is, our sinnes, by the name of his first begotten sonne, and being set on fire by the word of his calling, are a right kinde of high priests of God, as God himself doth witnes, That in al places among the Gentiles, acceptable & pure sacrifices are offred to him. But God receiueth no sacrifice of any but of his Priestes. Wherefore God before hand doth testifie, that he doth accept all them that offer by this name the sacrifices, which Iesus Christe hath deliuered to be made, that is in the Eucharistie or thankesgiuing of the bread and the cuppe, which are done in eueryevery place of the Christians. By these words it appeareth not, that Christ was offered, but thankesgiuing in ye sacrament, not of the priest alone, but by all Christians. And yet more plainely in the wordes of his, that are in the same Dialogue: foreign.
And as concerning those sacrifices which are offered to him of vsus Gentiles in eueryevery place, that is of the breade of thankesgiuing, and the cup likewise of thankesgiuing, hee foresheweth saying, that we do glorifie his name, and that you do prophane it. In which saying what can we see, but the sacrifice of thankesgiuing in the bread and cup? And to proue that the Church hath none other sacrifice but of prayers and thankesgiuing, he saith within few lines after the place cited by M. Heskins; foreign. For I my selfe do affirme, that prayers and thankesgiuing made by worthie persons, are the only perfect and acceptable sacrifices to God. For these are the only sacrifices that Christians hauehave receiued to make, to be put in minde by their drie and moyst nourishment, of the passion which God the son of God is recorded to hauehave suffered for them. This place doth not onelyonly shewe, what the only sacrifice of Christians was in his time, but also teacheth, that in the sacrament is drie and moyst nourishment, that is, bread and drinke, not bare accidents as the transubstantiators affirme. How little Iustinus maketh for the sacrifice of the Masse, these places doe sufficiently declare.
The second place hee citeth, is out of Hierom in his booke of Hebrue questions. Quod autem …it, &c. whereas he sa…th, thou art a Priest for …uer after the order of Melchisedech: in the word (order) our mysterie is signified, not in offering vnreasonable sacrifices by Aaron, but in offering bread and wine, that is, the body and blood of our Lord Iesus Christ. We hauehave shewed sufficiently before, howe the olde writers vsed the worde of sacrifice licentiously, when there was no such heresie, as fined is sprung vp, of the sacrifice of ye Masse, for the memoriall of the sacrifice of Christes body and bloud, in which was offered the spirituall sacrifice of prayers and thanksgiuing: which reasonable men might wel ynough vnderstand, though heretiques do nowe drawe it to their meaning. As when Hierom calleth this offering of bread and wine a mysterie, eueryevery indifferent reader may vnderstand, that he speaketh not properly in calling it the body and bloud of Christe, and a sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe. But as to a sicke man of the ague, all drinkes seeme bitter, so to a popish heretique, all sayings of the Doctours seeme popish and hereticall.
The third place he alledgeth, it is out of Ambrose his preparatiue prayer to Masse, I will not vouchsafe to rehearse it, bicause it is a meere bastard and counterfet writing, out of which it is cyted, hauing as much of S. Ambrose in it, as M. Heskins hath witt and honestie in alledging it. If any man will obiect, that then I must bring arguments to disproue it, or else I may likewise denye any authenticall writer: I answere, it were too long to do in this shortnesse that I must vse, and not necessarie, when they are notorious and well knowne already to eueryevery man of meane reading in the Doctors, and Erasmus in his censure doth plainly reiect it.
The fourth is Isydorus li. 1. ca 18. de off. which althogh he be somwhat wtout ye cōpasse of 600. yeares after Christ, yet because he is an auncient writer, & nere that time, I will consider his speach which is cited by M. Heskins in these wordes, The sacrifice that is offered to God by the Christians, our Lorde and maister Christ did first institute, when hee commended to his Apostles his bodie and bloude, before hee was betraied, as it is redd in the Gospell: Iesus tooke the bread and the cup and blessing them gaue the same vntounto them. Here beside the vsuall phrase of sacrifice (which we hauehave often declared what it did signifie, and whence it came) is nothing to quarrell at. For Isydore ment no doubt, the spirituall sacrifice of thankesgiuing, which is offered in the celebration of the Lords supper, & not the propitiatorie sacrifice of the popish masse, of which scarce the foundations were begonne to be laide in his time, of certaine odde stones of vnproper speach, and licentious phrases of sacrifices and oblations.
As for Haymo and Cabasila, I will neuer trouble my self to examine their speaches, they are but late writers, & therefore of small credite in these causes. And whereas M. Heskins glorieth that he hath aunswered foure members of the proclamation in this booke: the scriptures in the vulgar tongue, the reseruation of the sacrament, the offering of Christe to his father, and the presence of his bodie and bloude in the sacrament: let the iudgement reste with the indifferent readers, whether although hee hath some of the lower house to fauour his billes, & more might hauehave, if hee woulde aske their voyces, yet I hauehave proued by this short aunswere, that of the higher house, he hath not one that hath giuen a voyce with thē, but many that hauehave spoken directly against them.
God be praysed.