Of Masse vvith out a number of others receiuing the Commu­nion vvith the priest at the same tyme and place, vvhich the gospellers call priuate Masse.
ARTICLE. I.

EVERY Masse is publike,No Masse priuate in it self, but in respe­cte of cir­cūstāces. con­cerning bothe the Oblation, and also the communion, and none priuate. For no man offereth that dredfull Sacrifice priuately for him selfe alone, but for the whole Churche of Christ in common. The Communion li­kewise of the Sacrament, is a publike feast by Christ through the ministerie of the priest in the same pre­pared for euery faithfull person: from partaking whereof none is excluded, that with due examinatiō hauing before made him selfe ready, demaundeth the same. And so being common by order of the first Institution, and by will of the ministers, it ought to [Page] be reputed for common, not priuate.

That others doo so commonly forebeare to com­municate with the priest, it is through their owne de­faulte and negligence, not regarding their owne salua­tion. Whereof the godly and carefull rulers of faith­full people, haue sithens the tyme of the primitiue Churche, alwayes much complayned. Therefore in this respecte we doo not acknowledge any priuate Masse, but leaue that terme to Luthers schoole, where it was first deuysed, and so termed by Sathan him selfe seeking how to withdraw his nouice Luther from the loue and estimation of that most blessed Sacrifice, by reasoning with him against the same in a night vision, as him selfe recordeth in a litle booke, which he made, De Missa angulari & vnctione sacerdotali. Yet we denye not but that theConcil. Vasen. c. 4 Cōcil. Tri­buriē. De­cretal. li. 3. tit. 41. c. 2. De conse­crat. dist. 1 ex Augu­sti. quod quidā Gregorio tri­buunt. Gregor. ex Regist. li. 2. ad Ca­steriū c. 9. fathers of some auncient Councelles, and sithens likewise3. parte summae. q. 83. respō ­sione ad 12. argu­mentu ar­ticuli. 5. What the Luthera­nes call priuate Masse. S. Tho­mas, and certaine other schoole doctours, haue called it sometymes a priuate Masse, but not after the sense of Luther and his scolers: but onely as it is cōtrary to publike and solemne, in consideration of place, tyme, audience, purpose, rites, and other circumstances. The varietie and chaunge of which being thinges acci­dentarie, can not varie or chaunge the substance or essentiall nature of the Masse. Maister Iuell an earnest professour of the new doctrine of Luther and of the Sacramentaries, calleth, as they doo, that a priuate Masse, whereat the priest hauing no cōpanie to com­municate with him, receiueth the Sacrament alone.

Against this priuate Masse, as he termeth it, he in­ueigheth sore in his prīted Sermō, which he preached [Page 10] at Poules Crosse the second Sundaye before Easter in the yere of our lord, 1560. as he entituleth it, shun­ning the accustomed name of Passion Sundaye, least (as it semeth) by vsing the terme of the catholike churche, he shuld seme to fauer any thing that is ca­tholike. In which Sermon he hath gathered together as it were in to one heape, all that euer he could fynde written in derogation of it, in their bookes, by whom it hath ben impugned. And though he pretende ene­mitie against priuate Masse in word, yet in dede who so euer readeth his Sermon, and discerneth his sprite, shall easely perceiue, that he extēdeth his whole witte and cunning, vtterly to abolishe the vnbloudy and daily Sacrifice of the Churche, commonly called the Masse. Which, as the Apostles them selues affirme inPro sacrificio cruē to, ratio­nale & in­cruētū ac mysticum sacrificiū instituit, quod in mortē do­mini per symbola corporis & sangui­nis ipsius celebra­tur. Cle­mens cō ­stitutionū Apostoli­carū lib. 6 cap. 23. Proufes for the Masse briefly touched. Clemēt their scoler and felow, being vnbloudy, hath succeded in place of the bloudy sacrifices of the olde lawe, and is by Christes commaundemēt frequented and offered in remembraunce of his passiō and death, and to be vsed all tymes vntill his coming. But what so euer he, or all other the forerunners of Antichrist, speake or worke against it, all that ought not to ouerthrowe the faith of good and true Christen men, hauing for proufe thereof besyde many other places of holy scripture, the figure of Melchisedech, that was before the law, the prophecie of Malachie in the law, and lastly and most plainely the Institution of Christ in the new testamēt. Which he lefte to the Apostles, the Apostles to the Churche, and the Churche hath cōtinually kepte and vsed through the whole world vntill this daye.

Touching doctours, they haue with one consent in all ages, in all partes of the world, from the Apo­stles tyme foreward, bothe with their example, and also testimonie of writing confirmed the same faith. They that haue ben brought vp in learning, and yet through corruption of the tyme stand doubtefull in this point: let them take paines to trauaile in studie, and they shall fynde by good auncient witnes of the priestes and deacons of Achaia, that Saint Androw the Apostle, touching the substance of the Masse, worshipped God euery daye with the same seruice, as priestes now doo in celebrating the externall Sa­crifice of the Churche. They shall fynd by witnes of Abdias first bishop of Babylō,Abdiae li. 7. historiae Apostol. who was the Apostles scoler and saw our Sauiour in fleshe, and was present at the passion and martyrdom of S. Androw, that S. Matthew the Apostle celebrated Masse in Aethiopia a litle before his Martyrdom. They shall fynde by reporte of an aunciēt Councell generall,Conciliū Constan­tinopol. in Trullo cap. 32. Epistol. ad Burdega. Lib cōsti­tut. apostolicarū 8. cap. vlt. that S. Iames wrote a liturgie or a forme of the Masse. They shall fynde that Martialis one of the lxxij. disciples of Christ, and Bishop of Bourdeaulx in Fraunce, sent thyther by S. Peter, serued God in like sorte. They shall fynde in Clement, the whole order and forme of the Masse, set forth by the Apostles them selues, and the same celebrated by them after our lord was assumpted, before they went to the ordering of bis­shops, priestes, and the vij. deacons, according to his Institution, and the same right so declared by Cyril­lus bishop of Ierusalem In mystagogicis orationibus. They shall fynde the same most plainely treated of, and a [Page 11] forme of the Masse much agreable to that is vsed in these dayes in wryting set forth by S. Dionyse,In eccles. hierarch. cap. 3. Act. 17. whom S. Paul conuerted to the faith, of whom it is mencio­ned in the actes of the Apostles, who had cōference with Peter, Paul, and Ihon th'euangelist, and much ac­quaintance with Timothe.

Thus doo I geue thee good Christen reader but a taste as it were of proufes, with out allegation of the wordes, for confirmation of thy faith, concerning the blessed Masse out of the Scriptures, Apostles, and Apostolike men. I doo further referre the to Iustinus the martyr and philosopher,Lib. 4. cō ­tra haeres. cap. 32. to Irenaeus the martyr and bishop of Lions, who lyued with the Apostles scho­lers. To the olde bishop and Martyr Hippolytus, that lyued in Origens tyme, who in his oration De Con­summatione mundi extant in Greke, maketh Christ thus to saye at the generall iudgement vnto bishops. Venite Pontifices, qui purê mihi Sacrificium die nocte (que) ohtuli­stis, ac praetiosum corpus & sanguinē meum immolastis quotidie. Come ye Bishops, that haue purely offered sacrifice to me daye and nyght, and haue sacrificed my pre­tious body and bloud daily. Finally I referre them in stede of many, to the two worthy fathers Basile and Chrysostome, whose Masses be lefte to the po­steritie at this tyme extāt.In mysta­gogicis orationi­bus. Amongest all Cyrillus Hie­rosolymitanus is not to be passed ouer lightly, who at large expoundeth the whole Masse vsed in Ieru­salem in his tyme, the same, which now we fynde in Clement, much like to that of Basile and Chryso­stome, and for the Canon and other principall partes, to that is now also vsed in the Latine Churche.

As for the other doctoures of the churche, that fo­lowed the Apostles and those Apostolike mē, many in number, excellent in learning, holy of lyfe, to shew what may be brought out of their workes for proufe of this matter, that th'oblation of the body and bloude of Christ in the Masse is the sacrifice of the Church, and proper to the new testament, it would require a whole volume: and therefore not being moued by M. Iuelles Chalēge to speake specially ther­of, but as it is priuate after their meaning, and ma­ny good treatises in defence of this sacrifice being set forth already in printe: at this present, I will saye no­thing, thinking hereof, as Salust dyd of Carthago that great citie, that it were better to kepe silence, then to speake fewe.

Now this presupposed, that the Masse standeth vpon good and sufficient groundes for the stay of all true christen mennes beleefe: let vs come to our speciall pourpose, and saye somewhat of priuate Masse, as our aduersaries call it.

The chiefe cause why they storme so much against priuate Masse, is, for that the priest receiueth the Sa­crament alone: which thing they expresse with great vilanie of wordes. Now in case the people might be styrred to such deuotion, as to dispose them sel­ues worthely to receiue their housell euery daye with the priest, as they dyd in the primitiue church, when they looked hourely to be caught and done to death in the persecutiō of Paynimes, that they de­parted not hence, Sine Viatico, without their viage prouision: what shuld these men haue to saye? In this [Page 12] case perhappes they would fynde other defaultes in the Masse, but against it in this respect onely that it is priuate, they shuld haue nothing to saye at all. So the right of their cause depēdeth of the misdooing of the people, which if they would amende, these folke shuld be dryuen either to recant, or to holde their peace. To other defaultes of the Masse by them vn­truely surmysed, answere shal be made hereafter. Now touching this.

Where no defaulte is committed, there no blame is to be imputed. That oftentymes the priest at Masse hath no comparteners to receiue the sacramēt with him, it procedeth of lacke of deuotion of the peoples parte, not of enuye or malice of his parte.

The feaste is common, all be inuited, they may come that lyst, they shall be receiued that be disposed and proued: None is thrust awaye, that thus commeth: it may be obtruded to none violētly, ne offred to none rashely. Well, none commeth. This is not a suffi­cient cause, why the faithfull and godly priest en­flamed with the loue of God, feeling him selfe hun­gry and thirsty after that heauēly foode and drynke, shuld be kepte from it, and imbarred from celebra­ting the memoire of our lordes death according to his commaundement, from his dutie of geuing than­kes for that great benefite, from taking the cuppe of saluatiō, and calling vpon the name of God:Psal. 115. for these thinges be done in the Masse.

But the enemies of this holy sacrifice saye, that this is against the Institution of Christ. God for­bydde, the Institution of Christ shuld not be kepte. [Page] But it is a world to see, how they crye out for the Institution of Christ, by whom it is most wickedly broken. For where as in Christes Institution concer­ning this Sacrament, three thinges are conteined, which he him selfe dyd, and by his commaundemēt gaue auctoritie to the Church to doo the same, the Consecration,Three es­sentials of the Masse. the oblation, and the participation, whe­rein consisteth the substance of the Masse: they ha­uing quite aborogated the other two, and not so much as once naming them in their bookes of ser­uice, now haue lefte to the people nothing but a bare Communion, and that after their own sorte: with what face can they so busely crye for Christes Insti­tution, by whom in the chiefe pointes the same is violated?

Of Consecration and Oblation although much might be sayde here against them, I will at this tyme saye nothing. Concerning participation the number of communicantes together in one place that they iangle so much of, as a thing so necessary, that with out it, the Masse is to be reputed vnlaufull: is no parte of Christes Institution. For Christ ordeined the Sa­crament, after consecration and oblation done, to be receiued and eaten. And for that ende he sayd: Acci­pite, Number of cōmu­nicants, place, ty­me, vvith other ri­tes, bee not of Christes institutiō manducate, bibite: take, eate, drinke. Here in cōsisteth his Institution.

Now as for the number of the communicantes, how many shuld receiue together in one place, and in what place, what tyme, sitting at table (as some would haue it) standing or kneeling, fasting, or after other meates: and whether they shuld receiue it in [Page 13] their handes, or with their mowthes, and other the like orders, maners and circumstāces: all these thinges perteine to the ceremonie of eating. the obseruation whereof dependeth of the churches ordinance, and not of Christes Institution. And therefore S. Augu­stine writing to Ianuarius sayeth: Saluator non praecepit, Epist. 118. quo deinceps ordine sumeretur, vt Apostolis, per quos dispositu­rus erat Ecclesiam, seruaret hunc locum. Our Sauiour gaue not commaundement in what order it shuld be re­ceiued, meaning to reserue that matter to the Apo­stles, by whom he would directe and dispose his churche. Wherefore the receiuing of the Sacrament being the Institution of Christ, and the maner, num­ber, and other rites of the receiuing not fixed nor determined by the same, but ordered by the Chur­ches disposition: whether many or fewe, or but one, in one place receiue: for that respecte the ministra­tion of the priest is not made vnlaufull.

But if they alleage against vs the exāple of Christ, saying that he receiued it not alone, but did commu­nicate with his twelue Apostles, and that we ought to folow the same: I answer, that we are bounde to folow this example, quo ad substantiam, nō quo ad externam ceremoniam. for the substance, not for the outward ceremonie, to the which perteineth the number and other rites, as is a fore sayde. Christes exāple impor­teth necessitie of receiuing onely, the other rites, as number, place, tyme etc. be of congruence and order. In which thinges the churche hath taken order, wil­ling and charging, that all shall communicate, that be worthy and disposed. And so it were to be wished, [Page] as oftentymes as the priest doth celebrate this high sacrifice, that there were some, who worthely dispo­sed, might receiue their rightes with him, and be par­takers sacramētally of the body and bloude of Christ with him. But in case such do lacke, as we haue sene that lacke commonly in our tyme yet therefore the cōtinuall and dayly sacrifice ought not to be intermit­ted. For sith this is done in remembraunce of Chri­stes oblation once made on the Crosse for the Re­demption of all mankinde, therefore it ought dayly to be celebrated thorough out the whole churche of Christ, for the better keping of that great benefite in remembraunce: and that though none receiue with the priest. And it is sufficient in that case, if they that be present, be partakers of those holy mysteries spi­ritually, and communicate with him in prayer and thankes geuing, in faith and deuotion, hauing their mynde and will to communicate with him also fa­cramentally, when tyme shall serue.

M. Iuell and many other of that syde, thinke to haue an argument against priuate Masse, of the word Communio, as though the sacramēt were called a com­munion, in cōsyderation of many receiuers together. So he calleth that a Communion,In his ser­mō. fo. 41. which is for the whole congregation to receiue together. And there­fore in his sermon oftentymes he maketh an op­position betwen priuate Masse and communion, and alleaging diuerse places where mention is of a com­munion, inferreth of eche of them an argument against priuate Masse. But this argument is weake and vtterly vnlearned, as that which procedeth of igno­rance. [Page 14] For it is not so called, because many,Why the sacramēt is called a cōmuniō. or as M. Iuell teacheth, the whole congregation, communi­cateth to gether in one place: but because of the ef­fecte of the Sacrament, for that by the same we are ioyned to God, and many that be diuerse, be vnited together, and made one mysticall body of Christ, which is the churche, of which body by vertue and effecte of this holy Sacrament, all the faithfuls be membres one of an other, and Christ is the head. Thus diuerse auncient doctoures doo expounde it, and specially Dionysius Areopagita, Ecclesias. hierarch. cap. 3. where speaking of this sacrament, he sayeth Dignissimum hoc Sacramentum sua praestantia reliquis sacramentis longè antecellit. atque ea cau­sa illud meritò singulariter communio appellatur. Nam quanuis vnumquod (que) sacramentum id agat, vt nostras vitas in plura di­uisas, in vnicum illum statum, quo Deo iungimur, colligat, atta­men huic Sacramento Communionis vocabulum praecipuè ac pe­culiariter congruit. This most worthy Sacrament is of such excellencie, that it passeth farre all other sacra­mentes. And for that cause it is alonely called the communion. For albe it euery Sacrament be such, as gathereth our lyues that be diuided a sunder many wayes in to that one state, whereby we are ioyned to God: yet the name of cōmunion is fitte and con­uenient for this sacrament specially and peculiarly, more then for any other. By which wordes and by the whole place of that holy father, we vnderstand, that this sacramēt is specially called the communion, for the speciall effecte it worketh in vs, which is to ioyne vs nearely to God, so as we be in him, and he in vs, and all we that beleue in him, one body in [Page] Christ. And for this in dede we doo not commu­nicate alone. For in asmuch as the whole churche of God is but one house,De coena domini. as Saint Cyprian sayeth, Vna est domus ecclesiae, in qua agnus editur. There is one house of the church, wherein the lambe is eaten: and S. Paul sayeth to Timothe, [...]. Tim. 3. that this house of God, is the churche of the lyuing God: who so euer doth eate this lambe worthely, doth cōmunicate with al chri­sten men, of all places and countries, that be in this house, and doo the like. And therefore S. Hierom a priest shewing him selfe loth to contend in writing with S. Augustine a bishop, calleth him a bishop of his communion.Inter epi­stolas Au­gustini. epist. 14. His wordes be these. Non enim conue­nit, vt ab adolescentia vsque ad hanc aetatem, in monasteriolo cum sanctis fratribus labore desudans, aliquid contrà Episcopum com­munionis meae scribere audeam, & eum Episcopū, quem ante coepi amare, quâm nosse. It is not meete (sayeth he) that I oc­cupied in labour from my yowth vntil this age, in a poore monasterie with holy brethren, shuld be so bolde as to write any thing against a bishop of my communion, yea and that bishop, whom I beganne to loue, er that I knewe him. Thus we see, that S. Hie­rom and S. Augustine were of one communion, and dyd comunicate together, though they were farre a sunder, the one at Bethlehem in Palestina, the other at Hippo in Aphrica. Thus there may be a Com­munion, though the communicantes be not together in one place. What if foure or fyue of sundry houses in a sicknes tyme being at the pointe of death in a parrish, requyre to haue their rightes er they departe? The priest after that he hath receiued the sacrament [Page 15] in the church, taketh his naturall sustenaunce and dyneth. and then being called vpon, carieth the reste a mile or two to the sicke, in eche house none being disposed to receiue with the sicke, he doth that he is requyred. Doth he not in this case communicate with them, and doo not they cōmunicate one with an other, rather hauing a will to communicate to­gether in one place also, if oportunitie serued? Elles if this might not be accōpted as a lawfull and good communion, and therfore not to be vsed: th'one of these great inconueniences shuld wittingly be com­mitted. That either they shuld be denyed that ne­cessarie vitayle of lyfe at their departing hence, which were a cruel iniurie, and a thing contrary to the ex­amples and godly ordināces of the primitiue churche: Or the priest rather for companies sake then of de­uotion, shuld receiue that holy meate, after that he had serued his stomake with cōmon meates, which likewise is against the aunciēt decrees of the churche. Euen so the priest that receiueth alone at Masse, doth communicate with all them that doo the like, in other places and countries.

Now if either the priest,Necessitie of many cōmuni­cants together, contrarie to the li­bertie of the gos­pell. or euery other christen man or woman might at no tyme receiue this bles­sed Sacrament, but with mo together in one place: then for the enioying of this great and necessary be­nefite, we were bounde to condition of a place. And so the churche delyuered from all bondage by christ and set at libertie, shuld yet for all that be in serui­tute, and subiection vnder those outward thinges, which S. Paul calleth, infirma & egena elementa, Galat. 4. weake [Page] and beggarly ceremonies after the English Bibles translation. Then where S. Paul blamyng the Gala­thians sayeth, Ye obserue dayes and monethes and tymes, For this bondage he might likewise blame vs, and saye, ye obserue places. But S. Paul would not we shuld re­tourne againe to these, which he calleth elemētes, for that were Iewishe. And to the Colossians he sayeth, we be dead with Christ from the elementes of this worlde. Colos. 2. Now, if we excepte those thinges, which be neces­saryly requyred to this Sacrament by Christes insti­tution, either declared by writtē scriptures, or taught by the holy ghost,Similiter & calicem miscēs ex vino & aqua, & sanctifi­cās, tradi­dit eis, di­cēs, bibite etc. Cle­mēs in Canone Li­turgiae lib. 8. apostol. cōsti. c. 17 1. Cor. 3. as bread and wyne mingled with water for the matter, the due wordes of Consecra­tion for the forme, and the priest rightely ordered, hauing intention to doo as the churche doth, for the ministerie: all these elementes and all outward thin­ges be subiecte to vs, and serue vs being members of Christes churche. In consideration whereof S. Paul saveth to the Corinthians, Omnia enim vestra sunt, etc. All thinges are yours, whether it be Paul, either Apollo, either Cephas: whether it be the worlde, either lyfe, either death, whether they be present thinges, or thinges to come, all are yours, and ye Christes, and Christ is Gods.

Againe where as the auncient and great learned Bishop Cyrillus teacheth plainely and at large, the meruelouse vniting and ioyning together of vs with Christ, and of our selues in to one bodie by this sa­crament: seing that all so vnited and made one body, be not for all that brought together in to one place, for they be dispersed abroade in all the worlde: thereof we may well conclude, that to this effecte [Page 16] the being together of communicantes in one place is not of necessitie. His wordes be these, much agrea­ble to Dionysius Areopagita a fore mentioned.In Ioan. lib. 11. c. 16 Vt igi­tur inter nos & Deum singulos vniret, quanuis corpore simul & anima distemus, modum tamen adinuenit, consilio patris & sa­pientiae suae conueniētem. Suo enim corpore credentes per commu­nionem mysticam benedicens, & secum, & inter nos, vnum nos corpus efficit. Quis enim eos, qui vnius sancti corporis vnione in vno Christo vniti sunt, ab hac naturali vnione alienos putabit? Nam si omnes vnum panem manducamus, vnum omnes corpus efficimur: diuidi enim atque seiungi Christus non patitur.

That Christ might vnite euery one of vs within our selues, and with God, although we be distant both in body and also in soule, yet he hath deuised a meane conuenable to the counsell of the father, and to his own wisedom. For in that he blesseth them that beleue, with his own body through the mysti­call Communion, he maketh vs one body both with him selfe, and also betwen our selues. For who will thinke them not to be of this natural vnion, which with the vnion of that one holy body, be vnited in one Christ? For if we eate all of one bread, then are we made all one body: for Christ may not be diui­ded, nor done asunder.

Thus we see after this auncient fathers learning grounded vpon the scriptures, that all the faithfulles blessed with the body of Christ through the mysti­call communion, bee made one body with Christ, and one body betwen them selues. Which good blessing of Christ is of more vertue, and also of more necessitie, then that it may be made frustrate by [Page] condition of place, specially where as is no wylfull breache nor contempte of most semely and conue­nable order.Many maye cō ­municate together, not being in one place to­gether. Sermon fol. 51. And therefore that one may commu­nicate with an other, though they be not together in one place, (which M. Iuell denyeth with as peeuish an argument of the vse of excommunication, as any of all those ys, that he scoffeth at some catholike writers for) and that it was thought lawfull and godly by the fathers of the auncient churche neare to the Apostles tyme, it may be well proued by diuerse good auctorities.

Irenaeus writing to Victor Bishop of Rome con­cerning the keping of Easter,Ecclesias. hist. lib. 5. cap. 24. As Eusebius Caesariensis re­citeth, to the intent Victor shuld not refrayne from their cōmuniō, which kepte Easter after the custome of the churches in Asia fownded by S. Iohn th'Euan­geliste, sheweth, that when bishoppes came from for­reine parties to Rome, the bishoppes of that see vsed to send to them, if they had ben of the catholike faith, the Sacrament, to receiue, whereby mutuall commu­nion betwen them was declared. Irenaeus his wordes be these.Graeca sic habēt, ali­ter quàm Rufini versio vulgata. Qui fuerunt ante te presbyteri, etiam cum non ita ob­seruarent, presbyteris ecclesiarum, (cum Romam acc [...]derent) Eu­charistiam mittebant. The priestes (by which name in this place bishoppes are vnderstanded) that were a fore thy tyme, though they kepte not Easter as they of Asia dyd, yet when the bishoppes of the churches there came to Rome, dyd sende them the sacrament. Thus those bishoppes dyd communicate together, before their meeting in one place.

Iustinus the Martyr likewise describing the maner [Page 17] and [...]der of christen Religion of his tyme touching the vse of the Sacrament, sayeth thus. Finitis ab eo, Apolog. 2. qui praef [...]ctus est, gratijs & orationibus, & ab vniuerso populo facta [...]ccl [...]matione, Diaconi, quo [...] ita vocamus, vnicui (que) tum tempo­ris prasenti, pa [...]is et aquae & vini cōsecrati dāt participationem, & adeos, qui non adsunt, deferunt. When the priest hath made an lende of thankes and prayers, and all the people therto haue sayde amen. They, which we call deacons, geue to euery one then present, bread and water and wyne consecrated, to take parte of it for their housell, and for those that be not present, they beare it home to them. Thus in that tyme they that serued God together in the common place of prayer, and some others that were absent, letted from comming to their companie by sickenes, busines, or other wise: communicated together, though not in one place. and no man cryed out of breaking the In­stitution of Christ.

And because M. Iuell is so vehement against pri­uate Masse, for that the priest receiueth the Sacramēt alone, and triumpheth so much, as though he had wonne the fielde, making him selfe mery with these wordes,In his ser­mō. fo. 43 in dede with out cause Vvhere then was the pri­uate Masse? where then was the single Communion all this while? he meaneth for the space of syx hundred yeres after Christ, as there he expresseth: I will bring in good euidence and witnes, that long before S. Grego­ries tyme that he speaketh of, yea from the begin­ning of the churche, faithfull persones both men and women receiued the sacrament alone, and were neuer therefore reproued, as breakers of Christes Institu­tion, [Page] And or [...] to the r [...]h [...]rsall of the pla­ce with [...]l:4. [...] and [...] to shew [...] for this purpose, one question [...] of M. Iuell. if they which r [...] ­mained at [...]o [...]e, of whom [...] writeth re­ceiued the communiō by themselues alone laufully, why may not the priest doo the [...] in the churche seruing God in most deuou [...]e wife in the holy sacri­fice of the Masse, [...]king compar [...] with out any his defaulte? Haue the Sacramentaries any Religion to condemne it in the priest, and to alowe it in laye folke? What is in the priest, that shuld make it vnlaw­full to him, more then to the people? Or may a laye m [...]n or woman receiue it kep [...]e a long tyme, and may not a priest receiue it forth with, so sone as he hath consecr [...]ed and offred? And if case of necessi­ties be alle [...]ged for [...]e laye, the same may no lesse be [...]aged for the prieste [...] also wanting compartners with out their defaulte. For other wi [...] the memorie and [...] lordes death shuld not accor­ding to his commandem [...] be celebrated and done. Well now to these places.

Proufes for priua­te Masse.Tertullian [...] his wife, that if he dyed be­fore hea [...]e [...] not a [...]ain [...] specially to an Infidell, shewing th [...]f [...] dyd, it would be hard for her to obserue her Religion with out great inconuenience, sayeth thus.Lib. 2. ad vxorem. Non sci [...]ritus, quid secretò ante omnem ci­bum gustes? Et si seiueri [...] p [...]n [...], non illū credet esse, qui dicit [...]r, Will not thy husband knowe what thou [...]rest se­cretly before all other meate? And if he doo knowe, he will beleue it to be bread, and not him, who it is called. He hath the like saying in his booke, De co­rona [Page 18] militis. Which place plainely declareth vnto vs the beleefe of the churche then in three great poin­tes by M. Iuell and the rest of our Gospellers vtterly denyed. The one, that the communiō maye be kepte, the second, that it may be receiued of one alone with out other cōpanie, the third, that the thing reueren­tly and deuoutly before other meates receiued, is nor bread, as the infidels then, and the Sacramentaries now beleue: but he who it is sayde to be of Christen people, or who it is called, that is, our maker and Re­demer, or, which is the same, our lordes bodye. And by this place of Tertullian, as also by diuerse other auncient doctoures, we may gather, that in the tymes of persecution the maner was, that the priestes dely­uered to deuoute and godly men and women the Sa­crament consecrated in the churche, to carye home with them, to receiue a parte of it euery morning fa­sting, as their deuotiō serued them, so secretly as they might, that the infidels shuld not espie them, nor gete any knowledge of the holy mysteries. And this was done, because they might not assemble them selues in solemne congregation, for feare of the infidels amongest whom they dwelte. Neither shud the case of necessitie haue excused them of the breach of Christes commaundemēt, if the sole communion had ben expressely forbydden,Origen i [...] Exod. ho­milia. 13. Aug. ho­mil. 26. in lib. 50. ho­mil. & ser­mone. 252 de tēpore. as we are borne in hande by those that vphold the contrarie doctrine. And Origen that auncient doctour and likewise S. Augu­stine doth write of the great reuerence, feare, and wa­renes, that the men and women vsed in receiuing the Sacrament in a cleane lynnen cloth to cary it home [Page] with them for the same purpose.

Saint Cyprian, writeth of a woman that dyd the like though vnworthely after this sorte.In sermo­ne de lap­s [...]a. Cum quadam [...]cam suam, in qua domini sanctum s [...]it, ma [...]ibuti [...]ignis ten­tasset aperere, igne i [...]de surgent [...], deterrita est, ut auderet attin­gere. When a certaine woman, went about to open her cheste wherein was the holy thing of our lorde, with vnworthy handes she was fra [...]ed with fyer that rose from thence that she durst not touche it. This place of S. Cypriane reporteth the maner of keping the Sacrament at home, to be receiued of a deuout christen person alone at conuenient tyme. The ex­ample of Sera [...]ion of whom Dionysius Alexandrinus, writeth,Ecclesias. hist. lib. 6. cap. 34. recited by Eusebius, confirmeth our purpose of the single communion. This Serapion one of Ale­xandria, had committed idolatrie, and lying at the pointe of death, that he might be reconciled to the churche, before he departed sent to the priest for the Sacrament the priest being him selfe s [...]ke and not hable to come, g [...]e to the ladde that came of that errant, parum Eucharistiae, quod i [...]fusum iussit seni proeberi. a litle of the Sacrament, which he commaunded to be powred in to the olde manes mowth. And when this solēnitie was done, (sayeth the storye) as though he had broken certaine chaynes and giues, he gaue vp his ghost cherefully.

Of keping the sacrament secretly at home, and how it might he receiued of deuoute persons alone with out other companie, I wene none of the aun­cient doctours wrote so playnely, as S. Basile, in an epistle, that he wrote to a noble woman called Cae­saria, [Page 19] which is extant in greeke, where he sayeth fur­ther that this maner beganne not first in his tyme, but long before, his wordes be these. Illud autem in per­secutionis temporibus necessitate [...]ogi quempiam, non praesente sa­cerdote aut ministro cōmunioni propria manu sumere, nequ [...]quam esse graue, superuacaneum est demonstrare, propterea quòd longa consuetudine, & ipso rerum vsu confirmatum est. Omnes enim in eremis solitariam vitam agen [...]es, vbi non est sacerdos, communio­nem domiseruantes, à seipsis communicant. In Alexandria verò & in Aegypto, vnusquisque eorum qui sunt de populo, plurimùm habet communionem in domo sua. Sem [...]l enim sacrificium sacer­dote consecrante & distribuente, merito participare & suscipere, credere oportet. Etenim & in Ecclesia sacerdos dat partem et ac­cipiteamis qui suscipit, cum omni libertate et ipsam admouet er [...] propria manu Idem igitur est virtute, siue vnam pertem accipiat quisquam à socerdote siue plures partes simul.

As concerning this, that it is no greuouse offence, for one to be driuē by necessitie in the tymes of per­secution to receiue the cōmuniō with his owne hand, no priest nor deacon being present: it is a thing su­perfluouse to declare for that by long custome and practise it hath ben confirmed and taken place. For all they which lyue a solitary lyfe in wildernes, where no priest is to be had, keping the cōmunion at home, doo communicate with them selues alone. And in Alexandria and in Egypte, euery one of the people for the most parte hath the communion at home in his house. For when as the priest doth once conse­crate and distribute the hoste, it is reason we beleue, that we ought to be partakers of it, and he that ta­keth it, receiueth it with out all scruple of cōscience, [Page] and putteth it to his mowth with his owne hande. And so it is of one vertue, whether any body take one parte of the priest, or mo partes together. This-farre S. Basile. In this saying of Basile, it is to be no­ted, 1 first, that necessitie here hath respecte to the lacke of priest and deacon: So as in that case the Sacrament might be receiued of a faithfull person with his owne 2 hande. And that for the satifying of so doing, he al­leageth continuance of custome, which for vs in this point of the sole receiuing, maye in more ample wise 3 be alleaged. Agayne, that holy Eremites lyuing in wildernes a parte from companie, and also the deuour people of Alexandria and Egypte, receiued the com­munion 4 alone in their celles and howses. Further­more that the hoste once consecrated of the priest, is algates to be receiued, whether of many together, or of one alone, by him it semeth not to force.

5 Finally, that whether a man take at the priestes hande the blessed Sacrament in one piece or mo pie­ces, and receiue them at conuenient tymes, when de­uotion best serueth: the vertue, effecte, and power thereof is one.Reserua­tion of the Sacra­ment. By which auctoritie reseruation is auouched. Doubteles where he speaketh so precisely and particularly of sundry cases touching the order of receiuing, if he had ben of M. Iuelles opinion, that the Sacrament may not be receiued of one with out a certaine number of communicantes together, he would not so haue passed ouer that matter in silēce, much lesse written so plainely of the contrary. Now that the communion thus kepte in wildernes and in Egypte, places of extreme heate, where wyne in small [Page 20] quantie as is for that purpose conuenient, can not be long kepte from sowring and chaunging his nature, was in the forme of bread only, and not also of wyne: I differre to note it here, because it pertineth to the treatise of the nexte Article.

It appeareth euidently by witnes of saint Hierome also, that this custome of receiuing the communion priuately at home cōtynewed among Christen men at Rome not only in tyme of persecution, but also afterward when the churche was at rest and peace, so as the case of necessitie can not here serue them for mainetenaunce of their straunge negatiue in this point. These be his wordes.In Apolo­gia aduer­sus Ioui­nianum. Rom. 1 [...] Scio Romae hanc esse consue­tudinem, vt fideles semper Christi corpus accipiant, quod nec re­prehendo, nec probo. Vnusquisque enim in suo sensu abundat. Sed ipsorum conscientiam conuenio, qui eodem die post coitum com­municant, & iuxtà Persium, noctem flumine purgant: quare ad Martyres ire non audent? Quare non ingrediuntur Ecclesias? An alius in publico, alius in domo Christus est? Quod in Ecclesia non licet, nec domi licet. Nihil Deo clausum est, & tenebrae quo (que) lu­cent apud Deum. Probet se vnusquis (que), & sic ad corpus Christi accedat. I know this custome is at Rome, that Chri­sten folke receiue the body of Christ dayly, which I doo neither reproue, nor allowe. For euery mā hath ynough in his owne sense. But I appose their cōscien­ce, which doo communicate that same daye, as they haue done wedlocke worke, and as Persius sayth, doo rynce night filth with running water: why dare not they goe to Martyrs Shrynes? Why goe not they in to churches? what, is there one Christ abroade, and an other Christ with in the house? what so euer is [Page] not laufull in the churche, neither at home is it lau­full. To God nothing is hyddē: yea darknes also shy­neth before God. Let euery one examine him selfe, and so come to the body of Christ. S. Hierome re­proueth this in the Romaines, that where as S. Paul ordeined, that for cause of prayer maried folke shuld at tymes forbeare their carnall imbracinges, they not withstanding that, though they had had doing with their wyues, yet receiued their rightes neuertelesse dayly. And yet what daye they had so done they durft not goe to churches, where martyrs toūbes were, there to receiue our lordes body. For it is to be vnderstāded for better knowledge hereof, that such as knewe thē selues to haue done any vncleannes, were afrayd in th'old tyme to comme to the Martyrs Sepulchres. For there commonly by miracle such thinges were bewrayed,Hereof speaketh S Hierom ad Vigilā ­tiū, and S. Aug. epi­stola. 137. and Seue­rus Sulpi­tius in vi­ta S. Mar­tini. dial. 3. cap. 7. and many tymes by open confession of the parties, whether they would or no. Erasmus in his Scholles vpon this place of S. Hierome sayeth thus. Of this place we gather, that in th'olde tyme euery one was wonte to receiue the body of Christ at home in his house, that would. He sayeth further; Idem videtur innuere Paulus, cum ait: an domos non habe­tis ad manducandū? S. Paul sayeth he, semeth to meane the same thing, where he sayeth, haue you not houses to eate in? Thus Erasmus gathereth proufe of priuate, or as M. Iuell gesteth, Single Communion, out of the scriptures, and he was as wel learned in them as M. Iuell is. Yet here in I leaue Erasmus to his owne de­fence. By this we may vndestand, that in the auncient tymes of the Churche, the receiuing of the Commu­nion [Page 21] of one by selfe alone, was well allowed. And though it was done but by one faithfull person at once in one place, yet was it called a communion both of S. Basile, and also of S. Hierom, cleane contrary to M. Iuelles sense. It is to be iudged that they knew the Institution of Christ, so well as he, or any other of these newe Maisters, and that their conscience was such, as if Christes ordinance therein had ben bro­ken, they would not haue winckte at it, ne with their vngodly silence confirmed such an vngodly custome. Verely for excuse of this sole receiuing, ne­cessitie can not iustly be alleaged.

Damasus Bishop of Rome in S. Hieromes tyme writeth in libro Pontificali, that Milciades Pope and Martyr, ordeined that the Sacrament in sundry por­tions consecrated by a bishop, shuld be sent a broade among the churches for cause of heretikes, that the catholike people of the churches (which word here signifieth as the greke word [...] doth, so as it is not necessarie to vndestand that the sacrament was directed only to the materiall churches, but to the people of the parrishes) might receiue the catholike communion, and not communicate with heretikes. Which doubteles must be vndestanded of this pri­uate and single communion in eche catholike mans house, and that where heretikes bare the swea, and priestes might not be suffred to consecrate after the catholike vsage. Elles if the priestes might with out let or disturbance haue so done, then what nede had it ben for Milciades, to haue made such a prouision for sending abroade hostes sanctified for that purpose [Page] by the cōsecration of a Bishop? The place of Damasus hath thus. Milciades fecit, vt oblationes consecratae per Ecclesias ex consecratu Episcopi (propter haereticos) diri­gerentur. Milciades ordeined that consecrated hostes shuld be sent abroade amongest the churches, prepa­red by the consecration of a bishop. The two wor­des propter haereticos, for heretikes, added by Ado the writer of Martyrs lyues, openeth the meaning and purporte of that decree.

Here haue I brought much for proufe of priuate and single communion, and that it hath not onely ben suffered in tyme of persecution, but also allowed in quiet and peaceable tymes, euen in the Churche of Rome it selfe, where true Religion hath euer ben most exactly obserued aboue all other places of the worlde, and from whence all the churches of the West hath taken their light. As the Bishops of all Gallia that now is called Fraunce, doo acknowledge in an epistle sent to Leo the Pope, with these wordes. Vnde religionis nostrae propicio Christo, Epistola proxima post 51. in­ter episto­las Leonis fons & origo ma­nauit. From that Apostolike see by the mercie of Christ, the fontaine and spring of our Religion hath come.

More could I yet bryng for confirmation of the same, as th'example of S. Hilaria the virgine in the tyme of Numerianus, of S. Lucia in Diocletians tyme done to martyrdom, of S. Maria Aegyptiaca, and of S. Ambros: of which euery one, as auncient testimo­nies of ecclesiasticall histories, and of Paulinus doo declare, at the houre of their departure hence to God, receiued the holy Sacrament of th'aulter for their [Page 22] viage prouision, alone: But I iudge this is ynough, and if any man will not be persuaded with this, I doubte whether with such a one a more number of autori­ties shall any thing priuaile.

Now that I haue thus proued the single commu­nion, I vse their own terme, I desire M. Iuell to reason with me soberly a word or two. How saye you Syr? doo you reproue the Masse, or doo you reproue the priuate Masse? I thinke what so euer your opinion is herein, your answer shall be, you allow not the priuate Masse. For as touching that the Oblation of the bo­dy and bloude of Christ done in the Masse, is the sacrifice of the churche, and proper to the new te­stament, commaunded by Christ to be frequented ac­cording to his institution: if you denye this, make it so light as you liste: all those authorities, which you denye vs to haue for proufe of your great number of articles, will be fownde against you: I meane do­ctoures, general councelles the most aunciēt, th'exam­ple of the primitiue churche, the scriptures, I adde further reason, consent vniuersall and vncontrolled, and tradition. If you denye this, you must denye all our Religion from the Apostles tyme to this daye, and now in the ende of the world, when iniquitie aboūdeth, and charitie waxeth colde, when the sonne of man cōming shall scarcely finde faith in the earth, begynne a new. And therefore you M. Iuell knowing this well ynough, what so euer you doo in dede, in worde, as it appeareth by the litle booke you haue set foorth in printe: you pretende to disallow, yea most vehemētly to improue the priuate Masse. Vpon [Page] this resolution, that the Masse, as it is taken in gene­rall, is to be allowed: I enter further in reason with you, and make you this argument. If priuate Masse in respecte only of that it is priuate after your mea­ning, be reproueable, it is for the single communion, that is to saye, for that the priest receiueth the Sacra­ment alone. But the single communion is laufull, yea good and godly: ergo the priuate Masse in this res­pecte that it is priuate, is not reproueable, but to be allowed, holden for good and holy, and to be frequē ­ted. If you denye the first proposition, or maior, then must youe shew for what elles you doo reproue pri­uate Masse in respecte only that it is priuate, then for single communion. If you shew any thing elles, then doo you digresse from our purpose, and de­clare, that you reproue the Masse. The minor you can not denye, seing that you see how sufficiently I haue proued it. And so the priuate Masse in that res­pecte only it is priuate, is to be allowed for good, as the Masse is. Mary I denye not but that it were more commēdable, and more godly on the churches parte, if many wel disposed and examined, would be par­takers of the blessed Sacrament with the priest. But though the Clergie be worthely blamed for negli­gence herein, through which the people may be thought to haue growen to this slaknes and indeuo­cion: yet that notwithstanding, this parte of the ca­tholike Religion remaineth sownde and faultles. For as touching the substance of the Masse it selfe, by the single communion of the priest, in case of the peoples coldenes and negligence, it is nothing impaired. Elles [Page 23] if the publike sacrifice of the churche might not be offered with out a number of communicantes recei­uing with the priest in one place: then would the auncient fathers in all their writinges some where haue complained of the ceasing of that, which eue­ry where they call quotidianum & iuge sacrificium, the dayly and cōtinuall sacrifice: of which their opinion is, that it ought dayly to be sacrificed, that the death of our lord and the worke of our Redēption might alwayes be celebrated and had in memorie, and we thereby shewe our selues according to our bounden duetie myndefull and thankefull. But verely the fa­thers no where complaine of intermitting the daily sacrifice, but very much of the slaknes of the people, for that they came not more often vnto this holy and holesome banket: and yet they neuer compelled them thereto, but exhorting them to frequēt it wor­thely, lefte them to their owne conscience.

S. Ambros witnesseth that the people of the East, had a custome in his tyme to be houseled but once in the yere. And he rebuketh sharply such as folowe them, after this sorte. Si quotidianus est cibus, Lib. 6. de sacra. ca. 4 cur post an­num illum sumis, quemadmodum Graeci in Oriente facere consueuerunt? If it be our daily meate (sayeth he) why takest it but once in the yere, as the Grekes are wonte to doo in the East?De verbis domini secūdū Lu­cā. ho. 28. S. Augustine vttereth the same thinge almost with the same wordes. And in the second booke, De sermone Domini in monte the twelfth chapter, expownding the fourth petition of our lordes prayer, Geue vs this daye our dayly bread, shewing that this may be taken either for materiall [Page] bread, either for the sacrament of our lordes body, or for spirituall meate, which he alloweth best: would that concerning the sacrament of our lordes body, they of the Easte shuld not moue question, how it might be vnderstanded to be their dayly bread, which were not dayly partakers of our lordes sup­per, where as for all that, this bread is called dayly bread: There he sayeth thus: Vt ergo illi taceant, neque de hac re sententiam suam defendant, vel ipsa auctoritate Ecclesiae sint contenti, quòd sine scandalo ista faciunt, neque ab eis qui ecclesiis praesunt, facere prohibentur, neque non obtemperantes condemnantur. Wherefore that they holde their peace, and stand not in defence of their opinion, let them be contēt at least waye with the au­ctoritie of the churche, that they doo these thinges with out offence thereof taken, neither be forbidden of those that be ouer the churches, neither be con­demned, when they disobeye. Here we see by S. Augustine, that they of the Orient, who so seldom receiued the sacrament, were holden for all that, for Christē people by the autoritie of the churche, none offence thereof was taken, neither were they inhibi­ted of their custome, and though they obeyed not their spirituall gouernours mouing them to receiue more often, yet were they not condemned, nor ex­communicated.

In 10. cap. ad Hebr. hom. 17. S. Chrysostome many tymes exhorting his people to prepare them selues to receiue their rightes at least at Easter, in one place sayeth thus. What mea­neth this? The most parte of you be partakers of this sacrifice but once in the yere, some twyse, some ofte­ner. [Page 24] Therefore this that I speake, is to all, not to them onely that be here present, but to those also that lyue in wildernes. For they receiue the sacramēt but once in the yere, and peraduenture but once in two yeres. Well what then? whom shall we receiue? those that come but once, or that come often, or that come sel­dom? Soothly we receiue them that come with a pure and a cleane conscience, with a cleane harte, and to be shorte, with a blamelesse lyfe. They that be such, let them come allwayes, and they that be not such, let not them come not so much as once. Why so? because they receiue to them selues iudgement, damnation, and punishement. The aunciēt doctoures, specially Chrysostome and Augustine, be full of such sentences.

Now to this ende I dryue these allegations, leauing out a great number of the same sense. Although many tymes the people forbare to come to the commu­nion, so as many tymes none at all were founde dis­posed to receiue, yet the holy fathers,The peo­ples fore­bearing the com­muniō, is no cause vvhy the priest shuld not saye Masse In 10. cap. ad Hebr. homil. 17. bishops and priestes thought not that a cause why they shuld not dayly offer the blessed sacrifice, and celebrate Masse. Which thing may sufficiently be proued, whether M. Iuell, that maketh him selfe so sure of the contrary, will yelde and subscribe, according to his promise, or no. Of the dayly sacrifice these wordes of Chrysostome be plaine. Quid ergo nos? Nonne per singulos dies offerimus? offerimus quidem, sed ad recordationem facientes mortis eius, & vna est hostia, non multae. etc. Then what doo we? doo we not offer euery daye? yeas verely we doo so. But we doo it for [Page] recording of his death. And it is one hoste, not ma­ny. Here I heare M. Iuell saye, though against his will, I grawnt the dayly sacrifice, but I stand still in my negatiue,By order of the laste com­munion booke, no cōmuniō may be sayd or had, vvith out three doo com­municate vvith the minister at leaste, of hovv small nū ­ber so euer the parrishe bee. De cōsec. dist. 1. can. hoc quo (que) statutū. that it can not be shewed, there was euer any such sacrifice celebrated, with out a communion, that is, as they will haue it, with out some conuenient number to receiue the sacrament in the same place with the priest. For proufe of this, these be such places as I am persuaded with all. The better learned men that be of more reading then I am, haue other I doubte not.

Soter Byshop of Rome a bout the yere of our lord. 170. who suffred martyrdom vnder Antoninus Verus the Emperour, for order of celebrating the Masse, made this statute or decree. Vt nullus presbyte­rorum solennia celebrare praesumat, nisi duobus praesentibus, sibi (que) respondentibus, & ipse tertius habeatur, quia cum pluraliter ab eo dicitur, Dominus vobiscum, & illud in se­cretis: Orate pro me: apertissimè conuenit, vt ipsius respon­deatur salutationi. This hath ben ordeined, that no priest presume to celebrate the solēnitie of the Masse, excepte there be two present, and answer him, so as he be the third. For whereas he sayeth (as by waye of speaking to many) our lorde be with you: and li­kewise in the Secretes, Praye you for me: it semeth eui­dently conuenient, that answer be made to his saluta­tion accordingly. Which auncient decree requireth not, that all people of necessitie be present, much lesse that all so oftentymes shuld communicate sacramen­tally, which thing it requireth neither of those two, that ought to be present. If of the bare wordes of [Page 25] this decree a sufficient argument maye not be made for our purpose, inducing of th'affirmation of that one thing there specified, the denyall of that other thing we speake of, which maner of argumēt is com­monly vsed of our aduersaries: thē more weight may be put vnto it in this case: for that where as the re­ceiuing of Christes body is a farre greatter matter, then to answer the priest at Masse, if that holy bishop and Martyr had thought it so necessary, as that the Masse might not be done with out it: doubteles of very reason and conuenience, he would and shuld haue specially spoken of that, rather then of the other. But for that he thought other wise,Ex con­cilio Aga­thē. can. 31 Missas die dominico secularibꝰ totas an­dire, spe­ciali ordi­ne praecipimꝰ: ita vt ante bene dictionē sacerdotis egredi po­pulus non praesumat: quod si sec [...]rim, ab Episcopo publicè confun­dantur. he required onely of necessitie, the presence of two, for the pur­pose aboue mentioned.

In a councell holden at Agatha a citie of Fraunce then called Gallia, about the tyme of Chrysostome, an olde decree of Fabianus Bishop of Rome and Martyr, and also of the councel Elibertine in the tyme of saint Syluester, anno Domini 314. was renewed, that all se­cular christē folke shuld be houseled three tymes eue­ry yere, at Easter, Witsontide, and Christmasse. It was there also decreed, that they shuld heare the whole Masse euery Sunnedaye, and not departe, before the priest had geuen blessing. So they were bownde to heare Masse euery Sunnedaye, and to receiue the cō ­munion but thrise in the yere. The selfe same order was decreed in theDe cōse, dist. 1. cū ad celebrā das Missas. Councell of Orleance. Then of like, specially in small townes and villages, they had Masse without the communion of many together, some tymes.

In that Councell of Agatha we fynde a decree, made by the fathers assembled there, whereof it ap­peareth, that priestes oftetymes sayd Masse with out others receiuing with them. And this much it is in English.Cap. 21. If any man will haue and oratorie or chap­pell abroade in the countrie, beside the parrish churches, in which laufull and ordinarie assemble is: for the rest of the holydayes, that he haue Masses there, in consideration of weerynesse of the house­hold, with iust ordinance we permitte. But at Easter, Christes Birth, Epiphanie, the Ascension of our lord, Witsunnedaye, and Natiuitie of Saint Iohn Baptist, and if therebe any other speciall feastes: let them not kepe their Masses, but in the cities and parishes. And as for the clerkes, if any will doo or haue their Masses at the a fore sayde feastes in chappelles, onlesse the bishop so cōmaunde or permitte: let them be thrust out from commnion. By this decree we learne, that then Masses were commonly sayd in priuat chappel­les at home, at such tymes, as the people were not ac­customed to be howseled. For when by commaun­demēt and cōmon order they receiued their rightes, as in the afore named feastes: then were the priestes prohibited to saye Masses in priuate oratories or chappelles with out the parish churches. And hereof we may plainely vnderstand, that in such places, prie­stes customeably sayde Masses of their owne and of the householders deuotion, when none of the house­hold were disposed to receiue with them The like decree is to be fownde, Cōcilij Aruernensis, cap. 14. Con­cil. Constantinop. generalis in Trullo. cap. 31.

Now let vs see what examples of the olde fathers we haue for the priuate Masse. Leontius a Greke bishop of a Cirie in the East Churche called Neapolis, wri­ting the lyfe of Saint Iohn the holy Patriarke of Alexandria, who for his great charitie was cōmonly called eleemosynarius, that is, th'almose geuer, telleth this story, whereby it appeareth that at that tyme priuate Masse was vsed. Though the translatour through ignorance of the tyme he lyued in, tourned this lyfe in to latine of meane eloquēce, yet for truthes sake, I will not let to recite that, which I take for my purpose, as I fynde it. Malitiam reseruantem quendam in­dustrium contra alium principem, audiens hic Magnus Ioan­nes, monuit eum saepè, & suasit ad concordiam, & non po­tuit eum conuertere ad pacem. Semel ergo ad eum mittit & adducit eum sanctus, quasi pro republica, & facit missas in oratorio suo, nullum habens secum nisi ministrum suum. Cum ergo sancta benedixisset Patriarcha, & orationem Domini­cam inchoasset, coeperūt dicere tantum tres illi, Pater noster, Et cum peruenissent ad sermonem quo dicitur, Dimitte nobis debita nostra, sicut & nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris: In­nuit domestico Patriarcha, vt taceret. Siluit ergo & Patri­archa, & remansit Princeps solus dicens versum, dimitte no­bis, sicut & nos dimittimus. Et statim conuersus sanctus, di­cit ei mansueta voce. Vide in quàm terribili voce dicas Deo, quoniam sicut ego dimitto, ita & tu dimitte mihi. Et tanquā ab igne statim cruciatū ferens praedictus princeps, cecidit in faciem ad pedes sancti, dicens: Quaecunque iusseris domine, fa­faciet seruus tuus. Et reconciliatus est inimico suo cum omni veritate. This story soundeth thus in English. This great patriarke Iohn, hearing that a noble man bare [Page] malice to an other noble man, warned him often­tymes of it, and treated with him, to be at accorde, but he could not bring him to be at peace. Wherefore on a daye this holy father sent for the noble man, and causeth him to come to him, as though it were about some matter of the common weale. At that tyme he sayeth Masse in his chappell, hauing none other body with him, but his seruant. When the Patriarke had consecrated the sacrament, and had begonne to saye our lordes prayer, they three onely begonne to saye Our father, and so foorth. When they were come to those wordes, Forgeue vs our trespasses, as we forgeue them, that trespasse against vs: the Patri­arke made a becke to his seruant, to holde his peace. then the Patriarke held his peace also. and the noble man remained alone, saying foorth the verse, Forgeue vs, as we forgeue: Then the holy father tourning him selfe toward him, by and by sayeth with a milde voice. Cōsider with how terrible wordes thou sayest to God, that as I forgeue, so sorgeue thou me also. Whereat the sayde noble man, as though he had felt the torment of fyer, foorth with fell downe on his face at the holy fathers feete, saying: My lord, what so euer thou byddest me thy seruant to doo, I will doo it. And so he was reconciled vnto his enemie, with out all dissembling.

Here M. Iuell I trowe, will grawnt that this was a priuate Masse. The place was priuate, the audiēce not publike nor cōmon, the purpose touching the noble man, was priuate: The cōmunion also priuate, I meane for the patriarkes parte alone, for besyde that the [Page 27] story maketh no mention of any other communi­cantes, he could not be assured of that noble man to cōmunicate with him. For whereas he could by no meanes before bring him to forgeue his enemie, he had but a small coniecture he shuld bring it to passe now. And agayne though he had conceiued no di­strust of his reconciliation vpon this holy policie, yet we may doubte, whether the patriarke foorth with, with out further and more mature probation and examination, which Saint Paul in this case requireth:1. Cor. 11. would haue admitted him to receiue our lordes bo­dy so vpon the suddeine. Now for the seruant, it is a streight case that so holy and so great a Pa­triake and bishop of so populouse a citie, as Alexan­dria was, vnderstanding that Masse can not be cele­brated with out breach of Christes Institution (as M. Iuell holdeth opinion) excepte he haue a number to communicate with him in the same place: shuld haue none of his spiritual flocke with him at so weightie a matter of conscience, but one onely, and him his owne houshold seruant. He was not so simple as not to thinke, that the seruant might be letted from re­ceiuing by some suddeine pange cōming vpon him, or with some cogitation and conscience of his owne vnworthines suddeinly comming to his mynde. If either this, or any other let had chaunced, in what case had the patriarke ben then? He had ben like, by M. Iuelles doctrine, to haue broken Christes Institu­tion, and so Gods cōmaundement, through an others defecte, which were straunge. But I iudge, that M. Iuell, who harpeth so many iarring argumētes against [Page] priuate Masse vpon the very word Communion, will not allowe that for a good and lawfull communion, where there is but one onely to receiue with the priest. Verely it appeareth by his sermon that all the people ought to receiue, or to be dryuen out of the churche. Now therefore to an other example of the priuate Masse.

Amphilochius byshop of Iconium the head citie of Lycaonia, to whom S. Basile dedicated his booke De Spiritu sancto, and an other booke intituled Ascetica, writing the lyfe of saint Basile, or rather the miracles through Gods power by him wrought, which he calleth,Memora­bilia, & vera ac mag­na mira­cula, in praefatio­ne. worthy of record, true, and great miracles: spe­cially such as were not by the three most worthy men Gregorie Nazianzene, Gregorie Nyssene, and holy Ephrem, in their Epitaphicall or funerall trea­tises before mentioned: among other thinges, repor­teth a notable story, wherein we haue a cleare testi­monie of a priuate Masse. And for the thing that the storie sheweth, as much as for any other, of the same Amphilochius he is called, Coelestium virtutum collocu­tor, & angelicorum ordinum comminister, a talker toge­ther with the heauenly powers, and a felowe seruant with orders of Angelles. The story is this. This holy bishop Basile besoughte God in his prayers, he would geue him grace, wisedom and vnderstanding, so as he might offer the sacrifice of Christes bloude sheding, proprijs sermonibus, with prayers and seruice of his owne making: and that the better to atcheue that purpose, the holy ghost might come vpon him. After syx dayes, he was in a traunce for cause of the [Page 28] holy ghostes comming. When the seuenth daye was come, he beganne to minister vnto God, that is to witte, he sayde Masse, euery daye. After a certaine tyme thus spent, through faith and prayer he begāne to write with his owne hande, mysteria ministrationis, the Masse, or the seruice of the Masse. On a night our lord came vnto him in a vision with the Apostles, and layde breade to be consecrated on the holy aul­ter, and stirring vp Basile, sayd vnto him. Secundum po­stulationem tuam repleatur os tuum laude, etc. According to thy request, let thy mowth be fylled with praise, that with thyne owne wordes, thou mayst offer vp to me sacrifice. He not able to abide the vision with his eyes, rose vp with trembling, and goyng to the holy aulter, beganne to saye, that he had written in paper, thus. Repleatur os meum laude, & hymnum dicat gloriae tuae domine Deus, qui creasti nos, & adduxisti in vitam hanc, & caeteras orationes sancti ministerij. Let my mowth be fylled with prayse, to vtter an hymne to thy glory, Lord God, which hast created vs, and brought vs in to this lyfe, and so foorth the other prayers of the Masse. It foloweth in the story. Et post finem orationum, exaltauit panem, sine intermissione orans, & dicens: Respice domine Iesu Christe, etc. After that he had done the prayers of Consecration, he lyfted vp the bread, praying continually and saying, Looke vpon vs lord Iesus Christ out of thy holy tabernacle, and come to sanctifie vs, that sittest aboue with thy father, and arte here present inuisibly with vs, vou­chesafe with thy mighty hand to delyuer to vs, and by vs to all thy people, Sancta Sanctis, thy holy [Page] thinges to the holy. The people answered, one holy, one our lord Iesus Christ, with the holy ghost, in glorie of God the father, Amen.

Now let vs consyder, what foloweth perteining most to our purpose. Et diuidens panem in tres partes, vnam quidem communicauit timore multo, alteram autem reseruauit consepelire secum, tertiam verò imposuit colum­bae aureae, quae pependit super altare. He diuided the bread in to three partes, of which be receiued one at his communion, with greate feare and reuerence, the other he reserued, that it might be buried with him, and the third parte he caused to be put in a golden pyxe, that was hanged vp ouer the aulter, made in forme and shape of a dooue. After this, a litle before the ende of this treatise, it foloweth, how that S. Ba­sile at the houre that he departed out of this lyfe, receiued that parte of the hoste him selfe, which he had purposed to haue enterred with him in his graue, and immediatly as he laye in his bedde, gaue thankes to God, and rendred vp the ghost.

That this was a priuate Masse, no man can denye. Basile receiued the sacrament alone, for there was no earthly creature in that churche with him. The people that answered him, were such, as Christ brought with him. And that all this was no dreame, but a thing by the will of god done in dede, though in a vision, as it pleased Christ to exhibite, Amphilo­chius playnely witnesseth, declaring how that one Eu­bulus, and others the chiefe of that clergie, standing before the gates of the churche, whiles this was in dooing, sawe lightes with in the churche, and men [Page 29] clothed in white, and heard a voice of people glori­fying god, and behelde Basile standing at the aulter, and for this cause at his comming foorth fell downe prostrate at his feete.

Here M. Iuell and his consacramentaries doo stag­gar I doubte not, for graunt to a priuate Masse they will not, what so euer be brought for proufe of it. and therefore some doubte to auoyd this autoritie must be deuysed. But whereof they shuld doubte, ve­rely I see not. If they doubte any thing of the brīging of the bread and other necessaries to serue for cōsecra­tion of the hoste: let thē also doubte of the bread and fleshe, that Elias had in the ponde of Carith.3. Reg. 17. 3. Reg. 19. Let them doubte of the bread and potte of water, he had vnder the Iuniper tree in Bersabée. Let them doubte of the potte of potage brought to Daniel for his dyner,Daniel. 14 from Iewerie in to the caue of lyons at Babylon, by Aba­cuk the prophete. But perhappes they doubte of the auctoritie of Amphilochius, that wrote this story. It may well be, that they would be gladde to discredite that worthy bishop. For he was that vigilant pastour and good gouernour of the churche,Theodo­rit. in hist. eccles. lib. 4. cap. 11. [...] precato­res. who first with Letoius bishop of Melite, and with Flauianus bishop of Antioche, ouerthrewe and vtterly vanquished the he­retikes called Messaliani, otherwise, euchitae, the first parentes of the Sacramentarie heresie. Whose opinion was, that the holy Eucharistie, that is the blessed Sa­crament of th'aulter, doth neither good, nor euil, neither profiteth ought, nor hurteth. euen as our sa­cramentaries doo ascribe all to faith onely, and call the most worthiest sacramēt, none other, but tokening [Page] bread, which of it selfe hath no diuine efficacie or operation. Therefore, I wonder the lesse, I saye, if they would Amphilochius his auctoritie to be diminished. But for this I will matche them with greate Basile, who estemed him so much, who loued him so intier­ly, who honored him so highly with the dedication of so excellent workes. I will ioyne them also with the learned Bishop Theodoritus, Theodor. lib. 5. ec­clesiast. hist. c. 16. who semeth to geue him so soueraigne praise, as to any other Bishop, he writeth his stories of, neuer naming him with out preface of great honour, now calling him admiran­dum, the wonderful, at an other tyme, sapientissimum, the most wise, and most cōmonly laudatissimum, most praise worthy.

If they doubte of Basile him selfe, whether he were a man worthy to obteine by his prayer of God such a vision, it may please them to peruse what Gregorius Nyssenus, what holy Ephrē of Syria, and specially, what Gregorie Nazianzene wrote of him,In mono­dia. which two Gre­gories be not affrayed to compare him with Elias, with Moses, with S. Paul, and with who so euer was greatest, and for vertue of most renome. Whereby without all enuie he hath obteined of all the poste­ritie, to be called Magnus, Basile the great, much more for deserte of vertue and learning, then those other for merite of chiualrie, the great Charles, the great Pompey, the great Alexander.

If they denye the whole treatise, and saye that it was neuer of Amphilochius dooing, that were a shifte in dede, but yet the worst of all, and farthest from reason and custome of the best learned, and much [Page 30] like the facte of kyng Alexander, who being desy­rouse to vndoo the fatall knotte, at Gordium a towne in Phrygia, hearing that the Empier of the worlde was boded by an olde prophecie to him, that could vnknitte it, not fynding out the endes of the stren­ges, nor perceiuing by what meanes he could doo it, drewe foorth his sworde, and hewed it in pieces, sup­plying want of skill, with wilfull violence. For the au­ctoritie of his treatise, this much I can saye. Be syde that it is set foorth in a booke of certaine holy mens lyues printed in Colen, and besyde very great likely­hode appearing in the treatise it selfe: it is to be sene in the librarie of Saint Nazarius, in the citie of Verona in Italie, written in veleme for three hundred yeres past, bearing the name of Amphilochius bishop of Iconium.

Now one place more for proufe of priuate Masse, at the wyneding vp of this matter, and then an ende of this article. This place is twyse fownd in Chryso­stō, in an homilie vpon the epistle to the Ephesiās, and more plainely in an homelie ad populum Antiochenū. Where he hath these very wordes.Hom. 61. ad popul. Antioch. Multā video rerū in­aequalitatē. In alijs quidem temporibus cum puri frequenter sitis, non acceditis, In Pascha vero licet sit aliquid à vobis patratum, acceditis. O consuetudinem, ô praesumptionem. Sa­crificium frustrà quotidianum. In cassum assistimus altari. nullus qui communicetur. I see great inequalitie of thinges among you. At other tymes, when as for the more parte ye are in cleane lyfe, ye come not to re­ceiue your rightes. But at Easter, though ye haue done some thing amysse, yet ye come. O what a custome is [Page] this: O what a presumption is this: The dayly sacri­fice is offred in vaine. We stand at the aulter, for nought. There is not one, that woll be houseled. Here is to be noted,A true de­claration of Chry­stomes place. whereas Chrysostome sayeth, the daily sacrifice was celebrated in vaine, and the priestes stoode at th'aulter in vaine: it is not to be vnderstan­ded of the sacrifice in it selfe, as though it were in vaine and frustrate: but this is to be referred to the people, it was in vaine for their parte, that shuld haue receiued their communion with the priestes, who waited daily for them, and cryed out as the maner was, Sancta sanctis, holy thinges for the holy. and after that they had receiued the breade thē selues, shewing the chalice to the people,In Missa Chrysost. sayd: Cum timore Dei, & fi­de, & dilectione accedite. Come ye vp to receiue with the feare of God, with faith and charitie. But all was in vaine. For none came, so colde was their deuotion in that behalfe. Now if Chrysostome had cause to complaine of the peoples slaknes in comming to the communion, in that great and populouse citie of An­tioche, where the scriptures were daily expownded and preached, where discipline and good order was more streightely exacted, where in so great number some of likelyhode were of more deuotion then others: what is to be thought of many other litle townes and villages through the worlde, where litle preaching was heard, where discipline slaked, where the number of the faithfuls being small, and they oc­cupied all together in worldly affayeres, fewe gaue good ensample of deuotion to others? Doubtles in such places was much lesse resorte of the people at [Page 31] the Masse tyme, to receiue the Sacrament with their priestes. And whereas, least this place might seme plainely to auouche the hauing of Masse without a number communicating with the bishop or priest, for auoyding of this auctoritie, the gospellers answere by waye of coniecture, that in Chrysostomes tyme the priestes and deacons cōmunicated together daily with the partie that offred the Sacrifice, though none of the people dyd: we tell thē, that this poore shifte will not serue their purpose. For though they saye, some sufficient number euer cōmunicated with him that celebrated the dayly sacrifice in that great and famouse churche of Antioche, where many priestes and deacons were, which neither being denyed they shall neuer be able to proue: what may be sayde or thought of many thousand other lesser churches through the world, where the priest that sayd Masse, had not alwayes in redynes a sufficient number of other priestes and deacons to receiue with him, so to make vp a communion? Of such churches it must be sayde, that either the Sacrifice ceased, and that was not done which Christ commaunded to be done in his remembrāce, which is not to be grawnted: or that the memorie of our lordes death was oftentymes celebrated of the priestes in the daily oblation with out tarying for others to cōmunicat with them, and so hadde these churches priuate Masses, as the chur­ches now a dayes haue. Now to conclude, of this most euident place of Chrysostome, euery childe is hable to make an inuincible argumēt against M. Iuell for the priuate Masse, as they call it, in this sorte. By [Page] reporte of Chrysostome, the sacrifice in his tyme was daily offred, that is to saye, the Masse was celebrated, but many tymes no body came to communicate sa­cramentally with the priestes, as it is before proued: ergo there were Masses done with out other recei­uing the Sacrament with the priestes. And then fur­ther, ergo priuate Masses in Chrysostomes dayes were not straunge, and then yet one steppe further, there to staye: Ergo M. Iuel according to his owne promise and offre, must yelde, subscribe and recant.

Of communion vnder one kynde.
ARTICLE. II.

THis being a Sacramēt of vnitie, euery true christen man ought in receiuing of it, to consyder, how vnitie may be acheued and kepte, rather thē to shewe a streightnes of conscience aboute the outward formes of bread and wyne, to be vsed in the administratiō of it: and that so much the more, how much the ende of euery thinge, is to be estemed more, then that, which serueth to the ende. Otherwise herein the breache of vnitie is so litle recompensed by the exacte kepinge of th'out­ward ceremonie, that according to the saying of S. Augustine, who so euer taketh the mysterie of vni­tie, and kepeth not the bonde of peace, he taketh not a mysterie for him selfe, but a testimonie against him selfe.

Therefore they haue great cause to weigh with them selues, what they receiue in this sacrament, who moued by slēder reasons made for bothe kyndes, do rashely and dangerously condemne the churche, for geuing of it vnder one kinde, to all, that doo not in their owne persons consecrate and offer the same in remembraunce of the sacrifice once offered on the crosse. And that they may thinke the churche to stād vpon good growndes herein, may it please them to vnderstand, that the fruite of this sacramēt, which they enioye that worthely receiue it, dependeth not of the outward formes of bread and wine, but re­doundeth of the vertue of the fleshe and bloude of Christ. And whereas vnder either kynde whole Christ is verely present, (for now that he is risen againe from the deade, his fleshe and bloude can be sundred no more,Rom. 6. because he dyeth no more) this helthfull sacrament is of true christen people with no lesse fruit receiued vnder one kynde, then vnder bothe. And as this spirituall fruite is not any thinge diminished to him that receiueth one kinde, so it is not any whitte increaced to him, that receiueth bothe. The Sacramentaries that beleue not the truth of Christes bodye and bloude in this holy Sacramēt, I remitte to sundry godly treatises made in defence of the right faith in that pointe. I thinke it not ne­cessarie here, to treate thereof, or of any other mat­ter, which M. Iuell hath not as yet manifestly touched in his sermon.

Now concerning th'outward formes of bread and wyne, their vse is imployed in significatiō onely, and [Page] be not of necessitie, so as grace may not be obteined by worthy receiuing of tbe Sacrament, onlesse bothe kindes be ministred. Therefore in consecrating of the Sacrament, according to Christes institution, bothe kyndes be necessarie, for as much as it is not prepa­red for the receiuing onely, but also for renewing and stirring vp of the remembraunce of oure lordes death. So in as much as the sacrament serueth the sacrifice, by which the death and oblation of Christ is represented, bothe the kyndes be requisite: that by diuerse and sundry formes, the bloude of Christ shedde for our synnes, and separated from his body, may euidently be signified. But in as much as the faithful people doo receiue the sacrament, thereby to atteine spirituall grace and saluatiō of their soules, diuersitie of the formes or kyndes, that be vsed for the signification onely, hath no further vse ne profite. But by one kynde, because in it whole Christ is ex­hibited, abundance of all grace is once geuen: so as by the other kynde thereto ouer added (which geueth the same and not an other Christ) no further aug­mentation of spirituall grace, may be atteined.

In consideration of this, the catholike churche taught by the holy ghost all truth, whiles in the daily sacrifice the memorie of oure lordes death and pas­sion is celebrated, for that it is necessarie therein to expresse most playnely the shedding and separating of the bloude from the bodye, that was crucified: hath alwayes to that purpose, diligently vsed bothe kyndes of breade and wine. But in distributing of the blessed sacramāt to christen people, hath vsed her [Page 33] libertie (which Christ neuer imbarred by any com­maundement to the contrary) so as it hath euer ben most for the behoufe and commoditie of the re­ceiuers: and hath ministred sometymes bothe kindes, sometymes one kynde onely, as it hath ben thought most expediēt, in regard of tyme, place, and persons.Matth. 26 Christes vvordes bynde not the laitie to receiue both kin­des. Ante pas­sionē no­bis solis praecepit hoc face­re inquiūt Apostoli apud Cle­mentem. lib. 8. con­stitu. Apostolicarū. cap. vlt.

As touching the wordes of Christ, Bibite ex hoc omnes, Drinke ye all of this: they perteine to the Apo­stles only, and to their successours. For to them only he gaue commaundement to doo that, which he dyd in his supper, as Clement sayeth: To them only saying, doo this in my remembrance, he gaue commission to consecrate, offer, and to receiue the sacrament in re­membrance of his death and passion, by the same wordes ordeining thē priestes of the newe testamēt. Wherefore this belongeth not to the laye people, neither can it be iustely gathered by this place, that they are bounde of necessitie, and vnder paine of deadly synne, to receiue the sacrament vnder bothe kyndes.

And this vnderstoode they, which aboue an hun­dred yeres past, chaunging the olde custome of the churche of receiuing the communion vnder one kynde, by theire priuate auctoritie, would nedes vsurpe the cuppe also. For seeing them selues not to haue sufficient proufe and warrant for their dooing of these wordes, drinke ye all of this: the better to bol­ster vp their newe flangled attempte,Ioan. 6. they thought it better to alleage the wordes of Christ in S. Iohn: Ex­cepte ye eate the fleshe of the sonne of man, and drinke his bloude, ye shall not haue lyfe in you: which wordes for [Page] all that oure new maisters of these xl. yeres past, will to be vnderstanded of the spirituall and not of the sa­cramentall eating. Which place although it be taken for the sacramentall eating, as it may be, and is taken for bothe of the doctours vewed a parte: yet in all that chapter there is no mention of the cuppe, nor of wine at all. Wherefore they that crye so much on the Institution and commaundement of Christ, can not fynde in all the scriptures, neither commaundement, where he gaue charge the sacrament so to be geuen, neither so much as any example, where Christ gaue it vnder bothe kyndes, to any other, then to the Apostles. Where as contrary wise it may be shewed of oure parte, that the sacrament was geuen vnder one kynde only to the two disciples, that went to Emaus.Luc. 24. For that the bread, which Christ there tooke, blessed, brake, and gaue to them, was not simple and common bread, but the Sacrament of the bodye and bloude of Christ. For soIn Mat­thaeū ho­mil. 17. Chrysostome,De con­sensu Euā gelist. li. 3. cap. 25. Augu­stine,In Luc. Bede, andIn Lucā. Act. 2. Theophylacte with one accorde doo witnesse. It appeareth also that the communion vnder one kynde was vsed at Ierusalem among chri­stes disciples, by that S. Luke writeth in the Actes of the Apostles of the breaking of the bread. If M. Iuell here thinke to auoyde these places by their ac­customed figure synecdoche, among his owne secte happely it may be accepted, but among men of right and learded iudgement, that shifte will seme ouer weake and vaine. Now to conclude touching the sixth chapter of S. Ihon, as thereof they can bring no one worde mentioning the cuppe or wyne, for [Page 34] proufe of their bothe kyndes: so it sheweth and not in very obscure wise, that the forme of breade alone is sufficient, where as Christ sayeth, Qui manducat pa­nem hunc, viuet in aeternum, He that eateth this bread, shall lyue for euer.

Thus oure aduersaries haue nothing to bring out of the scriptures against the vse of the catholike churche in ministring the communion vnder one kynde. And yet they cease not crying out vpon the breache of christes expresse commaundement, and M. Iuell for his parte in his first answere to D. Cole, sayeth, that the councell of Constance pronounced openly against Christ him selfe. But for as much as they are so hote in this pointe, I will send them to Martin Luther him selfe their patriarke, that either by his sobrietie in this matter they may be some what colded, or by his, and his scolers incōstancie herein, be brought to be a shamed of them selues. Though the places be well knowen, as oftentymes cited of the catholike writers of oure tyme against the gos­pellers, yet here I thinke good to rehearse them, that the vnlearned may see, how them selues make not so greate a matter of this Article, as some seme to beare the people in hand it is.

Luther wryteth to them of Bohemia these very wordes. Quoniam pulchrum quidem esset, Luther and his ofspryng doth not necessi­tate Com­munion vnder both kyn­des. vtraque specie eucharistiae vti, & Christus hac in re nihil tanquam ne­cessarium praecepit: praestaret pacem & vnitatem, quam Christus vbique praecepit, sectari, quam de speciebus Sacra­mēti cōtendere. Whereas it were a fayre thinge (sayeth he) to vse bothe kyndes of the sacrament, yet for [Page] that Christ herein hath commaunded nothing as ne­cessary: it were better to kepe peace and vnitie, which Christ hath euery where charged vs withall, then to striue for the outward kyndes of the sacrament. Agayne his wordes be these in a declaration that he wrote of the sacrament. Non dixi, neque consului, neque est intentio mea, vt vnus aut aliquot Episcopi propria au­thoritate alicui incipiant vtramque speciem porrigere, nisi ita constitueretur & mandaretur in concilio generali. Neither haue I sayde nor counsailed, nor my minde is, that any one or moe bishops, begynne by their owne auctoritie, to geue bothe kyndes (of the sacramēt) to any person, onlesse it were so ordeined and cōmaun­ded in generall councell.

Thus he wrote before that he had conceiued per­fite hatred against the church.Of his cō ­ference vvith the deuill, he vvriteth libello de Missa an­gulari. But after that he had ben better acquainted with the deuill, and of him appearing vnto him sensibly, had ben instructed with argumentes against the sacrifice of the Masse, that the memorie of oure redemption by Christ wrought on the crosse, might vtterly be abolyshed: he wrote hereof farre otherwise. Si quo casu concilium statueret, minimè omnium nos vellemus vtraque specie potiri, imò tunc primū in despectum concilij vellemus aut vna, aut neutra, & nequaquā vtra (que) potiri, & eos planè anathema habere, quicū (que) talis cōcilij auctoritate, potiren­tur vtraque. If in any case the councell would so or­deyne, we would in no wise haue bothe the kyndes, but euen then in dispite of the councell, we would haue one kynde, or neither of them, and in no wise bothe, and holde them for accurfed, who so euer by [Page 35] auctoritie of such a councell, would haue bothe. These wordes declare what sprite Luther was of. They shewe him lyke him selfe. Who so euer readeth his bookes with indifferent iudgement, shall fynde, that sythens the Apostles, tyme neuer wrote man so arrogātly ne so dispitefully against the churche, nor so contraryly to him selfe. Which markes be so euident, that who so euer will not see them, but suffreth him selfe to be caried a waye in to errour, hatred of the church, and contempte of all godlynes, either by him, or by his scolers: except he repent and retourne, he is gyltie of his owne damnation, vtterly ouerthrowen,Tit. 3. and synneth inexcusably, as one condemned by his owne iudgement. But for excuse hereof, in his booke of the captiuitie of Babylon, he confesseth that he wrote thus, not for that he thought so, nor for that he iudged the vse of one kynde vnlawfull, but because he was stirred by hatred and anger so to doo. His wordes doo sounde so much plainely. Prouocatus, imò per vim raptus. I wrote this (sayeth he otherwise then I thought in my harte, prouoked, and by violence pulled to it, whether I would or no. Here I doubte not, but wise men will regarde more that Luther wrote, when his minde was quiet and calme, then when it was enra­ged with blustering stormes of naughty affections.

Now to put this matter, that Luther iudged it a thing indifferent, whether one receiue the sacrament vnder one kynde or bothe, more out of doubte: Phi­lip Melāchthon his scoler, and nearest of his counsell, wryteth: Sicut edere suillam, aut abstinere a suilla, In locis cōmuni­bus. sic al­terutra signi parte vti mediū esse. That as it is a thing [Page] indifferēt, to eate swines fleshe, or to forbeare swines fleshe, so it is also, to vse which parte of the signe, a man lysteth. By the word signe, he meaneth the Sa­crament, lyking better that straunge word, then the accustomed word of the churche, leaste he might perhaps be thought of the brethren of his secte, in some what to ioyne with the catholikes.

Bucer also is of the same opinion, who in the con­ference that was had betwene the catholikes and protestantes for agreement in controuersies of Reli­gion at Ratisbone, confirmed and allowed this ar­ticle by his full consent, with these wordes. Ad con­trouersiam quae est de vna aut vtraque specie, tollendam, cum primis conducturum, vt sancta Ecclesia liberam fa­ceret potestatem sacramentum hoc in vna vel in vtra (que) specie sumendi. Ea tamen lege, [...]r nulli per hoc detur occa­sio, quem vsum tantopere retinuit Ecclesia, temerê con­demnandi, aut inuicem iudicandi.

That the controuersie for the one or bothe kyn­des may be taken awaye, it shall be very well done, that holy churche made it free, to receiue this sacra­ment in one or bothe kyndes: yet vnder suche con­dition, as hereby no occasion be geuen to any bodye rashely to condēne the vse, which the church hath so long tyme kepte, nor to iudge one an other. Sooth­ly he which would haue it free and at libertie, to receiue the sacrament vnder one or bothe kyndes, and holdeth opinion, that the olde custome of the one kynde onely is not to be condemned, semeth plainely ynough to confesse, that nothing hath ben instituted or commaunded of Christ touching this [Page 36] matter, as necessarie to saluation.

Thus we may see playnely, that they which haue diuided them selues from the mysticall bodye of Christ, that is his churche, who were of greatest lear­ning and iudgement, make it a matter indifferent (as it is in dede of it selfe lefte to the libertie of the churche) whether the sacrament be ministred vnder one kynde or bothe.

And this much hath ben cōfessed against M. Iuell and his secte, not onely by the learned aduersaries of the churche in oure tyme, but also by a learned man of Bohemia aboue six score yeres past. His name is Iohn Przybxam, of whose writinges some are set foorth in printe. This learned man whereas he en­deuoured to proue the vse of bothe kyndes of the wordes of Christ written by S. Iohn: Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man, and drinke his bloude, ye shal not haue lyfe in you: at length vttereth these wordes ac­cording to the eloquence of his tyme.In libr. de professio­ne fidei catholieae cap. 19. Veruntamen hic Deum timens, & mores impios aliorum praecauens, fateor quòd quaslibet personas de ecclesia communion, fidelium sub vtra (que) specie repugnantes, damnare aut haereticare non in­tendo. But here hauing the feare of god before myne eyes, and being well ware, I folowe not the wicked conditions of others, I grawnt, that what persones so euer of the churche repine against the communion of the faithfull people vnder bothe kyndes, I entend not to condemne them, nor to holde them for here­tikes. But if it be the commaundement of God, that the Sacrament be receiued of all vnder bothe kyn­des, why shuld he be forbydden by the feare of God [Page] to cōdemne those, that wythstād that order of com­munion? Seeing that who so euer goeth against Gods commaundement, is worthy to be cōdemned? There­fore by his testimonie the vse of one or bothe kin­des, is indifferent.

Thus we are able to alleage Luther, Melanchthon, Bucer, and that learned Bohemian, for the Indifferen­cie of the communion to be minister either vnder one kynde, or bothe. Whereby I meane not that the vse of the sacramēt is so lefte to euery mannes liber­tie, as he that listeth, may require bothe kyndes, and an other may content him selfe with one kynde: not so, euery man is bownde to folow the order of the churche, but the churche is not bownde of necessi­tie by Gods commaundement, to minister it vnder bothe kyndes to the laitie.

And whereas it was ministred in bothe kyndes at Corinth, as it appeareth by S. Paul, and in sundry other places,Causes mouing the chur­che to cō ­municate vnder one kinde. as we finde most euidently in the wri­tinges of diuerse auncient fathers: yet the churche hath ben moued by diuerse and weighty causes, to take order, that the people should receiue their cō ­munion vnder one kynde, not onely in the councell of Basile, but also in that of Constāce, and long before them aboue a thousand yeres, in the first councell of Ephesus, as many doo probably gather, and mamely Vrbanus Regius a doctour of Luthers scoole, confesseth, in his booke, De locis communibus. One cause and not the leaste, was, that thereby the heresie of Nestorius might the rather be extinguished, who emonges other errours, held opinion, that vnder the forme of [Page 37] bread in the Sacramēt is cōteined the body of Christ with out his bloude, and vnder the forme of the wine, his bloude onely without his bodye. Many other causes moued those fathers to take that order, for th'auoyding of many inconueniences, dangers, and offences, which might happē in the vse of the cuppe: as vnreuerence of so high a Sacrament, whereof chri­sten people at the beginning had a meruelouse care and regarde, the lothsomnes of many, that can not brooke the taste of wine, the difficultie of getting, and impossibilitie of keping wine from corruption in countries situated neare to the north Pole, in that clime, where is knowen to be great extremitie of colde, besyde a number of the like. So that it had ben beside reason to haue bounde all to the necessitie of bothe kyndes.

Now in very dede if we would graunt to oure aduersaries, which in no wise we do not graunt, that it hath ben commaunded of Christ, the laye people should communicate vnder bothe kyndes, by these wordes: Drinke ye all of this: yet this notwithstanding, the exacte streightnes of gods ordināce may without synne in cases be omitted, in such thinges which be not necessaryly to be obserued of them selues, or of the prescripte of the lawe of nature: so that great and weighty causes (the rule of charitie exactely obser­ued) require the same. For euident proufe of this, we haue exāples bothe of the olde and also of the newe testamēt.Leuit. 24. Dyd not God commaunde that none shuld eate of the shewebread, but the priestes onely?1. Reg. 21. Dauid eate thereof, and yet Christ cleareth him of all blame.Mar. 2. [Page] The lawe of circuncisiō so streightly commaunded,Genes. 17. & 34. was for the space of forty yeres by the people of Israel quite omitted, whiles they passed from Egypte to the land of promesse, and God fownde no faulte with them for it. God gaue the law of keping holy the Saboth daye with out exception.Exod. 20. 1. Mach. 1. The Macha­bés notwithstanding stickte not to arme them sel­ues against Antiochus, and to spende that daye in the fielde in theire defence, hauing no scruple of con­science for breach of that law. Many the like exam­ples we fynde in the olde testament. But let vs come to the newe testament, and to the Sacraments of the tyme of grace. In due cōsideration of which, we may fynde, that Christ hath scarcely commaunded any outward thing, the moderation, qualifying, and orde­ring whereof, he hath not lefte to his churche, as ac­cording to the cōdition of the tyme, it hath ben sene most expedient for the common prefermēt and edi­fying of the same. So that notwithstanding there be no swaruing from the scope, and principal intente, and no creature defrauded of that good, which by the outward thinges is to be atteined. Touching the Sacrament of baptisme, though nothing be sayde of the teaching of them, that shuld be bapti­zed, neyther of the dipping of them in to the wa­ter,Matt. 28. which Christes charge in this behalfe geuen, se­meth plainely to require, go you (sayeth he to his Apostles) and teach all nations, baptizing them etc: and yet the church hath not feared to baptise in­fantes that be with out capacitie of teaching, and for the due administration of this Sacrament, to many, [Page 38] hath thoughte powring or sprinkling of water vpon them sufficient: though this be not spoken of I saye, it is much to be consydered to this purpose, that the Apostles stickte not for a tyme to alter and chaunge the very essentiall forme of wordes, with which Christ would this sacrament to be ministred. For where as he commaunded them to baptise in the name of the father, and of the sonne,Act. 8. and of the holy ghost: th [...]y baptized in the name of Iesus Christ only, intending thereby to make that to be of more fame and celebritie.

So to retourne to the Sacrament of the bodye and bloude of Christ, whereof we treate, no man can denye, but many thinges were at th'institution of it done by the example of Christ, and by him com­maunded, which now be not obserued, and yet in that respecte no faulte is fownde. Christ washed the Apostles feete, and gaue them an expresse commaun­dement to doo the same with these moste plaine wordes. If I that am your Maister and lorde, Ioan. 6. haue wasshed your feete, you also ought to wash one an others feete. For I haue geuen you an example, that as I haue done, you doo so likewise. Which commaundement of Christ according to the outward letter, verely bindeth no lesse, then these wordes: Drinke ye all of this: yet this commaun­dement is not kepte, but cleane growen out of vse. Though it appeare by Saint Bernard,In ser. de coena do. who calleth it Magnum Sacramentum, a great Sacrament, and long be­fore, by reporte of S. Cyprian,In serm. de vncti­one chris­matis. that Christ dyd not onely washe his Apostles feete, but commaunded also by solemne request, and ordeined that th'apostles af­terward [Page] should doo the same. Whether this ordinance of Christ hath ben abolished, for that it should not be thought a rebaptization, as it may be gathered of S. Augustine,Ad Ianuarium. c. 18 or for any other cause, it forceth not greatly. But this is much to be merueiled at, that this so earnestly commaunded, is so quietly and with such silence suffered vndone, and in the ministration of the Sacrament, the vse of the cuppe so factiously and with so much crying out required. Neither in many other rites and ceremonies we do not as Christ dyd. Christ celebrated this sacrament after that he had supped, we do it in the morning, and fasting. Christ sate at the table with his twelue Apostles, neither sytte we at a table, neither thinke we it necessary to obserue such number. Christ brake the bread, we thinke it not necessary to breake the hoste, that is to be delyuered to the faithfull participantes. Here is to be noted, that saint Cyprian rebuking them which thought sprinkling or powring of water not to be sufficient for baptisme, declareth, that the sa­raments be not to be estemed according vnto their extreme and rigorouse obseruation or admini­stration of all the externe elementes: but rather ac­cording to the integritie and soundnes of faith of the geuer and of the receiuer, and that diuine thinges vsed in a compendious sorte, conferre and geue ne­uerthelesse to the right beleuers their whole vertue. lib. 4. epist. 7. Many other cōmaundemētes of God concerning outward thinges might here be rehear­sed, which notwithstanding by litle and litle in the churche haue ben omitted, as the forebearing of [Page 39] strangled thinges and bloude: which was cōmaunded by God in the olde testament, and according to the pleasure and aduise of the holy gost, decreed by the Apostles in the newe testament: yet for as much as concerneth outward thinges, both this, and many other the like, haue in processe of tyme growen out of obseruation, and haue with out any scruple of con­science ben abrogated.

I truste no man will gather of that I haue sayde here, that it is none offence to doo against Gods commaundemente. My meaning is farre otherwise. Neither saye I, that this saying of Christ in Mathew, Drinke ye all of this, or that in Ihon, Excepte ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man, and drinke his bloude, ye shal not haue lyfe in you: or other cōmaundementes of Christ, be not to be kepte: but this is that I saye, and that euery catholike man sayeth: that the vniuersall chur­che doth better vnderstand, which are the cōmaun­demētes of Christ, and how they ought to be kepte, then Berengarius, Wiclef, Hus, Luther, Zuinglius, Cal­uine, Cranmare, Peter Martyr, or any their scolers, and folowers, which now be sundry sectes. As for example: God hath thus cōmaunded,Matth. 5. Exod. 20. thow shalt not sweare, and, thow shalt not kylle, and if thine eye cause the to offende, pull him out, and cast him awaye from the. Whereas certaine sectes of heretikes, as na­mely they which be called Waldenses, and Picardi, by their construction hereof, haue mainteined opi­nion, that no othe ought to be geuen or made in no case or respecte: lyke wise that in no case or respecte a man may doo an other to death, and also that after [Page] the outward letter of the gospell, sometyme a man is bounde to pull out his eye, and cast it from him: which thing hath bē done by some of the Picardes, as it is reported, as though elles Gods commaunde­ment were not kepte: this hath so ben vnderstanded by the catholike churche, confessing neuerthelesse these to be gods commaundementes, as in tyme, in place, and in certaine cases, a man might and ought without breach of commaundement, bothe sweare, and kylle, and likewise kepe his eye in his head, and therein offend God nothing at all. So the catholike churche vnderstandeth, Drynke ye all of this, to be Christes commaundement, and of necessitie to be obserued, but of priestes onely, I meane of necessitie, and that, when in the sacrifice of the church, is cele­brated the memorie of Christes death, which in that degree be the successours of the Apostles, to whom that commaundement was specially geuen, when they were consecrated priestes of the new testamēt, who so dyd drinke in dede, as S. Marke witnesseth: Et biberunt ex eo omnes. Mar. 14. And they dranke all of it. To these onely, and to none other, the catholike churche hath euer referred the necessitie of that cō ­maundement. Elles if the necessitie of it should per­teine to all, and because Christ sayde, Drinke ye all of this, if all of euery state and condition of necessitie ought to drinke of the cuppe: how is it come to passe, that oure aduersaries them selues, (who pretēde so streight a conscience herein) kepe from it infan­tes and young children, vntill they come to good yeres of discretion: specially where as the custome [Page 40] of the primitiue churche was, that they also should be partakers of this sacrament, as it may playnely be sene, in S. Dionyse, Cyprian, Augustine, Innocētius, Zosimus, and other auncient fathers? what better reason haue they to kepe the infantes from the cuppe, then the Anabaptistes haue, to kepe them from theire bap­tisme? If they allege their impotencie of remembring our lordes death, the Anabaptistes will lihewise al­lege their impotencie of receiuing and vnderstāding doctrine, that Christes institution in this behalfe se­meth to require.

Thus th'aduersaries of the churche them selues doo agnise, that the vse of the cuppe in the Sacra­ment perteineth not to all of necessitie. So haue they neither godly charitie to ioyne with the churche, neither sufficient reason to impugne the churche. And although herein we could be content, infantes not to be spoken of, yet it maye easely be proued, that the communion vnder bothe kyndes, hath not euer ben generall. And as we doo not cōdemne it, but confesse it might be restored agayne by th'au­ctoritie of the churche lawfully assembled in a ge­nerall councell, vppon mature deliberation before had, and a holesome remedie against the inconue­niences thereof prouided: euen so are we hable to shewe good auctoritie for the defence of the one kynde, now vsed in the churche. And because M. Iuell beareth the world in hand, nothing can be brought for it of oure syde: some places I will allege here, that seme to me very euidently to proue, that the vse of bothe kyndes hath not alwayes ben [Page] thought necessary to all persons, and that the com­munion vnder one kynde hathe ben practised and holden for good within the six hundred yeres af­ter Christ, that he would so faine bynde vs vnto.

Proufes for com­munion vnder one kindeHere maye be alleaged first the example of our lord him selfe, out of the 24. chapter of S. Luke, which is spoken of before: where it is declared, that he gaue the Sacrament to the two disciples at Emaus, vnder the forme of bread only, which place ought to haue the more weight of auctoritie in a catholike mannes iudgement, because it is brought by the councell of Constance, and also by the councell of Basile, for proufe of the communion vnder one kynde. That it was the Sacrament, the auncient doctours doo af­firme it playnely, and the wordes cōferred with the wordes of our lordes supper, doo agree: and that it is not nedeful of oure owne head to adde thereto the administration of the cuppe, as oure aduersaries doo by their figure synecdoche: it appeareth by that those two disciples declared to the twelue Apostles assembled together in Ierusalem, how they knew our lorde, in fractione panis, in breakinge of the breade to them, which can not be taken for the wine. and as sone as they knewe him in breaking of the breade, he vanished awaye from theire syght, er that he tooke the cuppe in to his handes, and blessed it, and gaue it vnto them, as it appeareth euidently ynough to S. Augustine, to Bede, and to all other that be not willfully opinatiue.

Agayne what nede is it to vse violence in this scripture, and ioyne vnto it a patche of oure owne [Page 41] deuise, by so simple a warrant of a figure, sith that according to the minde of the learned fathers, Christ gaue here to the two disciples not a piece of the sa­crament, but the whole Sacrament, as it is proued by th'effecte of the same: and th'effecte presupposeth the cause. For saint Augustine confesseth by that Sa­crament of breade (so he calleth it.De cōsen­su Euan­gelistarū. li. 3. ca. 25.) Vnitate corporis participata, remoueri impedimentum inimici, vt Christus posset agnosci. that thereby they were made partakers of the vnitie of Christes bodye, that is to saye, made one bodye with Christ, and that all impediment or lette of the ennemie the deuil, was taken awaye, so as Christ might be acknowleged. What more should they haue gotten, if they had receiued the cuppe also?

Here might be alleaged the place of the Actes in the 2. chapter, where mention is made of the com­munion of breakinge of the breade, the cuppe not spoken of, which the heretikes called Waldēses, dyd confesse, that it must be vnderstanded of the Sacra­ment, in confessione ad Vladislaū. and likewise the place of the twentith chapter, and specially that of the seuen and twentith chapter of the Actes. Where Chrysostome and other fathers vnderstād the breade that saint Paul in perile of shipwracke tooke, gaue thankes ouer, brake, and eate, to be the holy Sa­crament.

It is not to be merueiled at, albe it S. Paul deliuered to the Corinthians the institution of oure lordes supper vnder hothe kyndes, that yet vppon occasion geuen, and when condition of tyme so required, he [Page] ministred the communion vnder one kynde, sith that with out doubte he tooke that holy mystery vnder one kynde, for the whole Sacrament, as we perceiue by his wordes,2. Cor. 10. where he sayeth, Vnus panis et vnum corpus multi sumus omnes, qui de vno pane par­ticipamus. One breade and one body we being many are, all that doo participate of one breade. Where he speaketh nothing of the cuppe. And likewise by his wordes, where he speaketh disiūctiuely, as the greke, and the true latine texte hath, Quicunque manducauerit panem, 1. Cor. 11. vel biberit calicem domini indignê, reus erit corpo­ris et sanguinis domini. Who so euer eateth the bread, or drynketh of the cuppe of our lord vnworthely, he shall be gylty of the bodye and bloude of our lorde. Whereon dependeth an argument of the contrary, that who so euer either eateth this bread worthely, or drinketh this cuppe worthely, he eateth and drinketh righteousnes and lyfe.

For thys purpose we haue a notable place in the hebrew gospell of S. Matthew, which S. Hierome sayeth, he sawe in the librarie of Caesarea, and trans­lated it. This place is cited by S. Hierome in his booke de ecclesiasticis scriptoribus, in Iacobo fratre domini. The wordes touching the communion, that S. Hierome rehearseth, agree thoroughly with those of S. Luke 24. chapter. Matthaeus sic refert. Dominus autem etc. Matthew reporteth thus. When oure lorde had geuen his shrowde vnto the bishopes seruant, he went to Iames, and appeared vnto him: for Iames had made an oth, that he would not eate breade, from that howre he dranke of the cuppe of our lorde, vntill [Page 42] he saw him raysed from the dead. It foloweth a litle after. Afferte ait dominus mensam, & panem. Statimque addit: Tulit panem, & benedixit, ac fregit, & dedit Iacobo iusto, & dixit ei: frater comede panem tuum, quia resur­rexit filius hominis à dormientibus. Bring the table and set on bread quoth our lorde, and by and by it is added: he tooke bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gaue it to Iames the iust, and sayde vnto him: my brother eate thy breade, for the sonne of man is risen agayne from the dead. No man can doubte but this was the Sacrament. And wine was there none geuen, for any thing that may be gathered. For it is not likely that S. Iames had wyne in his house then, for as much as Egesippus who was not long after him, witnesseth of him, that he neuer dranke wyne, but at our lordes supper.

But because perhappes oure aduersaries will caste some myste ouer these allegations, to darken the truth with theire clowdy gloses, which be cleare ynough to quiet and sobre wittes, that geue eare to the holy ghost speaking to vs by the mowth of the churche: I will bring forth such witnesses and proufes for this purpose out of auncient fathers, as by no reason or Sophisticall shifte, they shall be hable to auoyde. Many of the places that I alleged in the ar­ticle before this for priuate communion, may serue to his purpose very well, and therfore, I will not lette to recite some of them here also.

Milciades that constant martyr of Christ, and bishop of Rome, ordeined, that sundry hostes prepa­red by the consecrating of a bishop, shuld be sent [Page] abroade among the churches and parishes, that chri­sten folke, who remayned in the catholike faith, might not through heretikes be defrauded of the holy Sacramēt. Which can none other wise be taken, then for the forme of breade onlye, because the wine can not conueniently be so caryed abroade frō place to place in small quantitie for such vse, much lesse any long tyme be kepte with out corruption. The councell of Nice decreed,Can. 14. that in churches, where neither bishop nor priest were present, the deacons them selues bringe forth and eate the holy commu­nion. Which lykewise can not be referred to the forme of wine, for cause of sowring and corruption, if it be long kepte. Where oftentymes we finde it re­corded of the fathers, that christen people in tyme of persecution receiued of the priestes at church in fyne linnen clothes the sacrament in sundry portiōs, to beare with them, and to receiue it secretly in the morninge before other meate, as their deuotion ser­ued thē: for the same cause, and in respectes of other circumstances, it must of necessitie be taken onely for the kynde or forme of breade.

The places of Tertullian, and saint Cyprian be knowen.Lib. 2. ad vxorem. Tertullian writing to his wife, exhorteth her, not to marye agayne, specially to an infidell, if he dye before her, for that if she doo, she shall not be hable at all tymes for her husband, to doo as a christen womā ought to doo. Will not thy husband know (sayeth he) what thou eatest secretly before all other meate? and in case he doo know it, he will beleue it to be bread, not him, who it is called-Saint [Page 43] Cyprian writeth in his sermon de lapsis, that when a woman had gonne aboute with vnworthy handes to open her cofer, wher the holy thing of oure lord was layde vp, she was made affrayde with fyre that rose vp from thence, as she durst not touch it. Which doubteles must be taken for that one kynde of the Sacrament.

The examples of keping the holy Sacrament vnder the forme of bread onely, to be in a redines for the sycke, and for others in tyme of danger, that they might haue their necessarie vitaile of lyfe, or viage prouision with them, at their departure hence, be in maner infinite. Here one or two may serue in stede of a number. For though M. Iuell maketh his vaunt, that we haue not one sentence or clause for proufe of these articles, which he so defaceth with his negatiue: yet I will not accumulat this treatise with tediouse allegation of auctorities. S. Ambrose at the houre of death, receiued the communion vnder one kynde, kepte for that purpose, as it appeareth by this testimonie of Paulinus, who wrote his life. And because it may be a good instruction to others to dye well, I will here recite his wordes. At the same tyme as he departed from vs to oure lorde, from about the eleuēth howre of the day, vntill the howre that he gaue vp the ghost, stretching abroade his handes in maner of a crosse, he prayed. We sawe his lippes moue, but voice we heard none. Horatus a priest of the churche of Vercelles, being gonne vp to bedde, heard a voice three tymes of one calling him, and saying to him, aryse, and haste the, for he [Page] will departe hence by and by. Who going downe, gaue to the sainte oure lordes bodye, which taken, and swalowed downe, he gaue vp the ghost, hauing with him a good voiage prouision, so as the soule being the better refreshed by the vertue of that meate, maye now reioyse with the companie of An­gelles, whose life he leade in the earth, and with the felowship of Elias.

Ecclesias. hist. lib. 6. cap. 44. Dionysius Alexandrinus aboute the yere of oure lord 200. as Eusebius Caesariensis reciteth, manifestly declareth, how that an olde man called Serapion, was houseled vnder one kinde at his ende. This Sera­pion after that he had layen speacheles three dayes, sent for the Sacrament. The priest for sickenes not hable to come him selfe, gaue to the ladde that came of that errant, a litle of the sacrament, commaunding him to weate it, and so being moisted to powre it in to the oldes mannes mowth. [...]. this much is expressed by the wordes there as the greke is to be constre­wed. The ladde being retourned home, moisted with some liquour that diuine meate, to serue the olde man with all, lying now panting for desyre to be dimis­sed hence, and to haste him awaye to heauen. and powred it in to his mowth. For that this old mannes mowth and throte had long ben drye by force of his sikenes, the priest, who had experience in that case, prouidently gaue warning, to moyste the Sacra­ment with some liquoure, and so together to powre it in to his mowth. Which was so done by the ladde, as Dionysius expresseth. Now if the forme of wine had then also ben brought, by the ladde to be mi­nistred, [Page 44] there had ben no nede of such circumstance, to procure the olde man a moisture to swallowe downe that holy foode.

And that this was the maner of ministring the Sacrament to old men at their departing, it appeareth by record of Theodoritus, who wryteth in his eccle­siastical storye, how one Bassus an archepriest mini­stred vnto an olde mā called Simeones of great f [...]me for his holynes. Bassus (sayeth he as he visited his churches, chaunced vpō holy Simeones that woonder of the world, lying sicke, who through feblenes was not hable to speake nor moue. When Bassus sawe he shuld dye, he geueth him his rightes before. But af­ter what sorte, it is to be marked. Spongia petita Si­meoni os humectat, atque eluit, ac tum ei diuinum obtulit Sacramentum. He calleth for a sponge (sayeth Theodo­ritus) and therewith moysteth and washeth Simeones mowth, and then geueth him the holye Sacrament. If at that tyme the receiuing of the sacred cuppe had ben in vse, such procuring of moisture, for the better swallowing downe of the Sacramēt vnder the one kynde, had ben needles.

Amphilochius that worthy bishop of Iconium in Lycaonia, of whom mention is made in the article afore this, writeth in the life of saint Basile, that a litle before he gaue vp his ghost: he receiued a portion of the holy Sacrament, which long before he had wil­led to be kepte, to the intent it might be put in his graue with him at his buriall. Which no man can cauille to be any other, then the forme of breade onely.

It hath ben a custome in the latine churche from th'apostles tyme to oure dayes, that on good Fridaye as well priestes as other christen people, receiue the Sacrament vnder the forme of bread onelye, conse­crated the daye before, called the daye of oure lor­des supper, commonly Maunde thursdaye, and that not without signification of a singular mysterie. And this hath euer ben iudged a good and sufficient communion.

And that in the greke churche also euen in the tyme of Chrysostome, the cōmunion vnder the forme of breade onely, was vsed and alowed, it appeareth by this notable storye of Sozomenus a greke writer.Historîae ecclesiast. lib. 8. ca. 5. in graeco. which because it is long, I will here rehearse it one­ly in english, remitting the learned to the greke.

When Ihon otherwise named Chrysostome, gouer­ned the church of Constantinople very well, a cer­taine man of the Macedonian heresie, had a wife of the same opinion. When this man had heard Ihon in his sermō declare, how one ought to thinke of god, he praysed his doctrine, and exhorted his wife to conforme her selfe to the same iudgement also. But when as she was leadde by the talke of noble womē, rather then by her husbandes good aduertisemētes, after that he sawe councell tooke no place: excepte, (quoth he) thou wilt beare me companie in thinges touching god, thou shalt haue no more to doo with me, nor lyue any further with me. The woman hea­ring this, promysing faynedly, that she would agree vnto it, conferreth the matter with a woman seruant that she had, whom she estemed for trusty, and vseth [Page 45] her helpe to deceiue her husband. About the tyme of the mysteries, she holding fast that which she had re­ceiued, stouped downe, making resemblance to praye. Her seruant standing by, geueth to her secretly that which she had brought with her in her hand. That, as she put her teeth to it, to byte it, hardneth in to a stone. With that, the womā sore astoyned, fearing leastsome euill shuld happē vnto her, therefore, which came by the power of God: ranne forthwith to the bishop, and bewraying her selfe, sheweth him the stone, hauing yet in it the printes of her bitte, repre­senting a straunge matter, and a wonderouse colour: and so with teares of her eyes, besought forgeuenes, promising her husband, she would consent and agree to him. If this seme to any incredible (sayeth Sozo­menus) that stone is witnes, which to this daye is kepte among the iewelles of the churche of Con­stantinople. By this storye it is cleare, [...]. the Sacrament was then ministred vnder one kynde onely. For by receiuing that one forme, this woman would haue persuaded her husband, that she had communicated with him, and with that holy bishop. Elles if bothe kyndes had then ben ministred, she shuld haue pra­ctised some other shifte, for the auoyding of the cuppe. Which had not ben so easye.

The place of S. Basiles epistles ad Caesariam, can not be auoyded by no shifte nor sophistrie of the gos­pellers. These be his wordes. All they which lyue the solitaire life in wildernes, where is no priest, ke­ping the communion at home, communicate them selues. And in Alexandria and in Egypte, eche one [Page] of the people for the most parte hath the commu­nion in his house.

Here I might aske M. Iuell how they could kepe wine cōsecrated in small measures, as shuld serue for euery mannes housel a parte, in those countries of extreme heate, specially in wildernes, where they had neither priest, nor deacon, as in that place S. Basile writeth. For lacke of whom, they kepte it in store a long tyme, that they might not be destitute of it, at neede. Agayne here I might aske him, whether it was the forme of bread only, or of wine also, which chri­sten men and specially women, were wont deuoute­ly to receiue of the priestes,Vide arti­culū prio­rem. in their cleane lynnen, or napkyns, to beare home with them, taking great heede, that no fragments of it fell downe on the grownde, as bothe Origen, and also S. Augustine, doo witnesse. I thinke he will confesse, that lynnen cloth is not a very fytte thing, to kepe liquour in.

Though I might bring a great number of other places for the vse of one kynde, which after the most common rule of the churche, was the forme of breade: yet here I will staye my selfe, putting the reader in mynde, that the communion hath ben mi­nistred to some persons, vnder the forme of wine onlye, and hath ben taken for the whole Sacrament, specially to such, as for drynesse of their throte, at their death, could not swallow it downe, vnder the for­me of bread.Serm. 5. de lapsis. Whereas it appeareth by S. Cyprian, and also by S. Augustine, that the sacramēt was geuen to infantes in their tyme, we fynde in S. Cyprian, that when a deacon offred the cuppe of oure lordes [Page 46] bloude to a litle mayde childe, which through de­faulte of the nource, had tasted of the sacrifices that had ben offered to deuilles: the childe tourned awaye her face by the instincte of the diuine maiestie (sayeth he) closed fast her lippes, and refused the cuppe. but yet when the deacon had forced her to receiue a litle of the cuppe, the yeax and vomite folowed, so as that sanctified drinke in the bloude of oure lorde, gowshed foorth of the polluted boilles. If the Sacra­ment had ben geuen to this infant vnder the forme of breade before, she would haue resused that no lesse, then she dyd the cuppe, that the deacon then would not haue geuen her the cuppe.De cōsec. distinct. 4 can. 4. si qui apud illos hae­reticos. And that this may seme the lesse to be wondered at, Ioannes Teutonicus that wrote scholies vpon Gratian, witnesseth, that euen in his tyme the custome was in some places, to geue the Sacrament to infantes, not by deliuering to them the bodye of Christ, but by powring the bloude in to theire mowthes: which custome hath ben vppon good confyderation abrogated in the church of Rome, and kepte in the greke church, as Lyre writeth vpon S. Ihon.

The fourth councell of Carthago decreed,Can. 76. if a mā in sicknes (who was enioyned publike penaunce) do demaunde his housel, and er he dye fall in a phre­nesie, or becomme speacheles that the Sacrament be powred in to his mowthe. To take this for the forme of wine, we ar moued by the decree of the eleuenth councell Toletane. Where it is sayde,Can. 11. that the weake nature of man is wonte at the pointe of death to be so farre oppressed with drowth, that it may be re­freshed [Page] by no meates, vnneth susteined with com­forte of drinke. Then it foloweth. Which thing we see to be so, at departing of many, who being very desyrouse to receiue their viage prouision of the holy communion, when the Sacrament was geuen them, haue cast it vp agayne: not that they dyd this through infidelitie, but for that they were not hable to swallow downe the Sacrament deliuered to them, but onely a draught of oure lordes cuppe.

How so euer this be taken, it is plaine by this coun­cell, as by many other auncient councelles and do­ctours, that the maner of the catholike churche hath ben, to minister the Sacrament to the sicke, vnder one kynde.

Now where as some saye, that the Sacrament to be geuen vnder the forme of bread, was first dipte in the bloude of oure lorde, and would haue so vsed nowe also for the sicke, and that it is so to be taken for the whole and intiere Sacrament, as though the Sacrament vnder forme of bread were not of it selfe sufficient: let them vnderstand, that this was an olde errour condemned aboue twelue hundred yeres past, by Iulius the first, that great defender of Athanasius. who hereof in an epistle to the bishoppes through Egypte,De conse. distinct. 2. can. cum omne cri­men. wrote thus. Illud verò quod pro complemento communionis intinctam tradunt eucharistiam populis, nec hoc prolatum ex euangelio testimonium receperunt, vbi Apostolis corpus suum dominus commendauit & sangui­nem. Seorsum enim panis, & seorsum calicis commendatio memoratur. Where as some delyuer to the people the sacrament dipte, for the full and whole communion, [Page 47] they haue not receiued this testimonie pronounced out of the gospel, where oure lorde gaue his body and his bloude. For the geuing of the bread is recor­ded aparte by it selfe, and the geuing of the cuppe aparte lykewise by it selfe. And where as some af­terwarde in the tyme of Vitellianus, would haue brought in agayne this abrogated custome, it was in like maner condēned and abolished, in tertio Concilio Braccarensi. Can. 1.

Now I referre me to the iudgemēt of the reader, of what opinion so euer he bee, whether for proufe of the communion vnder one kynde, we haue any word, sentence, or clause at all, or no: and whether these wordes of M. Iuell in his sermon,Fol. 16. in the ende. be true or no, where he sayeth thus: it was vsed through out the whole catholike churche six hundred yeres after Christes ascension, vnder bothe kyndes, with out exception. That it was so vsed, yea six hundred yeres, and long after, we denye not: but that it was so alwayes, and in eue­ry place vsed, and with out exception, that we de­nye. and vpon what growndes we doo it, let M. Iuell him selfe be iudge.

If some of oure allegations may bee with violence wrested from oure purpose, verely a great number of them can not, the auctoritie of the auncient fa­thers, who wrote them, remayning inuiolated. Where of it foloweth, that after the iudgement of these fa­thers, where as Christ instituted this blessed Sacra­ment, and commaunded it to be celebrated, and re­ceiued in remembraunce of his death: he gaue no ne­cessary commaundement, either for the one, or for [Page] both kyndes, (besyde and without the celebration of the Sacrifice) but lefte that to the determination of the churche. Now that the churche for th'auoy­ding of vnreuerēce, periles, offences, and other weigh­ty and important causes, hath decreed it in two ge­nerall councelles, to be receiued of the laye people vnder one kynde onely, we thinke it good with all humblenes to submite oure selues to the churche herein:Matth. 18. which churche, Christ commaundeth to be heard and obeyed, saying, he that heareth not the churche, let him be to the, as a heathen, and as a pub­lican. In doing whereof we weigh aduisedly with oure selues, the horrible danger that remaineth for them, who be auctoures of schisme, and breakers of vnitie.

Now for answere to M. Iuelles place alleaged out of Gelasius, which is the chiefe that he and all other the aduersaries of the churche haue to bring for theire purpose in this pointe, this much may be sayde. First,Gelasius his canon guilefully by M. Iuel alleaged, truly exa­mined. that he alleageth Gelasius vntruly, making him to sownde in english otherwise, then he doth in la­tine. M. Iuelles wordes be these. Gelasius an olde father of the Church and a bysshop of Rome, sayeth that to mi­nister the communion vnder one kinde, is open sacrilege. But where sayeth Gelasius so? this is no syncere han­deling of the matter. And because he knewe, the wordes of that father imported not so much: guile­fully he reciteth them in latine, and doth not en­glish them: which he would not haue omitted, if they had so plainely made for his purpose. The wor­des of Gelasius be these. Diuisio vnius eiusdemque my­sterij, [Page 48] sine grandi sacrilegio non potest peruenire. The di­uision of one and the same mystery, can not come with out great sacriledge. Of these wordes he can not conclude Gelasius to saye, that to minister the communion vnder one kynde, is open sacriledge.

Gelasius rebuketh and abhorreth the diuisiō of that high mysterie, which vnder one forme, and vnder bothe, is vnum idemque, one and the same, not one vnder the forme of breade, and an other vnder the forme of wine, not one in respecte of the bodye, and an other in respecte of the bloude: but vnum idem (que), one and the selfe same. The wordes afore recited be taken out of a fragment of a Canon of Gelasius, which is thus, as we fynde in Gratian.De con­secrat. distin. 2. can. cō ­perimus. Comperimus au­tem, quòd quidam sumpta tantum corporis sacri portione, à calice sacrati cuoris abstineant. Qui proculdubio (quoniam nescio qua superstitione docentur adstringi) aut integra sa­cramenta percipiant, aut ab integris arceantur: quia diui­sio vnius eiusdemque mysterij, sine grandi sacrilegio non potest peruenire. Which may thus be englished. But we haue founde, that some hauing receiued onely the portion where in is the holy bodye, absteine, from the cuppe of the sacred bloude: who with out doubte (for as much as I knowe not with what su­perstition they be taught to be tyed) either let them receiue the whole Sacramentes, or let them be kepte from the whole: because the diuision of one and the same mystery, can not comme without great sa­criledge.

Here might be sayde to M. Iuell, shewe vs the whole epistle of Gelasius, from whence this fragmēt [Page] is taken, that we maye weigh the circumstance, and the causes why he wrote it, conferring that goeth before, and that foloweth, and we will frame you a reasonable answere. But it is not extant. and therfore your argument in that respecte, is of lesse force. But for auoyding of that, oure aduersaries would hereof conclude, it is to be vnderstanded, that this canon speaketh agaynst the heretikes named Manichaei: who in the tyme of Leo the first, about fourty yeres be­fore Gelasius, went about to spredde their heresie in Rome, and in the parties of Italie. Their hereticall opinion was, that Christ tooke not oure fleshe and bloude, but that he had a phātasticall bodye, and dyed not, ne rose agayne trulye and in dede, but by waye of phantasie. And therefore at the communion, they absteined from the cuppe, and the better to cloke their heresie, came to receiue the Sacrament in the forme of breade with other catholike people. Against whom Leo sayeth thus.Serm. 4. de quadra gesima. Abdicant enim se sacramento salutis nostrae, etc. They dryue thē selues awaye from the Sacrament of oure saluation. And as they denye, that Christ oure lorde was borne in truth of oure fleshe, so they beleue not that he dyed, and rose agayne truly. And for this cause, they condemne the daye of oure saluation and gladnes (that is the sunne­daye) to be their sadde fastinge daye. And where as to cloke theire infidelitie, they dare to be at oure mysteries: they temper them selues so in the com­munion of the Sacramentes, as in the meane tyme they may the more safely kepe them priuye. With vnworthy mowth they receiue Christes bodye, but [Page 49] to drinke the bloude of oure redemption, vtterly they will none of it. Which thing we would aduer­tise your holynes of, that bothe such men maye be manifested by these tokens vnto you, and also that they whose deuilish simulatiō and fayning is fownde, being brought to light, and bewrayed of the fe­lowship of saintes, maye be thrust out of the churche, by priestly auctoritie. Thus farre be Leo his wordes.

Gelasius that succeded fourty yeres after Leo, im­ployed no lesse diligence then he dyd, vtterly to vanquish and abolish that horrible heresie. of whom Platina wryteth, that he banished so many mani­ches, as were fownde at Rome, and there openlye burned their bookes. And because this heresie shuld none elles where take roote and springe, he wrote an epistle to Mai [...]ricus and Ioannes two bis­shops, amongest other thinges warning them of the same. Out of which epistle, this fragment onely is taken, whereby he doth bothe briefly shewe what the Maniches dyd for cloking of their infidelitie, as Leo sayeth: and also in as muche as their opinion was, that Christes bodye had not verye bloude, as being phantasticall onely, and therefore supersti­tiously absteined frō the cuppe of that holy bloude: geueth charge and commaundement, that either for­saking their heresie they receiue the whole Sacra­mentes, to witte, vnder bothe kyndes, or that they be kepte from them wholy.

Here the wordes of Leo afore mentioned, and this canon of Gelasius conferred together, specially the storye of that tyme knowen: it may sone appeare to any

Of the Church Seruice in learned tonges, vvhich the vnlearned people in olde tyme, in sundry places vnderstoode not.
ARTICLE. III.

IF you meane Maister Iuell by the peoples common prayers, such as at that tyme they commonly made to God in priuate deuotion: I thinke, they vttered them in that tonge, which they vnderstoode, and so doo Chri­sten people now for the most parte. and it hath ne­uer ben reproued by any catholike doctour. But if by the common prayers you meane the publike Ser­uice of the churche, whereof the most parte hath ben pronounced by the bishops, priestes, deacōs and other ecclesiasticall ministres, the people to sundry partes of it saying Amen, or otherwise geuing their assent: I graunt, some vnderstoode the language thereof, and some vnderstoode it not, I meane, for the tyme you referre vs vnto, euen of syx hundred yeres after Christes conuersation here in earth. For about nyne hundred yeres past, it is certaine, the people in some countries had their Seruice in an vnknowen tonge, as it shall be proued of our owne countrie of England.

But to speake first of antiquitie, and of the com­passe of your first syx hundred yeres, it is euident by sundry auncient recordes bothe of doctours and of councelles, specially of the councell Laodicene in Phrygia Pacatiana, holden by the bishops of the lesser Asia, about the yere of our lord. 364. that the Greke [Page 51] churches had solemne Seruice in due order and for­me, set forth with exacte distinction of psalmes and lessons, of houres, dayes, feastes and tymes of the yere, of silence and open pronouncing, of geuing the kisse of peace to the bishop, first by the priestes, then by the laye people, of offering the Sacrifice, of the only ministers cōming to the aulter to receiue the com­munion, with diuerse other semely obseruations.

As for the Latine churches, they had their prayers and Seruice also, but in such fixed order, long after the Grekes. For Damasus the Pope first ordeyned, that psalmes shuld be longe in the churche of Rome, alternatim, enterchaungeably, or by course, so as now we sing them in the quyere, and that in the ende of euery psalme, shuld be sayde, Gloria Patri & Filio & Spiritui sancto, sicut erat etc. Which he caused to be done, by counsell of S. Hierome, In rescri­pto Hie­ronymi ad 2. epist. Damasi Papae ad Hierony­mū pres­byterum. that the faith of the 318. bishops of the Nicene councell, might with like felowship be declared in the mowthes of the Latines. To whom Damasus wrote by Bonifacius the priest to Ierusalem, that Hierom would send vnto him psallentiam Graecorum, the maner of synging of the Grekes, so as he had learned the same, of Ale­xander the bishop in the East. In that epistle com­playning of the simplicitie of the Romaine churche, he sayeth, that there was in the Sunnedaye but one epistle of the Apostle, and one chapter of the Gos­pell rehearsed, and that there was no synging with the voice hearde, nor the comelynes of hymnes knowen among them.

About the same tyme, S. Ambrose also tooke order [Page] for the Seruice of his churche of Millane, and made holy hymnes him selfe.Lib. Con­fessionū. In whose tyme (as S. Augu­stine writeth) when Iustina the young Emperour Valentinians mother, for cause of her heresie, where­with she was seduced by the Arianes, persecuted the catholike faith, and the people thereof occupied them selues in deuoute watches, more then before tyme, ready to dye with their bishop in that quarell: it was ordeyned, that hymnes and psalmes shuld be song in the churche of Millane, after the maner of the east parties: that the good folke thereby might haue some comfort and spirituall reliefe, in that lamentable state and continuall sorowes. Thereof the churches of the West, forthwith tooke example, and in eue­ry countrie they folowed the same. In his seconde booke of Retractations,Cap. 11. he sheweth that in his tyme such maner of synging began to be receiued in Aphri­ca. Before this tyme had Hilarius also the bishop of Poiters in Fraunce, made hymnes for that purpose, of which S. Hierom maketh mention.In 2. pro­oemio cō ­mentario­rum epist. ad Galat.

Much might be alleaged for proufe of hauing Seruice in the Greke and in the Latine churches, long before the first syx hundred yeres were expired, which is not denyed. The thing that is denyed by M. Iuell, is this. That for the space of syx hundred yeres after Christ, any Christen people had their Seruice or common prayers, in a tonge they vnder­stoode not. Which they of his syde beare the world in hande, to be a haynouse erroure of the churche, and a wicked deceite of the papistes. And I saye, as I sayde before, that the Seruice was then in a tonge, [Page 52] which some people vnderstoode, and some vnder­stoode not. I meane,Vsage of churche seruice in any vul­gare tōge vvith in 600. yeres after Christ, cā not be proued. the Greke tonge and the Latine tonge. For that it was with in the syx hundred yeres in any other barbarous or vulgare tonge, I neuer reade, neither I thinke M. Iuell, nor any the best lear­ned of his syde, is able to prooue. To be the better vnderstanded, I call all tonges barbarous and vul­gare, besyde the Hebrewe, Greke and Latine.

The gospell and the faith of Christ, was preached and set forth in Syria and Arabia, by Paul, in Egypte by Marke, in Ethiopia by Matthew, in Mesopota­mia, Persia, Media, Bactra, Hyrcania, Parthia and Car­mania, by Thomas, In Armenia the greater, by Bar­thelemew, in Scythia by Androw, and likewise in other countries, by Apostolike men, who were sent by the Apostles and theire nexte successours, as in Fraunce, by Martialis sent by Peter, by Dionysius sent by Clement, by Crescens, asCōstitu­tionū apostolicarū li. 7. c. 46. Clement andLib. de scriptori. ecclesiast. Hie­rome writeth, and by Trophimus S. Paules scholer, and by Nathanael Christes disciple, of whom he at A relate, and this at Bourges and Treueres, preached the gospell, as some recorde. In our countries here of Britaine, by Fugatius, Damianus, and others, sent by Eleutherius the Pope and Martyr, at the request of king Lucius, as Damasus writeth in Pontificali. Tempori­bus Anto­nini Co­modi. an­no do. 182 Other countries, where the Greke and Latine tonge was commonly knowen, I passe ouer of purpose. Now if M. Iuell, or any of our learned aduersaries, or any man lyuing could shewe good euidence and proufe, that the publike Seruice of the churche, was then in the Syriacall or Arabike, in the Egyptian, Ethiopian, [Page] Persiā, Armeniā, Scythian, Frenche or Britaine tonge: then might they iustly clayme prescription against vs in this Article, then might they charge vs with the example of antiquitie, then might they requyre vs to yelde to the maner and auctoritie of the pri­mitiue churche. But that doubteles can not appeare. Which if any could shewe, it would make much for the Seruice to be had in the vulgare tonge.

Wherefore M. Iuell in his sermon, which he vttered in so solemne an audience, and hath set forth in print to the world, sayeth more thē he is able to iu­stifie,Folio. 16. where he speaketh generally thus. Before the people grewe to corruption, (whereby he meaneth the first syx hundred yeres after Christ) all christen men through out the world, made their common prayers, and had the holy communion in their owne common and knowen tonge. This is sone spoken Syr, but it will not by you be so sone prooued. In dede we fynde, that where as holy Ephrem deacon of the churche of Edessa, wrote many thinges in the Syriacall tonge, he was of so worthy same and re­nome,Lib. de scriptori. ecclesiast. that (as S. Hierome witnesseth) his writinges were rehearsed in certaine churches openly, post le­ctionem scripturarū, after the scriptures had ben reade. Whereof it appeareth to Erasmus, that nothing was wont then to be reade in the churches, besyde the writinges of the Apostles, or at least of such men, as were of Apostolike auctoritie. But by this place of S. Hierome, it semeth not, that Ephrems workes were vsed as a parte of the common Seruice: but rather as homelies or exhortations to be reade after the Ser­uice, [Page 53] which consisted in maner wholly of the scrip­tures. And whether they were tourned in to greke or no so sone, it is vncertaine.

Neither S. Hieromes translation of the scriptures in to the Dalmaticall tonge (if any such was by him made at all) proueth, that the Seruice was then in that vulgare tonge. That labour may be thought, to haue serued to an other purpose. But of the translation of the scriptures into vulgare tonges, I shall speake hereafter, when I shall come to that peculiar Article. Verely the handeling of this present and of that, hath most thinges common to bothe. Thus that the people of any countrie had the churche Seruice in their vulgare and common tonge, besyde the Greke and the Latine tonge, we leaue as a matter stowtly affirmed by M. Iuell, but faintly proued, yea nothing at all proued.

Now concerning the two learned tonges, Greke and Latine, and first the Greke. That the Seruice was in the greke tonge, and vsed in the greke chur­che, I graunt. And to shewe what is meant by the Greke churche, the learned doo vnderstand, all the christen people of that countrie, which properly is called Graecia, of Macedonia, Thracia, and of Asia the lesser, and the countries adioyning. The prouinces that were allotted to the Patriarke of Alexandria in Egypte, and to the patriarke of Antiochia in Syria, are of the olde writers called sometyme, by the name of the Orientall or East churche, sometyme, of the Greke churche.

This much by vs bothe confessed M. Iuell and [Page] agreed vpon: I saye, that if I can shewe, that the people of some countries of the Greke churche, which all had their common prayers and Seruice in the Greke tonge, for the more parte vnderstoode not the greke tonge, more then Englishe men now vnderstand the Latine tonge: then I haue proued, that I promysed to proue: that some peoples, I meane whole nations, vnderstoode not their Seruice, for that they had it in an vnknowen tonge.

Now how well I am able to proue this, I referre it to your owne cōsideration. The lesser Asia being a principall parte of the greke churche,All peo­ple of the Greke churche vnder­stoode not the greke ser­uice. had then the Seruice in the greke tonge. But the people of sundry regions and countries of the lesser Asia then vnder­stoode not the greke tonge: Ergo the people of sun­dry regions and countries had then their Seruice in an vnknowen tonge. The first proposition or maior, is confessed as manifest, no learned man will denye it, and if any would, it may easely be proued. The second proposition or minor, maye thus be proued. Strabo who trauailed ouer all the countries of Asia, for perfite knowledge of the same, neare about the tyme of S. Paules peregrination there, who also was borne in the same: in his 14. booke of Geographie writeth, that where as with in that Cherronesus, that is, the streight betwen sea and sea, there were syxten nations by reporte of Ephorus: of them all onely three were grekes, all the rest barbarous. Likewise Plinius in the syxth booke natural. histor. cap. 2. de­clareth, that with in the circuite of that land, were three greke nations onely, Dores, Iones, Eoles, and [Page 54] that the reste were barbarous, amongest whom the people of Lycaonia was one, who in S. Paules tyme spake before Paul and Barnabas,Act. 14. in the Lycaonical tonge.

The scripture it selfe reporteth a diuersitie of lan­guage there, and thereabout, as it appeareth by the second chapter of the Actes. Where the Iewes ga­thered together in Ierusalem for keping of the feast of Pentecoste, wondering at the Apostles for their speaking with so many sundry tonges, emonges other prouinces different in language, they rekon Pontus and Asia, Cappadocia, Phrygia and Pamphy­lia. Which two prouinces are of all attributed vnto the lesser Asia. Which maketh a good argument, that all Asia the lesser had not one onely the greke tōge. and therefore so many of them as were of other language, hauing the Seruice in greke, had it in a tonge they vnderstode not.

They that will seme to serche the cause why that land had so great diuersitie of languages, impute it to the often chaunge of conquestes, for that it was ouercome and possessed of diuerse nations: of which euery one coueted with enlarging their Empyre, to bring into the countries subdued, their lawes, their customes, and their language. Now this being pro­ued by good and sufficient auctoritie, that in Asia, of xvj. nations three onely were Grekes, it foloweth, that the other thirtene hauing their Seruice in greke, had it not in their owne, but in a straunge tonge. For elles if they had all naturally spoken greke, why shuld not they haue ben called grekes? Thus we see it is [Page] no newe thing proceding of a generall corruption in the churche, some peoples to haue the Seruice in an vnknowen tonge.

Here perhappes M. Iuell, or some other for him, replyeth and sayeth, that the people of Asia com­monly besyde their owne proper language, spake the greke tonge also, and alleageth for that purpose S. Hierome, In prooe­mio 2. lib. cōment. epist. ad Galatas. who, sayeth, Galatas, excepto Sermone Grae­co, quo omnis Oriens loquitur, propriam linguam eandem habere, quam Treuiros. That the Galathians, besyde the greke language, which all the Orient or the East speaketh, haue their owne peculiar tonge, the very same, that they of Treueres haue. Lo, sayeth this re­plyer, S. Hierome affirmeth all the Orient to speake the greke tonge. Ergo the Seruice in greke to them was not straunge and vnknowen.

To this I answere S. Hierome meaneth, that some of all countries of the Orient or east, spake greke, as the learned men, gentle men, merchantes, all of libe­rall education, and such other, as had cause to trauaile those countries. To be shorte, it was with out doubte very common, as being their only learned tonge for all sciences, and the tonge that might best serue to trauaile with all from countrie to countrie with in the East, right so as the Latine tonge serueth to the like intentes, for all nations of the West. And he meaneth not that all and singular persons, of what degree or condition so euer they were, all vplandish people, tillers of the grownde, herdmen and women, spake greke. For if it had ben so, then had they not had peculiar and proper tonges. For it is not for [Page 55] their simple headdes (for the most parte) to beare a waie two languages. In that S. Hierome calleth the Galathians tonge propriam linguam, a proper and pe­culiar tonge to that nation, he doth vs to vnderstād, the same to perteine to all in particular, that is, to euery one of that prouince, and the greke, to all in generall, in respecte of other nations there, so as not of necessitie it be vnderstanded of euery one.

S. Augustine speaking of the title written by Pi­late on the crosse, sayeth thus. It was in Hebrew,Tracta. in Ioan. 117. Greke, and Latine, Rex Iudaeorum. For these three tonges were there in preeminence before all other. Hebraea, propter Iudaeos in Dei lege gloriantes, Graeca, propter gentium Sapientes, Latina, propter Romanos multis ac penè omnibus iam tunc gentibus imperantes. The, He­brewe, for the Iewes, that gloried in the lawe of God, the greke, for the wise men of the gentiles, the La­tine, for the Romaines bearing rule at that tyme ouer many, and almost ouer all nations. Now where he sayeth here, that the greke tonge was in preemi­nence, propter gentium Sapientes, for the wise men of the gētiles: he discusseth fully the doubte, that might seme to rise of S. Hieromes saying, and sheweth, that the greke tonge was common, not to all the vulgare people of the whole Orient, but to the wise men onely, and that for the atteyning of learning. And for this it is to be noted, that the scripture reporteth the vulgare tong of the Lycaonians to haue ben vt­tered in hearing of Paul and Barnabas, not by the Magistrates, or other the chiefe, but by the vulgare people. Turbae leuauerunt vocem suam Lycaonicè di­centes, [Page] etc. Act. 2. And so S. Hierome is to be vnder­standed to speake in that place, not of all men of the nations of the East, but rather of a great number, and of some persons of all nations. For elles if all the East had spoken greke, the souldiers that buried Gordia­nus the younger, Emperour, apud Circeium Castrum, at Circey castle, neare to the land of Persie: would not haue written his title of honour vpon his se­pulchre, in greke and latine, in the Persians, Iewes, and the Egyptians tonges, vt ab omnibus legeretur, that it might be read of all,In Gor­dij [...]. as Iulius Capitolinus writeth. Which is an argument, that all the East spake not ne vnderstoode not the greke tonge. As likewise that Epiphanius writeth,Lib. 2. hae­resi. 66. where he sayeth thus. Most of the Persians after the persicall letters, vse also the Syrianes letters. As with vs many nations vse the greke letters, yea where as in euery nation in ma­ner, they haue letters of their owne. And others some much esteme the most profownde tonge of the Sy­rians, and the tonge that is about Palmyra, both the tonge it selfe, and also the letters of the same. Bookes also haue ben written of Manes in the Syrianes tonge. Agayne if all the East had spoken greke, sun­dry the holy fathers would not haue ben so en­uiouse to the common weale of the churche, as to hyde their singular workes from the reading of all, which they wrote in barbarouse and vulgare ton­ges, to the commoditie only of their brethren that vnderstoode the same. Antonius, that wrote seuen notable epistles to diuerse monasteries,Lib. de ecclesiast. script. of apostolike sense and speache, as S. Hierome witnesseth, in the [Page 56] Egyptian tonge. Likewise holy Ephrem of Edessa, Bardesanes of Mesopotamia, who wrote very ex­cellent workes in the Syriacall tonge. Euen so dyd Isaac of Antioche, and Samuel of Edessa priestes, write many goodly workes against the ennemies of the churche, in the same tonge, as Gennadius recordeth.

But what shall we speake of all the East? neither all the lesser Asia, and the countries there adioyning, spake not greke one generation before the cōming of Christ. For if all had spokē greke, Mithridates that renoumed king of Pontus, had not neded to haue learned two and twenty languages of so many na­tions he was king ouer, to make answere to suters, to appoint them orders and lawes, and in open au­dience to speake to them in so many languages with out an interpreter, as Plinie writeth.Natural. hist. lib. 7. cap. 24. Here if these 22. nations of 22. sundry tonges, had also besyde their owne language spoken greke, and vnderstanded the same: Plinie would not haue vttered that word, sine interprete, without an interpreter. And likewise that king had taken vaine labour in learning those ton­ges, where one might haue serued his tourne.

Neare to this kinges dominiō in the shore of the sea Euxinus, in the lāde of Colchis,Li. 6. nat. hist. ca. 5. there stoode a ci­tie named Dioscurias, so much haunted of straungers, that as Plinie writeth by recorde of Timosthenes, it was resorted vnto of three hundred nations of di­stincte languages, and that the Romaines for the better expeditiō of their affaires there, had at lenghth lying in the same, cxxx. interpreters. Now if all the Orient had spoken greke, as S. Hieromes wordes [Page] seme to importe: the Romaines shuld not haue neded to haue maineteyned there to theire great charges, so great a number of interpreters, to be their agentes there. But for proufe that all the Orient spake not greke, what nede we alleage prophane wryters? the knowen place of the Actes, maketh mencion of sun­dry nations there, that had distincte languages, the Parthians, Medians, and Elamites etc. Act. 2.

To cōclude, they that to maineteine their straunge opinion of the vniuersall vnderstanding of the Ser­uice vsed of olde tyme in the East Churche, saye and affirme, that all the Orient spake greke: seme much to diminishe the maiestie, vtilitie, and necessitie of the miraculouse gifte of tonges, which the holy ghost gaue in the primitiue churche, for the better furtherance of the gospell. For if all in those parties had spoken greke, the gifte of tonges had ben in that respecte nedeles. Hytherto of the greke, and of the Seruice in that language.

Now concerning the Latine tonge, which is the learned tonge of the West. That the Latine churche, or the West churche, for so it is called, had the Ser­uice in Latine, I graunt. The chiefe Regions and countries of the Latine churche, with in the forsayd syx hundred yeres, were these. Italie, Aphrike, Illyrike, bothe Pannonies, now called Hungarie and Austria, Gallia, now Fraunce, and Spaine. The coūtries of Ger­manie, Pole, and Swethen, and those north partes, re­ceiued the faith long sithens. The countries of Bri­taine here had receiued the faith in most places, but were dryuen from the open profession of it agayne, [Page 57] by the cruell persecution of Diocletian the Empe­rour, at which persecution, S. Albane with many others, suffered martyrdom.

After that these countries had ben instructed in the faith, as thinges grewe to perfection, they had their Seruice accordingly: no doubte such, as was vsed in the churches, from whence their first Apostles and preachers were sent. And because the first prea­chers of the faith came to these west parties from Rome, directed some from S. Peter, some from Cle­ment, some others afterward from other bishops of that See Apostolike: they planted and set vp in the countries by them conuerted, the Seruice of the churche of Rome, or some other very like, and that in the Latine tonge onely, for ought that can be she­wed to the contrary. Wherein I referre me onely to the first syx hundred yeres. Now that such Seruice was vnderstanded of those peoples, that spake and vnderstoode Latine, no man denyeth. For to some nations that was a natiue and a mother tonge, as the greke was to the Grecians.

M. Iuell alleaging for the hauing of the prayers and Seruice in a vulgare tonge (as for England in the English, for Ireland in the Irishe, for doucheland in the douche tonge, etc) authorities and examples of the churches, where in the tyme of the primitiue churche the greke and Latine tong was the vsuall and common tonge of the people: bringeth nothing for proufe of that, which lyeth in controuersie. Ar­nobius (sayeth he) called the latine tonge,M. Iuelles allegatiō [...] soluted. sermonem Italū. S. Ambrose in Millane, S. Augustine in Aphrike, [Page] S. Gregorie in Rome, preached in Latine, and the people vnderstoode them. What then? no man de­nyeth you this.Hexaeme rō. hom. 4 S. Basile also speaketh of a sownde, which the men, women and children made in their prayers to God, like the sownde of a waue stryking the sea bankes. What can you conclude of this ne­cessaryly M. Iuell? All this may be vnderstanded of the sownding that one worde, Amen, answered at the prayers ende, which is done now by the quyer, and may be done by the people also in the lower parte of the churche. For S. Hierome leadeth vs so to thinke. Who commending the deuotion of the people of Rome,In 2. pro­oemio cō ­ment. ad Galatas. sayeth in like maner. Vbi sic ad si­militudinem coelestis tonitrui, amen reboat, & vacua ido­lorum templa quatiuntur? Where elles are the churches and the sepulchres of Martyrs, with so feruent de­uotion, and with so great companie resorted vnto? (which wordes go before) Where doth Amen geue so lowde a sownde, like the thunderclappe out of the ayer, so as the temples empted of idoles, shake with it, as at Rome?

The people speaketh with the priest, at the my­sticall prayers, sayeth Chrysostome, alleaged by M. Iuell. What then? So was it long before, euen in the Apostles tyme,Cōstitut. apostoli­carū li. 8. cap. 16. as we reade in Clement, and likewise in S. Cyprian, inIn ora­tionibus mystago­gicis. Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus, and many others, so is it now. For he shall fynde in the olde fathers, that to Per omnia secula seculorū (which Chry­sostom speaketh of) to Dominus vobiscum, so light as they make of it, to Sursum corda, and to Gratias aga­mus domino Deo nostro, the people answered, as now [Page 58] also they answere, Amen, & cum Spiritu tuo, hahemus ad dominum, dignum & iustum est.

As for the place he alleageth out of S. Augustine vpon the psalmes, it maketh nothing for his pur­pose. S. Augustines wordes be these, other wise then he reporteth them. Quid hoc sit; intelligere debemus, In Psal 18 in exposi­tione se­cunda. vt humana ratione, non quasi auium voce cantemus. Nam & merulae, & psittaci, & corui, & picae, & huiuscemodi vo­lucres, saepè ab hominibus docentur sonare, quod nesciunt. Hauing prayed to God (sayeth S. August.) that he make vs cleane of our priuie synnes, etc. we ought to vnderstand, what this is, that we maye singe with mannes reason, not with voice, as byrdes doo. For owselles, popiniayes, rauens, and pyes, and such the like byrdes, oftetymes be taughte of men to sownde, they knowe not what. These wordes are to be taken of th'understanding of the sense, not of the tonge which the Seruice is songe in. For the people of Hip­po, where he was bishop, vnderstoode the latine tonge meanely. Which sense can not rightly and safely be atteined of the common people,De eccle­siasticis diuersis capitulis. Constitu­tione 123. Greg. Ha­loādro in­terprete. Nā in ve­teri trans­latione nihil tale habetur. but is bet­ter, and more holesomly taughte by the preaching of the learned bishops and priestes.

The commaundement of Iustinian the Emperour, which M. Iuell alleageth, that bishops and priestes shuld celebrate the holy oblation or Sacrifice, which we call the Masse, not closely, [...] but with vtterāce and sownde of voice, that they might be heard of the people: maketh nothing for the Seruice to be had in the Englishe tong, in the churche of England, or in any other vulgare tonge, in the churche of any [Page] other nation: but requireth onely of the bishops and priestes open pronouncing,Iustinia­nes ordi­naunce truly de­clared. vocall not mentall spea­king, not whispering with the breath onely in the celebration of the holy Sacrifice and other Seruice. Wherein he agreeth with S. Augustine, who in his booke de Magistro,Cap. 1. sayeth, that when we praye, there is no nede of speaking, onlesse perhappes we doo as priestes doo. Who when they praye (in pub­like assemble) vse speaking for cause of signifying their mynde, that is, to shewe, that they praye, not to th'intēt God, but menne maye heare, and with a cer­taine consent through putting in mynde (by sownde of voice) maye be lyfted vp vnto God. This much S. Augustine there. And this is the right meaning of that Constitution. And thus he ordeined for the greke churche onely, and thereto only it is to be referred, for that some thought the Sacrifice shuld be celebrated rather with silence, after the maner of the churche of Rome, specially at the consecration. And as that constitution perteined to the Grekes, and not to the Latines, so was it not fownde in the Latine bookes, vntill Gregorius Haloander of Germanie of late yeres translated the place. And where M. Iuell alleageth this commaundement of Iustinian against the hauing of the Seruice in a learned tonge, vn­knowen to the common people: it is to be noted, how he demeaneth him selfe, not vprightly, but so as euery man may thereby knowe a scholer of Lu­ther, Caluine and Peter Martyr. For whereas by th'allegation of that ordinance, he might seme to bring somewhat, that maketh for the blessed Sacri­fice [Page 59] of the churche, commonly named the Masse, he dissembleth the worde of the sacrifice, which Iusti­nian putteth expressely, [...], id est, di­uinam oblationem, the diuine or holy oblation: and termeth it other wise, in his replyes, by the name of common prayers, and in his Sermon, by the name of the wordes of the ministration, refusing the worde of the churche, no lesse, then he refuseth to be a mem­ber of the churche. Thus through fooysting and coggyng their dye, and other false playe, these newe perilouse teachers deceiue many poore soules, and robbe them of the suer simplicitie of their faith.

And where was this commaundement geuen? In Constantinople the chiefe citie of Grece, where the greke tonge was commonly knowen. That Empe­rour had dominion ouer some nations, that vnder­stoode not the greke commonly. Yet no man can tell of any constitution, that euer he made for Seruice there to be had in their vulgare and bar­barous tonge. So many nations hauing ben con­uerted to the faith, the common people whereof vnderstoode neither greke nor latine: if the hauing of the Seruice in their vulgare tonge, had bē thought necessary to their saluation: the fathers that stickte not to bestowe their bloude for their flockes, would not haue spared that small paine and trauaile, to put their Seruice in vulgare tonges. If it had ben neces­sary, it had ben done: if it had ben done, it had ben mentioned, by one or other.Psal. 104. Lib. 1 cō ­tra haeres. haeresi 39.

It appeareth by Arnobius vpon the Psalmes, by Epiphanius writing against heresies, and by S. Au­gustine [Page] in his bookes De Doctrina Christiana, that by accompte of th'antiquitie, there were 72. tonges in the worlde.In Tus­cul. q. Cicero sayeth that they be in number in­finite. Of them all, neither M. Iuell, nor any one of his syde, is able to shewe, that the publike Seruice of the churche in any nation, was euer for the space of syx hundred yeres after Christ, in any other, then in greke and latine.

For further answere to the auctoritie of Iustinianes ordinance, we holde well with it. Good men thinke it meete, the Seruice be vttered now also, with a di­stincte and audible voice, that all sortes of people, specially so many as vnderstand it, may the more be stirred to deuocion, and thereby the rather be mo­ued to saye Amen, and geue their assent to it, through their obedience and credite, they beare to the chur­che, assuring them selues, the same to be good and helthfulll, and to the glory of God. And for that purpose, we haue commonly sene the priest, when he spedde him to saye his seruice, to ring the Sawnce bell, and speake out a lowde, Pater noster. By which token the people were commaunded silence, reue­rence, and deuotion.

Now to saye somewhat touching the common prayers or Seruice of the curches of Aphrica, where S, Augustine preached in Latine, as you saye, and I denye not, and thereof you seme to cōclude, that the common people of that countrie vnderstoode and spake latine, as their vulgare tonge. That the Aphri­cane churches had their Seruice in Latine, it is eui­dent by sundry places of S. Augustine, in his exposi­tion [Page 60] of the Psalmes, in his bookes De Doctrina Chri­stiana, and in his sermons, and most plainely in an epistle that he wrote to S. Hierome, in which he sheweth, that the people of a citie in Aphrica was greatly moued and offended with their bishop, for that in reciting the scriptures for parte of the serui­ce to them, he read out of the fourth chapter of Io­nas the Prophete, not cucurbita, after the olde texte, which they had ben accustomed vnto, but hedera, af­ter the newe translation of S. Hierome.All peo­ple of the latine churche vnder­stoode not the latine Ser­uice. Lib. 3.2. belli pu­nici. Now as I graunt, that some vnderstoode it, so I haue cause to doubte, whether some others vnderstoode it, or no. Nay rather I haue great probabilitie to tkinke, they vnderstoode it not. For the bewraying of Han­nibals Ambassadoures to the Romaines, by their Pu­nicall language, whereof Titus Liuius writeth: and likewise the cōference betwixte Sylla the noble man of Rome, and Bocchus kinge of Numidia, had by meane of interpreters adhibited of bothe parties, as Saluste recordeth in bello Iugurthino, declareth, that the tonge of Aphrica was the punicall tonge before the Ro­maines conqueste. Now the same people remaining there vntill S. Augustines tyme, what shuld moue vs to iudge, that they forgate their owne natiue and mother tonge, and learned a newe the latine tonge? I confesse that many vnderstoode and spake latine, by reason of the Romaines common resorte thy­ther, of their lawes there executed, of their garnisons there abyding, and specially of the great multitude of latine people thyther sent to inhabite, deductis co­lonijs, by August the Emperour first, then by Adria­nus, [Page] and afterward by Comodus, who would haue had the great citie Carthago newly reedified, to be cal­led after his owne name, Alexandria Comodiana, as Lampridius writeth. These Romaine colonies, that is to witte, multitudes of people sent to inhabite the countrie, placed them selues about the sea costes, in the chiefe cities, in Carthago, Vtica, Hippo, Leptis, etc. and thereabout. And by this meanes the Romaine or Latine speache spred abroade there, and became to be very commō, as that which remained still among the inhabitantes, that were of the Romaine kynde, and was learned by long vse and custome of others dwelling amōgest them, specially in the cities, where the Romaines bare the swea and gouernement. For these consyderations, I thinke the Latine tonge was there very common. But that it was common to the inwarde parties of the countrie also, and to the vplā ­dishe people, amongest whom the olde accustomed language is longest kepte, as experience teacheth: it is not likely. For though the nobilitie and cities chaunge their language, to be the more in estimation, yet the common and base people of the countrie, fall not so sone to a chaunge. In this realme of England after William Conqueroures tyme, by occasion of great resortes of Frenchemē hyther, and of our coun­trie men in to Fraunce, also of the Frenche lawes, and speciall fauour by the princes borne, and prefer­mentes bestowed vpon those that spake Frenche: the most parte of the nobilitie, lawyeres, merchantes, ca­pitaines, souldiers and welthy folke, had skill in the vnderstāding and speaking of the Frenche tonge, but [Page 61] yet the common and vplandish people spake litle or nought at all. Whereof grewe this prouerbe in Eng­land of olde tyme, lacke would be a gentilman, but lacke can no frenche. The like may be thought of the Latine tonge of Aphrica.

What shall we thinke of the vplandish people there, when as Septimius Seuerus the Emperour, yea after the Apostles tyme, had not very good skill in the Latine tonge, but in the punicall tonge, and that being borne at Leptis? of whom Aurelius Victor sayeth thus in Epitome. Latinis literis sufficienter instru­ctus, Punica lingua promptior, quippe genitus apud Leptim Prouinciae Aphricae. Seuerus was learned in the latine lettres sufficiently, but in the punicall tonge he was redyer, as being borne at Leptis, within the prouince of Aphrica. Here the Latine tonge is attributed to instruction and teaching, and the punicall tonge to nature. Aelius Spartianus writing the lyfe of this Seue­rus to Diocletian, sheweth, that when his syster a woman of Leptis, came to Rome to him, vix latinè loquens, her brother the Emperoure was a shamed of her, and blushed at her, for that she could scantly speake Latine, and therefore cōmaunded her a waie home againe to her countrie, for these be the very wordes of Spartianus. Now if such noble personages lackte the latine speache in the chiefe parte of Aphri­ca, it is sone vnderstanded, what is to be demed of the common and vulgare people abroade in the countrie. Let vs come downe lowgher euen to S. Hieromes tyme. S. Hierome writing to a noble young Romaine virgine called [Page] Demetrias, being in Aphrica, exhorting her to kepe her selfe in that holy state of virginitie, sayeth thus. Vrbs tua quondam orbis caput, etc. Thy citie once the head of the world, is becomme the sepulchre of the Romaine people, and wilt thou take a banished hus­band, thy selfe beyng a banished woman, in the shore of Libya? what woman shalt thou haue there, to bring thee too and fro? Stridor Punicae linguae procacia tibi fescennina cantabit. The iarryng punical tonge shall sing thee bawdy songes at thy weddyng. Lo, in S. Hieromes tyme they of Aphrica spake the puni­call tonge, and that by the sea syde, where the Ro­maines of long tyme had made their abode. Of this maye be gathered, that the latine speache was not in the farther parties within the countrie, very cōmon.

S. Augustine in sundry places of his workes she­weth, that the people of Aphrica called punikes, spake the punicall tonge,De verbis domini secūdū Luc. Serm. 35. acknowledging a likenes and coosynage, as it were, to be betwen that and the Hebrew tonge. But most euident witnes for the pu­nicall tonge, is to be fownde in his 44. epistle ad Ma­ximum Madaurensem. In which he answereth him so­berly, for his scoffing and iesting at certaine punicall wordes, in derogation of the Christianes. After won­dering that he being an Aphricane borne, and wri­ting to Aphricanes, shuld fynde faulte with the pu­nicall names and wordes, and after commendation of the tonge, for that many thinges haue right wi­sely ben commended to memorie by great learned men in bookes of the punicall language: at length concluded against him thus. Poeniteat te certè ibi na­tum, [Page 62] vbi huiusmodi linguae cunabula recalent. In good footh thou mayest be sorye in thy heart, that thou were borne there, where the cradelles of such a tonge, be warme agayne. By which wordes he se­meth to charge him with an vnnaturall griefe and repenting, that he was borne in that countrie, where they speake punike, er they creape out of their cra­delles. Whereby it appeareth, the mother tonge of those parties of Aphrica which he speaketh of, to be the punicall, and not the latine. To conclude, if they had all spokē latine, and not some the punicall tonge, S. Augustine would neuer haue wrytten,Lib. 1. de peccatorū meritis et remissio­ne. ca. 24. Punici Chri­stiani baptismum, salutem, Eucharistiam, vitam vocant: That those Christianes which speake the punicall tonge, call baptisme in their language, helth or Sal­uation, and the Eucharist, lyfe. Wherefore we see that there were Latine christianes, and punicall christia­nes in Aphrica, of whom all vnderstoode not the latine seruice.

And whereas S. Augustine, as you alleage him, without shewing the place (as your maner is, where­by you may easely deceiue the reader) hath these wordes in his sermons to the common people di­uerse tymes: Nunc loquar latinè, vt omnes intelligatis, now will I speake latine, that you maye all vnder­stand me: of that saying, if any such be, may be ga­thered, that sometymes he spake in the punicall tonge to the punicall christianes, not vnderstanding the latine: but now among the Latine Aphricanes, that were of the Romaine kynde, and vnderstoode not the punike, he would speake latine, that all such [Page] shuld vnderstand him.

Who so desyreth further to be persuaded, that the people of Aphrica called Poeni, spake and vn­derstoode theire owne punicall tonge, and not the latine tonge, as likewise the people of Spaigne, named Iberi, spake that language which was proper to them: let him reade Titus Liuius de bello Macedonico. For there he recordeth, that when those of Aphrica, or of Spaigne and the Romaines came together for parle and talke: they vsed an interpreter.

And Vlpianus the Lawier a great officer about Alexander Seuerus the Emperour, at the begynning of Christen Religiō,In l fidei­commissa ff. d. leg. 3. writeth, that fidei commissa maye be lefte in all vulgare tonges. and putteth for exam­ples, the Punicall and the Frenche, or rather Galli­call tonge.

This much or more might here be sayde of the language of the people of Gallia, now called Fraunce; which thē was barbarouse and vulgare, and not one­ly latine, and yet had they of that nation their Ser­uice then in Latine: as all the West churche had. That the common language of the people there was vulgare, the vse of the latine seruing for the lear­ned, as we must nedes iudge: we haue first, the auto­ritie of Titus Liuius. Ab vrbe condita. lib. 7. Who writeth, that a Galloes, or as now we saye, a French man of a notable stature, prouoked a Romaine to fight with him man for man, making his chalenge by an Interpreter. Which had not ben done, in case the latine tonge had ben common to that nation: Nexte, the place of Vlpianus before mentioned: Then, the recorde of Aelius Lam­pridius, [Page 63] who writeth, that a woman of the order of the Druides,In vita Alexandri Mamaeae. cryed out a lowde to Alexander Seuerus Mammaea her sonne the Emperour, as he marched foreward on a daye with his armie, gallico sermone, in the gallicall tonge, these wordes, boding his death. which right so shortly after folowed: Vadas, nec vi­ctoriam speres, ne militi tuo credas. Go thy waye, and looke not for the victorie, truste not thy souldier. Lastly, the witnes of S. Hierom, who hauing trauailed ouer that region, and therefore being skilful of the whole state thereof;In prooe­mio 2. cō ­ment. ad Galatas. acknowlegeth the people of Tre­ueres and of that territorie, to haue a peculiar lan­guage, diuerse from latine and greke.

If all that I haue broughte here touching this matter, be well weighed, it will seme probable, I doubte not, that all sortes of people in Aphrica, vn­derstoode not the Seruice, which they had in the la­tine tonge. And no lesse maye be thought of Gallia and Spaigne. And so farre it is proued against M. Iuelles stowte assertion, that within his syx hundred yeres after Christ, some Christen people had their common prayers and Seruice, in a tonge they vn­derstoode not.

And thus all his allegations broughte for proufe of his saying in this behalfe, be answered, the place of S. Paul to the Corinthians excepted. Which er I answer, I will according to my promise proue,The anti­quitie of the latine Seruice in the chur­ch of England. that about nyne hūdred yeres past, yea a thousand also, and therefore some deale within his syx hundred yeres, euen in S. Gregories tyme, the Seruice was in an vn­knowen tonge in this lande of England, then called [Page] Britaine, and begonne to be called England, at least for so much, as sithens, and at these dayes, is called by the name of England.

Beda an English man, that wrote the ecclesiasticall storye of the English nation, in the yere of our lord 731. and of their comming in to Britaine, about 285. recordeth, that S. Augustine and his companie, who were sent hyther to conuert the English people to the faith of Christ, which the Britons here had pro­fessed long before hauing a safe conducte graunted the by king Ethelbert, to preache the gospell, where they would: sayde and song their seruice in a chur­che buylded of olde tyme in the honour of S. Mar­tine, adioyning on the east syde of the head citie of Kent, whiles the Romaines dwelt in Britaine. The wordes of Beda be these.Lib. 1. hist. ecclesiast. cap 26. In hac (ecclesia) conuenire pri­mo, psallere, orare, missas facere, praedicare & baptizare coeperunt. In this churche they beganne first to as­semble them selues together, to synge, to praye, to saye Masse, to preache and to baptise. It is plaine, that this was the Seruice. And no doubte they resorted to it, who beleued and were of them baptized, won­dering (as Bede sayeth) at the simplicitie of their in­nocent lyfe, and swetnes of their heauenly doctrine. In English it was not, for they had no skille of that tonge, as Bedo sheweth, lib. 1. cap. 23. And therefore er they entred the land, they tooke with them by cō ­maundemēt of S. Gregorie,Lib. 1. c. 25. interpreters out of fraunce. Which interpreters serued for open preaching and priuate instruction, exhortation and teaching. In syn­ging and saying the Seruice, there was no vse of thē. [Page 64] Whereas S. Augustine, after that the English nation had receiued the faith, and he had ben made Arche­bishop ouer them, hauing fownde, the faith being one, diuersitie of customes in diuerse churches, one maner of Masses in the holy Romaine churche, an other in that of Fraunce: for this and certaine other purposes, sent two of his clergie, Laurence and Peter to Rome, to be aduertised amongest other thinges, what order, maner and custome of Masses it liked S. Gregorie, the churches of the English nation shuld haue: hereunto that holy father answered, that what he espyed either in the Romaine or French, or any other churche, that might be most acceptable to al­mighty god, he shuld choose out, and gather toge­ther, and commēde the same to the churche of Eng­land, there to be lefte in custome to continewe. lib. 1. cap. 27. If it had then ben thought necessary, the Ser­uice of the Masse to be in English, or if it had ben translated in to the English tonge: it is not to be thought, that Bede, who declareth all thinges concer­ning matters of Religion so diligently, specially pro­fessing to write an ecclesiasticall storye, would haue passed ouer that in silence. And if the Masse had ben vsed in the English tonge, the monumentes and bookes so much multiplied among the churches, would haue remained in some place or other. And doubteles some mention would haue ben made of the tyme and causes of the leauing such kynde of Seruice, and of begynning the newe latine Seruice. As certaine of S. Gregories workes tourned in to English by Bede him selfe, haue ben kepte, so as they [Page] remaine to this daye. S. Gregorie him selfe is a witnes of right good auctoritie vnto vs, that this land of England, which he calleth Britaine, in his tyme, that is almost a thousand yeres past: had the cōmon prayers and Seruice in an vnknowen tonge, without doubte in Latine, much in like sorte, as we haue of olde tyme had, till now. His wordes be these. Ecce (omnipotens dominus) penè cunctarum iam gentium corda penetrauit, Expositionis in Iob li. 27. ca. 6 ecce in vna fide Orientis limitem Occi­dentisque coniunxit. Ecce lingua Britanniae, quae nil aliud nouerat, quàm Barbarum frendere, iam dudum in diuinis laudibus Hebraeum coepit Halleluia resonare. Beholde our lord almighty hath now pearced the hartes al­most of all nations. Beholde he hath ioyned the bor­ders of the East and the West in one faith together. Beholde the tonge of Britaine, that could nothing el­les but gnashe barbarously, hath begonne now of late in diuine seruice to sownde the Hebrewe Hal­leluia.

Bede in the ende of his second booke, sheweth, that one Iames a deacon of the churche of Yorke, a very cunning man in songe, sone after the faith had ben spred abroade here, as the number of beleuers grewe, began to be a maister or teacher of synging in the churche, after the maner of the Romaines. The like he writeth of one Eddi surnamed Stepha­nus, that taught the people of Northumberland to sing the Seruice after the Romaine maner, and of Putta a holy man, bishop of Rochester, commending him much for his great skille of synging in the chur­che, after the vse and maner of the Romaines, which [Page 65] he had learned of the disciples of S. Gregorie.

These be testimonies playne and euident ynough, that at the begynning the churches of England had their diuine Seruice in Latine, and not in English. One place more I will recite out of Bede, most ma­nifest of all other, for proufe hereof. In the tyme of Agatho the Pope, there was a reuerent man called Iohn, Archicantor, that is chiefe chaunter or synger of S. Peters churche at Rome, and Abbot of the mo­nasterie of S. Martin there. Benedicte an abbot of Britaine, hauīg buylded a monasterie at the mowth of the Riuer Murus, (Bede so calleth it) sued to the Pope for cōfirmations, liberties, fraunchesies, priuileges, etc. as in such case hath ben accustomed. Among other thinges, he obteined this cunning Chaunter Iohn, to come with him into Britaine, to teache songe.

Because Bedes ecclesiasticall storye is not very cō ­mon, I haue thought good, here to recite his owne wordes, thus englished. This Abbot Benedicte tooke with him the foresayd Iohn, to bring him in to Bri­taine, that he shuld teache in his monastery, the course of seruice for the whole yere, so as it was done at S. Peters in Rome. Iohn dyd as he had commaun­dement of the Pope, both in teaching the synging men of the sayde monastery the order and rite of synging and reading with vtterance of their voice, and also of writing and prycking those thinges, that the compasse of the whole yere requyred, in the ce­lebration and keping of the holy dayes. Which be kepte in the same monasterie, till this daye, and be copied out of many rownde about on euery coste. [Page] Neither dyd that Iohn teache the brethren of that monastery onely, but also many other made all the meanes they could, to gete him to other places, where they might haue him to teache. This farre Bede. I trowe no man will thinke, that this Romaine taught and wrote the order and maner of synging and pronouncing the Seruice of the churches of this lande, in the English tonge.

If it had ben demed of the learned and godly go­uernours of Christen people then a necessary pointe to saluation, to haue had the seruice in the english: no mā had ben so apte and fitte to haue trāslated it, as he, who in those dayes had by speciall grace of God, a singular gifte to make songes and sonets in english meter, to serue religion and deuotion. His name was Cednom. Cednom. of whom Bede writeth merueilouse thinges. How he made diuerse songes conteining matter of the holy scripture, with such exceding swetenes, and with such a grace, as many feeling their hartes com­puncte and prickte with hearing and reading of thē, withdrewe them selues from the loue of the world, and were enkēdled with the desyer of the heauenly lyfe. Many sayeth Bede of th'english nation attemp­ted after him to make religiouse and godly poetries, but none could doo comparably to him. For he was not (sayeth he alluding to S. Paules wordes) taught of men,Galat. 1. neither by man, that arte of making godly son­ges: but receiued from God that gifte freely. And therfore he could make no wanton, tryfling, or vaine ditties, but onely such, as perteined to godly Reli­gion, and might seme to procede of a head guyded [Page 66] by the holy ghost. lib. 4. cap. 24. This diuine poet Cednom, though he made many and sundry holy workes, hauing their whole argument out of holy scripture, as Bede reporteth: yet neuer made he any piece of the Seruice to be vsed in the churche. Thus the faith hath continewed in this land among the English people, from the 14. yere of the reigne of Mauritius the Emperour, almost these thousand yeres,The first entree of the Eng­lish Ser­uice. and vntill the late king Edwardes tyme, the English Seruice was neuer heard of, at least waye neuer in the churche of England by publike auctoritie receiued and vsed.

Now touching the scripture by M. Iuell, and by all them of that syde alleaged, for the Seruice to be had in the vulgare tonge. In the 14. chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians, S. Paul treateth of the vse of tonges, so as it was in the primitiue churche a speciall gifte. As the faithfull folke came together to pray and to heare gods worde, some one man suddeinly stoode vp, and spake in the congregation with tonges of many nations, Spiritu insusurrante, as Chrysostom sayeth, that is, by inspiration or prom­pting of the spirite, so, as neither others that were pre­sent, neither him selfe, after the opinion of Chryso­stome, vnderstoode, what he sayd: That gifte the Apostle dyd not forbyd. For that euery gifte of God is good, and nothing by him done in vaine: but de­horted the Corinthians frō the vaine and ambitiouse vse of it, and therefore dyd much extenuate the same, and preferred prophecying, that is the gifte to in­terprete and expounde scriptures, farre before it. It [Page] was not in the churche, but in the Apostles tyme, or a very shorte while after them, and that all toge­ther by miracle, the holy ghost being the worker of it.

The place of S. Paul to the Corinthians maketh not for the Serui­ce in the English tonge.As concernig the order of the common prayers and publike Seruice, in such sorte as we haue now, and that age had not: S. Paul mentioneth nothing, neither speaheth one word in that whole chapter, but of the vse of the miraculouse gifte, as is sayde before. And therefore his sayinges out of that chapter, be not fittely alleaged of M. Iuell and the reste of our aduersaries, against the maner of prayers and Seruice of the churche now receiued and of long tyme vsed, which in the West is vttered in the latine tonge, not by waye of miracle or peculiar gifte, but accor­ding to the institution and ordināce of the churche. Profectò enim coelū Ecclesia tū fuit. In 1. Cor. 14. ho. 37. In very dede sayeth Chrysostome, the churche then was a heauen, when as the holy ghost administred all thinges, modera­ted all the headdes of the churche, caughte eche one with his inspiration. As for now, we kepe but the steppes onely of those thinges. We speake two or three of vs, and that a sundre, and one holding his peace, an other begynneth. But these be but signes onely and memorials of thinges. And so when we haue begonne, (he meaneth Dominus vobiscum) & cum spiritu tuo, the people answereth: meaning to sig­nifie thereby, that so in olde tyme they spake, not of their owne wisedome, but of the instincte of the spirite of God. This much Chrysostome of the hea­uēly maner of the primitiue churche in the Apostles [Page 67] tyme. Now if in these dayes the maner were like, if it pleased the holy ghost to powre vpon vs the like abundance of grace, as to doo all thinges for vs, to rule the headdes of all faithfull people, to carrie eche one of vs with his diuine inspiratiō, and whē we came to churche together for cōforte and edifying, to geue in to our hartes and put in to our mowthes by daily miracle, what we shuld praye, and what we shuld preache, and how we shuld hādle the scriptures: In this case no catholike christen man would allowe the vn­fruitefull speaking with straunge and vnknowen tonges without interpretation, to the lette and hin­derance of gods word to be declared, and to the keping of the people onely in gasing and wonde­ring, from saying Amen, and geuing their assent to the godly blessing and thankes geuing. But the or­der of the churche now is farre otherwise. We haue not those miraculouse giftes, and right well maye we doo with out them. For the speaking with tonges, was in stede of a signe or wonder, not to them that beleued, but to the vnbeleuers. And signes be for the vnfaithfull, the faithfull haue no neede of them. In churches, I meane where aunciēt order is kepte, whi­les the Seruice is song or sayd, the ministers doo not speake with tonges, or with a tonge, in such sorte as S. Paul vnderstoode: but they doo reade and rehearse thinges set forth and appointed to them. S. Paul re­buketh them, who speaking with tonges, letted the preachers, so as the people present might not be edi­fyed. The Latine Seruice is not so done in the chur­che, as the exposition of the scriptures be thereby [Page] excluded. In the Apostles tyme, they came to chur­che, to th'intent they might profitably exercise the giftes God gaue them, and by the same, specially by the gifte of prophecying, edifie one an other, and teache one an other. Now adayes they come not to churche together one to teache an other, and to ex­pounde the scriptures in common: but to praye, and to heare the opening of Gods word, not one of an other with out order, but of some one, to witte, the bishop, priest, curate, or other spirituall gouernour and teacher. And for as much as all the people can not heare the priestes prayers at th'aulter (which hath from the Apostles tyme hytherto euer ben a place to celebrate the holy oblation at) tourning him selfe for the most parte to the East, according to Apostolike tradition, in what tonge so euer they be vttered, for distance of the place they remaine in: it is no inconuenience, such admitted in to the quyer, as haue better vnderstanding of that is sayd or song: that the reste remaine in semely wise in the neather parte of the churche, and there make their humble prayers to God, by them selues in silence, in that language, they best vnderstand, conforming them sel­ues to the priestes blessing and thankes geuing through faith and obedience with their brethren in the quyer, and geuing assent to the same, vnderstan­ding some good parte of that is done, as declared by often preaching, and by holy outward ceremonies, perceiueable to the senses of the simplest.

Fol. 15.Where as you M. Iuell alleage S. Paul for your purpose, and make him to saye thus, otherwise then [Page 68] he wrote:1. Cor. 14. If thou make thy prayer in the congregation with thy Spirite or noise of straunge wordes, how shall the vnlearned man thereunto saye amen? for he knoweth not what thou sayest: you bombaste this texte with your owne counterfeit stuffing. The trāslatiō auctorised by king Edward and his counsell, is truer, and foloweth the greke nearer, which hath thus. When thou bles­sest with the spirite, how shall he that occupieth the rome of the vnlearned, saye amen at thy geuyng of thankes, seing he vndestandeth not, what thou sayest? Here the Apostle saint Paul speaketh of blessing or thankes geuing with the spirite, which spirite what it is, it is not easy to declare, after the iudgement of your owne patriarke Iohn Caluine. Saint Am­brose taketh it for the spirite we haue receiued in baptisme, that doth incline and moue vs to prayer. S. Thomas for the holy ghoste geuen to vs, for rea­son, and for the power imaginatiue. Erasmus for the voice it selfe. Isidorus Clarius for the power of pro­nouncing or vtterance. some for the breath that pas­seth the throte, some for the intention, S. Augustine very subtily, pro apprehensione quae ideas concipit & signa rerum. Caluine in his Institutions, De Oratione cap. 15. for the sownde of the mowth, that is caused of the breath of a mannes throte and rebownding of the ayer. Chrysostom for the spirituall gifte, or the gifte of the holy ghost to speake with tonges. Which Caluine him selfe sytting in iudgement as it were vpon this doubtefull matter, alloweth best, and condemneth the mynde of all others, and also his owne, though vnwares, as it semeth and so he would [Page] condemne your noyse of straunge wordes likewise, if he heard it. This texte being so doubtefull of it selfe in sense, so put out of tune by your noyse of straunge wordes, wherewith you descant vpon the worde Spirite, so violently applyed by your newe fangled exposition, maketh litle to the condemna­tion of the latine Seruice in the latine churche: spe­cially seing that S. Paul meaneth by that miraculouse speaking with tonges, vsed or rather abused among the Corinthians, a farre different maner of speaking from that speaking, whereby the priest vttereth the common Seruice.

The priest (I graunt) saying his Seruice to his pa­rish, speaketh with a tonge, but such maner of spea­king is not that, which S. Paul meant. For the priest vnderstandeth it for the better parte, if he be lear­ned, and the people be not vtterly ignorant, because of often preaching, long custome, solemne feastes and sundry ceremonies. And therefore your argument gathered out of that texte, cōcludeth nothing against hauing the Seruice in the learned latine tonge not perfitely vnderstanded of the vnlearned people.

Verely if you admitte the exacte iudgement of S. Augustine concerning this place of S. Paul,vide Aug. lib. 12. de Genesi ad literā. c. 7. 8. & 9. to. 3 then must you seeke for other scriptures and proufes of your English Seruice. For as he discusseth this point learnedly, by the tonge S. Paul meaneth not the La­tine, Greke, or Hebrewe amōg the vnlearned people, or any other alien or straunge tonge: but onely, and that by waye of metaphore, any maner of vtterāce, whereby the signes of thinges are pronounced, before [Page 69] they be vnderstanded. And by the Spirite, he vnder­standeth not a noyse of straunge wordes, after your straunge interpretation, but, as it is here in a certaine proper and peculiar maner taken, a power of the soule inferiour to the mynde, which conceiueth the similitudes of thinges, and vnderstandeth them not. And thinges so vttered, be vttered with the tonge and spirite, whether it be in Englishe or Latine, or any other language.

And Syr, although the people vnderstand not in most exacte wise, what the priest sayeth in the La­tine seruice, yet haue they commoditie and profite therby, so farre as it pleaseth God to accepte the common prayer of the churche, pronounced by the priest for them.

But S. Paul (saye they) requyreth that the people geue assent, and cōforme them selues vnto the priest, by answering Amen to his prayer made in the con­gregation. Verely in the Primitiue churche this was necessary, when the faith was a learning. And there­fore the prayers were made then in a cōmon tonge knowen to the people, for cause of their further in­struction who being of late conuerted to the faith, and of paynimes made christians, had nede in all thinges to be taught. But after that the faithfull peo­ple was multiplied and increaced in great numbers, and had ben so well instructed in all pointes of Re­ligion, as by their owne accorde they conformed them selues to the ministers at the cōmon prayers: in the Latine churche the Seruice was set out in La­tine, and it was thought sufficiēt, parte of the people [Page] in the quyer, to answere for the whole people. And this hath ben estemed for a more expedite and con­uenient order, then if it were in the vulgare tonge of euery nation.

I graunt they can not saye Amen to the blessing or thankes-geuing of the priest, so well as if they vnderstoode the Latine tōge perfitely. Yet they geue assent to it, and ratifie it in their hartes, and doo con­forme them selues vnto the priest, though not in spe­ciall, yet in generall: that is to witte, though not in euery particular sentence of praise and thankes-ge­uing, or in euery seuerall petition, yet in the whole. For if they come to churche with a right and good intent, as the simple doo, no lesse then the learned: their desyre is to render vnto god glorie, praise and honour, and to thanke him for benefites receiued, and with all, to obteine of him thinges behofull for them in this life, and in the life to come. And with­out doubte this godly affection of their myndes, is so acceptable to God, as no vnderstanding of wordes may be compared with it. This requysite assent and conforming of them selues to the priest, they declare by sundry outward tokens and gestures: as by stan­ding vp at the gospell and at the preface of the Masse, by bowing them selues downe and adoring at the Sacrament, by kneeling at other tymes, as when par­don and mercie is humbly asked, and by other like signes of deuotion, in other partes of the Seruice.

And whereas S. Paul semeth to disallowe praying with tonges in the common assemble, because of want of edifying, and to esteme the vtterance of fyue [Page 70] wordes or sentences with vnderstāding of his mea­ning, that the reste might be instructed thereby, more then ten thousand wordes in a straunge and vnknowen tonge: all this is to be referred to the state of that tyme, which was much vnlike the state of the churche we be now in. The tōge of the prayers which S. Paul speaketh of, was vtterly straunge and vnknowen, and serued for a signe to the vnbeleuers. The latine tonge in the latine churche is not all to­gether straunge and vnknowē. For besyde the priest, in most places some of the reste haue vnderstanding of it, more or lesse, and now we haue no nede of any such signe. They needed instruction: we be not ignorant of the chiefe pointes of Religiō. They were to be taught in all thinges: we come not to churche specially and chiefly to be thaught at the Seruice, but to praye, and to be taught by preaching. Their prayer was not vaileable for lacke of faith, and there­fore was it to be made in the vulgare tonge, for in­creace of faith. Our faith will stand vs in better stede, if we geue our selues to deuout prayer. They for lacke of faith, had nede of interpretation, bothe in prayers, and also in preaching, and all other spirituall exercises. We hauing sufficient instruction in the ne­cessary rudimentes of our faith, for the reste, haue more nede by earnest and feruent prayer, to make sute vnto God, for an vpright pure and holy lyfe, then to spende much tyme in hearing for know­ledge. Concerning which thing, Chrysostome hath this saying. Profectò si orare cum diligentia insuescas, Contrà Anomaeo [...] homil. 3. nihil est quòd doctrinam tui conserui desideres, quum ipse [Page] Deus sine vllo interprete mentem abundè luce asficiat. Verely if thou vse to praye diligently, there is no­thing, why thou shuldest desyre teaching of thy fe­lowe seruant, seing God him selfe doth abundantly lighten thy mynde without any interpreter.

I would not here that any man shuld laye to my charge the defence of ignorance, as though I enuyed the people any godly knowledge. I wish them to haue all heauenly knowledge, and to be ignorant of nothing necessary to their Saluation. Yea euen with my very harte I wish with Moses.Num. 11. Quis tribunt vt omnis populus prophetet, & det dominus illis spiritum suum! O that all the people could prophecie, and were learned in gods holy worde, and that our lord would geue them his spirite! But all the common people to vnderstand the priest at the Seruice, I thinke wise ad godly men iudge it not a thing so necessary, as for the which the auncient order of the churche with no litle offence, publike and vniuersall auctori­tie not consulted, shuld be condemned, broken, and quite abrogated by priuate aduise of a fewe.

If defaulte were in this befalse iustly fownde, it is knowen, to whom the redresse perteineth. Concer­ning the state of Religion, in all ages the generall Councell representing the vniuersall churche, for all sores hath ordeined holesom remedies. Where they be not heard,Luc. 10. of whom Christ sayde, He that heareth you, heareth me, and he that dispiseth you, dispiseth me: it is to be feared, that cōcerning the seruice, the newe lear­ned boldnes is not so acceptable to God, as the olde simple humilitie. It were good the people hauing [Page 71] humble and reuerent hartes, vnderstoode the Serui­ce, I denye not. Yet all standeth not in vnderstāding. S. Augustine sayeth notably,Cōtrà Manichaeos. epist. Fun­damenti. cap. 4. turbā non intelligendi vi­uacitas, sed credendi simplicitas, tutissimam facit. That as for the cōmon people, it is not the quiknesse of vn­derstanding, but the simplicitie of beleuing, that ma­keth them safest of all. And in an other place,Ad Eno­diū epist. 102. Si pro­pter eos solos Christus mortuus est, qui certa intelligentia possunt ista discernere, penè frustrà in Ecclesia laboramus. If Christ (sayeth he) dyed onely for them which can with certaine or suer vnderstanding discerne these thinges (concerning God) then is the labour we take in the churche, in maner in vayne. God requyreth not so much of vs, how much we vnderstād, as how much we beleue, and through belefe, how much we loue. And when we shall all appeare before Christ in that dredfull daye of iudgement, whe shall not be requyred to geue an accompte of our vnderstan­ding, but faith presupposed, of our charitie.

Now though the people knowe not the Latine tonge, and albeit it were better,The be­nefite of prayer vt­tered in a tonge not vnderstā ­ded. they had the Seruice in their owne vulgare tonge, for the better vnder­standing of it: yet as it is, for as muche as it cōsisteth in maner all together of the scriptures, that great profite cometh bothe to the reader and to the hearer of it: Origen sheweth at large, in the twētith homilie vpon Iosue. Because it were ouer long to bring all that he sayeth there to this purpose, the summe of the whole may thus be abbridged.

First that the heauenly powers and angelles of God, which be with vs, haue great lyking in our [Page] vtterāce of the wordes of the scripture. Though we vnderstād not the wordes we vtter with our mowth, yet those powers (sayeth he) vnderstand them, and thereby be inuited, and that with delite, to helpe vs. And speaking of the powers that be within vs, to whom charge of our soules and bodies is com­mitted, he sayeth, that if the scriptures be read of vs, they haue pleasure therein, and be made the stronger toward taking heede to vs, yea and that if we speake with tonges, and our spirite praye, and our sense be with out fruite. And there he alleageth to that purpose, the cōmon place of S. Paul to the Co­rinthiās, calling it merueilouse, and in maner a myste­rie, shewing how the spirite prayeth, the sense being with out fruite. After this he declareth the euill powers and our ghostly ennemies the deuill, by our reading and hearing of the scriptures, to be dryuen from vs. As by enchauntements sayeth he, snakes be stayed from doing hurte with their venyme, so if there be in vs any serpent of contrary power, or if any snake waite priuely to mischiefe vs: by vertue of the holy scripture rehearsed (so that for wearynesse thou tourne not awaye thy hearing) he is put awaye. S. Augustine confirmeth the same doctrine, where he sayeth,In prolo­go Psal­morum. psalmus daemones fugat, angelos in adiutorium in­uitat. The psalme (read deuoutly or heard) putteth deuilles to flight, and prouoketh angels to helpe. At lenght Origen shewing how by meate or drynke we fynde remedie for sore eyes, though we feele no be­nefite forthwith in eating or drynking (he conclu­deth his speciall parte of the comparison with these [Page 72] wordes): In this wise we must beleue also of the ho­ly scripture, that it is profitable, and doth good to the soule, etiamsi sensus noster ad praesens intelligentiam non capit, although presently our sense doo not atteine the meaning or vnderstanding, because our good powers by these wordes be refreshed and fedde, and the cōtrary, that is, our aduersarie powers, are weak­ned and put to flight. At lenght making obiection to him selfe on the behalfe of his hearers, as though they shuld laye this doctrine to his charge for ex­cuse of taking further paynes in preaching and ex­pounding the scriptures to them: therto he answe­reth and sayeth. No no, we haue not sayd these to you for that cause, neither haue we vttered these thinges to you for excuse, but to shewe you, in Scri­pturis sanctis esse vim quandam, quae legenti etiam sine explanatione sufficiat: that in the holy scriptures there is a certaine power or strength, which is sufficient for one that readeth it, yea without any expounding of it. This sufficiencie he referreth (I thinke) to the procuring of the good powers to helpe vs, and to the dryuing awaye the malice of the euill powers our ghostly enemies, that they hurte vs not.

I trust wise godly and stedfast men, who be not caryed about with euery wynde of doctrine, will be moued more with the auctoritie of Origen, a man allwayes in the iudgemēt of all the christē worlde ac­cōpted most excellētly learned, thē with the scorning of Caluine, who speaking of the auncient latine Ser­uice vsed in England and Fraunce, sayeth:In Insti­tutionib. ad Ecclesiā ex sono non intellecto, nullus penitus fructus redit: that of [Page] the sownde not vnderstanded no fruite at all retour­neth to the churche: vsing that word of dispite, that might better be spoken by a mynstrell of his pype and taburrette, then by a preacher, of the diuine Ser­uice. Neither hereof with any milder spirite speaketh his disciple and subminister Theodore Beza, the hote minister of the deformed churches of Fraunce.Confessi­onis. ca. 4. Sectiōe. 16 Quae­cunque preces ab aliquo concipiuntur eo idiomate, quod ip­se non intelligat, pro Dei ludibrio sunt habendae. What prayers so euer be made (sayeth he) of any man in a tonge that he vnderstādeth not, they be to be taken for a mockery of God. Who so euer here alloweth Caluine and Beza condemned of the churche, must condemne Origen, for this point neuer reproued nor touched of any, that haue not spared him, where so euer they could charge him with any errour. If all prayers made in an vnknowen tonge be a mocking of God, as Beza sayeth: then were the prayers vtte­red by miracle in the primitiue churche with ton­ges (which the vtterers them selues vnderstoode not, after the mynde of Chrysostome) a mocking of god: for I see nothing, whereby they are excluded from his generall saying and vniuersall propositiō. Verely this teaching of Beza is not sownde. I wene, if he were out of the protection of his deformed chur­ches, and cōuented before a catholike bishop to geue an accompte of this doctrine, he would steppe backe and reuoke that rashe saying agayne. For els he shuld seme to graunt, that God gaue at the begyn­ning of the church, the gifte of tonges to be mokte withall, which were very absurde and blasphe­mouse. [Page 73] S. Paul wisheth that all the Corinthians spake with tonges, but rather that they prophecied.

If our newe maisters condemne the Latine Ser­uice in the Latine churche, for that the people vn­derstand it not, thereof must it folowe, that the En­glish seruice, so much of it as consisteth of Dauides psalmes, which is the most parte, be also cōdemned. The like may besayde of other nations. For how many shall we fynde not of the people onely, but also of the best learned mē, that vnderstand the mea­ning of them, in what tōge so euer they be set forth? S. Hilarie cōpareth the booke of psalmes to a heape of keyes,Praesat. in Psalmos. that be to open the dores of euery house of a great citie, layed together. Amōg whō it is hard to fynde, which keye serueth which locke, and without the right keye, no dore can be opened. S. Augustine lykeneth the people of Aphrica synging the Psalmes which they vnderstoode not, to owselles, popiniayes, rauens, pyes, and such other byrdes, which be taught to sounde, they knowe not what, and yet they vn­derstoode the tonge they sang them in. And therefore he exhorteth them to learne the meaning of them at his preaching, least they shuld syng not with hu­maine reason, (as is before recited) but with voyce onely, as byrdes doo.

The reste of the scriptures whereof the Seruice consisteth, is, though not all together so obscure as the psalmes, yet veryly darker and harder, then that the common peoples grosse and simple wittes may pearce the vndestanding of it, by hearing the same pronounced of the minister in their mother tonge. [Page] And by this reason we shuld haue no Seruice at all gathered out of the scriptures, for defaulte of vnder­standing. And whereas of the Seruice in the vulgare tōge, the people will frame lewde and peruerse mea­nings of their owne lewde senses: So of the Latine Seruice, they will make no constructions either of false doctrine, or of euill lyfe. And as the vulgare Ser­uice pulleth their mindes from priuate deuotion to heare, and not to praye, to litle benefite of know­ledge, for the obscuritie of it: so the latine geuing them no such motion, they occupie them selues, whi­les the priest prayeth for all, and in the person of all, in their priuate prayers, all for all, and euery one for him selfe.

Such na­tiōs as vse church Seruice in their ovvne tō ­ge, conti­nevve in schismes. In episto­la ad grae­cos.The nations that haue euer had their Seruice in their vulgare tonge, the people thereof haue conti­newed in schismes, errours, and certaine Iudaicall ob­seruances, so, as they haue not ben reckened in the number of the catholike churche. As the Christians of Moschouia, of Armenia, of Prester Iohn his land in Ethiopia. Bessarion asking by waye of a question, of the Grekes his countrie men, what churche that is, against the which hell gates shall neuer preuaile: an­swereth him selfe, and sayeth: Aut Latina, aut Greca est Ecclesia, tertia enim dari non potest. Siquidem aliae om­nes haeresibus sunt plenae, quas sancti patres & generales Synodi condemnarunt. Either it is the Latine, or the Greke churche, for there is no thyrd, that can be graunted. For all other churches be full of heresies, which the holy fathers and generall councelles, haue condemned. Wherefore of these churches no exam­ple [Page 74] ought to be taken for Seruice in the vulgare tonge, as neither of the churches of Russia and Mo­rauia, and certaine other, to whom aboue syx hun­dred yeres past, it was graunted, to haue the Masse in the Sclauons tonge, through speciall licence there­to obteined of the See Apostolike, by Cyrullus and Methodius, that first conuerted them to the faith. Which maner of seruice, so many of them as be ca­tholike, for good causes haue lefte, and vse the Lati­ne, as other Latine churches doo. Concerning the reste yet keping their Sclauon tonge, besyde other er­rours and defaultes, for which they are not herein to be estemed worthy to be folowed: we maye saye of them, the wordes of Gregorie Nazianzene. Priuile­gia paucorum, non faciunt legem communem: The pri­uileges of a fewe, make not a thing laufull in com­mon.

Wherefore to conclude, seing in syx hundred yeres after Christ, the Seruice of the churche was not in any other, then in the Greke and Latine tōge, for that any man is able to shewe by good ptoufe, and the same not vnderstanded of all people: seing the auctorities by M. Iuell alleaged, importe no ne­cessary argument nor directe cōmaundement of the vulgare tonge, but onely of plaine and open pro­nouncing, and that where the tonge of the Seruice was vnderstanded: seing the churche of the Englishe natiō had their Seruice in the Latine tonge to them vnknowen, well near a thousand yeres past: seing the place of S. Paul to the Corinthians either perteineth not to this purpose, or if it be so graunted, for the di­uersitie [Page] of states of that and of this our tyme, it per­mitteth a diuersitie of obseruation in this behalfe, though some likenes and resemblance yet reserued: seing great profite cometh to the faithfull people hauing it so as they vnderstand it not: Finally seing the examples rehearsed herein to be folowed, be of small auctoritie, in respecte either of antiquitie, or of true Religion: As the bolde assertion of M. Iuell is plainely disproued, so the olde order of the Latine Seruice in the Latine churche, whereof England is a prouince, is not rashly to be condemned: specially whereas being first committed to the churches by the Apostles of our countrie, and the first preachers of the faith here, it hath ben auctorised by conti­nuance almost of a thousand yeres without controll or gaynesaying, to the glory of God, the welth of the people, and procuring of helpe from heauen, al­wayes to this land.

And to adde hereunto this much last of all, though it might be graunted, that it were good, the Seruice were in the vulgare tonge, as in Englishe for our countrie of England: yet doubteles good men and zelouse kepers of the catholike faith, will neuer al­lowe the Seruice deuysed in king Edwardes tyme now restored agayne, not so much for the tonge it is in, as for the order it selfe and disposition of it, lacking some thinges necessary, and ha­uing some other thinges repugnant to the faith and custome of the catholike churche.

Of the Popes Primacie.
ARTICLE 4.

BY what name so euer the bishop of Rome was called within syx hundred yeres af­ter Christes ascension, this is cleare, that his Primacie, that is to say, supreme power and auctoritie ouer and aboue all bishops, and chiefe gouernement of all Christes flocke, in matters per­teining to faith and Christen religion, was then ac­knowleged and confessed. Which thinge beinge so, whether then he were called by either of those na­mes, that you denye, or no: it is not of great impor­tance. And yet for the one of them somewhat, and for the other, an infinite number of good authori­ties may be alleaged. But thereof hereafter.

Now concerninge the chiefe point of this article, which is the Primacie of the Pope, Peters successour. First, it hath ben set vp and ordeined by God, so as it 1 standeth in force Iure diuino, by gods lawe, and not onely by mans lawe, the scriptures leadinge thereto. Nexte, cōmended to the worlde, by decrees of coun­celles, 2 and confirmed by edictes of Christen empe­roures, 3 for auoidinge of schismes. Furthermore, con­fessed 4 and witnessed by the holy fathers. Againe, 5 fownde to be necessary, by reason. Finally, vsed 6 and declared by the euente of thinges, and practise of the church. For proufe of all this, so much might ea­sely be sayde, as shuld serue to a whole volume. But [Page] In this treatise seeking to auoide prolixitie, hauing purposed to saye somewhat to this number of the other Articles, and knowing this matter of the Primacie to be allready largely and learnedly han­deled of others: will but trippe as it were lightly ouer at this tyme, and not sette my fast footing in the deepe debating and treating of it.

1 The Po­pes Primacie not of Man, but of gods ordināce. The first proufe of the Popes primacie, scripture expoūded Matth. 16.First, as concerning the right of the Popes pri­macie by gods lawe, by these auncient autorities it hath ben auouched. Anacletus that holy bishop and martyr S. Peters scholer, and of him cōsecrated priest, in his epistle to the bishops of Italie, writeth thus. In nouo testamento post Christum, etc. In the newe testa­ment the order of priestes beganne after our lord Christ, of Peter, because to him bishoprike was first geuen in the churche of Christ, where as our lord saide vnto him. Thou art Peter, and vpon this rocke I will buylde my church, and the gates of hell shall not pre­uaile against it, and vnto thee I will geue the keies of the kingdome of heauen. Wherfore this Peter receiued of our lord first of all, power to binde and to lowse, and first of all, he brought people to the faith, by vertue of his preaching. As for the other Apostles, they receiued honour and power in like felowship with him, and willed him to be their prince, or chiefe gouernour.

In an other epistle to all bishoppes, alleaging the same texte, for the Primacie of the See of Rome, speaking of the disposition of churches committed to Patriarkes and Primates, saith thus most plainely. This holy ad Apostolike church of Rome, hath ob­teined [Page 76] the Primacie, not of the Apostles, but of our lord Sauiour him selfe, and hath gotten the pre­eminence of power ouer all churches, and ouer the whole flocke of Christen people, euen so as he saide to blessed Peter th'Apostle: Thou art Peter, and vpon this rocke etc.

S. Gregorie writing to Mauritius the Emperoure 2 against Iohn the bishop of Constantinople, ambi­tiously claiming and vsurping the name of an vni­uersall bishop, proueth the bishop of Rome succe­ding in Peters chaier, to be Primate, and to haue char­ge ouer all the church of Christ, by scriptures, thus. Cunctis euangelium scientibus, liquet etc. Epist. 32. It is euident to all that knowe the gospell, that the cure and charge of the whole church, hath ben committed by the worde of our lord, to the holy Apostle Peter prince of all the Apostles. for to him it is sayde. Peter, Ioan. 21. Luc. 22. louest thou me? feede my sheepe. to him it is sayd: Beholde Sa­than hath desyred to syfte you, as it were wheate, and I haue prayed for thee Peter, that thy faith faile not. And thou being once conuerted, strengthen thy brethren. To him it is saide. Thou art Peter, Matth. 26 and vpon this rocke I will buylde my church, and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it. And vnto the I will geue the keies of the kingdom of heauen. And what so euer thou byndest vpon earth, shalbe bounde also in heauen, and what so euer thou lowsest on earth shable lovvsed also in heauen. Beholde he recei­ueth the keies of the heauenly kingdome:Cura ei totius Ec­clesiae & principa­tus com­mittitur. the power of bynding and lowsing is geuen to him: the charge of the whole church and principalitie is committed to him. Thus farre Gregorie. But because our aduer­saries [Page] though without iuste cause, refuse the witnes of the Bishops of Rome in this article, as vnlawfull witnesses in their owne cause, were thei neuer so ho­ly martyrs or learned confessours: they may vnder­stand, we are able to alleage sundry other authorities to the confirmation hereof, that be aboue all ex­ception.

3 S. Cyprian declaring the contempte of the high Priest Christes Vicarie in earth, to be cause of schis­mes and heresies, writeth thus to Cornelius Pope and Martyr. Neque enim aliunde haereses obortae sunt, etc. Neither haue heresies or schismes rysen of any other occasiō, then of that, the Priest of God is not obeied, and that one Priest for the tyme in the church, and one iudge for the tyme in stede of Christ, is not thoughte vpon. To whom if the whole brotherhed (that is, the whole number of Christē people which be brethren together and were so called in the pri­matiue church) would be obedient according to gods teachinges:Secūdum magiste­ria diuina then no man would make adoo against the colledge of priestes, no mā woulde make him selfe iudge, not of the bishop nowe, but of God, after gods iudgement, after the fauour of the people declared by theire voices at the Election, after the consent of his felowbishops: no man through breach of vnitie and strife, would diuide the church of Christ: no man standing in his owne conceite and swelling with pride, would sette vp by him selfe abroade without the church, a newe heresie.

Of all other authorities, that of Athanasius, and of the bishops of Egypte and Libya gathered to­gether [Page 77] in a Synode at Alexandria, is to be regarded. Who making humble sute to Felix then bishop of Rome, for aide and succour against the Arianes, through the whole epistle confessing the supreme auctoritie of that Apostolike See, vtter these very wordes. Vestrae apostolicae sedis imploramus auxilium etc. In primo tomo Cō ­ciliorum. We humbly besech you of the helpe of your Apo­stolike See. Because (as verely we beleue) God hath not despised the praiers of his seruantes offered vp to him with teares, but hath constituted and placed you & your predecessours, who were Apostolike Prelates, in the highest tower or supreme state,In sum­mitatis ar­ce consti­tuit. and commaunded them to haue cure and charge of all churches, to th'intent, you helpe and succour vs, and that defending vs (as to whom iudgemēt of bishops is committed) you forslowe not through negligence, to delyuer vs from our enemies.

Now if the Apostolike church of Rome hath obteined the Primacie and preeminence of power ouer all churches, and ouer the whole flocke of Chri­sten people, of our lord Sauiour him selfe, as Anacle­tus saith: If it be euident to all that knowe the gos­pell, that the cure and charge of the whole church, hath ben committed to the holy Apostle Peter, Prince of all the Apostles, by the worde of our lord, as Gregorie witnesseth: If the whole brotherhed (that is to say all christen folke) ought to obeye the one hygh Priest or bishop of God, and the one Iudge that is Christes Vicare, or in the steede of Christ for the tyme, according to the preceptes and teachinges of God, as Cyprian writeth: If it be God, that hath [Page] placed and ordeined the bishop of Rome in the hi­ghest state of the church, as Athanasius with all the fathers of that Alexandrine councell recordeth: If this I say be true: then is it easely sene, vpon how good grownde this doctrine standeth, whereby it is affirmed, that the bishop of Rome his Primacie hath his force by gods lawe, and not onely by mannes lawe, much lesse by vniust vsurpation. The scriptu­res, by which as well these, as all other holy and lear­ned fathers were leadde to acknowledge and con­fesse the Primacie of Peter and his successours, were partly such, as Anacletus and Gregorie here alleageth, and Cyprian meaneth, as it appeareth by his third treatise De simplicitate praelatorum, and sundry mo of the newe testament, as to the learned is knowen: of which to treate here largely, and piththely, as the weight of the matter requyreth, at this tyme I haue no leisure, neither if I had, yet myght I conueniently performe it in this treatise, which otherwise will amount to a sufficiēt bignes, and that matter through­ly handeled, will fill a right great volume. Wherfore referring the readers to the credite of these worthy fathers, who so vnderstoode the scriptures, as thereof thei were persuaded the Primacie to be attributed to Peters successour by God him selfe: I will procede, keping my prefixed order.

The 2. proufe, coūcelles.Whereas the preeminence of power and auctori­tie, which to the bishop of Rome by speciall and singular priuiledge God hath graunted, is commen­ded to the worlde by many and sundry councelles: for auoiding of tediousnesse I will rehearse the testi­monies [Page 78] of a fewe. Amonge the canons made by the three hundred and eighten bishops at the Nicene Councell, which were in number 70. and all burnt by heretikes in the East church saue xx. and yet the whole number was kepte diligently in the church of Rome in the originall it selfe, sent to Syluester the bishop there from the councell, subscribed with the said 318. fathers handes:Vide Frā ­cisc. Tur­rianū. lib. 3. charact. dogmat. the 44. canon which is of the power of the patriarke ouer the Metropolitanes and bishops, and of the Metropolitane ouer bishops, in the ende hath this decree. Vt autem cunctis ditionis suae nationibus etc. As the patriarke beareth rule ouer all nations of his iurisdiction, and geueth lawes to them, and as Peter Christes vicare at the beginning sette in auctoritie ouer religion, ouer the churches, and ouer all other thinges perteining to Christ, was Maister and ruler of christen princes, prouinces, and of all nations: So he whose principalitie or chieftie is at Rome, like vnto Peter, and equall in auctoritie, obteineth the rule and souerainetie ouer all patriakes. After a sewe wordes it foloweth there. If any man repine against this statute, or dare resist it, by the de­cree of the whole councell he is accursed.

Iulius that worthy bishop of Rome not long af­ter the councell of Nice, in his epistle that he wrote to the 90. Ariane bishops assembled in councell at Antioche, against Athanasius bishop of Alexandria, reprouing them for theire vniust treating of him, saith of the canons of the Nicene councell, then freshe in their remembrance: that thei commaunde, Non debere praeter sententiā Romani pontificis vllo modo [Page] concilia celebrari, nec episcopos damnari. That without the auctoritie of the Bishop of Rome, neither Coun­celles ought to be kepte, nor bishops condemned. Againe, that nothing be decreed without the Bishop of Rome. Cui haec & maiora ecclesiarum negotia, tam ab ipso domino, quàm ab omnibus vniuersorum conciliorum fratribus, speciali priuilegio contradita sunt. To whom these and other the weighty matters of the churches be committed by speciall priuiledge, as well by our lord him selfe, as by all oure brethren of the whole vniuersall councelles. Among other principalle poin­tes, which he reciteth in that epistle out of the Ni­cene councelles canōs, this is one. Vt omnes episcopi etc. That all bishops who susteine wronge, in weighty causes, so often as nede shall require, make their ap­peale freely to the See Apostolike, and flie to it for succour, as to their mother, that frō thence they may be charitably susteined, defended, and deliuered. To the disposition of which See, the auncient auctoritie of th'Apostles, and their successours, and of the ca­nons, hath reserued all weighty, or great ecclesiasti­call causes, and iudgementes of bishops.

Athanasius and the whole companie of bishops of Egypte, Thebaida and Libya, assembled together in councell at Alexandria, complaining in their epi­stle to Felix the Pope of the great iniuries and griefes they susteined at the Arianes: alleageth the determi­nation of the Nicene councell, touching the supreme auctoritie and power of that See Apostolike ouer all other bishops. Similiter & à supradictis patribus est de­finitum consonanter etc. Likewise (saie they) it hath ben [Page 79] determined by common assent of the foresaide fa­thers (of Nice) that if any of the bishops suspecte the Metropolitane, or theire felowbishops of the same prouince, or the iudges: that then they make their appeale to your holy See of Rome, to whom by our lord him selfe, power to binde and louse,Matt. 16. by speciall priuiledge aboue other hath ben graunted. This much alleaged out os the canōs of the Nicene coun­cell, gathered partly out of Iulius epistle, who wrote to them that were present at the making of them, (which taketh awaye all suspicion of vntruth) and partly out of Athanasius and others, that were a great parte of the same councell. For further declaration of this matter, it were easy here to alleage the councell of Sardica, the councell of Chalcedon,Ca. 4. ca. 9 certaine coun­celles of Aphrica, yea some councelles also holden by heretikes, and sundry other, but such store of auctori­ties commonly knowen, these may suffise.

The Christen princes that ratified and confirmed with their proclamations and edictes,The 3. proufe, Edictes of Empe­rours. the decrees of the canons, concerning the Popes Primacie, and gaue not to him first that auctoritie, as the aduersaries doo vntruly reporte, were Iustinian and Phocas the Em­perours. The wordes of Iustinianes edicte, be these.In authēt. de Eccles. tit. Sancimus secundum canonum definitiones, sanctissimum senioris Romae Papam, primum esse omnium sacerdotum. We ordeine according to the determinations of the canons, that the most holy Pope of the elder Rome, be formest, and chiefe of all priestes,

About three score and ten yeres after Iustinian, Phocas the Emperour in the tyme of Bonifacius, to [Page] represse the arrogancie of the bishop of Constanti­nople,Lib. 4. hi­storiae lō ­gobardicae cap. 36. as Paulus Diaconus writeth, who vainely, and as Gregorie sayeth, contrary to our lordes teachin­ges, and the decrees of the canons, and for that wic­kedly, tooke vpon him the name of the vniuersall or oecumenicall bishop, and wrote him selfe chiefe of all bishops: made the like decree and ordinance, that the holy See of the Romaine and Apostolike church shuld be holden for the head of all churches.

The 4. proufe, doctoures.Of the doctours what shall I say? verely this matter is so often and so commonly reported of them, that their sainges laide together, would scantly be com­prised within a great volume. The recitall of a fewe shall here geue a taste, as it were, of the whole, and so suffise.

Lib. 3. c. 3.Irenaeus hauing much praised the church of Rome, at length vttereth these wordes, by which the soue­rainetie therof is confessed. Ad hanc Ecclesiam propter potentiorem principalitatem, necesse est omnem conuenire ecclesiam, hoc est, eos qui vndique sunt fideles. To this church (of Rome) it is necessary, all the church, that is to say, all that be faithfull any where, to repaire and come together, for the mightier principalitie of the same, that is to witte, for that it is of greater power and auctoritie, then other churches, and the principal­lest of all. Androw folowed our Sauiour before that Peter dyd, & tamen primatum non accepit Andreas, sed Petrus: and yet Androw receiued not the Primacie, but Peter,In 2. Co­rinth. 12. sayeth Ambrose. In the epistle of Athana­sius and the bishops of Egipte to Liberius the Pope, in which they sue for helpe against the oppressions [Page 80] of the Arianes: we fynde these wordes. Huius rei gratia vniuersalis vobis à Christo Iesu commissa est ec­clesia etc. Euen for this cause the vniuersall church hath ben committed to you of Christ Iesus, that you shuld trauaile for all, and not be negligent to helpe euery one.Luc. 11. for whyles the stronge man being armed kepeth his house, all thinges that he possesseth, are in peace.

Hilarius speaking much to th'extolling of Peter and his successour in that See, sayeth:De Trini­ta. lib. 6. Supereminentem beatae fidei suae confessione locum promeruit: Matt. 16. that for the confession of his blessed faith, he deserued a place of preeminence aboue all other. S. Ambros confessing him selfe to beleue, that the largenesse of the Ro­maine Empire was by gods prouidence prepared, that the gospell might haue his course, and be spred­de abrode the better, sayeth thus of Rome:De voca­tione gē ­tium. li. 2. cap. 6. Quae ta­men per Apostolici sacerdotij principatum, amplior facta est arce religionis, quàm solio potestatis. Which for all that, hath ben aduaunced more by the chieftie of the Apostolike priesthod in the tower of Religion, then in the throne of temporall power.

Saint Augustine in his 162. epistle, sayeth: In Eccle­sia Romana semper apostolicae cathedrae viguit principa­tus. The primacie or principalitie of the Apostolike chaier,Lib. 1. cō ­tra 2. epi­stolas Pelagianorum ad Bonifaciū. cap. 1. Quamuis ipse in eo preemi­ [...] cel­siore fastigio specu­lae pasto­ralis. Lib. 2. de baptismo, cōtrà Do­natistas. hath euermore ben in force in the Romaine church. The same saint Augustine speaking to Bo­nifacius Bishop of Rome, this care (sayeth he com­plaining of the Pelagians) is common to vs all, that haue the office of a bishop, albe it therein, thou thy selfe hast the preeminence ouer all, being on the [Page] toppe of the pastorall watchetower. In an other place he hath these wordes. Caeterum magis vereri debeo, ne in Petrum contumeliosus existam. Quis enim nescit, illum apostolatus principatum, cuilibet episcopatui praeferendum? But I ought rather to be afraied, least I be reproche­full towarde Peter. For who is he that knoweth not, that that principalitie of Apostleship, is to be pre­ferred before any bishoprike that is?

An other most euidēt place he hath in his booke, De vtilitate credendi, Cap. 17. ad Honoratum. Cum tantum auxi­lium Dei etc. Whereas (sayeth he) we see so great helpe of God, so great profite and fruite, shall we stande in doubte, whether we may hide our selues in the lappe of that church, which (though heretikes barke at it in vaine rownde about, condemned part­ly by the iudgement of the people them selues,Culmen auctoritatis obti­nuit. Cui pri­mas dare nolle, vel summae profecto impietatis est, vel praecipitis ar­rogantiae. Cōtrà Luciferianos part­ly by the sadnes of Councelles, and partly by the maiestie of miracles euen to the confession of man­kynde) from the Apostolike See by successions of bishops, hath obteined the toppe or highest degree of auctoritie? to which church, if we will not geue and graunt the Primacie, soothly it is a point either of most high wickednes, or of hedlong arrogancie.

The notable saying of S. Hierome may not be let passe. Ecclesiae salus à summi sacerdotis dignitate pendet. cui si non exors quaedam & ab omnibus eminens detur potestas, tot in ecclesiis efficientur schismata, quot sacerdo­tes. The saftie of the church hangeth of the worship of the high Priest (he meaneth the Pope Peters suc­cessour) to whom if there be not geuen a power peerelesse and surmonting all others, in the churches [Page 81] we shall haue so many schismes, as there be priestes.

There is an epistle of Theodoritus bishop of Cy­rus extāt in greke, written to Leo bishop of Rome. Wherein we finde a worthy witnes of the Primacie of the See Apostolike. His wordes may thus be en­glished. If Paul (sayeth he) the preacher of truth, and trumpet of the holy ghoste, ranne to Peter, to bring from him a determination and declaration, for them who at Antioche were in argument and contention concerning lyuing after Moyses lawe, much more wee, who are but small and vile, shall runne vnto your throne Apostolike, that of you we may haue salue for the sores of the churches, (there folowe these wordes. [...], id est, per omnia enim vobis conuenit primas tenere, that is to saye: [...]. The 5, proufe, Reason. For in all thinges (perteining to faith or religion (so he meaneth) it is meete, that you haue the chiefe dooinges, or that you haue the Primacie. For your high seate or throne is endewed with ma­ny prerogatiues and priuileges.

Now let vs see, whether this chiefe auctoritie may be fownde necessary by reason. That a multitude which is in it selfe one, can not continewe one, on­lesse it be conteined and holden in by one, bothe learned philosophers haue declared, and the common nature of thinges teacheth. For euery multitude of their owne nature goeth a sunder in to many: and from an other it cometh, that it is one, and that it contineweth one. And that whereof it is one, and is kepte in vnion or onenesse, it is necessary that it be one, elles that selfe also shall nede the helpe of an [Page] other, that it bee one. For which cause that saying of Homere was alleaged by Aristotle as most notable, It is not good to haue many rulers, [...]. let one be ruler. Where­by is meant, that pluralitie of soueraine rulers, is not fitte, to conteine and kepe vnitie of a multitude of subiectes. Therefore sith that the churche of Christ is one, (for as there is one faith, one baptisme, one calling, so there is one churche, yea all we are one body, and membres one of an other, as S. Paul sayeth: and in our Crede we all professe to beleue one ho­ly catholike and Apostolike churche) therefore I saye, it hath nede of one prince and ruler, to be kepte and holden in. If it be other wise, vnitie must nedes forthwith be sparkled and brokē a sunder. And there­fore it behoued that the rule and gouernement of the churche, shuld be committed to one.

And whereas these Gospellers saye, that Christ is the gouernour of the churche, and that he being one, kepeth the churche in vnitie, we answere, that, al­though the churche be first and principally gouer­ned by Christ, as all other thinges are, yet gods high goodnes hath so ordeined, as eche thing may be pro­uided for, according to his owne condition and na­ture. Therefore whereas mankynde dependeth most of sense, and receiueth all learnīg and institutiō of sen­sible thinges, therefor it hath nede of a man to be a gouernour and ruler, whom it maye perceiue by out­ward sense. And euen so the Sacramentes, by which the grace of God is geuen vnto vs, in consideration of mannes nature being so made of God, as it is, are ordeined in thinges sensible. Therefor it was behoo­full [Page 82] this gouernement of the churche to be commit­ted to one man, which at the first was Peter, and af­terward eche successour of Peter for his tyme, as is afore declared. Neither can this one man haue this power of any consent or companie of men, but it is necessary he haue it of God. For to ordeine and ap­pointe the vicare of Christ, it perteineth to none other, then to Christ. For where as the churche, and all that is of the chuch, is Christes, as well for other causes, as specially for that we are bought with a great price, euen with his bloude as S. Paul sayeth:1. Cor. 3. how can it perteine to any other, then to him, to institute and appoint to him selfe a vicare, that is, one, to doe his steede? Wherefore to cōclude, excepte we would wickedly graunt, that gods prouidence hath lacked, or doth lacke to his churche, for loue of which he hath geuen his onely begotten sonne, and which he hath promised neuer to forgete, so as the woman can not forgete the chylde she bare in her wombe: Reason may sone enduce vs to beleue, that to one man, one bishop, the chiefe and highest of all bishops, the successour of Peter, the rule and gouer­nement of the church, by God hath ben deferred. For elles if God had ordeyned, that in in the church shuld be sundry heades and rulers, and none consti­tuted to be ouer other, but all of equall power, ech one among their people: then he shuld seme to haue set vp so many churches, as he hath appointed go­uernours. And so he shall appeare to haue brought in among his faithfull people, that vnruly confusion, the destruction of all common weales, so much ab­horred [Page] of princes, which the grekes call Anarchian, which is a state for lacke of order in gouernours, without any gouernement at all. Which thing, sith that the wise and politike men of this worlde doo shunne and detest in the gouernemēt of these earthly kingdomes, as most perniciouse and hurtfull, to attri­bute to the high wisdome of God, and to our lord Christ, who is the auctor of the most ordinate dis­position of all thinges in earth and in heauen: it were heynous and prophane impietie. Wherefore if the state of a kingdome can not continew safe, onlesse one haue power to rule, how shall not the church spredde so farre abroade, be in danger of great disor­ders, corruption, and vtter destruction, if, as occasion shalbe geuen, among so great strifes and debates of men, among so many fyerbrandes of discord tossed to and fro by the deuils, enemies of vnitie: there be not one head and ruler, of all to be consulted, of all to be hearde, of all to be folowed and obeied? If strife and contentiō be stirred about matters of faith, if controuersie happen to rise about the sense of the scriptures, shall it not be necessary, there be one su­preme iudge, to whose sentence the parties may stande? If nede require (as it hath ben often sene) that generall councelles be kepte, how can the bishops, to whom that matter belongeth, be brought together, but by commaundement of one head gouernour, whom they owe their obediēce vnto? For elles being summoned perhappes they will not come. Finally how shall the contumacie, and pertinacie of mische­uous persones be repressed, specially if the bishops [Page 83] be at discension with in them selues: if there be not a supreme power, who towardes some may vse the rodde, towardes other some the spirite of lenitie, with such discrete temperament, as malice be vanquished, right defended, and concorde procured: least, if the small sparkes of strife be not quenched by auctori­tie at the beginning, at length a great flame of schis­mes and heresies flashe abrode, to the great dāger of a multitude? Therefore as there is one body of Christ, one flocke, one church, euen so is there one head of that his mysticall body, one shepeherd and one chiefe seruant made steward, ouerseer, and ruler ouer Chri­stes householde in his absence, vntill his comming againe.The 6. proufe, practise of the churche, syxfolde.

But here perhappes some will saie, it can not ap­peare by the euente of thinges and practise of the church, that the Pope had this supreme power and auctoritie ouer all bishops, and ouer all Christes flocke in matters touching faith, and in causes eccle­siasticall. Verely who so euer peruseth the ecclesiasti­call stories, and vieweth the state of the church of all tymes and ages, cā not but cōfesse this to be most eui­dent. And here I might alleage first, certaine places of the newe testament, declaring that Peter practised this preeminence among the disciples at the begin­ning, and that they yelded the same, as of right apper­teining vnto him.Act. 1. As when he first and onely mo­ued them to choose one in the stede of Iudas, and demeaned him selfe, as the chiefe autctor of all that was done therein: when he made answere for all,Act. 2. at what time they were gased and wondered at, and of [Page] some mockte, as being dronken with newe wine: for that in the fistith day thei spake with tonges of so many nations: when he vsed that dredfull seueritie in punishing the falshed,Act. 5. and hypocrisie of Ananias and Saphira his wife:Act. 15. when variāce being risen about the obseruation of certaine pointes of Moyses lawe, he as chiefe, and head of the rest, saide his mynde be­fore all others. Among many other places lefte out for breuitie, that is not of least weight, that Paul being retourned to Damasco out of Arabia,Galat. 1. after three yeres went to Ierusalem, to see Peter, and abode with him fiften dayes.

But because our aduersaries doo wreath and wreste the scriptures (be they neuer so plaine) by there pri­uate, and straunge constructions, to an vnderstanding quite contrary to the sense of the catholike church: I will referre the reader for further proufe of this matter, to the stories bearing faithfull witnes of the whole state and condition of the church in all ages. In which stories, the practise of the church is plai­nely reported to haue ben such, as thereby the Pri­macie of Peters successour, may seeme to all men suf­ficiētly declared. For perusing the ecclesiasticall sto­ries with writinges of the fathers, besyde many other thinges perteining hereto, we finde these practises, for declaration of this speciall auctoritie and power. 1 First, that bishops of euery nation haue made their appeale in their weighty affaires to the Pope, and allwayes haue sued to the See Apostolike, as well for succour and helpe against violence, iniuries & op­pressions, 2 as for redresse of other disorders. Also, that [Page 84] the malice of wicked persons hath ben repressed and chastised of that auctoritie by excommunication, eiection, and expulsion out of their dignities and romes, and by other censures of the church. Further­more, 3 that the ordinations and elections of bishops of all prouinces, haue ben confirmed by the Pope. Beside this, that the approuing and disalowing of 4 councelles haue perteined to him. Item, that bishops 5 wrongfully cōdemned and depriued by councelles, by him haue ben assoiled and restored to their chur­ches againe. Lastly, that bishops and patriarkes after 6 longe strifes and contentions, haue at length vpon better aduise, ben reconcilied vnto him againe.

First,Appella­tions the Pope. for the appellation of bishops to the See 1 Apostolike, beside many oher, we haue the knowen examples of Athanasius that worthy bishop of Ale­xandria, and lighte of the worlde: who hauing su­steined great and fundry wronges at the Arianes, appealed first, to Iulius the Pope, and after his death, to Felix: of Chrisostome, who appealed to Innocen­tius, against the violence of Theophilus: of Theodo­ritus, who appealed to Leo. Neither made bishops onely their appeale to the Pope by their delegates, but also in certaine cases, being cited, appeared before him in their owne persons. Which is plainely gathe­red of Theodoritus his ecclesiasticall storye, who writeth thus. Eusebius bishop of Nicomedia (who was the chiefe pillour of the Arianes) and they that ioyned with him in that factiō, falsly accused Atha­nasius to Iulius the B. of Rome. Iulius folowing the ecclesiasticall rule, commaunded them to come to [Page] Rome, and caused the reuerent Athanasius to be ci­ted to iudgement, regulariter, after the order of the canōs. He came. The false accusers went not to Rome, knowing righte well that theire forged lye might easely be deprehended.

In the cause and defence of Ihon Chrysostome, these bishops came from Constantinople, to Innocentius the Pope, Pansophus B. of Pisidia, Pappus of Syria, Demetrius of the seconde Galatia, and Eugenius of Phrygia. These were suters for Chrysostome. He him selfe treated his matter with Innocentius by wri­ting. In his epistle among other thinges, he writeth thus. Least this outragious confusion runne ouer all, and beare rule euery where, write (I pray you) and determine by your auctoritie, such wicked actes done in our absence, and when we withdrewe not our selues from iudgement, to be of no force, as by theire owne nature truly they be voied, and vtterly none. Furthermore who haue committed these euil­les, put you them vnder the censure of the church. And as for vs, sith that we are innocent, neither con­uicte, neither fownde in any defaulte, nor proued gyltie of any crime: geue commaundement, that we be restored to our churches agayne, that we may enioye the accustomed charitie and peace with our brethren. Innocentius after that he vnderstoode the whole matter, pronounced and decreed the iudge­ment of Theophilus, that was against Chrysostome, to be voyed, and of no force. This whole tragedie is at large set forth by Palladius B. of Helenopolis, in vi­ta Ioannis Chrysostomi, who lyued at that tyme. By this [Page 85] appeale of Chrysostome, and by the whole hande­ling of the matter, and specially by the purporte of his epistle to Innocētius, the superioritie of the Pope, is euidently acknowleged. And so is it plainely con­fessed by Athanasius, and the bishops of Egipte, Thebais and Libya, assembled in councell at Alexan­dria, by these wordes of their epistle to Felix. Vestrū est enim nobis manum porrigere, etc. It is your parte (saie they) to stretche forth your helping hāde vnto vs, because we are committed vnto you. It is your parte to defende vs, and deliuer vs, it is our parte to seeke helpe of you, and to obey your commaunde­mentes. And a litle after. For we knowe that you beare the cure and charge of the vniuersall church, and specially of bishops, who in respecte of their cō ­templation and speculation, are called the eyes of our lord, as alwaies the prelates of your See, first the Apostles, then theire successours, haue done.

Theodoritus that learned B. of Cyrus, besyde the epistle he wrote to Leo for succour and helpe in his troubles, in an other, that he wrote to Renatus a priest neare about Leo, sayeth thus. Spoliarunt me sa­cerdotio etc. They haue violently robbed me of my bishoprike, they haue caste me foorth of the cities, neither hauing reuerenced myne age spente in reli­giō, nor my hoare heares. Wherefore I beseche thee, that thou persuade the most holy Archebishop (he meaneth Leo) to vse his apostolike auctoritie, and to commaunde vs to come vnto your councell or con­sistorie. For this holy See holdeth the rudther, and hath the gouernement of the churches of the whole [Page] worlde, partly for other respectes, but specially, for that it hath euermore cōtinewed cleare frō stintche of heresie, and that none euer sate in it, who was of contrary opiniō, but rather hath euer kepte the apo­stolike grace, vndefyled. In which wordes of Theo­doritus, this is chiefly to be marked, that the holy See of Rome (as he sayeth) hath the gouernement of the churches of all the worlde, most for this cause, that it was neuer infected with heresie, as all other churches fownded by the Apostles were.

For which cause, that See hath euer hitherto of all christen nations, and now also ought to be hearde and obeyed in all pointes of faith. For that See though it hath failed sometymes in charitie, and hath ben in case as it might truly saye the wordes of the gospell, spoken by the foolishe virgins,Matth. 25. our lampes be without lighte: yet it neuer failed in faith, as Theodoritus wit­nesseth, and S. Augustine affirmeth the same. Which speciall grace and singulare priuiledge, is to be im­puted vnto the prayer of Christ, by which he ob­teined of God for Peter and his successours,Euill lyfe of the B. of Rome: ought not to seuer vs frō the faith of the chur­che of Rome. that their faith shuld not fayle. Therfore the euill lyfe of the bishops of Rome ought not to withdrawe vs from beleuing and folowing the doctrine preached and taughte in the holy churche of Rome.

For better credite hereof, that is earnestly to be considered, which S. Augustine writeth epistola 165. where, after that he hath rehearsed in order all the Popes that succeded Peter, euen to him that was Pope in his tyme, he sayeth thus. In illum ordinem epi­scoporum etc. In to that rewe of bishops, that reacheth [Page 86] from Peter him selfe to Anastasius, which now sit­teth in the same chaier, if any traitour had crepte in, it shuld nothing hurte the church, and the innocent christen folke, ouer whom our lord hauing proui­dence, sayeth of euill rulers: what they saye vnto you, Matth. 23. doo ye, but what they doo, doo ye not, for they saye, and doo not: to the intent the hope of a faith­full person may be certaine, and such, as being set not in man, but in our lord, be neuer scattered abroade with tempest of wicked schisme. And in his 166. epistle, (he sayeth) our heauēly Maister hath so farre forewarned vs, to be ware of all euill of dissension, that he assured the people also of euill rulers, that for their sakes, the Seate of holesom doctrine shuld not be forsaken, in which Seate, euen the very euill men be compelled to saye good thinges. For the thinges which they saye, be not theires, but gods, who in the Seate of vnitie, hath put the doctrine of veritie.

By this we are plainely taught, that albe it the successours of Peter Christes vicares in earth, be fownde blameworthy for euill lyfe, yet we oughte not to dissente from them in doctrine, nor seuer our selues from them in faith. For as much as, notwith­standing they be euill, by gods prouidence for the suertie of his people, they be compelled to saie the thinges that be good, and to teache the truth, the thinges they speake, not being theirs, but gods, who hath put the doctrine of veritie in the Seate or chaier of vnitie: which singulare grace cometh specially to the See of Peter, either of the force of Christes prayer, [Page] as is sayde before, or in respecte of place and digni­tie, which the bishops of that See holde for Christ, as Balaam could be broughte by no meanes to curse that people, whom God would to be blessed. And Caiphas also prophecied, because he was high bishop of that yere, and prophecied truly, being a mā other­wise most wicked. And therfore the euill doinges of bishops of Rome make no argument of discrediting their doctrine. To this purpose the example of Gre­gorie Nazianzene may very fittely be applied, of the golden, syluerne, and leadden seale. As touching the valewe of metalles, golde and syluer are better, but for the goodnes of the seale, as well doth leadde imprint a figure in waxe, as syluer or golde. For this cause, that the See of Rome hath neuer ben defyled with stinking heresies, as Theodoritus sayeth, and god hath alwaies kepte in that chaier of vnitie, the doctrine of veritie, as Augustine writeth: for this cause (I saye) it sitteth at the sterne, and gouerneth the churches of the whole worlde, for this cause bishops haue made their appellations thither, iudgement in doubtes of doctrine, and determination in all con­trouersies and strifes, hath ben from thence alwayes demaunded.

Now that the B. of Rome had alwayes cure and rule ouer all other bishops, specially of them of the East (for touching them of the West church it is ge­nerally cōfessed) besyde a hundred other euidēt argu­mentes, this is one very sufficient, that he had in the East to doo his stede, three delegates or vicares, now commonly they be named legates. And this for the [Page 87] commoditie of the bishops there, whose churches were farre distāt frō Rome. The one was the bishop of Constantinople, as we finde it mencioned in epi­stola Simplicij ad Achatium Constantinopolitanum. The seconde was the bishop of Alexandria, as the epistle of Bonifacius the seconde to Eulalius, recordeth. The third was the bishop of Thessalonica, as it is at large declared in the 82. epistle of Leo ad Anastasium Thes­salonicensem. By perusing these epistles euery man may see, that all the bishops of Grece, Asia, Syria, Egi­te, and to be shorte of all the Orient, rendred and exhibited their humble obediēce to the B. of Rome, and to his arbitremēt referred their doubtes, cōplain­tes and causes, and to him onely made theire appel­lations.

Of the B. of Rome his punishing of offenders by 2 censures of the church and otherwyse,Correc­tiōs from the Pope. as by excom­munications, eiection, deposition, and enioyning pe­nance for transgressions: we haue more exāples, then I thinke good to recite here. They that haue know­ledge of the ecclesiasticall stories, may remēber, how Timotheus B. of Alexandria was excommunicated with Peter his deacon, by Simplicius the Pope: Nesto­rius B. of Constantinople, by Celestinus: Theophilus B. of Alexandria with Arcadius the Emperour and Eudoxia the Empreresse, by Innocentius, for their wicked demeanour toward Chrysostome: How Dios­corus B. of Alexādria was deposed, though the whole secōde Ephesine councell stoode in his defence: how Peter B. of Antioche was not onely put out of his bishoprike, but also of all priestly honour: How Pho­tius [Page] was put out of the Patriarkeship of Constanti­ple, into which he was intruded by fauour of Mi­chael the Emperour, at the sute of his wicked vnkle, by Nicolaus the first.

Lib 3. epist. 13.For proufe of this auctoritie, the epistle of Cyprian, which he wrote to Stephanus Pope in his tyme against Martianus the B. of Arelate in Gallia, maketh an euident argument. For that this Martianus became a maineteyner of the heresie of Nouatianus, and therewith seduced the faithfull people, Cyprian ha­uing intelligence of it by Faustinus from Lions, ad­uertised Stephanus of it, and moued him earnestly to directe his letters to the people of Arle, by aucto­ritie of which Martianus shuld be deposed, and an other put in his rome, to th'intent (sayeth he there) the flocke of Christ, which hytherto by him scatte­red abroade and woonded is contemned, may be ga­thered together. Which S. Cyprian would not haue written, had the B. of Rome had no suche auctoritie.

3 Cōfirma­tions by the Pope.For the Popes auctoritie concerning confirmation of the ordinations and elections of all bishops, many examples might easely be alleaged, as the request made to Iulius by the 90. Ariane bishops assembled in councell as Antioche against Athanasius, that he would wouchesafe to ratifie and confirme those that they had chosen in place of Athanasius, Paulus, Mar­cellus and others, whom they had condemned and depriued. Also the earnest sute, which Theodosius the Emperour made to Leo for cōfirmation of Ana­tolius, and likewise that Martianus the Emperour made to him, for confirmation of Proterius bothe [Page 88] bishops of Alexandria, as it appeareth by their let­ters written to Leo in theire fauour. And as for Ana­toliꝰ, Leo would not in any wise order and cōfirme him, onlesse he would first professe, that he beleued and helde the doctrine,Vide Leo­nis epis. 1 [...] which was conteined in Leo his epistle to Flauianus, and would further by wri­ting witnesse, that he agreed with Cyrillus and the other catholihe fathers, against Nestorius. For this, if nothing elles could be alleaged, the testimonie of ho­ly Gregorie were sufficient to make good credite. Who vnderstanding that Maximus was ordered bis­shop of Salonae a citie in Illyrico, without the aucto­ritie and confirmation of the See Apostolike, stan­ding in doubte least perhappes that had ben done by cōmaundement of Mauritius the Emperour, who did many other thinges wickedly: thereof writeth to Constantina the Emperesse thus. Salonitanae ciuita­tis episcopus me ac responsali meo nesciente, ordinatus est. Et facta est res, quae sub nullis anterioribus principibus euenit. The bishop of the citie of Salonae (sayeth he) is ordered, neither I, nor my depute made priuye to it. And herein that thing hath ben done, which neuer happened in the tyme of any princes before our daies. Thus it appeareth, that before a thousand yeres past, bishops had their ordination and election con­firmed by the See Apostolike. 4 The Po­pes appro­uing of coūcelles.

That the bishops of Rome by accustomed pra­ctise of the church, had auctoritie to approue or dis­proue councelles, I nede to saye nothing for prouse of it,Li. 4. c. 19. seing that the ecclesiasticall rule (as we reade in the Tripartite storie) commaundeth, that no councell [Page] be celebrate and kepte without the aduise and au­ctoritie of the Pope. Verely the councelles holden at Ariminum, at Seleucia, at Sirmium, at Antiochia, and at the seconde tyme at Ephesus, for that they were not summoned, nor approued by the auctoritie of the B. of Rome, haue not ben accompted for laufull councelles: but as well for that reiected, as also for their hereticall determinatiōs. The fathers assembled in the councell of Nice, sent their epistle to Siluester the Pope, beseching him with his consent to ratifie and confirme,Quas Ro­mana sus­cipiēs cō ­firmauit Ecclesia. In praefa­tione Ni­ceni con­cilij. what so euer they had ordeined. Isido­rus witnesseth, that the Nicene councell had set forth rules, the which (sayeth he) the church of Rome re­ceiued and confirmed. The second generall councell holden at Constantinople, was likewise allowed and approued by Damasus, specially requested by the fa­thers of the same, thereto. So was the third councell holden at Ephesus, ratified and confirmed by Cele­stinus, who had there for his vicares or deputes, Cy­rillus the famouse B. of Alexandria, and one Arca­dius a bishop out of Italie. As for the fouerth coun­cell kepte at Chalcedon, the fathers thereof also in their epistle to Leo the Pope, subscribed with the handes of 44. bishops, made humble requeste vnto him, to establish, fortifie and allowe, the decrees and ordinances of the same. This being fownde true for the fower first chiefe councelles, we nede not to say any thinge of the rest, that folowed. But for the suer proufe of all this, that chiefly is to be alleaged, that Constantius the Arian Emperour made so im­portune and so earnest sute to Liberius the Pope, to [Page 89] confirme the actes of the councell holden at An­tioche by the 90. Ariane bishops, wherein Athana­sius was depriued, and put out of his bishoprike. For he beleved, as Ammianus Marcellinus writeth,Lib. 15. that what had ben done in that councell, shuld not stande and take effecte, onlesse it had ben approued and confirmed by the auctoritie of the B. of Rome, which he termeth the eternall citie.

Now what auctoritie the bishops of Rome haue 5 euer had and exercised in the assoiling of bishops vniustly condemned,Absolu­tiōs from the Pope. and in restoring of them againe to their churches, of which they were wrongfully thruste out by heretikes, or other disorder: it is a thing so well knowen of all that reade the stories, in which the auncient state of the church is described, that I nede not but rehearse the names onely. Atha­nasius of Alexandria, and Paulus of Constantinople, depriued and thrust out of their bishoprikes by the violence of the Arianes assisted with the Emperour Constantius, appealed to Rome, to Iulius the Pope and bishop there, and by his auctoritie were resto­red to their romes againe. So Leo assoiled Flauianus the B. of Constantinople, excommunicated by Dios­corus. So Nicolaus the first restored Ignatius to the see of Constantinople, though Michael the Empe­rour wroughte all that he could against it. Many other bishops haue ben in all ages assoiled and re­stored to their churches by the auctoritie of the See Apostolike, who haue ben without deserte excom­municated depriued, and put from all their dignities. But to haue rehearsed these fewe it may suffise.

6 Concerning the reconciliation of the prelates of the church both bishops and patriarkes to the B. of Rome,Reconci­liatiōs to the Pope. wherby his primacie is acknowleged and cō ­fessed, I nede not say much, the matter being so eui­dent. After that the whole churches of Aphrica had continewed in schisme, and withdrawen them selues from the obedience of the See Apostolike, through the entisement of Aurelius archebishop of Cartha­go, for the space of one hundred yeres, during which tyme by gods punishment they came in to captiui­tie of the barbarous and cruell Vandales, who were Arians: at the length, when it pleased God of his goodnes to haue pitie on his people of that prouin­ce, sending them Bellisarius the valiant capitaine, that vanquished and destroyed the Vandales, and likewyse Eulalius that godly archebishop of Carthago, that brought the churches home againe, and ioyned the diuided members vnto the whole body the catho­like church: A publike instrument conteining the forme of their repentance, and of their humble sub­mission, was offered and exhibited solemly to Boni­facius the second then Pope, by Eulalius, in the name of that whole prouince, which was ioyfully receiued, and he thereupon forthwith reconciled. Of this re­conciliation and restoring of the Affricane churches to the catholike church, the mysticall body of Christ, Bonifacius writeth his letters to Eulalius bis­shop of Thessalonica, requiring him, with the chur­ches there about, to geue almighty God thankes for it.

But here if I would shewe what bishops diuiding [Page 90] them selues through heresie, schisme, or other enor­mitie, from the obedience of the See of Rome, haue vpon better aduise submitted them selues to the same againe, and thereupon haue ben reconciled: I had a large field to walke in. As inferiour bishops of sun­dry prouinces haue done it, so haue the great pa­triarkes done likewise. Among them that to satisfie the maliciouse mynde of Eudoxia the Emperesse, practised their wicked conspiracie against Chryso­stome, through which he was deposed, and caried awaye in to banishment, Alexander B. of Antioche and primate of the orient, was one: who at length strooken with repentance, for that he had ben both a cōsenter and a promotour of that wicked acte, sub­mitted him selfe humby to Innocētius the Pope, and by all meanes sought to be assoiled and reconciled. And therfore sent his legates to Rome, to exhibite to Innocentius a solemne instrumēt of his repentāce and lowly submission, and to accepte what shuld be enioyned. By which his hūblenes Innocētius moued, graunted to his petitions, receiued him in to the lappe of the catholike church againe, and thus was he reconciled. Sundry the like reconciliations of the patriarkes of Alexandria and Ierusalem to the See of Rome in like cases, might easely be recited, which for auoiding of tediousnesse I passe ouer, as likewise of the patriarkes of Constantinople, which as we reade in aunciēt stories, haue forsaken the church of Rome twelue tymes, and haue ben reconcilied to the same againe.

Thus hauing declared the supreme auctoritie and [Page] primacie of the Pope by the common practise of the churche. I nede not to shewe further, how in all questions, doubtes, and controuersies touching faith and religion, the See of Rome hath alwayes ben con­sulted, how the decision of all doubtefull cases, hath ben referred to the iudgement of that See, and to be shorte, how all the worlde hath euer fetched light from thence. For the proufe whereof because it can not be here declared briefly, I remitte the learned reader to the ecclesiasticall storyes, where he shal fynde this matter amply treated.

Now for a briefe answere to M. Iuell, who denieth that within six hundred yeres after Christ, the bishop of Rome was euer called an vniuersall bishop, or the head of the vniuersall church, and maketh him selfe very suer of it. Although it be a childish thing to sticke at the name any thing is called by, the thing by the name signified being sufficiently proued: yet to th'intent good folke may vnderstand, that all is not truth of the olde gospell, which our newe gos­pellers either affirme or denie:The Pope aboue a thousand yeres si­thens cal­led vniuersall bis­hop, and head of the vni­uersall churthe. I will bring good and sufficient witnes, that the B. of Rome was then cal­led both vniuersall bis [...]op, or oecumenicall patriarke, which is one, to witte, bishop or principall father of the whole world, and also head of the church. Leo that worthy B. of Rome, was called the vniuersall Bishop and vniuersall patriarke, of syx hundred and thirty fathers assembled together from all partes of the world in generall councell at Chalcedon. Which is both expressed in that councell, and also clearly af­firmed by S. Gregory in three sundry epistles, to [Page 91] Mauricius the Emperour, to Eulogius Patriarke of Alexandria, and to Anastasius Patriarke of An­tioche. Thus that name was deferred vnto the Pope by the fathers of that great councell, which by them had not ben done, had it ben vnlawfull. In ve­ry dede neither Leo him selfe, nor any other his suc­cessour euer called or wrote himselfe, by that name, as S. Gregorie sayeth, much lesse presumed they to take it vnto them. But rather vsed the name of hu­militie, calling them selues ech one Seruum seruorum Dei, the seruant of the seruantes of God. Yet sundry holy martyrs bishops of Rome vsed to calle them selues bishops of the vniuersall church, which in ef­fecte is the same, as the fathers of Chalcedon vnder­stoode. So did Sixtus in the tyme of Adrianus the Emperour in his epistle to the bishops of all the world. So dyd Victor writing to Theophilus of Ale­xandria. So dyd Pontianus writing to all that bele­ued in Christ before 1300. yeres past. So dyd Stepha­nus in his epistle to all bishops of all prouinces in the tyme of S. Cyprian. And all these were before Con­stantine the great, and before the councell of Nice, which times our aduersaries acknowledge and con­fesse to haue ben without corruption. The same title was vsed likewise after the Nicene councell, by Fe­lix, by Leo, and by diuerse others, before the first six hundred yeres after Christ were expired. Neither did the bishops of Rome vse this title and name one­ly thē selues to theire owne aduauncemēt, as the ad­uersaries of the churche charge thē, but they were ho­noured therewith also by others: as namely Innocētius [Page] by the fathers assembled in councell at Carthago, and Marcus by Athanasius and the bishops of Egypte.

Head of the chur­che.Concerning the other name (Head of the church) I meruell not a litle, that M. Iuell denyeth, that the bishop of Rome was then so called. Either he doth contrary to his owne knowledge, wherin he must nedes be condemned in his owne iudgement and of his owne cōsciēce,Peter and consequē ­tly the Pope Pe­ters successour cal­led head of the church, both in termes equiualēt, and also expresly. Matth. 10. or he is not so well learned, as of that syde he is thoughte to bee. For who so euer tra­ueileth in the reading of the auncient fathers, findeth that name almost euery where attributed to Peter the first B. of Rome, and cōsequētly to the successour of Peter, that name (I saie) either in termes equiualēt, or expressely. First, the scripture calleth Peter primū, the first among the Apostles. The names of the twelue Apostles (sayeth Matthew) are these. Primus Simon, qui dicitur Petrus. First Simon, who is called Peter. And yet was not Peter first called of Christ, but his brother Androwe before him, as is before saide. Dionysius that auncient writer calleth Peter sometyme,De diui­nis nomi­nibus. c. 3. supremū decus, the highest honour, for that he was most ho­norable of all the Apostles, sometime, summum, some­time, verticalem, the chiefest and the highest Apostle. Origen vpon the beginning of Iohn sayeth: Let no man thinke, that we set Iohn before Peter. Who may fo doo? for who shuld be higher of the Apostles then he,Lib 1. epi­stola 3. who is, and is called the toppe of them? Cyprian calleth the church of Rome, in consideration of that bishops supreme auctoritie, Ecclesiam principalē, vnde vnitas sacerdotalis exorta est. The principall or chiefe church, frō whence the vnitie of priestes is spronge. [Page 92] Eusebius Caesariensis speaking of Peter sent to Rome by gods prouidence, to vanquish Simon Magus, [...]. calleth him potentissimum & maximum Apostolorum, & reli­quorum omnium principem: the mightìest of power and greatest of the Apostles, and prince of all the reste. Augustine commonly calleth Peter, primum apostolo­rum, first or chiefe of the Apostles. Hierome, Am­brose, Leo, and other doctours, Prince of the Apostles. Chrysostome vpon the place of Iohn cap. 21. sequere me, folowe me, among other thinges sayeth thus.Homil. 87 If any would demaunde of me, how Iames tooke the see of Ierusalem, that is to saie, how he became bis­shop there: I would answere, that this (he meaneth Peter) Maister of the whole worlde, made him go­uernour there.In Matth. homil. 55. Ierem. 1. And in an other place bringing in that God saide to Ieremie, I haue set thee like an yron pil­lour, and like a brasen walle: But the father (sayeth he) made him ouer one natiō, but Christ made this man (meaning Peter) ruler ouer the whole worlde. etc. And least these places shuld seme to attribute this supreme auctoritie to Peter onely, and not also to his successours: it is to be remembred, that Irenaeus and Cyprian acknowledge and call the churche of Rome, chiefe and principall. And Theodoritus in an epistle to Leo, calleth the same in cōsideration of the bishop of that See his primacie, orbi terrarum praesidētem, [...]. pre­sident or bearing rule ouer the worlde. Ambrose vpon that place of Paul, 1. Timoth. 3. where the church is called the pillour, and staie of the truth, saieth thus. Cum totus mundus Dei sit, ecclesia tamen domus eius dici­tur, cuius hodie rector est Damasus. Where as the whole [Page] world is gods, yet the churche is called his howse▪ the ruler whereof at these daies is Damasus.

I would not weery and trouble the reader with such a number of allegations, were not that M. Iuell beareth the world in hande, we haue not one sen­tence nor clause for vs, to proue either this, or any other of all his Articles.

But perhappes some one will replye and saye, yet I heare not the B. of Rome called Head of the vni­uersall churche. What forceth it, whether that very terme be founde in any auncient writer or no? Other termes of the same vertue and power be oftentymes founde. Is it not one to saie, Head of the vniuersall churche, and to saie ruler of gods house, which Am­brose sayeth? whereof this argument may be made. The church, yea the vniuersall church is the house of God: but Damasus B. of Rome, is ruler of the house of God, after Ambrose: ergo Damasus is ruler of the vniuersall church, and by like right and title is the Pope, who is B. of Rome now also, ruler of the same. What other is it to call the church of Rome the principall churche, respecte had to the bishop there, and not otherwise (wherein a figure of speach is vsed) as Ireneus and Cyprian doo, and president or set in auctoritie ouer the whole world, as Leo doth: then to call the bishop of Rome,In locum Ioā. 21 ho­mil. 87. ex ponēs il­lud, seque­re me. In Matth. homil. 55. Heade of the vniuersall church? what meaneth Chrysostome calling Peter to­tius orbis magistrum, the Maister and teacher of all the worlde, and saying in an other place, that Christ made Peter not ruler ouer one nation, as the father made Ieremie ouer the Iewes, but ouer the whole worlde? [Page 93] what other (I saie) meaneth he thereby, then that he is head of the whole worlde, and therefore of the v­niuersall church?

But to satisfie these men, and to take awaye occa­sion of cauille, I wil alleage a fewe places, where the expresse terme (Head) is attributed to Peter the first B. of Rome, and by like right to his successours,Peter and his successour cal­led head of the churche, expressely and to the See Apostolike. Chrysostome speaking of the vertue and power of Peter, and of the stedfastnes of the church, in the 55. Homilie vpon Mathewe, hath these wordes among other. Cuius Pastor & caput, ho­mo piscator, atque ignobilis &c. By which wordes he affirmeth, that the pastour and head of the church, being but a fisher, a man, and one of base parentage, passeth in firmnes the nature of the diamant. Againe in an homilie of the praises of Paul, he sayeth thus. Neither was this man onely such a one, but he also which was the head of the Apostles, who oftenty­mes sayde, he was ready to bestowe his life for Christ, and yet was full sore afrayed of death. If he were head of the Apostles, then was he head of the inferi­our people, and so Head of the vniuersall churche.

Hierome writing against Iouinian, sayeth, propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur, vt capite constituto schisma­tis tollatur occasio. for that cause among the twelue on is specially chosen out, that the Head being ordei­ned, occasion of schisme may be taken awaye. Whe­reby it appeareth that Peter was constituted head, for auoiding of diuision and schisme. Now the dan­ger of the inconuenience remaining still, yea more then at that tyme, for the greater multitude of the [Page] churche, and for sundry other imperfections: the sa­me remedy must be thought to continewe, onlesse we would saye, that Christ hath lesse care of his church now, that it is so much encreaced, then he had at the beginning, when his flocke was smal. For this cause excepte we denye Gods prouidēce toward his church, there is one Head for auoiding of schis­me also now, as well as in the Apostles tyme. Which head is the successour of him, that was head by Chri­stes appointment then, the B. of Rome sitting in the seate that Peter sate in.

Cyrillus sayeth, Petrus vt princeps, caputque caeterorū, primus exclamauit, tu es Christus filius Dei viui. Peter as prince and Head of the reste, first cryed out, thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God. Serm. 124. de tēpore Augustine also in a sermon to the people, calleth him head of the church, saying. Totius corporis membrum in ipso capite curat ec­clesiae, & in ipso vertice componit omnium membrorum sanitatem. He healeth the member of the whole bo­dy, in the Head it selfe of the church, and in the top­pe it selfe he ordereth the helth of all the members. And in an other place,Li. quaest. vet. & no. testam. q. 75. Saluator quando pro se & Petro exolui iubet, pro omnibus exoluisse videtur. Quia sicut in saluatore erant omnes causa magisterij, ita post saluatorem in Petro omnes continentur, ipsum enim constituit Caput omnium. Our sauiour sayeth Augustine, when as he cōmaundeth paimēt (for the Emperoure) to be made for him selfe and for Peter, he semeth to haue payde for all. Because as all were in our sauiour for cause of teaching, so after our sauiour, all are conteined in Pe­ter, for he ordeined him Head of all.

Here haue these men the plaine and expresse terme Head of the rest, Head of the church, Head of all, and therefore of the vniuersall church. What will they haue more? Neither here can they saie, that although this auctoritie and title of the Head be geuen to Pe­ter, yet it is not deriued and transferred from him to his successours. For this is manifest, that Christ instituted his churche so, as it shuld continewe to the worldes ende,Cap. 9. according to the saying of Esaie the prophete. Super solium Dauid &c. Vpon the seat of Dauid, and vpon his kingdome, shall Messias sitte to strengthen it, and to establish it in iudgement and righte­ousnes: from this daye for euermore. And thereof it is euidēt, that he ordeined those, who then were in mi­nisterie, so as their auctoritie and power shuld be de­riued vnto their aftercommers for the vtilitie of the church for euer, specially, where as he sayde,Matt vlt. beholde I am with you vntill the ende of the worlde. And there­fore as Victor writeth in his storie of the persecutiō of the Vandales, Eugenius B. of Carthago,Lib. 2. conuen­ted of Obadus a great capitaine of Hunerike king of the Vandales, about a councell to be kepte in A­phrica for matters of the faith, betwixte the Arians supported by the king, and the catholikes: sayde in this wise. Si nostram fidem &c. If the kinges power desyre to knowe our faith, which is one and the true, let him sende to his frendes. I will write also to my brethren, that my fellowebishops come, who may declare the faith, that is cōmon to you and vs, (there he hath these wordes) & praecipuè ecclesia Romana, quae Caput est omnium ecclesiarum. and specially the church [Page] of Rome, which is the Head of all the churches. Na­ming the church of Rome, he meaneth the bishop there, or his legates to be sent in his stede.

Thus it is proued by good and auncient auctori­ties, that the name and title of the Head, ruler, presi­dent, chiefe and principall gouernour of the church, is of the fathers attributed not onely to Peter, but al­so to his successours bishops of the See Apostolike. And therefore M. Iuell may thinke him selfe by this charitably admonished, to remember his promise of yelding and subscribing.

I will adde to all that hath ben hytherto sayde of this matter, a saying of Martin Luther, that such as doo litle regarde the grauitie of auncient fathers of the olde church, may yet somewhat be moued with the lightnes of the young father Luther, Patriarke and fownder of their newe churche. Lightnes I may well call it, for in this saying which I shall here rehearse, he doth not so soberly allowe the Popes Primacie,The po­pes pri­macie ac­knovvle­ged by Martin Luther. as in sundry other treatises he doth rashly, and furiou­sely inueigh against the same. In a litle treatise intitu­led, Resolutio Lutheriana super propositione sua 13. de po­testate papae: his wordes be these, Primum quod me mouet Romanum pontificem esse alijs omnibus, quos saltem nouerimus se pontifices gerere, superiorem, est ipsa volun­tas Dei, quam in ipso facto videmus. Neque enim sine vo­luntate Dei in hanc monarchiam vnquam venire potuisset Rom. Pontifex. At voluntas Dei quoquo modo nota fuerit, cum reuerentia suscipienda est, ideoque non licet temerè Romano pontifici in suo primatu resistere. Haec autem ratio tanta est, vt si etiam nulla scriptura, nulla alia causa esset, [Page 95] haec tamen satis esset ad compescendam temeritatem resi­stentium. Et hac sola ratione gloriosissimus martyr Cypri­anus per multas epistolas confidentissimè gloriatur contrà omnes episcoporum quorumcunque aduersarios, sicut 3. Re­gum legimus, quòd decē tribus Israel discesserunt à Roboam filio Salomonis, & tamen quia voluntate Dei siue aucto­ritate factum est, ratum apud Deum fuit. Nam & apud theologos omnes voluntas signi, quam vocant operationem Dei, non minus quàm alia signa voluntatis Dei, vt praece­pta prohibitiua etc. metuenda est. Ideo non video, quomodo sint excusati à schismatis reatu, qui huic voluntati contra­ueniētes, sese à Romani pontificis auctoritate subtrahunt. Ecce haec est vna prima mihi insuperabilis ratio, quae me subijcit Romano pontifici, & Primatū eius confiteri cogit. The first thing that moueth me to thinke the B. of Rome to be ouer all other, that we knowe to be bis­shops, is the very will of God, which we see in the facte or dede it selfe. for without the will of God, the B. of Rome could neuer haue commen vnto this monarchie. But the will of God, by what meane so euer it be knowen, is to be receiued reuerently. And therefore it is not lawfull rashly to resiste the B. of Rome in his primacie. And this is so great a reason for the same, that if there were no scripture at all, nor other reason: yet this were ynough to stay the rashnes of them, that resiste. And through this onely reason the most gloriouse martyr Cyprian in many of his epistles vaunteth him selfe very boldly against all the aduersaries of Bishops, what soeuer they were. As in the thirde booke of the kinges we read, that the ten tribes of Israel departed from Roboam Salo­mons [Page] sōne. Yeat because it was done by the will or auctoritie of God, it stoode in effecte with God. For among all the diuines, the will of the signe, which they call the working of God, is to be feared no lesse, then other signes of Gods will, as commaunde­mētes prohibitiue, etc. Therefore, I see not, how they may be excused of the gilte of schisme, which going against this will, withdrawe them selues from the auctoritie of the B. of Rome. Lo this is one chiefe in­uincible reason, that maketh me to be vnder the bis­shop of Rome, and compelleth me to confesse his Primacie. This farre Luther.

Thus I haue briefly touched some deale of the scriptures, of the canons and councells, of the edictes of Emperours, of the fathers sayinges, of the reasons, and of the manifolde practises of the church, which are wonte to be alleaged for the Popes Primacie and supreme auctoritie. With all, I haue proued that, which M. Iuell denyeth, that the B. of Rome within sixe hundred yeres after Christ, hath ben called the vniuersall bishop, of no small number of men of great credite, and very oftentymes Head of the vni­uersall church, both in termes equiualent, and also expressely. Now to the nexte article.

Of the termes really, substantially, corporally, carnally, na­turally, fovvnde in the Doctours treating of the true being of Christes body in the blessed Sacrament.
ARTICLE. V.

CHristen people hath euer ben taught, that the body and bloud of Iesus Christ by the vnspeakeable working of the grace of God and vertue of the holy Ghoste, is present in this most holy Sacrament, and that verely and in dede. This doctrine is fownded vppon the plaine wordes of Christ, which he vttered in the in­stitution of this sacrament, expressed by the Euange­listes, and by S. Paul. As they were at supper (sayeth Matthewe) Iesus tooke breade and blessed it, and brake it, Matth. 26 and gaue it to his disciples, and sayeth: Take ye, eate ye, this is my body. And takyng the cuppe, he gaue thankes, and gaue it to them, saying: Drynke ye all of this: For this is my bloude of the newe testament, which shall be shedde for many in remission of synnes. With like wordes al­most Marke, Luke and Paul,Marc. 14. Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11. doo describe this diuine institution. Neither sayde our lord onely, This is my body, but least some shuld doubte, how his wordes are to be vnderstanded: for a playne declaration of them, he addeth this further, (Wich ys geuen for you. Luc. 22. Likewise of the cuppe he sayeth not onely, This is my bloude, But also, as it were to putte it out of all doubte: Which shall be shed for many.

Now as faithful people doo beleue, that Christ ga­ue not a figure of his body, but his owne true and [Page] very body in substance, and like wise not a figure of his bloude, but his very pretiouse bloude it selfe at his passion and death on the crosse for our Redem­ption: so they beleue also, that the wordes of the in­stitution of this Sacrament, admitte no other vnder­stāding, but that he geueth vnto vs in these holy my­steries, his selfe same body, and his selfe same bloude in truth of substance, which was crucified and shed­de foorth for vs. Thus to the humble beleuers scri­pture it selfe ministreth sufficient argument of the truth of Christes body and bloude in the sacrament against the sacramentaries, who holde opinion, that it is there but in a figure, signe, or taken onely.

Againe, we can not fynde where our lord perfor­med the promise he made in the syxth chapter of Iohn, The bread which I wil geue, is my fleshe, which I will geue for the lyfe of the worlde: but onely in his last supper. where if he gaue his fleshe to his Apostles, and that none other, but the very same, which he gaue for the lyfe of the worlde: it foloweth that in the bles­sed Sacrament is not mere bread, but that same his very body in substance. For it was not mere bread, but his very body, that was geuen and offred vp v­pon the crosse.

If the wordes spoken by Christ in S. Iohn of pro­mise, that he performed in his holy supper, The bread that I will geue, is my fleshe, had ben to be taken not as they seme to meane plainely and truly, but meta­phorically, tropically, symbolically and figuratiuely, so as the truth of our lordes fleshe be excluded, as our aduersaries do vnderstand them: then the Ca­pernaites [Page 97] had not had any occasion at all of their great offence. Then shuld not they haue had cause to murmour against Christ, as the Euāgelist sheweth: The Iewes (sayeth S. Iohn) Stroue among them selues, Cap. 6. saying: how can he geue vs his fleshe to eate? And much lesse his dere disciples, to whom he had shewed so many and so great miracles, to whom he had be­fore declared so many parables and so high secretes, shuld haue had any occasiō of offence. And doubte­les if Christ had meant, they shuld eate but the signe or figure of his body, they would not haue sayde, Durus est hic sermo, this is a hard saying, and who can abyde to heare it? For then shuld they haue done no greater thing, then they had done oftentymes before in eating the Easter lambe. And how could it seme a hard worde or saying, if Christ had meant nothing elles, but this, the bread that I will geue, is a figure of my body, that shall cause you to remem­ber me?

To conclude shortely. If Christ would so haue ben vnderstanded, as though he had meant to geue but a figure onely of his body, it had ben no nede for him to haue alleaged his omnipotencie and almighty po­wer to his disciples, thereby the rather to bring them to beleefe of his true body to be geuen them to eate. Hoc vos scandalizet? doth this offende you, sayeth he. what if ye see the sonne of man ascende where he was before? it is the Spirite that geueth lyfe, &c. As though he had sayde: ye consyder onely my humanitie, that semeth weake and fraile, neither doo you esteme my diuine power by the great miracles I haue wrought: [Page] But when as ye shall see me by power of my god­hed ascend in to heauen, from whence I came vnto you, will ye then also stand in doubte, whether ye-may beleue, that I geue you my very body to be eaten? Thus by signifyyng his diuine power, Christ confownded their vnbeleefe, touching the veritie and substance of his body, that he promysed to geue them in meate.

What oc­casioned the fa­thers to vse these termes re­ally, sub­stantially, corporal­ly, &c.These places of the scripture, and many other re­porting plainely, that Christ at his supper gaue to his disciples his very body, euen that same which the daye folowing suffered death on the Crosse, haue ministred iust cause to the godly and learned fathers of the churche, to saye, that Christes body is present in this Sacrament really, substantially, corporally, car­nally, and naturally. By vse of which aduerbes, they haue meant onely a truth of being, and not a waye or meane of being. And though this manner of speaking be not thus expressed in the scripture, yet is it deduced out of the scripture. For if Christ spake plainely, and vsed no trope, figure, nor metaphore, as the scripture it selfe sufficiently declareth to an hūble beleuer, and would his disciples to vnderstand him, so as he spake in manifest termes, when he sayde, This is my body, which is geuen for you: Thē may we saye, that in the sacrament his very body is present, yea really, that is to saye in dede, substantially, that is, in sub­stāce, and corporally, carnally, and naturally: by which wordes is meant, that his very body, his very fleshe and his very humaine nature is there, not after cor­poral, carnal, or, natural wise, but inuisibly, vnspeakea­bly, [Page 98] miraculousely, supernaturally, spiritually, diuinely, and by waye to him onely knowen.

And the fathers haue ben driuen to vse these ter­mes for more ample and full declaratiō of the truth, and also for withstanding and stopping obiections made by heretikes. And because the catholike faith touching the veritie of Christes body in the Sacra­ment, was not impugned by any man for the space of a thousand yeres after Christes being in earth, and about that tyme BerengariusBerenga­rius. first beganne openly to sowe the wicked sede of the sacramentarie heresie, which then sone confuted by learned men, and by the same first author abiured and recanted, now is with no lesse wickednes, but more busely and more earnestly set forth againe: the doctoures that sythēs haue written in defence of the true and catholike faith herein, haue more often vsed the termes a fore mentioned, then the olde and auncient fathers, that wrote within M. Iuelles syx hundred yeres after Christ. who doubteles would no lesse haue vsed thē, if that matter had ben in question or doubte in their tyme. And albeit these termes were straunge and newe, as vsed within these fyue hundred yeres onely, and that the people were neuer taught for syx hun­dred yeres after Christ, as M. Iuell sayeth, more bold­ly then truly, and therefore more rashely then wyse­ly: yet the faith by them opened and declared, is vniuersall and olde, verely no lesse olde, then ys our lordes supper, where this Sacrament was first insti­tuted.

Here before that I bring in places of auncient [Page] fathers reporting the same doctrine, and in like ter­mes, as the catholike churche doth holde concerning this article: least our opinion herein might happely appeare ouer carnall and grosse: I thincke it necessa­ry, briefly to declare, what maner a true bodie and bloud of Christ is in the sacrament. Christ in him selfe hath but one fleshe and bloud in substāce, which his godhed tooke of the virgine Mary once, and neuer afterward lefte it of.The fleshe and bloud of Christ is of dou­ble consyderation. But this one fleshe and bloud in respecte of double qualitie, hath a double consideration. For at what tyme Christ lyued here in earth among men in the shape of man, his fleshe was thrall and subiecte to the frailtie of mannes na­ture, synne and ignorāce excepted. That fleshe being passible vntil death, the souldiers at the procurement of the Iewes crucified. And such maner bloud was at his passion shedde foorth of his body, in sighte of them which were then present. But after that Christ rose againe from the deade, his body from that tyme forward euer remaineth immortall and liuely, in dā ­ger no more of any infirmitie or suffering, much lesse of death: but is become by diuine giftes and en­dowmētes, a spirituall and a diuine body, as to whom the godhed hath communicated diuine and godly properties and excellencies, that ben aboue all man­nes capacitie of vnderstanding. This fleshe and body thus considered, which sundry doctours call corpus spirituale & deificatum, a spirituall and deified body, is geuen to vs in the blessed sacrament.

This is the doctrine of the church vttered by S. Hierome, in his commentaries vppon th'Epistle to [Page 99] the Ephesians, where he hath these wordes.Lib. 1. ca. 1. Duplici­ter verò sanguis & caro intelligitur, vel spiritualis illa atque diuina, de qua ipse dixit, Caro mea vere est cibus, & sanguis meus verè est potus: Et, nisi manducaueritis carnē meam, & sanguinem meum biberitis, non habebitis vitam aeternam: vel caro, quae crucifixa est, & sanguis, qui mili­tis effusus est lancea. that is. The bloud and fleshe of Christ is vnderstanded two waies, either that it is that spiritual and diuine fleshe, of which he spake him selfe, My fleshe is verely meate, and my bloud is ve­rely drinke, And, excepte ye eate my fleshe and drinke my bloud ye shall not haue lyfe in you: Or, that fleshe, which was crucified, and that bloud, which was shedde by pearcing of the souldiers speare. And to the intent a man shuld not take this differēce accor­ding to the substance of Christes fleshe and bloud, but according to the qualitie onely: S. Hierome brin­geth a similitude of our fleshe, as of which it hath ben in double respecte sayde: Iuxta hanc diuisionem & in sanctis etiam diuersitas sanguinis & carnis accipi­tur, vt alia sit caro, quae visura est salutare Dei, Luc. 3. alia caro & sanguis, quae regnum Dei nō queant possidere. 1. Cor. 15. Accor­ding to this diuision diuersitie of bloud and fleshe is to be vnderstanded in sainctes also, so as there is one fleshe which shal see the saluacion of God, and an other fleshe and bloud, which may not possesse the kingdom of God. Which two states of fleshe and bloud, seme (as it appeareth to the vnlearned) quite contrarie.

But Saint Paul dissolueth this doubte, in the fiftenth chapter of his first epistle to the Corinthians, saying, [Page] that fleshe of such sorte as we beare about vs in this lyfe, earthly, mortal, fraile, and bourthenouse to the soule, can not possesse the kingdom of God, because corruption shal not possesse incorruption. But after resurrection we shal haue a spirituall, gloriouse, incor­ruptible and immortall flesh, and like in figure to the gloriouse body of Christ, as S. Paul sayeth: This cor­ruptible body must putte on incorruption, and this mortall, immortalitie, Then such fleshe, or our fleshe of that maner and sorte, shall possesse the kingdom of God, and shal beholde God him selfe. And yet our fleshe now corruptible, and then incorruptible, is but one fleshe in substāce, but diuerse in qualitie and pro­pertie. Euen so it is to be thought of our lordes fleshe as is afore sayde. The due weghing of this differēce, geueth much light to this matter, and ought to staye many horrible blasphemies wickedly vttered against this most blessed Sacrament.

Now whereas M. Iuell denyeth that Christen peo­ple were of olde tyme taught to beleue, that Christes body is really, substantially, corporally, carnally, or naturally in the Sacrament, I doo plainely affirme the cōtrarie. Yet I acknowledge, that the learned fathers which haue so taught, would not thereby seme to make it here outwardly sensible or perceptible.Hom. 83. in Matt & 60 ad po­pul. Anti­ochen.

For they confesse all with Saint Chrysostome, that the thing which is here geuen vs, is not sensible, but that vnder visible signes, inuisible thinges be delyue­red vnto vs. But they thought good to vse the afore­sayed termes, to put awaye all doubte of the being of his very body in these holy mysteries, and to [Page 100] exclude the onely imagination, phantasie, figure, signe, token, vertue, or signification there of.

For in such wise the Sacramentaries haue vttered their doctrine in this pointe, as they may seme by their manner of speaking and wryting, here to re­present our lordes body onely, in deede being ab­sent, as kinges oftentymes are represented in a Tra­gedie, or meane persones in a Comedie. Verely the maner and waye by which it is here present and geuen to vs, and receiued of vs, is secrete: not hu­maine ne naturall, true for all that. And we doo not atteine it by sense, reason, or nature, but by faith. For which cause we doo not ouer basely con­syder and attende the visible elementes, but as we are taught by the councell of Nice, lifting vp our mynde and spirite, we beholde by faith on that ho­ly table put and layde (so for the better significa­tion of the real presence their terme sowndeth) the Lambe of God, [...]. that taketh awaye the synnes of the worlde. And here (saye they) we receiue his pre­tiouse body and bloude, [...] that is to saye, vere­ly and in deede, which is no other wise, nor lesse, then this terme really importeth.

And touching these termes, fyrst Verely, or which is all one Really, and substantially: me thinketh M. Iuell shuld beare the more with vs for vse of the sa­me, sith that Bucer him selfe one of the greatest lear­ned men of that syde hath allowed them: yea and that after much writing against Luther in defēce of Zuin­glius and Oecolampadius by him set forth, and after that he had assured him selfe of the truth in this article [Page] by diuine inspiration, as most constantly he affir­meth with these wordes:In responsione ad Lutherū. Haec non dubitamus diuini­tus nobis, & per scripturam reuelata de hoc sacramento. We doubte not (sayeth he) but these thinges con­cerning this sacramēt, be reueled vnto vs from god, and by the scripture. If you demaunde where this may be fownde: in the actes of a Councell holden betwen the Lutheranes and Zuinglianes for this ve­ry purpose in Martine Luthers house at Wittenberg, in the yere of our lord. 1536. you shal fynde these wordes. Audiuimus D. Bucerum explicantem suam sen­tentiam de Sacramento corporis & sanguinis Domini, hoc modo. Cum pane & vino verè & substantialiter adest, exhibetur & sumitur corpus Christi & sanguis. Et sacra­mentali vnione panis est corpus Christi, & porrecto pane verè adest & verè exhibetur corpus Christi. We haue heard M. Bucer declare his mynde touching the sa­crament of the body and bloud of our Lord, in this sorte. With the bread and wyne the body of Christ and his bloud is present, exhibited, and receiued ve­rely and substantially. And by Sacramental vnion, the breade is the body of Christ, and the breade being geuen, the body of Christ is verely present, and ve­rely deliuered.

Though this opinion of Bucer, by which he re­canted his former Zuinglian heresie, be in sundry pointes false and hereticall, yet in this he agreeth with the catholike churche against M. Iuelles nega­tiue assertion, that the body and bloud of Christ is present in the sacramēt verely, that is, truly, and real­ly or in dede, and substantially. Where in he spea­keth, [Page 101] as the aunciēt fathers spake long before a thou­sand yeres past.

Let Chrysostome for proufe of this, be in stede of many that might be alleaged. His wordes be these. Nos secum in vnā (vt ita dicam) massam reducit, In 26. ca. Mat. hom. 83. neque id fide solum, sed re ipsa nos corpus suum efficit. By this sa­crament (sayeth he) Christ reduceth vs (as it were) in to one loumpe with him selfe, and that not by faith onely, but he maketh vs his owne body in very de­de, reipsa, which is no other to saye, then Really. The other aduerbes corporally Carnally, Naturally, be fownde in the fathers not seldom, specially where they dispute against the Arianes. And therefore it had be more conuenient for M. Iuell to haue modestly interpreted them, then vtterly to haue denyed them.

The olde fathers of the greke and latine churche, denye that faithfull people haue an habitude or dis­position, vnion or coniunction with Christ onely by faith and charitie, or that we are spiritually ioyned and vnited to him onely by hope, loue, religion, obe­dience, and will: yea further they affirme, that by the vertue and efficacie of this sacramēt duely and worthe­ly receiued, Christ is really and in deede communi­cated by true cōmunication and participation of the nature and substance of his body and bloud, and that he is and dwelleth in vs truly, because of our recei­uing the same in this sacramēt. The benefite where­of is such, as we be in Christ, and Christ in vs, [...]oan. 6. accor­ding to that he sayeth, qui manducat meā carnē, manet in me, & ego in illo. Who eateth my fleshe, he dwelleth [Page] in me, and I in him. The which dwelling vnion and ioinyng together of him with vs, and of vs with him, that it might the better be expressed, and recō ­mended vnto vs: they thought good in their wri­tinges to vse the aforesayde aduerbes.

Hilarius writing against the Arianes alleaging the wordes of Christ. 17. Iohn. Vt omnes vnum sint, sicut tu pater in me, & ego in te, vt ipsi in nobis vnum sint, that all maye be one, as thou father art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in vs: going about by those wordes to shewe that the sonne and the father were not one in nature and substance, but onely in concord and vnitie of will: among other many and long sentēces for proufe of vnitie in substance, bothe betwen Christ and the father, and also betwen Christ and vs,De Trini­tate, lib: 8. hath these wordes. Si enim verè verbum caro factum est, & nos verè verbum carnem cibo Dominico sumimus, quomodo non naturaliter manere in nobis existi­mandus est, qui & naturam carnis nostrae iam insepara­bilem sibi homo natus assumpsit, & naturam carnis suae ad naturam aeternitatis sub sacramento nobis communicandae carnis admiscuit: If the word be made fleshe verely, and we receiue the word being fleshe in our lordes meate verely: how is he to be thought not to dwell in vs naturally, who bothe hath taken the nature of our fleshe now inseparable to him selfe, in that he is borne man, and also hath mengled the nature of his owne fleshe to the nature of his euerlastingnesse vn­der the sacrament of his fleshe to be receiued of vs in the communion? There afterwarde this word naturaliter, in this sense that by the sacrament wor­thely [Page 102] receiued, Christ is in vs, and we in Christ na­turally, that is in truth of nature, is sundry tymes put and rehearsed. Who so listeth to reade further his eight booke de trinitate, he shall fynde him agnise manentem in nobis carnaliter filium, that the sonne of God (through the sacrament) dwelleth in vs carnal­ly, that is in truth of fleshe, and that by the same sa­crament we with him, and he with vs are vnited and knitte together corporaliter, & inseperabiliter, cor­porally and inseparably, for they be his very wordes.

Gregorie Nyssene speaking to this purpose sayeth,In lib. de vita Mosi [...] Panis qui de coelo descendit, non incorporea quaedā res est, quo enim pacto res incorporea corpori cibus fiet? res verò quae incorporea non est, corpus omnino est. Huius corporis panem non aratio, non satio, non agricolarum opus effecit, sed terra intacta permansit, & tamen pane plena fuit, quo famescentes, mysterium virginis perdocti, facilè saturātur. Which wordes reporte so plainely the truth of Chri­stes body in the sacrament, as al maner of figure and signification must be excluded. And thus they may be englished. The bread that came downe from hea­uen, is not a bodilesse thing. For by what meane shall a bodilesse thing be made meate to a body? And the thing which is not bodylesse, is a body, without doubte. It is not earing, not sowing, not the worke of tillers, that hath brought forth the bread of this body, but the earth which remained vntouched, and yet was full of the bread, whereof they that waxe hungry, being thoroughly taught the mysterie of the virgine, sone haue their fylle. Of these wordes may easely be inferred a conclusion, that in the sacramēt is Christ [Page] and that in the same we receiue him corporally, that is, in veritie and substance of his body, for as much as that is there, and that is of vs receiued, which was brought forth and borne of the virgine Mary.

Cyrillus that auncient father and worthy bishop of Alexandria, for confirmation of the catholike faith in this point,In Ioan. lib. 10. cap. 13. sayeth thus. Non negamus recta nos fide, charitateque syncera Christo spiritaliter coniungi: sed nul­lam nobis coniunctionis rationem secundum carnem cum illo esse, id profecto pernegamus, idque à diuinis scripturis omnino alienum dicimus. We denye not but that we are ioyned spiritually with Christ by right faith and pure charitie: but that we haue no maner of ioyning with him according to the fleshe (which is one as to saye carnaliter carnally) that we denye vtterly, and saye, that it is not aggreable with the scriptures. A­gaine least any man shuld thinke this ioyning of vs and Christ together to be by other meanes then by the participation of his body in the Sacrament, in the same place afterward he sayeth further. An fortassis putat ignotam nobis mysticae benedictionis virtu­tem esse? Quae cum in nobis fiat, nōne corporaliter quoque facit communicatione corporis Christi, Christum in nobis haebitare? what troweth this Ariane heretike perhap­pes, that we knowe not the vertue of the mysticall blessing? (whereby is meant this sacrament) which when it is become to be in vs, doth it not cause Christ to dwell in vs corporally by receiuing of Christes body in the communion? And after this he sayeth as plainely, that Christ is in vs, non habitudine solum, quae per charitatem intelligitur, verumetiam & [Page 103] participatione naturali. not by charitie onely, but also by naturall participation.

The same Cyrill sayeth in an other place,Lib. in Io­an 11. cap. 26. that through the holy communion of Christes body, we are ioyned to him in naturall vnion. Quis enim eos, qui vnius sancti corporis vnione in vno Christo vniti su [...]t, ab hac naturali vnione alienos putabit? who will thinke (sayeth he) that they, wich be vnited together by the vnion of that one holy body in one Christ, be not of this natural vnion? He calleth this also a cor­porall vnion in the same booke, and at length after large discussion how we be vnited to Christ, not onely by charitie and obedience of religion, but also in substance, concludeth thus. Sed de vnione corpo­rali satis. But we▪ haue treated ynough of the cor­porall vnion. Yet afterward in diuerse sentences he vseth these aduerbes (for declaring of the veritie of Christes body in the sacrament) naturaliter, substan­tialiter, secundum carnem or carnaliter, corporaliter, as most manifestly in the 27. chapter of the same boo­ke. Corporaliter filius per benedictionem mysticam nobis vt homo vnitur, spiritualiter autem vt Deus. The sonne of God is vnited vnto vs corporally as man, and spiritually as God.

Agayne where as he sayeth there: Filium Dei na­tura Patri vnitum corporaliter substantialiterque acci­pientes, clarificamur, glorificamurque, &c. We recei­uing the sonne of God vnited to the father by na­ture corporally and substātially, are clarifyed and glo­rifyed or made glorious, being made partakers of the supreme nature: The like saying he hath. lib. 12. ca. 58.

Now this being and remayning of Christ in vs, and of vs in Christ naturally and carnally, and this vniting of vs and Christ together corporally, presup­poseth a participation of his very body, which body we can not truly participate, but in this blessed sa­crament. And therefor Christ is in the Sacrament naturally, carnally, corporally, that is to saye, according to the thruth of his nature, of his fleshe, and of his body. For were not he so in the Sacramēt, we could not be ioyned vnto him, nor he and we could not be ioyned and vnited together, corporally.

Diuerse other auncient fathers haue vsed the like manner of speach, but none so much as Hilarius, and Cyrillus, whereby they vnderstand, that Christ is pre­sent in this sacrament as we haue sayde, according to the truth of his substance, of his nature, of his fleshe, of his body and bloud. And the catholike fathers that sithens the tyme of Berengarius haue written in defence of the truth in this point, vsing these termes sometymes for excluding of metaphores, allegories, figures, and significations onely, whereby the sacra­mētaries would defraude faithfull people of the truth of Christes pretiouse body in this Sacrament: doo not thereby meane that the maner, meane, or waye of Christes presence, dwelling, vnion and coniunctiō with vs, and of vs with him, is therefor naturall, sub­stanciall, corporall, or carnall: but they, and all other catholike men confesse the contrarie, that it is farre higher and worthier, supernaturall, supersubstantiall, inuisible, vnspeakeable, speciall and propre to this sa­crament, true, reall, and in deede notwithstanding, [Page 104] and not onely tropicall, symbolicall, metaphoricall, allegoricall, not spirituall onely, and yet spirituall, not figuratiue or significatiue onely. And likewise concer­ning the maner of the presence and being of that bo­dy and bloud in the sacramēt, they and we acknow­ledge and confesse, that it is not locall, circumscripti­ue, diffinitiue, or subiectiue, or naturall, but such, as is knowen to God onely.

Of the being of Christes body in many places at one tyme.
ARTICLE VI.

AMong the miracles of this bleshed Sacra­ment, one is, that one and the same body maye bee in many places at once, to witte, vnder all consecrated hostes. As for God, it is agreable to his godhed to be euery where, sim­pliciter, & propriè. But as for a creature, to be but in one place onely. But as for the body of Christ, it is after a maner betwen bothe. For where as it is a crea­ture, it ought not to be made equall with the Crea­tor in this behalfe, that it be euery where. But where as it is vnited to the Godhed, herein it ought to ex­celle other bodyes, so, as it maye in one tyme bee in mo places vnder this holy Sacrament. For the vni­ting of Christes naturall body vnto the almighty godhed duly considered, bringeth a true Christē man in respecte of the same, to forsake reason, and to leane to faith, to put aparte all doubtes and discourses of [Page] humaine vnderstanding, and to rest in reuerent sim­plicitie of beleefe.

Thereby through the holy ghost persuaded he knoweth, that although the body of Christ be na­turall and humaine in dede, yet through the vnion and coniunctiō, many thinges be possible to the same now,Matt. 14. Luc. 24. Matt. 17. Luc. 24. Act. 1. Matt. 28. Ioan. 20. that to all other bodies be impossible: as to walke vpon waters, to vanishe awaye out of sight, to be transfigured and made bright as the sunne, to ascende vp through the clowdes: and after it became immortall, death being conquered, to ryse vp againe out of the graue, and to entre through doores fast shutte. Through the same faith he beleueth and ac­knowlegeth, that according vnto his worde, by his power it is made present in the blessed sacrament of th'aulter vnder the forme of bread and wyne, where so euer the same is duly consecrated, according vnto his institution in his holy supper, and that not after a grosse or carnall maner, but spiritually, and super­naturally, and yet substantially, not by locall, but by substantiall presence, not by maner of quantitie, or fylling of a place, or by chaunging of place, or by leauing his sitting on the right hande of the father, but in such a maner, as God onely knoweth, and yet doth vs to vnderstand by faith, the truth of this very presence, farre passing all mannes capacitie, to com­prehend the maner how.

Where as some against this pointe of beleefe doo alleage the article of Christes Ascension, and of his being in heauen at the right hande of God the father, bringing certaine textes of scriptures perteining to [Page 105] the same, and testimonies of auncient doctours signi­fying Christes absence from the earth:Christes being in heauē and in the Sa­cramēt at one tyme, implyeth no cōtra­diction. it may be-rightly vnderstanded, that he is verely bothe in hea­uen at the right hande of his father, in his visible and corporal forme, very God and mā, after which maner he is there, and not here, and also in the Sacrament inuisibly, and spiritually, bothe God and Man in a mysterie, so as the graunting of the one may stande without denyall of the other, no cōtradiction fown­de in these beinges, but onely a distinction in the waye and maner of being.

And how the aunciēt fathers of the churche haue confessed and taught bothe these beinges of Christ in heauen and in the sacrament together, contrarie to M. Iuelles negatiue, by witnes of their owne wordes we may perceiue. Basile in his liturgie, that is to saye seruice of his Masse, sayeth thus in a prayer. Looke downe vppon vs lord Iesus Christ our God from thy holy tabernacle,Qui suprà cum patre sedes, & hic inuisi­biliter versaris. and from the throne of glorie of thy kingdom, and come to sanctifie vs, which sit­test aboue with thy father, and art conuersant here inuisibly: And vouchesaufe to imparte vnto vs thine vndefyled body, and pretiouse bloude, and by vs to all thy people. S. Chrysostome prayeth with the very same wordes also in his Liturgie or Masse. Where we read further that the priest and the deacon doo adore and worship, saying three tymes secretly,Et popu­lus simi­liter oēs cū pietate adorant. God be merciful to me a synner, and that the people doo all likewise deuoutly adore. Now sith he will adora­tion to be made, he acknowlegeth Christ present, whom he graunteth to be also at the same tyme in [Page] heauen. Wich he vttereth more plainely in these wor­des.Chrysost. de Sacer­dotio. l. 3. O miraculum, o Dei benignitatem, &c. O miracle, o the goodnes of God, who sytteth aboue with the father, at that very instant of tyme, is handeled with the handes of all, and geueth him selfe to those that will receiue and imbrace him. And that is done by no crafty sleightes, but openly in the sight of all that stande about. How sayest thou, seme these thinges to thee no better then to be contemned and despysed? By which words of S. Chrysostome we may see, that Christes being in heauen, maketh no proufe that he is not in earth, sith both these verities may well stāde together.

Christes body in many places at once. Hom. 2.The same father confesseth the body of Christ to be in diuerse places likewise in his homilies ad popu­lū Antiochenum most plainely alluding to Elias. Elias (sayeth he) melotem quidē discipulo reliquit, filius autem Dei ascendens suam nobis carnem dimisit: sed Elias quidē exutus, Christus autem & nobis reliquit, & ipsam habens ascendit. Elias (when he was caried vp in the fyery chariot) lefte to his disciple Eliseus his mātell of shee­pes skynnes: but the sonne of God when he ascēded, lefte to vs his fleshe: but Elias dyd put of his mātel, and Christ bothe lefte his fleshe to vs, and also ascen­ded hauing it with him. Nothing can be spoken more plainely, whereby to shewe that we haue the same fleshe here in earth, that was receiued into heauen, which Christ hath not put of to geue it to vs. By which doctrine of S. Chrysostome we are taught to beleue, that Christes fleshe or his body is bothe in heauen and also in the earth, in how many places so [Page 106] euer this blessed Sacrament is rightely celebrated.

And whereas many measuring all thinges by the common order and lawes of nature, beleue nothing can be done aboue nature, and therefor thinke that the body of Christ, for as much as it is of nature fi­nite, can not by power of God be in many places at once of which opinion M. Iuell semeth to be him selfe: it shall not be besyde the purpose, though the places alreadie alleaged proue the contrarie, to recite the te­stimonies of an olde doctour or two, wherein they confesse most plainely that, which by this article is most vntruly denyed.

Saint Ambrose hath these wordes.In Psal. 38 Et si Christus nunc nō videtur offerre, tamen ipse offertur in terris, quādo Christi corpus offertur. Imò ipse offerre manifestatur in no­bis, cuius sermo sanctificat sacrificium quod offertur. If Christ now be not sene to offre, yet he is offered in earth, whē the body of Christ is offered. yea it is ma­nifest that him selfe offereth in vs, whose worde san­ctifieth and consecrateth the sacrifice, that is offered. Now if Christes body be offered in earth, as this fa­ther affirmeth, and that of Christ him selfe, in respecte that the sacrifice which is offered, is by his word cō ­secrated: then it foloweth, Christes bodie to be in so many places, as it is offered in. Where by the waye, this may be noted, that the sacrifice of the churche,Sacrificiū incruen­tū & viui­ficum. is not thākes geuing (as our newe Maisters doo teache) but the body of Christ it selfe, which of the fathers is called an vnbloudy and quikning or life geuing sacrifice.

We fynde in Chrysostome a most manifest place for the being of Christes body in many places at once, so [Page] as though he be offered in many places, yet is he but one Christ, not many Christes. his wordes be these. Vnum est hoc sacrificium, In epist. ad Heb. homil. 17. alioquin hac ratione, quoniam multis in locis offertur, multi Christi sunt? nequaquam, sed vnus vbique est Christus, & hic plenus existens, & illic plenus. Vnum corpus. Sicut enim qui vbique offertur vnum corpus est, & non multa corpora: ita etiam & vnum sa­crificium. This sacrifice is one, elles by this reason, sith it is offered in many places, bee there many Christes? Not so, but there is but one Christ euery where, being both here fully, and there fully also, one body. For as he that is offered euery where, is but one body, and not many bodies, so likewise it is but one sacrifice. By this place of Chrysostome we see, what hath ben the faith of the olde fathers touching this article, euen the same, which the catholike church professeth at these dayes, that one Christe is offered in many pla­ces, so as he be fully and perfitely here, and fully and perfitely there. And thus we perceiue, what force their argumentes haue in the iudgemēt of the learned fathers, by which they take awaie from Christ power to make his body present in many places at once.

Sermo. in coena Do­mini.S. Bernard vttereth the faith of the church in his tyme agreable with this, in these wordes. Sed vnde hoc nobis pijssime Domine, vt nos vermiculi reptātes etc. From whēce commeth this most louing lord, that we seely wormes creaping on the face of the earth, yea we, that are but duste and asshes, be admitted to haue thee present in our hādes, and before our eyes, which all and whole sittest at the right hande of thy father, which also arte present to all in one momēt of tyme [Page 107] from the east to the west, frō the north to the sowth, one in many, the same in diuerse places! from whēce (I saye) cōmeth this? soothly not of our dutie or de­serte, but of thy good will, and of the good pleasure of thy swetnesse, for thou hast prepared in thy swet­nesse for the poore one o God. In the same sermon exhorting the churche to reioise of the presence of Christ, he sayeth, In terra sponsum habes in Sacramento, in coelis habitura es sine velamento: & hic & ibi veritas, sed hic palliata, ibi manifestata. In the earth thou hast thy spouse in the sacrament, in heauē thou shalt haue him without vaile or couering. both here and also there is the truth, (of his presence) but here couered, there opened.

Thus all these fathers as likewise the rest, cōfesse as it were with one mowth, that Christ sitteth at the right hande of his father, and is here present in the sacrament the same tyme, that he is in heauen and in earth at once, in many and diuerse places one, and that the same is euery where offered, the one true sa­crifice of the churche. And this article is by them so clearely and plainely vttered, that figures, significa­tions, tropes, and metaphores can fynde no appea­raunce nor colour at all. Whereby the new Mai­sters reasons seme very peeuishe: Christ is ascended, ergo he is not in the sacramēt. Christ is in heauen sit­ting at the right hande of his father, ergo he is not in earth. Christes body is of nature finite, ergo it is conteined in a place circūscriptiuely, ergo it is not in many places. In making of which slender argumentes, they will not seme to acknowledge whose body it is, [Page] euen that, which is proper to God, whose power is ouer all, and to whom all thinges obeye.

But because M. Iuell and they of that secte, seme to set litle by these fathers, though very auncient, S. Bernard excepted, and of the churche holden for sain­tes, I will bring forth the auctoritie of Martin Bu­cer, a late doctour of their owne syde, though not canonizate for a sainte as yet,Truth cō ­fessed by the ene­mie of truth. for that I knowe. This newe father whom they esteme so much, and was the reader of diuinitie in Cābridge in kyng Edwar­des tyme, very vehemently, and for so much truly, affirmeth the true reall presence of Christes body in the sacrament. For he sayeth. Christ sayde not, This is my spirite, this is my vertue, but this is my body: where­fore we must beleue sayeth he, Christes body to be there, euen the same that dyd hange vpon the crosse, our lord him selfe. Which in some parte to declare, he vseth the similitude of the sunne for his purpose, contrary to M. Iuelles negatiue, to proue Christes body present, and that really and substātially, in what places so euer the sacrament is rightly ministred. His wordes be these.In cōmēt. in 16. cap. Matthaei. Vt sol verè vno in loco coeli visibilis cir­cūscriptus est, radijs tamē suis praesens verè & substātialiter exhibetur vbilibet orbis: Ita Dominus, etiā si circūscribatur vno loco coeli, arcani et diuini, id est gloriae Patris, verbo ta­mē suo, & sacris symbolis, verè et totus ipse Deus et homo praesens exhibetur in sacra coena, eoque substantialiter, quam praesentiā nō minus certò agnoscit mēs credēs verbis his Do­mini & Symbolis, quā oculi vident, et habēt solem presentē demonstratū & exhibitū sua corporali luce. Res ista arcana est, & noui testamēti, res fidei, nō sunt igitur huc admittēdae cogitationes de praesentatione corporis, quae constat ratione [Page 108] huius vitae etiam patibilis & fluxae. Verbo Domini simpli­citer in haerendum est, & debet fides sensuum defectui prae­bere supplementum. Which may thus be englished.

As the sunne is truly placed determinatly in one place of the visible heauen, and yet is exhibited truly and substantially by his beames euery where abroade in the worlde: So our lord although he be conteined in one place of the secret and diuine heauen, that is to witte, the glorie of his father: yet for all that by his word and holy tokens, he is exhibited present in his holy supper truly and him selfe whole God and man, and therefore substātially or in substāce. Which presence the mynde geuing credite to these our lor­des wordes and tokens, doth no lesse certainely ac­knowledge, then our eyes see and haue the sunne pre­sent shewed and exhibited with his corporall light. This is a secrete matter, and of the newe testament, a matter of faith, therefor herein thoughes be not to be admitted of such a presentatiō of the body, as cō ­sisteth in the maner of this lyfe passible and transi­torie, We must symply cleaue to the word of our lord, and where our senses faile, there must faith helpe to supplie. Thus we see, how Bucer in sundry other pointes of faith bothe deceiued and also a deceiuour, confirmeth the truth of this article pyththely and playnely. Such is the force of truth, that oftentymes it is confessed by the very enemies of truth.

Fight not with the churche M. Iuell, but fight with the enemie of the churche. fight with him, whō you haue folowed in departing from the churche, who neuer the lesse by force of truth, is driuē against you [Page] to confesse the truth in those most plaine wordes, Verè & totus ipse Deus & homo praesens exhibetur in sa­cra coena, eoque substantialiter. in this holy supper him selfe God and Man is exhibited present truly and whole, and therefore substantially.

Now to be shorte, whereas the chiefe argumētes that be made against the being of Christes body in many places at once, be deduced of nature, in respecte that this article semeth to them to abolishe nature, it maye please them to vnderstand,God vvorking abo­ue nature destroyeth not nature that God who is auctour of nature, can by his power doo with a body that, which is aboue the nature of a body, nature not de­stroyed, but kepte and preserued whole. Which Plato the hethen philosopher would sone haue ben induced to beleue, if he were alyue. Who asked what was na­ture, answered, quod Deus vult, that which God will.

And therefore we beleeue, that Enoch and Elias yet mortal by nature, doo by power of God lyue in body, and that aboue nature. Abacuc was by the same power caught vp, and in a momēt caried from Iewrie to Babylon, his nature reserued whole. Saint Peter by God according to nature walked on the earth, the same by God besyde nature, walked vpon the waters. Christ after condicion of nature assumpted, suffred death in body, the same Christ by his diuine power entred with his body in to his disciples through doo­res closed. Christ at his last supper according to nature sate downe with his twelue disciples, and among them occupied a place at the table visibly, by his di­uine power there he helde his body in his hādes inui­sibly.In exposi­tione psal. 13. For (as S. Augustine sayeth) ferebatur manibꝰ suis, [Page 109] he was borne in his owne hādes, where nature gaue place, and his one body was in mo places then one. Verely non est abbreuiata manus domini, the hande of our lord is not shortened, his power is as great, as euer it was. And therefore let vs not doubte, but he is able to vse nature finite, infinitely, specially now, the nature of his body being glorified after his re­surrection from the dead. And as the lyuing is not to be sought among the dead, so the thinges that be done by the power of God aboue nature, are not to be tryed by rules of nature.

And that all absurdities and carnall grosnes be se­uered from our thoughtes, where true christen peo­ple beleue Christes body to be in many places at once, they vnderstād it so to bee in a mysterie.Being in a mysterie. Now to be in a mysterie, is not to be comprehended in a place, but by the power of God to be made present in sorte and maner, as him selfe knoweth, verely so, as no reason of man can atteine it, and so, as it may be shewed by no examples in nature. Whereof that notable saying of S. Augustine may very well be re­ported,Aug. epis. ad Volu­sianū. Itē. Ser. 159. de tempore. O homo si rationem à me poscis, non erit mirabi­le: exemplum quaeritur, non erit singulare. that is, O man if (herein) thou require reason, it shall not be maruei­louse: seeke for the like example, and then it shall not be singuler. If Goddes working be comprehen­ded by reason (sayeth holy Gregorie) it is not wonderouse: neither faith hath meede,Gregorius in homil. whereto mannes reason geueth proufe.

Of the Eleuation or lyfting vp of the Sacrament.
ARTICLE. VII.

OF what weight this ceremonie is to be accompted, catholike Christē men, whom you call your aduersaries M. Iuell, knowe no lesse then you. Verely whereas it plea­seth you thus to ieste, and like a Lucian to scoffe at the sacramentes of the church, and the reuerent vse of the same, calling all these articles in generall th [...] highest mysteries, and greatest keyes of our religion without which our doctrine can not be mainetei­ned and stand vpright: vnderstand you that this, a sundry other articles, which you denye, and requyr [...] proufe of, is not such, ne neuer was so estemed. The priestes lifting vp or shewing of the Sacrament, is not one of the highest mysteries or greatest keyes of our Religion: and the doctrine of the catholike churche may right well be maineteined and stande without it. But it appeareth, you regarde not so much what you saye, as how you saye somewhat for co­lour of defacing the churche: which whiles you go about to doo, you deface your selfe more then you seeme to be ware of, and doo that thing, whereby among good christen men, specially the learned, you may be a shamed to shewe your face. For as you haue ouer rashely, yea I maye saye wickedly, affir­med the negatiue of sundry other articles, and stowtely craked of your assurance thereof,Eleuatiō of the sa­crament. so you hau [...] likewise of this. For perusing the auncient father [Page 110] writinges, we fynde record of this Ceremonie vsed euen from the Apostles tyme foreward.

Saint Dionyse, that was S. Paules scholer, sheweth, that the priest at his tyme after the consecration was wont to holde vp the dredfull mysteries, so as the people might beholde them. His wordes be these according to the greke.Ecclesias. hierarch. cap. 3. Pontifex diuina munera laude prosecutus, sacrosancta & augustissima mysteria conficit, & collaudata in conspectum agit per symbola sacrè pro­posita. The bishop after that he hath done his seruice of praising the diuine giftes, consecrateth the holy and most worthy mysteries, and bringeth them so praysed in to the sighte of the people by the tokēs set forth for that holy purpose. On which place the auncient greke writer of the scholies vpon that worke, sayeth thus. [...]. loquitur de vnius benedictionis, nimirum panis di­uini eleuatione, quem Pontifex in sublime attollit, dicens, Sancta sanctis. This father speaketh in this place, of the lifting vp of the one blessing, (that is to saye of the one forme or kynde of the sacrament) euen of that diuine breade, which the bishop lifteth vp on high, saying, holy thinges for the holy. In saint Ba­siles and Chrysostomes Masse we finde these wor­des. Sacerdos eleuans sacrum panem, dicit, Sancta Sanctis. The priest holding vp that sacred bread, sayeth: Ho­ly thinges for the holy. In Saint Chrysostomes Masse we reade, that, as the people is kneeling downe after th'example of the priest and of the deacon, the dea­con seing the priest stretching forth his handes, and [Page] taking vp that holy bread, [...], ad sacram eleuationem peragendam palam edicit, attendamus, to doo the holy eleuation, speaketh out a lowde, let vs be attent and (then) the priest sayeth (as he holdeth vp the sacrament) holy thinges for the holy.

Amphilochius, of whom mention is made afore in the lyfe of S. Basile, speaking of his wonderouse celebrating the Masse, among other thinges sayeth thus. Et post finem orationum, exaltauit panem, sine inter­missione orans, & dicens: Respice domine Iesu Christe, etc. And after that he had done the prayers of consecra­tion, he lyfted vp the bread, without ceasing praying and saying, Looke vpon vs lord Iesus Christ etc. The same saint Basile meant likewise of the Eleuation and holding vp of the sacrament after the custome of the Occidētall churche,Cap, 27. in his booke de Spiritu san­cto, where he sayeth thus. Inuocationis verba, dum osten­ditur panis eucharistiae & calix benedictionis, quis sancto­rum nobis scripto reliquit? Which of the sainctes, hath lefte vnto vs in writing, the wordes of Inuocation, whiles the bread of Eucharistia (that is to witte the blessed sacrament in forme of bread) and the conse­crated chalice, is shewed in sight? He speaketh there of many thinges that be of great auctoritie and weight in the church, which we haue by tradition onely, and can not be auouched by holy scripture. Of shewing the holy mysteries to them that be pre­sent in the sacrifice,In epist. ad Ephes. Sermon. 3. in moral. the olde doctours make mētion not sildom. S. Chrysostom declareth the maner of it, saying that such as were accompted vnworthy [Page 111] and heynouse synners, were put forth of the chur­che, whiles the sacrifice was offered, whiles Christ and that lambe of our lord was sacrificed. Which being put out of the churche, then were the vailes (of the aulter) taken awaie, to th'entent the holy my­steries might be shewed in sight, doubteles to styrre the people to more deuotion; reuerence, and to the adoration of christes bodie in them present. And thus for the Eleuation or holding vp of the sacra­ment, we haue sayde ynough.

Of the vvorshipping or adoration of the Sacrament.
ARTICLE. VIII.

IF the blessed Sacramēt of the aulter were no other, then M. Iuell and the rest of the Sacramentaries thinke of it: then were it not well done the people to bowe downe to it, and to worship it with godly honour. For then were it but bare bread and wyne, how honorably so euer they speake of it, calling it symbolicall, that is, tokening, and sacramentall bread and wyne. But now this being that very bread, which god the fa­ther gaue vs from heauē, as Christ sayeth:Ioan. 6. This bread being the fleshe of Christ, which he gaue for the life of the world this being that bread and that cuppe,1. Cor. 11. whereof who so euer eateth or drinketh vnworthe­ly, shall be gylty of the body and bloud of our lord: in this Sacrament being conteined the very reall and [Page] substantiall body and bloud of Christ, as him selfe sayeth expressely in the three first euangelistes, and in S. Paul: this being that holy Eucharistia, which Ig­natius calleth the fleshe of our Sauiour Iesus Christ,In episto­la quadā ad Smyr­nenses, vt citatur à Theodori to in Po­lymorph. Lib. 4. cō ­trà haere­ses. ca. 34. that hath suffered for our synnes, which the father by his goodnes hath raysed vp to life againe: This being not common bread, but the Eucharistia, after conse­cration consisting of two thinges, earthly and hea­uenly, as Irenaeus sayeth, meaning by the one, the out­ward formes, by the other, the very body and bloud of Christ, who partely for the godhed inseparably thereto vnited, and partly for that they were con­ceiued of the holy ghoste in the most holy virgine Mary, are worthely called heauenly: This being that bread, which of our lord geuen to his disciples, not in shape, but in nature chaunged by the almighty power of the word,In Ser. de coena do. is made fleshe, as S. Cyprian ter­meth it: This being that holy mysterie, wherein the inuisible priest tourneth the visible creatures (of bread and wyne) in to the substāce of his body and bloud, by his word with secrete power,Homil. 5. de Pascha. as Eusebiꝰ Emisenus reporteth: This being that holy foode, by worthy receiuing whereof Christ dwelleth in vs naturally, that is to witte, is in vs by truth of nature, and not by concorde of will onely,Lib. 8. de trinitate. as Hilarius affirmeth: Againe this being that table, whereat in our lordes meate we receiue the worde truly made fleshe of the most holy virgine Mary, as the same Hilarie sayeth: This being that bread which neither earing nor sowing nor worke of tyllers hath brought forth, but that earth which remained vntouched, and was [Page 112] full of the same, that is the blessed virgine Marye, as Gregorie Nyssene describeth:Lib. de vi­ta Mosis. cap. 48. Cōstitut. Apostol. li. 8. c. vlt. In Leuit. lib. 1. ca. 4. This being that sup­per, in the which Christ sacrificed him selfe, as Cle­mens Romanus, and as Hesychius declareth: Who fur­thermore in an other place writeth most plainely, that these mysteries, meaning the blessed sacrament of th'aulter, are sancta sanctorum, the holiest of all holy thinges, because it is the body of him selfe, of whom Gabriel sayd to the virgine,Luc. 1. the holy ghost shall come vpon the, and the power of the highest shall ouer­shaddowe the, therefore that holy thing which shall be borne of the, shall be called the sonne of God, and of whom also Esaie spake, Holy is our lord, and dwelleth on high, verely euen in the bosome of the father: On the holy table where these mysteries are celebrated, the lambe of God being layed and sacrificed of priestes vnbloudely, as that most auncient and wor­thy councell of Nice reporteth: Briefly in this highest Sacramēt vnder visible shape inuisible thinges, soothly the very true, reall, liuely, natural and substantiall bo­dy and bloude of our Sauiour Christ being contei­ned, as the scriptures, doctoures, councelles, yea and the best learned of Martin Lutheres schoole doo most plainely and assuredly affirme: This (I saye in conclusion) being so, as it is vndoubtedly so: we that remaine in the catholike churche, and can by no per­secution be remoued from the catholike faith, whom it liketh M. Iuell and his felowes to call papistes, be­leue verely, that it is our bownden duetie to adore the Sacrament, and to worship it with all godly ho­nour. By which word Sacrament notwithstanding [Page] in this respect, we meane not the outward formes, that properly are called the sacrament, but the thing of the sacramēt, the inuisible grace and vertue therein conteined, euen the very body and bloud of Christ.

And when we adore and worship this blessed Sacrament, we doo not adore and worship the sub­stance it selfe of bread and wine, because after con­secratiō none at all remaineth. Neither doo we adore the outward shapes and formes of bread and wine which remaine, for they be but creatures that ought not to be adored:What Christen people adore in the Sacra­ment. but the body it selfe and bloud of Christ, vnder those formes verely and really con­teined, lowly and deuoutly doo we adore. And there­fore to speake more properly, and according to skill, least our aduersaries might take aduātage against vs through occasion of termes, where right sense onely is meant: we proteste and saye, that we doo and ought to adore and worship the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament.

And here this much is further to be sayde, that in the Sacrament of the aulter, the body of Christ is not adored by thought of mynde sundred from the word, but being inseparably vnited to the word. For this is specially to be considered, that in this most holy Sacrament, the body and bloud of Christ are not present by them selues alone, as being separated from his soule and from the godhed: but that there is here his true and lyuing fleshe and bloud ioyned together with his godhed inseparably, and that they be as him selfe is, perfite, whole and inseparable Which is sufficiently confirmed by sundry his owne [Page 113] wordes in S. Iohn. I am (sayeth he) the bread of lyfe. Againe, this is bread comming downe from heauen, that if any eate of it, he dye not. I am the liuely bread that came downe from heauen, if any eate of this bread, he shall lyue euerlastingly. And to shewe what bread he meant, he cōcludeth with these wordes: And the bread which I shall geue, is my fleshe, which I shall geue for the life of the world. By which wordes he assureth vs plainely, that his fleshe which he geueth vs to eate, is full of lyfe, and ioyned with his godhed, which bringeth to the worthy receiuers thereof, immortalitie as well of body as of soule. Which thing fleshe and bloud of it selfe could not performe, as our lord him selfe declareth plainely, where he sayeth, as there it folo­weth: It is the spirite that quikneth or geueth lyfe, the fleshe profiteth nothing. The vvordes vvhich I haue spoken to you, bee spirite and life. As though he had sayde thus. The fleshe of it selfe profiteth nothing, but my fleshe which is full of godhed and spirite, bringeth and worketh immortalitie and life euetlasting to them that receiue it worthely. Thus we vnderstand in this blessed Sacrament not onely the body and bloud of Christ, but all and whole Christ, God and man, to be present in substāce, and that for the inseparable vnitie of the person of Christ: and for this cause we ac­knowledge our selues bownden to adore him, as ve­ry true God and man.

For a clearer declaration hereof, I will not let to recite a notable sentence out of S. Augustine, where he expoundeth these wordes of Christ:In Ioan. tractat. 27 Then if ye see the sonne of man go vp, vvhere he vvas before. There had [Page] ben no question (sayeth he) if he had thus sayde: if ye see the sonne of God go vp, where he was be­fore. But whereas he sayde, the sonne of man go vp, vvhere he vvas before, what was the sonne of man in heauen, before that he beganne to be in earth? Verely here he sayde, where he was before, as though then he were not there, when he spake these wordes. And in an other place he sayeth, No man hath ascended in to heauen, but he that descended from heauen, the sonne of man, vvhich is in heauen. He sayde not was, but the sonne of man (sayeth he) vvhich is in heauen. In earth he spake, and sayde him selfe to be in heauen. To what pertei­neth this, but that we vnderstand Christ to be one person, God and man, not two, least our faith be not a trinitie, but a quaternitie? Wherefore Christ is one, the worde, the soule and the fleshe, one Christ: the sonne of God, and the sonne of man, one Christ. The sonne of God euer, the sonne of man in tyme: yet one Christ according to th'unitie of person was in heauen, when he spake in earth. So was the sonne of man in heauen, as the sonne of god was in earth. The sonne of god in earth in fleshe taken, the sonne of man in heauen in vnitie of person. This farre saint Augustine.

Herevpon he expoundeth these wordes, it is the spirite that quikneth or geueth life, the fleshe auaileth nothing, thus: The fleshe profiteth nothing, but the onely fleshe. Come the spirite to the fleshe, and it profiteth very much. For if the fleshe shuld profite nothing, the word shuld not be made fleshe to dwell amon­gest vs. For this vnitie of person to be vnderstanded [Page 114] in bothe natures (sayeth the great learned father Leo) we reade that bothe the sonne of man came downe from heauen,Epist. ad Flauianū Constan­tinopoli­tanū epis. cap. 5. when as the sonne of god tooke fleshe of that virgine, of whom he was borne: and againe, it is sayde, that the sonne of god was crucified and buryed, whereas he suffered these thinges, not in the godhed it selfe, in which the onely begotē is coeuer­lasting and consubstantiall with the father, but in the infirmitie of humaine nature. Wherefore we cōfesse all in the Crede also, the onely begoten sonne of god crucified and buryed, according to that saying of th'apostle: For if they had knovven, 1. Cor. 2. they vvould neuer haue crucifyed the lord of Maiestie.

According to this doctrine Cyrillus writing vpon S. Iohn, sayeth,In Ioan. li. 4. ca. 15. he that eateth the fleshe of Christ hath lyfe euerlasting. For this fleshe hath the word of god, which naturally is lyfe. Therfore he sayeth: I vvill rayse him againe in the last daye. For I, sayde he, that is, my body, which shall be eaten, will raise him againe. For he is not other, then his fleshe. I saye not this because by nature he is not other, but because after incarnation he suffereth not him selfe to be diuided in to two sonnes. By which wordes he reproueth the heresie of wicked Nestorius, that went about to diuide Christ, and of Christ to make two sonnes, the one the sonne of god, the other the sonne of Marye, and so two persones. For which Nestorius was con­demned in the first Ephesine councell, and also spe­cially for that he sayde, we receiue in this Sacramēt onely the fleshe of Christ in the bread, and his bloud onely in the wine without the godhed, because [Page] Christ sayde, he that eateth my fleshe, and sayde not, he that eateth or drinketh my godhed, because his god­hed can not be eaten, but his fleshe onely. Which he­reticall cauille Cyrillus doth thus auoyd.Vide Anathematis­mum. xi. Item ad Theodos. de recta fi­de. & li. 2. ad Regi­nas, de re­cta fide. Although (sayeth he) the nature of the godhed be not eaten, yet we eate the body of Christ, which verely may be eaten. But this body is the Wordes owne proper body, which quikneth althinges. and in as much as it is the body of life, it is quikning or lyfe geuing.

Now he quikneth vs or geueth vs lyfe, as God, the onely fonteine of lyfe. Wherefore such speaches vt­tered in the scriptures, of Christ, whereby that ap­peareth to be attributed to the one nature, which apperteineth to the other, and contrary wise: accor­ding to that incomprehēsible and vnspeakeable con­iunction and vnion of the diuine and humaine na­ture in one person, are to be taken of him insepara­bly, in as much as he is both god and man: and not of this or that other nature onely, as being seuered from the other. For through cause of this insepara­ble vnion, what so euer is apperteining or peculiar to either nature, it is rightly ascribed, yea and it ought to be ascribed to the whole person. And this is done, as the learned diuines terme it, per communi­cationem idiomatum. And thus Cyrillus teacheth, how christ maye be eaten, not according to the diuine, but humaine nature, which he tooke of vs, and so likewise he is of Christen people adored in the Sa­cramēt according to his diuine nature. And yet not according to his diuine nature onely, as though that were separated from his humaine nature, but his [Page 115] whole person together God and man. And his pre­tious fleshe and bloud are adored for the inseparable cōiunction of bothe natures into one person, which is Iesus Christ God and man. Whom God hath exalted, (as S. Paul sayeth) and hath geuen him a name, Philip. 2. vvhich is aboue all name, that in the name of Iesus euery knee be bovved of the heauenly and the earthly thinges, and of thinges beneathe, and that euery tonge confesse, that our lord Iesus Christ is in glo­ry of God the father, that is, of equal glory with the fa­ther,Heb. 10. Psal. 96. And vvhen God (sayeth S. Paul) bringeth his first be­goten in to the vvorld, he sayeth, and let all the Angelles of God adore him. S. Iohn writeth in his reuelatiō, that he heard all creatures saye, blessing honour, Apoc. 5. glory and power be to him which sitteth in the throne, and to the lambe for euer. And the fouer and tvventie elders fell dovvne on their faces, and adored him that lyueth vntill vvorldes of vvorldes.

But it shall be more tediouse then nedefull, to re­cite places out of the scriptures for proufe of th'ado­ratiō of Christ, there may of thē be fownde so great plentie.Contra­rietie in the first diuisers of the nevve gospell. Yet because Luther was either so blinde or rather so deuilishe, as to denye th'adoration, where notwithstāding he cōfessed the presence of Christes true and natural body in the Sacrament: I will here recite what the Sacramentaries of Zurich haue writ­ten against him therefore. What (saye they) is the bread the true and natural body of Christ, and is Christ in the supper (as the Pope and Luther doo teache) present? Wherefore then ought not the lord there to be adored, where ye saye him to be present? Why shall we be forbydden to adore that, which is [Page] not onely sacramentally, but also corporally the bo­dy of Christ? Thomas toucheth the true body of Christ raysed vp from the dead, and falling downe on his knees adoreth saying: My God and my lord. The disciples adore the lord as well before as after his Ascension. Matth. 28. Act. 1. And the lord in S. Iohn sayeth to the blinde man,Ioan. 9. beleuest thou in the sonne of God? and he answered him saying, Lord who is he, that I may beleue in him? And Iesus sayed to him. Thou hast bothe sene him, and who speaketh with thee, he it is. Then he sayeth, lord I beleue. and he adored him. Now if we taught our lordes bread to be the natural bo­dy of Christ, verely we would adore it also faithfully with the papistes. This much the Zuinglians against Luther. Whereby they prooue sufficiently th'adora­tion of Christes body in the Sacrament, and so con­sequently of Christ him selfe God and man, because of the inseparable coniunction of his diuine and hu­maine nature in vnitie of persone, so as where his body is, there is it ioyned and vnited also vnto his godhed, and so there Christ is present perfitely, whol­ly, and substantially, very god and man.

For the cleare vnderstanding whereof the better to be atteined, the scholastical Diuines haue profitably deuised the terme concomitantia, plainely and truly teaching that in this Sacrament after consecration vnder the forme of breade is present the body of Christ, and vnder the forme of wine his bloud ex vi sacramenti, and with the body vnder forme of bread also the bloud, the soule, and godhed of Christ, and likewise with the bloud, vnder the forme of wyne, [Page 116] the body, soule, and godhed, ex concomitantia, as they terme it, in shorter and playner wise vttering the same doctrine of faith, which the holy fathers dyd in the Ephesme councell against Nestorius. Whereby they meane, that where the body of Christ is present, by necessary sequell, because of the indiuisible copula­tion of bothe natures in the vnitie of person, (for as much as the Word made fleshe neuer lefte the hu­maine nature) there is also his bloud, his soule, his godhed, and so whole and perfite Christ God and man. And in this respecte the terme is not to be misliked of any godly learned man, though some newe Maisters scoffe at it, who fill the measure of their predecessours, that likewise haue ben offended with termes for the apter declaration of certaine ne­cessary articles of our faith, by holy and learned fa­thers in generall councelles holesomly deuised. Of which sorte ben these, homousion, humanatio, incarnatio, transubstantiatio, etc. Now here is to be noted, how the Zuinglians, whom M. Iuell foloweth, in th'article of adoration confute the Lutherans, as on the other syde, the Lutherans in th'article of the presence, con­fute the Zuinglians. As though it were by gods spe­ciall prouidence for the better staye of his churche so wrought, that bothe the truth shuld be confes­sed by the enemies of truth, and also for vttering of vntruth, the one shuld be condemned of the other, that by the warre of heretikes the peace of the chur­che might be established, and by their discorde the catholike people might the faster grewe together in concorde.

Now hauing sufficiētly proued by the scriptures, and that with the Zuingliās also, adoration and god­ly honour to be due vnto Christes body, where so euer it please his diuine maiestie to exhibit the same present: let vs see, whether we can finde the same doctrine affirmed by the holy and auncient fathers.

What the Apostles taught in their tyme concer­ning this Article, we may iudge by that we reade in Dionysius, that was S. Paules scholer, and for that is to beleued. He adoreth and worshippeth this holy mysterie with these very wordes.Ecclesias. hierarch. cap. 3. Sed ò diuinum peni­tus sanctumque mysterium, etc. But ô diuine and holy mysterie, which vouchesafest to open the coouerin­ges of signes layd ouer the, vtter thy light to vs openly and plainely, and fill our spirituall eyes with the singular and euident brightnes of thy light.

Origen teacheth vs how to adore and worship Christ in the Sacrament, before we receiue it, after this forme of wordes.Hom: 5. in diuersos Euangelij locos. Quādo sanctum cibum, etc. when thou receiuest the holy meate and that vncorrupt banket, when thou enioyest the bread and cuppe of lyfe, thou eatest and drinkest the body and bloud of our lord: then our lord entreth in vnder thy roofe. And therefor thou also humbling thy selfe folowe this Cēturion or captaine, and saye: Lord I am not vvor­thy that thou enter vnder my roofe. For where he entreth in vnworthely, there he entreth in to the condem­nation of the receiuer.

What can be thought of S. Cyprian, but that he adored the inuisible thing of this Sacrament, which is the body and bloud of Christ, seing that he con­fesseth [Page 117] the godhed to be in the same, nolesse then it was in the person of Christ, which he vttereth by these wordes.In Ser. d [...] coena do. Panis iste quem dominus discipulis porri­gebat, etc. This bread which our lord gaue to his dis­ciples, chaunged not in shape, but in nature, by the almighty power of god is made fleshe. And as in the person of Christ the manhode was sene, and the godhed was hydden, euen so the diuine essence hath vnspeakeably infused it selfe into the visible sacramēt.

Chrysostom hath a notable place for the adora­tion of Christes body in the Sacrament, in his com­mentaries vpon S. Paul,In 10. cap. prioris ad Corinth. where he affirmeth also the real presence and the sacrifice. Let vs not, let vs not (sayeth he) be willing impudently to kill our selues. And when thou seest that body set forth, saye with thy selfe, for cause of this body I am no lenger earth and ashes, no lenger captiue, but free. This body fa­stened (on the Crosse) and beaten, was not ouercome with death. After this he exhorteth all to adore and worship our lordes body in the Sacrament. This bo­dy (sayeth he) the wise men worshipped in the stalle, and hauing takē a long iourney, being bothe wicked and aliantes, with very great feare and trembling adored him. Wherefore let vs folowe at least those aliants, vs I saye, that are citizens of heauen. For they, whereas they sawe but that stalle and cabben onely, and none of all the thinges thou seest nowe, came notwithstāding with the greatest reuerēce and feare, that was possible. But thou seest it not in a stalle of beastes, but on the aulter, not a woman to holde it in her armes, but a priest present, and the holy ghoste [Page] plentyfully spredde vpon the sacrifice. This father in his Masse maketh a prayer in presence of the blessed Sacrament, almost with the same wordes, that S. Basile did. Attēde domine Iesu Christe Deus noster, etc. Looke vpon vs o lord Iesus Christ our God, from thy holy habitacle, and from the throne of the glo­ry of thy kingdom, and come to sanctifie vs, who sittest on high with the father, and art here inuisibly with vs, and make vs worthy by thy mighty hāde, that we may be partakers of thy vnspotted body and pretiouse bloude, and through vs, all the people.

In the same Chrysostomes liturgie or Masse, a most euident testimonie of adoration of the Sacra­mēt is thus vttered. Sacerdos adorat, et diaconus in eo in quo est loco, ter secretò dicētes: Deus propitius esto, etc. The priest adoreth, and the deacon likewise in the place he standeth in, saying three tymes secretly: God be mercifull to me a synner. So the people, and likewise all make their adoration deuoutely and reuerently.

In the same father is an other prayer, which the greke priestes doo vse to this daye at their adora­tion of Christes body in the Sacrament, and it is ex­pressed in these wordes. Domine non sum dignus etc. Lord I am not worthy that thou enter vnder the filthy roofe of my soule. But as thou tookest in good parte to lye in the denne and stall of brute beastes, and in the house of Simon the leprouse, receiuedst also a harlot and a synner like me comming vnto thee: vouchesafe also to enter into the stalle of my soule voyde of reason, and into my fylthy body being dead and leprouse. And as thou dydst not ab­horre [Page 118] the fowle mowth of a harlot, kissing thyne vndefyled feete: So my lord God abhorre not me though a synner, but vouchesafe of thy goodnesse and benignitie, that I maye be made partaker of thy most holy body and bloude.

S. Ambrose after long serche and discussion,De spirit [...] sancto. li. 3. cap. 12. Psal. 96. how that saying of the prophete might be vnderstanded, Adore and worship ye his footestoole, because it is holy: At length concludeth so, as by the footestoole he vn­derstandeth the earth, because it is written,Esa. 66. Heauen is my seate, and the earth is my footestoole: And because, the earth is not to be adored, for that it is a creature, by this earth he vnderstādeth that earth, which our lord Iesus tooke in the assumption of his fleshe of the virgine Marye, and hereupon he vttereth those plaine wordes for testimonie of the adoration. Ira (que) per scabellum terra intelligitur, per terrā autem caro Chri­sti, quam hodie quoque in mysterijs adoramus, & quam Apostoli in domino Iesu adorarunt. And thus by the footestoole earth may be vnderstanded, and by earth the fleshe of Christ, which euen now adayes also we adore in the mysteries, and the Apostles adored in our lord Iesus.

S. Augustines learned handling of this place of the psalme, adore ye his footestoole, because it is holy: maketh so euidently for this purpose, that of all other aucto­rities, which in great number might be brought for prouse of the same, it ought least to be omitted. The place being long, I will recite it in English onely. His wordes be these. Adore ye his footestoole, In Psal. 98 because it is holy. See ye brethren, what that is, he byddeth vs [Page] to adore. [...]sa. 66. In an other place the scripture sayeth: heauē is my seate, and the earth is my footestoole. What doth he then bydde vs adore and worship the earth, be­cause he sayde in an other place, that it is the foote­stoole of God? And how shall we adore the earth, whereas the scripture sayeth plainely,Deut. 6.10 Thou shalt adore thy lord thy God, and here he sayeth, adore ye his foo­testoole? But he expoūdeth to me, what his footestoole is,Matth. 4. and sayeth And the earth is my footestoole. I am made doubtefull, afrayed I am to adore the earth, least he damne me, that made heauen and earth. Againe I am afrayed not to adore the footestoole of my lord, be­cause the Psalme sayeth to me, Adore ye his footestoole. I seeke what thing is his footestoole, and the scrip­ture telleth me, The earth is my footestoole. Being thus wauering, I tourne me to Christ, because him I seeke here, and I fynde how without impietie the earth may be adored. For he tooke of earth, earth, because fleshe is of earth, and of the fleshe of Marye, he tooke fleshe. And because he walked here in fleshe, and that very fleshe he gaue vs to eate to Saluation, and no man eateth that fleshe, excepte first he adore it: it is fownde out how such a footestoole of our lord may be adored, and how we not onely synne not by adoring, but synne by not adoring. Doth not the fleshe quicken and geue lyfe? Our lord him selfe sayde, when he spake of the commendation it selfe of that earth: Ioan. 6. it is the spirite that quikneth, but the fleshe, profiteth nothing. Therfore when thou bowest thy selfe and fallest downe to euery such earth, be­holde it not as earth, but that holy one, whose [Page 119] footestoole it is, that thou doest adore, for because of him thow doest adore. And therefore here he added: Adore ye his footestoole, because it is holy. Who is ho­ly? he for whose loue thou adorest his footestoole. And when thou adorest him, remaine not by cogi­tation in fleshe, that thou be not quikned of the spi­rite. For the spirite (sayeth he) quikneth, and the fleshe profiteth nothing. And then when our lord com­mended this vnto vs, he had spoken of his fleshe, and had sayde: Excepte a man eate my fleshe, he shall not haue in him lyfe euerlastyng.

Againe S. Augustine sheweth the maner and cu­stome of his tyme touching the adoration of Christ in the Sacrament, writing thus ad Honoratum, Epist. 120. cap. 21. vpon the verse of the xxj. psalme, Edent pauperes & satura­buntur, that is, the poore shall eate and be filled, and vpon that other, Manducauerunt & adorauerunt omnes diuites terrae, all the riche of the earth haue eaten and adored. It is not without cause (sayeth he) that the riche and the poore be so distincted, that of the poore it was sayde before, the poore shall eate and be fylled: and here (of the riche) they haue eaten and adored all that be the riche of the earth. For they haue bē brought to the table of Christ, and doo take of his body and bloud, but they doo adore onely, and be not also fyl­led, for as much as they doo not folowe him.

Likewise in his exposition vpon that Psalme:In Psal. 2 [...] All the riche also (sayeth he there) of the earth haue eaten the body of the humblenes of their lord, neither haue they ben fylled as the poore, vntill the folowing. But yet they haue adored and worshipped it, that is, [Page] by adoration they haue acknowleged Christ their lord there present.

Furthermore writing against Faustus the heretike of the Maniches secte, amongest other thinges he she­weth, how the Ethnikes thought that christē people for the honour they dyd before the blessed Sacramēt, that is of the bread and wyne consecrated, dyd ho­nor Bacchus and Ceres, which were false goddes ho­noured of the Gentiles for the inuention of wyne and corne. Whereof may iustly be gathered an ar­gument, that in those dayes faithfull people worship­ped the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacramēt, vnder the formes of bread and wyne. For elles the infidelles could not haue suspected them of doing idolatrie to Bacchus and Ceres.

One other most euident place touching this ho­nour and adoration, we fynde in him rehearsed by Gratian. lib. Sent. Prosperi. De conse­crat. dist 2 can. Nos autem. we doo honour (sayeth he) in forme of bread and wyne, which we see, thinges inuisible, that is to faye, fleshe and bloud. Neither take we likewise these two formes, as we tooke them before consecration. Sith that we doo faithfully graunt, that before cōsecration it is bread and wyne, which nature hath shapte, but after cōsecration, fleshe and bloud of Christ, which the blessing (of the priest) hath consecrated.

Leauing a number of places that might be allea­ged out of the auncient fathers for the confirmation of this matter, to auoyde tediousnes, I will conclude with that most plaine place of Theodoritus. Who speaking of the outward signes of the Sacrament, [Page 120] sayeth, that notwithstanding they remaine after the mysticall blessing in the proprietie of their former nature, as those that may be sene and felte nolesse then before: yet they are vnderstanded and beleued to be the thinges, which they are made by vertue of cōsecratiō, and are worshipped with godly honour. His wordes be these. Intelligūtur ea esse, quae facta sunt, Dialogo 2 & creduntur, & adorātur, vt quae illa sint, quae credūtur. These mysticall signes (sayeth he) are vnderstāded to be those thinges which they are made, and so they are beleued, and are adored, as being the thīges which they are beleued to be. With which wordes Theodoritus affirmeth bothe the reall presence, and also the adora­tion. The reall presence, in that he sayeth these out­ward signes or tokens after consecration to be made thinges, which are not sene, but vnderstanded and beleued, whereby he signifieth the inuisible thing of this Sacrament, the body and bloud of Christ. Ado­ratiō he teacheth with expresse termes, and that be­cause through power of the mysticall blessing the signes be in existence and in dede the thinges which they are beleued to be, soothly the body and bloud of Christ. For otherwise god forbydde, that christen people shuld be taught to adore and worship the insensible creatures bread and wyne. Of which he sayeth, that they are adored not as signes, not so in no wise, but as being the thinges which they are be­leued to be. Now I reporte me to the Christen rea­der, whether this Adoratiō of the Sacrament, where­by we meane the godly worship of Christes bo­dy in the Sacrament, be a newe deuise or no, brought [Page] into the church but lately, about three hūdred yeres past,Fol. 20. as M. Iuell maketh him selfe sure of it in his ser­mon. And whereas vtterly to abolishe this adora­tion,Fol. 26. he alleageth great danger of idolatrie, in case the priest do not truly cōsecrate: thereto may be answe­red,Gen. 29. that Iacob stoode in no danger of conscience, for that by the procurement of Laban, he laye with Lya in stede of Rachel, neither for the same was he to be charged with aduowtrie, because he meāt good faith, and thought him selfe to haue had the companie of his wyfe Rachel. So idolatrie is not to be imputed vnto him, that worshippeth Christ with godly ho­nour in the bread not cōsecrate, which of good faith he thinketh to be consecrate. Touching this case S. Augustine hath this notable saying.Inchi. 60 We haue nede (sayeth he) to put a difference in oure iudgemēt, and to knowe good from euyll, for as much as Sathan chaunging his shape, sheweth him selfe as an angell of light, least through deceite he leade vs a syde to some perniciouse thinges. For when he deceiueth the senses of the bodye, and remoueth not the mynde from true and right meaning, wherein ech man lea­deth a faithfull lyfe there is no perill in religion. Or if whē he fayneth him selfe good, and doth or sayeth those thinges, that of congruence perteine to good angels, although he be thought to be good, this is not a perilouse or sickely errour of Christian faith. But when as by these thinges he begynneth to bring vs to thinges quite contrarie, then to knowe him from the good Spirite, and not to go after him, it standeth vs much vpon diligently to watche and take heede. [Page 121] Thus S. Augustine. This much for th'adoration of the Sacrament, or rather of Christ in the Sacrament, maye suffise.

Of the reuerent hanging vp of the Sacrament vnder a Canopie.
ARTICLE. IX.

IF M. Iuell would in plaine termes denye the reseruatiō and keping of the blessed Sacra­ment, for which purpose the Pyxe and Canopie serued in the Churches of Eng­land, as of the professours of this newe gospell it is bothe in word and also in dede denyed: it were easy to proue the same by no small number of auctori­ties, such as him selfe can not but allowe for good and sufficient. But he knowing that right well, guile­fully refrayneth from mētion of that principall mat­ter, and the better to make vp his heape of Articles for some shewe against the Sacrament, by denyall reproueth the hanging vp of it vnder the Canopie, thereby shewing him selfe like to Momus, who es­pying nothing reproueable in fayer Venus, fownde faulte with her slypper. Whereto we saye, that if he with the rest of the Sacramentaries would agree to the keping of the Sacramēt, thē would we demaunde, why that maner of keping were not to be liked. And here vpon proufes made of defaulte in this be­halfe, and a better waye shewed, in so small a matter conformitie to the better would sone be persuaded.

Diuerse maners of keping the bles­sed Sacra­ment.In other christen countries (we graunt) it is kepte otherwise, vnder locke and keye, in some places at the one ende or syde of the aulter, in some places in a chappell buylded for that purpose, in some places in the vestrie or in some inward and secrete rome of the churche,In episto­la ad In­nocentiū. as it was in the tyme of Chrysostom at Constantinople. In some other places we reade, that it was kepte in the bishoppes palais neare to the churche, and in the holy dayes brought reuerently to the churche, and sette vppon th'aulter, which for abuses committed was by order of councelles abro­gated.In Cōcil. Braccarē. 3. Can. 5. Thus in diuerse places diuersely it hath ben kepte, euery where reuerently and surely, so as it might be safe from iniurie and villainie of miscreātes and dispysers of it. The hanging vp of it on high hath ben the maner of England, as Lindewode no­teth vpon the constitutions prouinciall on high, that wicked dispite might not reache to it, vnder a Ca­nopie, for shewe of reuerence and honour.

If princes be honored with cloth of estate, bishops with solemne thrones in their churches, and deanes with canopies of tapistrie, sylke and arras (as we see in sundry cathedrall churches) and no man finde faulte with it: why shuld M. Iuell mislike the Cano­pie that is vsed for honour of that blessed Sacramēt, wherein is conteined the very body of Christ, and through the inseparable ioyning together of bothe natures in vnitie of person, Christ him selfe very God and man? With what face speaketh he against the Canopie vsed to the honour of Christ in the Sacra­ment, that sytting in the bishoppes seate at Sales­burie, [Page 122] can abyde the syght of a solene canopie made of paineted bourdes spredde ouer his head? If he had ben of counsell with Moses, Dauid and Salomon, it is lyke he would haue reproued their iudgementes for the great honour they vsed and caused so to be continewed towardes the Arke, wherein was con­teined nothing but the tables of the lawe, Aarons rodde, and a pottefull of Manna.

King Dauid thought it very vnsitting,2. Reg. 7. and felte great remorse in heart, that he dwelte in a house of Cedres, and the Arke of God was putte in the myd­des of skynnes, that is, of the tabernacle, whose out­ward partes were couered with beastes skynnes. And now there is one fownde among other monstrouse and straunge formes of creatures, maners and doctri­nes, who being but duste and ashes, as Abrahā sayde of him selfe, promoted to the name of a bishop, and not chosen (I wene) to doo high seruice of a man ac­cording to Gods owne hearte, as Dauid was: thinketh not him selfe vnworthy to sytte in a bishopes chayer vnder a gorgeouse testure or Canopie of gilted bour­des, and can not suffer the pretiouse body of Christ, whereby we are redemed, to haue for remembraunce of honour done of our parte, so much as, a litle Ca­nopie, a thing of small price. Yet was the Arke but a shadowe, and this the body, that the figure, this the truthe, that the type or signe, this the very thing it selfe. As I doo not enuie M. Iuell that honour, by what right so euer he enioyeth it, So I can not but blame him for bereuing Christ of his honour in this blessed Sacrament.

Now concerning this article it selfe, if it may be called an article, wherein M. Iuell thinketh to haue great aduantage against vs, as though nothing could be brought for it (though it be not one of the grea­test keyes nor of the highest mysteries of our Reli­gion as he reporteth it to bee the more to deface it) of the Canopie what may be fownde, I leaue to others, neither it forceth greatly.Hanging vp of the Sacramēt in a pixe ouer the aulter is auncient. But of the hanging vp of the Sacrament ouer the aulter, we fynde plaine men­tion in S. Basiles lyfe written by Amphilochius that worthy bishop of Iconium. Who telleth that S. Ba­sile at his Masse hauing diuided the Sacramēt in three partes, dyd put the one in to the golden dooue (af­ter which forme the Pyxe was then cōmonly made) hanging ouer the aulter, His wordes be these, Imposue­rit columbae aureae pendenti super altare. And for further euidence, that such pyxes made in forme of a dooue in remembraunce of the holy ghost, that appeared like a dooue, were hāged vp ouer th'aulter, we fynde in the actes of the Generall councell holdē at Con­stantinople, that the clergie of Antioche accused one Seuerus an heretike, before Iohn the patriarke and the councell there, that he had ryfled and spoyled the holy aulters, and molted the cōsecrated vesselles, and had made awaye with some of them to his cō ­panions, praesumpsisset etiam columbas aureas & argen­teas in formam Spiritus sancti super diuina lauacra et al­taria appensas vna cum alijs sibi appropriare, dicens, non oportere in specie columbae Spiritum sanctum nominare. Which is to saye, that he had presumed also to con­uerte to his owne vse besyde other thinges, the [Page 123] golden and syluerne dooues, made to represent the holy ghoste, that were hanged vp ouer the holy fontes and aulters, saying that no mā ought to speake of the holy ghoste in the shape of a dooue.

Neither hath the Sacrament ben kepte in all places and in all tymes in one maner of vessels. So it be re­uerently kepte for the viage prouision for the sicke, no catholike man will maineteine strife for the ma­ner and order of keping. Symmachus a very worthy bishop of Rome in the tyme of Anastasius the Em­perour, as it is written in his lyfe, made two vessel­les of syluer to reserue the Sacrament in, and set them on the aulters of two churches in Rome, of S. Syluester, and of S. Androw. These vesselles they call commonly, ciboria. We fynde likewise in the lyfe of S. Gregorie, that he also like Symmachus made such a vessell which they call ciborium for the Sacrament, with fouer pillours of pure syluer, and set it on the aulter at S. Petres in Rome.

In a worke of Gregorius Turonensis, this vessell is called, turris in qua mysterium dominici corporis habeba­tur, a tower wherein our lordes body was kepte. In an olde booke de poenitentia of Theodorus the greke of Tarsus in Cilicia, sometyme archbishop of Cantorbu­ry, before Beda his tyme, it is called pixis cum corpore Domini ad viaticum pro infirmis. The pyxe with our lordes body for the viage prouision for the sicke. In that booke, in an admonition of a bishop to his cler­gie in a synode, warning is geuen, that nothing be put vppon th'aulter in tyme of the Sacrifice, but the cofer of Relikes, the booke of the fouer Euāgelistes, [Page] and the pyxe with our lordes body.

Thus we fynde that the blessed Sacrament hath alwaies ben kepte in some places in a pyxe hanged vp ouer the aulter, in some other places otherwise, euery where and in all tymes safely and reuerently, as is declared, to be alwaile in readynes for the viage prouision of the sicke. Which keping of it for that godly purpose, and with like due reuerēce, if M. Iuell and the Sacramentaries would admitte, no man will be either so scrupulouse or so contentiouse, as to stryue with them either for the hanging vp of it, or for the Canopie.

Of the remaining of the Accidentes vvithout their substance in the Sacrament.
ARTICLE. X.

IN this Sacrament after consecration, no­thing in substāce remayneth that was be­fore, neither breade nor wine, but onely the Accidentes of breade and wine: as their forme and shape, sauour, smell, colour, weight, and such the like, which here haue their being mira­culously without their subiecte: for as much as after consecration, there is none other substance, then the substance of the body and bloud of our lord, which is not affected with such accidentes, as the scholasti­call doctours terme it. Which doctrine hath alwayes [Page 124] though not with these precise termes, ben taught and beleued from the beginning,Transub­stantiatiō affirmed. and depēdeth of the Article of Transubstantiation. For if the substance of bread and wyne be chaunged in to the substance of the body and bloud of our lord (which is cōstantly affirmed by all the learned and auncient fathers of the churche) it foloweth by a necessary sequell in nature and by drifte of reason, that then the acciden­tes onely remaine. For witnes and proufe whereof, I will not let to recite certaine most manifest sayinges of the olde and best approued doctours.

S. Cyprian that learned bishop and holy martyr sayeth thus in sermone de coena domini. Panis iste quem dominus discipulis porrigebat, non effigie, sed natura muta­tus, omnipotentia verbi factus est caro. This bread which our lord gaue to his disciples, chaunged not in shape, but in nature, by the almighty power of the word (he meaneth Christes word of Consecratiō) is made fleshe. Lo he confesseth the breade to be chaunged not in shape or forme, for that remayneth, but in na­ture, that is to saye, in substance. And to signifie the chaunge of substance, and not an accidētarie chaunge onely, to witte, from the vse of common breade to serue for Sacramentall bread, as some of our newe Maisters doo expounde that place for a shifte he ad­deth great weight of wordes, whereby he farre ouer­peiseth these mennes light deuise, saying that by the almighty power of our lordes word, it is made fleshe. Verely they might consyder, as they would seme to be of sharpe iudgement, that to the perfor­mance of so small a matter, as their sacramentall [Page] chaunge is, the almighty power of gods worde is not nedefull. And now if here this worde factus est may signifie an imaginatiue making, then why may not verbum caro factum est, likewise be expounded to the defence of sundry olde haynouse heresies against the true manhod of Christ? Thus the nature of the bread in this sacrament being chaunged, and the forme re­mayning, so as it seme breade, as before consecration, and being made our lordes fleshe by vertue of the word, the substance of bread changed into that most excellent substance of the fleshe of Christ: of that which was before, the accidentes remaine onely, without the substance of breade. The like is to be be­leued of the wyne.

De conse­crat. dist. 2 ca [...] omnia quaecū (que).Nothing can be playner to this purpose, then the sayinges of S. Ambros. Licet figura panis & vini vi­deatur, nihil tamen aliud, quam caro Christi et sanguis post consecrationem credendum est. Although (sayeth he) the forme of bread and wyne be sene, yet after conse­cration we must beleue, they are nothing elles, but the fleshe and bloud of Christ. After the opinion of this father the shewe and figure of breade and wyne are sene, and therefore remaine after cōsecratiō. And if we must beleue that which was breade and wyne before, to be no other thing, but the fleshe and bloud of Christ: then are they no other thing in dede. For if they were, we might so beleue. For beleefe is grownded vpon truth, and what so euer is not true, it is not to be beleued. Hereof it foloweth, that after consecratiō the accidētes and shewes onely remayne without the substāce of breade and wyne.De Sacra­mētis lib. 4. cap. 4. In an other [Page 125] place he sayeth as much. Panis iste, etc. This bread be­fore the wordes of the Sacramētes, is bread, as sone as the cōsecratiō cōmeth, of bread is made the body of Christ. Againe in an other place he sayeth most plai­nely.De ijs qui initiātur. That the power of consecration is greatter then the power of nature, because nature is chaunged by consecration. By this father it is euident, that the nature, that is to saye, the substance of breade and wine by consecration being chaunged into the body and bloude of Christ, their natural qualities, which be accidentes contynewing vnchaunged for perfor­mance of the Sacrament, remayne without the sub­stance of bread and wyne.

According vnto the which meaning Theodoritus sayeth, videri & tangi possunt sicut prius, Dialog. 2. Intelligūtur au­tem ea esse, quae facta sunt, & creduntur. The breade and wyne may be sene and felte as before cōsecratiō, but they are vnderstāded to be the thinges, which they are made, and beleued. We do not in like sorte (sayeth S. Augustine) take these two formes of breade and wine after cōsecratiō, as we tooke them before.In lib Sē ­tent. Pro­speri. de cōse. dict. 2. ca. Nos autem. Sith that we graunt faithfully that before consecra­tion it is bread and wyne that nature hath shapte, but after consecration, that it is the fleshe and bloud of Christ, that the blessing hath consecrated.De verbis domini. Secundū Lucā. Ser­mone 28. In an other place he sayeth, that this is not the bread which goeth in to the body (meaning for bodily sustenance) but that bread of life, qui animae nostrae substantiam fulcit, which susteineth the substance of our soule.

No mā can speake more plainely hereof then Cyrillꝰ Hierosolymitanus an olde auctor, who wrote in greke, [Page] and is extant, but as yet remayning in written hāde, and commen to the sighte of fewe learned men. His wordes be not much vnlike the wordes of the scole-doctoures. Praebetur corpus [...]. in specie siue figura panis. Item praebetur sanguis [...]. Christes body (sayeth he) is geuen vs in forme or figure of bread. Againe his bloud is geuen vs in forme of wine. A litle after these wordes he sayeth thus. [...], etc. Ne mentem adhibeas quasi pani & vino nudis, sunt enim haec corpus & sanguis, vt Dominus pronunciauit. Nam tametsi illud tibi sensus suggerit, esse scilicet panem & vinum nudum, tamen firmet te fides, & ne gustatu rem dijudices, quin potius pro certo ac comperto habe, omni duhitatione reli­cta, esse tibi impartitum corpus & sanguinem Christi. Consyder not (sayeth this father) these as bare bread and wyne. For these are his body and bloud, as our lord sayde. For although thy sense reporte to thee so much, that it is bare bread and wyne, yet let thy faith staye thee, and iudge not thereof by thy taste, but rather be right well assured all doubte put a parte, that the body and bloud of Christ is geuen to thee. Againe he sayeth thus in the same place. Haec cum scias, & pro certo & explorato habeas, qui videtur esse panis, nō esse, sed corpus Christi, item quod videtur vinum, non esse, quanquam id velit sensus, sed sanguinem Christi, ac de eo prophetam dixisse, panis cor hominis confirmat: firma ipse cor, sumpto hoc pane, vtpote spirituali. Where as thou knowest this for a very certainetie, that that, which semeth to be wyne, is not wyne, albeit the sense maketh that accompte of it, but the bloud of [Page 126] Christ, and that the prophete therereof sayde, bread strengthneth the hart of man: strengthen thou thy selfe thy harte by taking this bread, as that which is spi­rituall. And in 3. Catechesi this father sayeth, Panis Eu­charistiae post inuocationem sancti Spiritus non amplius est panis nudus & simplex, Sed corpus etc. The bread of the Sacra­ment after prayer made to the holy ghost, is not bare and simple bread, but the body of Christ.

Now sith that by this doctours plaine declaratiō of the catholike faith in this point, we ought to be­leue, and to be verely assured, that the bread is no more bread after cōsecration, but the very body of Christ, and the wyne no more wyne, but his pretiouse bloud, though they seme to the eye otherwise, though taste and feeling iudge otherwise, and to be shorte, though all senses reporte the contrary, and all this vpon war­rant of our lordes word, who sayde these to be his body and bloud: and that (as he teacheth) not in the bread and wyne: And further sith we are taught by Eusebius Emisenus in his homilies of Easter, to beleue, terrena cōmutari & transire, the earthly thinges to be chaunged and to passe, againe, creaturas conuerti in sub­stantiam corporis Christi, the creatures of bread and wyne to be tourned in to the substāce of our lordes body and bloud, which is the very trāsubstantiation:Transub­stantion. In Litur­gia. And sith Chrysostom sayeth Panem absumi, that the bread is consumed awaie by the substance of Chri­stes bodye: And Damascen,Lib. 4. de orthodo­xa fi. c. 14. In Mar. 14 bread and wine trāsmuta­ri supernaturaliter, to be chaunged aboue the course of nature: and Theophylact, the bread transelementari in carnem domini, to be quite tourned by chaunging of [Page] the elementes, that is the matter or substance it con­sisteth of, into the fleshe of our lorde: and in an other place,In Matth. 26. ineffabili operatione trāsformari, etiamsi panis nobis vi­deatur, that the bread is trāsformed or chaunged into an other substantiall forme (he meaneth that of our lordes body) by vnspeakeable working, though it seme to be bread.

The trea­tises of these gre­ke vvri­ters haue ben set forth of late by one Clau­dius de Sainctes.Finally, sith that the greke Doctours of late age affirme the same doctrine, among whom Samona vseth for persuasion of it the similitude, which Gre­gorie Nyssene and Damascen for declaration of the same vsed before: which is, that in consecration such maner transubstantiation is made, as is the conuer­sion of the bread in nourrishing, in which it is tour­ned into the substance of the nourrished: Methonen­sis, like S. Ambrose, would not men in this matter to looke for the order of nature, seing that Christ was borne of a virgine besyde all order of nature, and sayeth, that our lordes bodye in this Sacrament, is re­ceiued vnder the forme or shape of an other thing, least bloud shuld cause it to be horrible: Nicolaus Cabasila sayeth that this bread is no more a figure of our lordes bodye,Cap. 27. neither a gifte bearing an image of the true gifte, nor bearing any description of the passiōs of our Sauiour him selfe, as it were in a table, but the true gifte it selfe, the most holy bodye of our lord it selfe, which hath truly receiued repro­ches, contumelies, stripes, which was crucified, which was kylled: Marcus Ephesius though otherwise to be reiected, as he that obstinatly resisted the deter­mination of the Councell of Florence concerning the [Page 127] proceding of the holy ghost out of the sonne, yet a sufficient witnes of the Greke churches faith in this point, affirming the thinges offred to be called of S. Basile antitypa, that is, the samplers and figures of our lordes bodye, because they be not yet perfitely con­secrated, but as yet bearing the figure and image, re­ferreth the chaunge or transubstantiation of them to the holy ghost, donec Spiritus sanctus adueniat, qui ea muter. these giftes offered (sayeth he) be of S. Basile called figures, vntill the holy ghost come vpon them, to chaunge them. Whereby he sheweth the faith of the Greke church, that through the holy ghost in consecration the bread and wine are so chaunged, as they maye no more be called figures, but the very bodye and bloud of our lord it selfe, as into the same chaunged by the comming of the holy ghost. Which chaunge is a chaunge in substance, and there­fore it may rightly be termed trāsubstātiation,Transub­stātiatiō. which is nothing elles, but a tourning or chaunging of one substance into an other substance: Sith for this point of our religiō, we haue so good auctoritie, and being thus assured of the infallible faith of the churche declared by the testimonies of these worthy fathers of diuerse ages and quarters of the worlde: we may well saye with the same churche against M. Iuell, that in this Sacrament after consecration there remayneth nothing of that which was before, but only the ac­cidentes and shewes, without the substance of bread and wyne.

And this is a matter to a Christen man not hard to beleue. For if it please God the almightie Creator, [Page] in the condition and state of thinges thus to or­deine, that substāces created beare and susteine acci­dētes, why may not he by his almighty power cōserue and kepe also accidētes without substāce, sith that the very hethen philosophers repute it for an absurditie to saye, primam causam non posse id praestare solam, quod possit cum secunda, that is to saye, that the first cause (whereby they vnderstand God) can not doo that alone, which he can doo with the secōd cause, where by they meane a creature?

And that this being of accidentes without sub­stance or subiecte in this Sacramēt, vnder which, the bread not remaining, the bodye of Christ is present, maye the rather be beleued: it is to be consydered, that this thing tooke place at the first creatiō of the world,Basilius hexaeme­rō. hom. 6 Damas. li. 2. cap. 7. Paulꝰ Bur­gensis. Gene. 1. after the opinion of some Doctoures. Who do affirme that that first light, which was at the be­gynning vntill the fourth daye, was not in any sub­iecte, but susteined by the power of God, as him ly­ked. For that first light and the sunne were as white­nesse and a body withed, sayeth S. Basile. Neither then was Wiclef yet borne, who might teache them, that the power of God can not put an accidēt with­out a subiect.Lib. 2. hi­stor. hus­sitarum. For so he sayeth in his booke de aposta­sia cap. 5. as Cochlaeus reporteth. Hereof it appeareth, out of what roote the Gospellers of our countrie spring. Who smatching of the sape of that wicked tree, and hereby shewing theire kinde, appoint bown­des and borders to the power of God, that is infinite and incomprehēsible. And thus by those fathers we maye conclude, that if God can susteine and kepe [Page 128] accidentes with substance, he can so doo without substance.

Of diuiding the Sacrament in three partes.
ARTICLE. XI.

OF the priestes receiuing the Sacrament him selfe alone, ynough hath ben sayde before. This terme All, here smatcheth of spite. For if any deuout person require to be partetaker with the priest, being worthely dispo­sed and examined, he is not tourned of, but with all gentlenes admitted. And in this case the priest is not to be charged with receiuing all alone. Albeit res­pecte had to the thing receiued, how many so euer receiue, it is all of all, and all of euery one receiued. Concerning the breaking of the Sacrament, and the diuiding of it in three partes, first, it is broken by the priest, that we may knowe our lord in fractione panis, in the breaking of the breade, as the two dis­ciples acknowleged him, to whom Iesus appeared in the daye of his Resurrection,Luc. 24. as they were going to Emaus. And also that thereby the passion of Christ may be represented to our remembraunce, at which his pretiouse body was for our synnes broken, rent and torne on the crosse. And this maner was vsed at the Sacrifice in the Apostles tyme, as it is witnessed by Dionysius S. Paules scoler.Ecclesias. hierarch. cap. 3. Opertum panem Pontifex aperit, in frusta concidens etc. The bishop (sayeth he) [Page] openeth the couered breade, diuiding it in pieces etc. Now touching the diuiding of the Sacramēt in three partes,The diui­ding of the Sac. in three par­tes, a tra­dition of the Apo­stles. it may appeare to be a Tradition of the Apo­stles, or otherwise a custome very auncient, for as much as Sergius the bishop of Rome, who lyued within lxxx. yeres of the syx hundred yeres after Christ, that M. Iuell referreth vs vnto, wrote of the mysterie of that breaking or diuiding the outward forme of bread, and declared the signification of the same.

It is no small argument of the antiquitie of this obseruation, that S. Basile, as Amphilochius writeth of him, diuided the Sacramēt in three partes at his Masse, as is aboue rehearsed.De conse­crat. dist. 2 can. Tri­forme. And where as Sergius sayeth, that the portion of the hoste which is put in to the chalice, betokeneth the body of Christ that is now risen againe, and the portion which is receiued and eaten, sheweth his body yet walking on the earth, and that other portion remayning on the aulter sig­nifieth his body in the sepulchre: what I praye you is there herein, that any man shuld be offended with all? I acknowledge that the mysterie hereof is other­wise of some declared, and of all to this ende, to put vs in mynde of the benefites purchaced to vs by Christ in his bodye. Now that this custom or my­sticall ceremonie was not first ordeined by Sergius, for ought that can be gathered, but of him expoun­ded onely touching the mysterie of it, as vsed before his tyme from the beginning of the churche, no one auncient councell or authour fownde vppon whom it may be fathered, of good reason, sith it hath gene­rally [Page 129] ben obserued, we may referre the first institu­tion of it to the Apostles: and that according to the mynde of S. Augustine, whose notable saying for that behalfe is this. Quod vniuersa tenet Ecclesia, nec in con­cilijs constitutum, sed semper retentum est, non nisi aucto­ritate Apostolica traditū rectissimè creditur. What (sayeth he) the vniuersall churche kepeth, neither hath ben ordeined in councelles, but hath alwaies ben obser­ued: of good right we beleeue it hath ben delyue­red (to the church) as a Tradition by the auctoritie of the Apostles.

To conclude, if any sparke of godlynes remaine in our deceiued countrie men and brethren, they will not scorne and dispyse this auncient ceremonie of diuiding the Sacrament in three partes at the blessed Sacrifice of the Masse, whereof any occasion of euill is not onely not ministred, but rather contrarywise, whereby we are admonished and stirred to tender our owne soule helth and to rendre thākes to God, for the great benefite of our redemption.

Of the termes figure, figne, token, etc. by the fa­thers applyed to the Sacrament.
ARTICLE XII.

IN this article we doo agree with M. Iuell in some respecte. For we confesse, it can not be auouched by scripture, auncient councell, doctour or example of the pri­mitiue [Page] church, that who so euer had sayde, the Sacra­ment is a figure, a pledge, a token, or a remēbraunce of Christes body, had therefore ben iudged for an heretike. No man of any learning euer wrote so vn­learnedly. Much lesse to impute heresie to any man for saying thus, hath ben any of the highest myste­ries or greatest keyes of our Religion, with which vntruth M. Iuell goeth abowt to deface the truth. Wherefore this article semeth to haue ben put in either of malice toward the church, or of ignorance, or onely to fill vp the heape, for lacke of better stuffe. Perusing the workes of the auncient and lear­ned fathers we fynde, that oftentymes they call the Sacrament a figure, a signe, a token, a mysterie, a sam­pler. The wordes of them vsed to this purpose in their learned tonges, are these. Figura, Signum, Symbo­lum, Mysteriū, Exemplar, [...], Imago, etc. By which they meane not to diminish the truth of Cristes bo­dy in the Sacrament, but to signifie the secrete ma­ner of his being in the same.

For the better vnderstāding of such places, where these termes are vsed in the matter of the Sacramēt, the doctrine of S. Augustine in sententijs Prosperi, may serue very well.De conse­crat. dist. 2 can. hoc est quod dicimus. Which is thus. Hoc est quod dicimus, quod omnibus modis approbare contendimus, sacrificium Ecclesiae duobus confici, duobus constare, visibili elemento­rum specie, & inuisibili Domini nostri Iesu Christi carne & sangnine: Sacramento, (id est externo sacro signo) et re sacramenti, id est, corpore Christi, etc. This is that we saye (sayeth he) which by all meanes we go about to proue, that the Sacrifice of the church is made of [Page 130] two thinges, and cōsisteth of two thinges, of the visi­ble shape of the elemētes (which are breade and wine) and the inuisible fleshe and bloude of our lord Iesus Christ, of the Sacrament, (that is the outward signe) and the thinge of the sacrament, to witte, of the bo­dy of Christ, etc. By this we vnderstand, that this word (Sacrament) is of the fathers two waies taken. First for the whole substance of the Sacrament, as it consisteth of the outward formes, and also with all of the very body of Christ verely present, as saint Augustine sayeth the Sacrifice of the Church to cō ­sist of these two. Secondly, it is taken so, as it is di­stincte from that hydden and diuine thing of the Sacrament, that is to saye, for the outward formes onely, which are the holy signe of Christes very bo­dy present vnder them conteined.Hovv the fathers are to be vnderstā ­ded callīg the Sacra­ment a fi­gure, sig­ne, token, etc. Whereof we must gather, that when so euer the fathers doo call this most excellent Sacrament a figure, or a signe, they would be vnderstanded to meane none otherwise, then of those outward formes, and not of Christes body it selfe, which is there present not typically, or figuratiuely, but really and substātially, onlesse perhaps respecte be had not to the body it selfe present, but to the maner of presence, as sometymes it happeneth.

So is Saint Basile to be vnderstanded in Liturgia, calling the sacrament antitypon, that is, a sampler or à figure, and that after cōsecration, as the copies, that be now abroade, bee founde to haue. So is Eustathius to be taken that great learned father of the Greke churche, who so constantly defended the catholike faith against the Arians, cited of Epiphanius in 7. Sy­nodo. [Page] Albe it concerning S. Basile,E [...]. 4. c. 14. in caput Matth. 26 Damascen and Eu­thymius, likewise Epiphanius in the second Nicene councell actione 6. and Marcus Ephesius, who was present at the councell of Florence, would haue that place so to be taken before consecration. As S. Am­brose also, calling it a figure of our lordes body and bloud. lib. 4. de sacram. cap. 5. And if it appeare straunge to any man, that S. Basile shuld call those holy my­steries antitypa after consecration, let him vnderstand, that this learned father thought good by that word to note the great secrete of that mysterie, and to shewe a distincte condition of present thinges, from thinges to come. And this consideration the church semeth to haue had, which in publike prayer after holy mysteries receiued, maketh this humble petitiō, vt quae nunc specie gerimus, Sabbato 4. tēporū mēsis Septemb. certae rerū veritate capiamus: that in the lyfe to come we may take that in cer­taine truth of thinges, which now we beare in shape or shewe. Neither doo these wordes importe any preiudice against the truth of the presence of Chri­stes body in the Sacrament: but they signifie and vtter the most principall truth of the same, when as all outward forme, shape, shewe, figure, sampler and coouer taken awaie, we shall haue the fruitiō of God him selfe in sight face to face, not as it were through a glasse, but so as he is, in truth of his Maiestie. So this word antitypon thus taken in S. Basile, furthereth no­thing at all the Sacramentaries false doctrine against the truth of the presence of Christes body in the Sacrament.

And because our aduersaries doo much abuse [Page 131] the simplicitie of the vnlearned, bearing thē in hand, that after the iudgement and doctrine of th'auncient fathers, the Sacrament is but a figure, a signe, a token, or a badge, and conteineth not the very body it selfe of Christ, for proufe of the same alleaging cer­taine their sayinges vttered with the same termes: I thinke good by the recitall of some the chiefe such places, to shewe, that they be vntruly reported, and that touching the veritie of the presence in the Sa­crament, they taught in their dayes the same faith, that is taught now in the catholike churche.

Holy Ephrem in a booke he wrote to those that will serch the nature of the sonne of God by man­nes reason,Cap. 4. sayeth thus. Inspice diligenter, quomodo sumēs in manibus panem, benedicit ac frangit in figura immacu­lati corporis sui, calicem (que) in figura pretiosi sanguinis sui benedicit, & tribuit discipulis suis. Beholde (sayeth he) di­ligently, how taking bread in his handes, he blesseth it and breaketh it in the figure of his vnspotted bo­dy, and blesseth the cuppe in the figure of his pre­tiouse bloude, and geueth it to his disciples. By these wordes he sheweth the partition, deuision, or brea­king of the Sacramēt, to be done no otherwise, but in the outward formes, which be the figure of Christes body present and vnder them conteined. Which bo­dy now being gloriouse, is no more broken nor parted, but is indiuisible, and subiect no more to any passion. and after the Sacrament is broken, it remai­neth whole and perfite vnder eche portion. Agayne, by the same wordes he signifieth, that outward brea­king to be a certaine holy figure and representation [Page] of the crucifying of Christ and of his bloude shed­ding. Which thing is with a more clearnes of wor­des set forth by saint Augustine, in Sententijs Prosperi. Dum frangitur hostia, De conse­crat. dist 2 can. dum frangitur. dum sanguis de calice in ora fi­delium funditur, quid aliud quám Dominici corporis in cruce immolatio, eiusue sanguinis de latere effusio desig­natur? Whiles the hoste is broken, whiles the bloud is powred in to the mowthes of the faithfulles, what other thing is thereby shewed and set forth, then the sacrificing of Christes body on the crosse, and the shedding of his bloud out of his syde? And by so dooing the commaundement of Christ is fulfylled, Doo this in my remembraunce.

That it may further appeare, that these wordes, fi­gure, signe, image, token, and such other the like some­tymes vsed in auncient writers, doo not exclude the truth of thinges exhibited in the Sacrament, but ra­ther signifie the secrete maner of th'exhibiting amō ­gest all other, the place of Tertullian in his fouerth booke contrâ Marcionem, is not to be omitted, spe­cially being one of the chiefe and of most appea­raunce, that the Sacramentaries bring for proufe of their doctrine. Tertullianes wordes be these. Acce­ptum panem & distributum discipulis suis, corpus suum il­lum fecit, hoc esse corpus meum dicēdo, id est, figura corpo­ris mei. The breade that he tooke and gaue to his disciples, he made it his body, in saying, this is my bo­dy, that is, the figure of my body.

The double taking of the worde Sacrament, afore mentioned remembred, and consideration had, how the sacramentes of the Newe testament comprehend [Page 132] two thinges, the outward visible formes, that be figu­res, signes and tokens, and also, and that chiefly a di­uine thinge vnder them according to christes pro­misse couertly conteined, specially this being weyed, that this most holy Sacramēt consisteth of these two thinges, to witte, of the visible forme of the outward elemētes, and the inuisible fleshe and bloud of Christ, that is to saye, of the Sacrament, and of the thing of the sacrament: Tertullian may seme to speake of these two partes of the sacramēt ioyntly in this one sentēce. For first, he speaketh most plainely of the very body of Christ in the Sacramēt, and of the maruelouse tour­nīg of the breade into the same. the breade (sayeth he) that he tooke and gaue to his disciples, he made it his body. Which is the diuine thing of the sacramēt. Then forthwith he sayeth, that our lord dyd it by sayng, This is my body, that is, the figure of my body. By which wor­des he sheweth the other parte, the sacramēt onely, that is to saye, that holy outward signe of the forme of breade, vnder which forme Christes body, into the which the breade by gods power is tourned, is con­teined: which outward forme is verely the figure of Christes body present, which our lord vnder the same conteined delyuered to his disciples, and now is likewise at that holy table to the faithfull people delyuered, where the order of the catholike churche is not broken.

That Tertullian in this place is so to be vnder­standed, we are taught by the great learned bishop saint Augustine, and by Hilarius, who was bishop of Rome nexte after Leo the first. Saint Augustines [Page] [...] [Page 132] [...] [Page] wordes be these.De cōsec. dist. 2. ca­non. vtrūsub figura Corpus Christi & veritas, & figura est. Veritas, dum corpus Christi & sanguis in virtute Spi­ritus sancti, ex panis & vini substantia efficitur. Figura verò est, quod exterius sentitur. The body of Christ is both the truth, and the figure. The truth, whiles the body of Christ and his bloud by the power of the holy ghost, is made of the substance of bread and wine. And it is the figure, that is with outward sense perceiued.

Where S. Augustine here sayeth, the body and bloude of Christ to be made of the substance of bread and wine, beware thou vnlearned man, thou thinke not them thereof to be made, as though they were newely created of the matter of bread and wine, neither that they be made of breade and wine, as of a matter: but that where bread and wine were before, after consecration there is the very body and bloud of Christ borne of the virgine Mary, and that in substance, in sorte and maner to our weake reason incomprehensible.

Dist 2. ca­no. corpus Christi.The wordes of Hilarius the Pope vtter the same doctrine. Corpus Christi quod sumitur de altari, figura est, dum panis & vinum videtur extrà: Veritas autem, dum corpus Christi interius creditur. The body of Christ which is receiued from the aulter, is the figure, whi­les bread and wine are sene outwardly: And it is the truth, whiles the body and bloud of Christ are be­leued inwardly. Thus the fathers call not onely the sacramēt, but also the body and bloud of Christ it selfe in the sacrament, sometymes the truth, sometymes a figure. the truth, that is to [Page 133] witte, the very and true body and bloud of Christ a figure, in respecte of the maner of being of the same there present, which is really and substantially, but inuisibly, vnder the visible forme of the outward ele­mentes. And so Tertullian meaneth by his, that is the figure of my body, as though Christ had shewed by the word (Hoc) that which was visible, which vere­ly is the figure of the body, right so as that which is the inuisible inward thing, is the truth of the bo­dy. Which interpretation of Tertullian in dede is not according to the right sense of Christes wordes, though his meaning swarue not from the truth. For where as our lord sayde, this is my body, he meant not so as though he had sayde, the outward forme of the Sacrament, which here I delyuer to you, is a figure of my body vnder the same conteined, for as much as by these wordes, Hoc est, he shewed not the visible forme of breade, but the substance of his ve­ry body, in to which by his diuine power he tour­ned the bread. And therefore none of all the fathers euer so expownded those wordes of Christ, but cō ­trary wise, namely Theophylacte, and Damascen. He sayd not (sayeth Theophylact) This is a figure,In Matth. cap. 26. Lib. 4. ca. 14. but this is my body. The bread, nor the wyne (meaning their outward formes) sayeth Damascen is not a fi­gure of the body and bloud of Christ: Not so, in no wise. But it is the body it selfe of our lord deificated, sith our lord him selfe sayeth, This is my body, not the figure of my body, but my body, and not the figure of my bloud, but my bloud. etc.

And the cause why Tertullian so expownded [Page] these wordes of Christ, was, that thereby he might take aduantage against Marcion the heretike, as ma­ny tymes the fathers in heate of disputatiō doo hādle some places, not after the exacte signification of the wordes, but rather folowe such waye, as serueth thē best to confut their aduersarie. Which maner not re­porting any vntruth, S. Basile doth excuse in the set­ting forth of a disputation, not in prescribing of a doctrine.Epist. 64. As he defendeth Gregorius Neocaesariensis against the Sabellianes, for that in a contentiō he had with Aelianus an Ethnike, to declare the mysteries of the trinitie, he vsed the word [...], in stede of [...]. And the learned men that be well sene in the fathers, knowe they must vse a discretion and a sun­dry iudgement betwen the thinges they write ago­nisticῶs, that is to saye, by waye of contention or disputation, and the thinges they vtter dogmaticῶs, that is by waie of setting forth a doctrine or matter of faith. Neither in that contention dyd Tertullian so much regard the exacte vse of wordes, as how he might wynne his purpose, and driue his aduersarie denying that Christ tooke the true body of man, and that he suffered death in dede, to confesse the truth, which he thought to bring to passe, by dedu­cing an argument from the figure of his body, which consisteth in that which is visible in the sacrament, to proue the veritie of his body. and therefore in framing his reason by waie of illation he sayeth, Fi­gura autem non esset, nisi veritatis esset corpus. There were not a figure, onlesse there were a body of truth or a very body in dede.

And whereas Tertullian vseth this word figure in this place, it is not to be vnderstanded to be such,The vvordes figure, signe, to­ken, etc. exclude not the truth. as the figures of the olde testament bee, as though it sig­nified the shewing of a thing to come, or of a thing absent, which is wonte to be set against the truth, as contrary to the same: but it is such a kinde of figure, as doth couer the truth present, and so as it were ioyned with the truth, as it is wonte to be taken in the newe testament, where it sheweth rather the maner of a thing to be exhibited, then that it taketh awaie the truth of presence of the thing which is exhibited. For elles concerning the truth of Christes body in the Sacramēt, if any man doubte what opi­nion he was of, he sheweth him selfe plainely so to iudge of it, as euer hath ben taught in the catholike churche. Whereof he geueth euidēce in many other places, but specially in his second booke to his wife, exhorting her not to marye againe to an infidell, if she ouerlyued him, least if she dyd, she should not haue oportunitie to obserue the Christen Religion, as she would. Speaking of the blessed Sacramēt, which was then commonly kepte of deuout men and wo­men in their houses, and there in tymes of persecu­tion receiued before other meates, when deuotion styrred them, he sayth thus. Shall not thy husband knowe, what thou eatest secretly before other meat? And if he knowe it, he wil beleue it to be bread, not him who it is called. the latine is recited before. I omitte many other places, which shewe him to acknowledge Christes body in the Sacrament, be­cause I would not be tediouse, which veryly by no [Page] wresting can be drawen to the significatiō of a mere figure. The like answere may be made to the obie­ction brought out of S. Augustine, contrà Adiman­tum Manichaeum. cap. 13. Non dubitauit dominus dicere, Hoc est corpus meum, cum tamen daret signum corporis sui: our lord stickte not to saye, This is my body, when notwithstanding he gaue the signe of his body. For this is to be consydered, that S. Augustine in fighting against the Maniches, oftētymes vseth not his owne sense and meaning, but those thinges, which by some meane, how so euer it were, might seme to geue him aduantage against them, so as he might put them to the worst. as he witnesseth him selfe in his booke de bono perseuerantiae cap. 11. & 12.

Gregorie Nazianzene oratione 4. in sanctum Pascha, shewing difference betwen the passeouer of the lawe, which the Iewes dyd eate, and that which we in the Newe testament doo eate in the mysterie of the Sacrament, and that which Christ shall eate with vs in the lyfe to come in the kingdom of his father, vttereth such wordes, as whereby he calleth that we receiue here, a figure of that shall be receiued there. Caeterum iam Paschae fiamus participes, figuraliter tamen adhuc, etsi Pascha hoc veteri sit manifestius. Siquidē Pas­cha legale, audenter dico, figurae figura erat obscurior: at paulò post illo perfectius & purius fruemnr, cum Verbum ipsum biberit nobiscum in regno patris nouum, detegens et docens, quae nunc mediocriter ostendit. Nouum enim sem­per existit id, quod nuper est cognitū. But now (sayeth he) let vs be made partetakers of this passeouer, and yet but figuratiuely as yet, albe it this passeouer be more [Page 135] manifest, then that of the olde lawe. For the passeouer of the lawe (I speake boldly) was a darke figure of a figure: but er it be long, we shall enioye it more per­fitely and more purely, when as the Word (that is the sonne of God) shall drynke the same newe with vs in the kingdom of his father, opening and tea­ching the thinges, that now he sheweth not in most clear wise. For that euer is newe, which of late is knowen. Where as this learned father calleth our passeouer that we eate a figure, whereof the lawe pas­seouer was a figure, terming it the figure of a figure, he asketh leaue, as it were, so to saye, and confesseth him selfe to speake boldely, alluding as it semeth to S. Paul, or at least hauing fast printed in his mynde his doctrine to the Hebrewes:Heb. 10. where he calleth the thinges of the lyfe to come, res ipsas, the very thinges thē selues, the thīges of the Newe testamēt, ipsā imaginē rerū, the very image of thinges: and the Olde testamēt, imaginis vmbrā, the shadowe of the image. Which do­ctrine Nazianzene applyeth to the Sacrament of the aulter. And his meaning is this, that although we be goten out of those darknes of the lawe, yet we are not come to the full lyght, which we looke for in the world to come, where we shall see and beholde the very thinges them selues clearely, and we shall knowe as we are knowen. To be shorte, by his re­porte the sacramētes of the olde testament be but fi­gures and shadowes of thinges to come, the Sacra­mentes of the Newe testament, not shadowes of thinges to come, but figures of thinges present, which are cōteined and delyuered vnder them in mysterie, [Page] but yet substantially at the ende all figures in heauen shall cease and be abolished, and there shall we see al those thinges that here be hydden, clearely face to face. And where Christ sayeth, that he will drinke his passeouer newe with vs in the kingdom of his father, Nazianzen so expowndeth that word (Newe) as it may be referred to the maner of the exhibiting, not to the thing exhibited. not that in the world to come we shall haue an other body of our lord, which now we haue not, but that we shall haue the selfe same body, that now we haue in the Sacrament of the aulter in a mysterie, but yet verely and substan­tially, after an other sorte and maner, and in that res­pecte newe. for so had without mysterie or couer­ture in cleare sight and most ioyfull fruitiō, it is newe in comparison of this present knowledge.

Thus the word figure reporteth not alwaies the absence of the truth of a thing, as we see, but the maner of the thing either promysed, or exhibited. that for as much as it is not clearly and fully sene, it be called a figure. so of Origen it is called imago re­rum, In Psal. 38 homil. 2. an image of the thinges, as in this place. Si quis verò transire potuerit ab hac vmbra, veniat ad imaginem rerum, & videat aduentum Christi in carne factum, vi­deat cum pontificem offerentem quidem & nunc patri ho­stias, & post modum oblaturum, & intelligat haec omnia imagines esse spiritualium rerum, & corporalibus officijs coelestia designari. Imago ergo dicitur hoc quod recipitur ad praesens, & intueri potest humana natura. And if any man (sayeth he) can passe and departe from this sha­dow, let him come to the image of thinges, and see [Page 136] the comming of Christ made in fleshe, let him see him a bishop that bothe now offereth sacrifice vnto his father, and also hereafter shall offer. And let him vnderstand, that all these thinges be images of spiri­tuall thinges, and that by bodily seruices heauenly thinges be resembled and set forth. So this which is at this present receiued, and may of mannes nature be sene, is called an image. In this saying of Origen this word image doth not in significatiō diminishe the truth of thinges, so as they be not the very thinges in dede, for the thinges that Christ dyd in fleshe, were true thinges: but when they are termed the image of thinges, thereby is signified, so farre, as the condition and nature of man can beholde and see them.

This is most plainely vttered by Oecumenius a Greke writer, vppon these wordes of saint Paul to the Hebrewes. Non ipsam imaginem rerum. Hebr. 10. Not the image it selfe of thinges, id est, veritàtem rerum, that is the truth of thinges, sayeth he. and addeth further. Res appellat futuram vitam, imaginem autē rerum, Euan­gelicam politiam, vmbram verò imaginis rerum, vetus Te­stamentum, imago enim manifestiora ostendit exemplaria: adumbratio autem imaginis obscurius haec manifestat, nam haec veteris testamenti exprimit imbecillitatem. The sense of which wordes may thus be vttered in En­glish. S. Paul calleth the lyfe to come, the thinges, and the ordinance or disposition of the thinges in the gospell, he calleth the image of thinges, and the olde testament, he nameth the shadowe of the image of thinges. For an image sheweth samples more ma­nifest: [Page] but the adumbration or shadowing of the image sheweth these thinges but darkely, for this doth expresse the weakenes of the olde testament. By this place of Oecumenius we see, that although it be proper to an image to exhibite the truth of thin­ges, and therefore by interpretation he sayeth, Imagi­nem, id est, veritatem, the image, that is, the truth yet the proper and right taking of the word, signifieth the waye or maner of a thing to be exhibited, not the thing it selfe: that what the image hath lesse then the thing it selfe, it is to be vnderstanded in the ma­ner of exhibiting, not in the thing it selfe exhibited.

Hitherto we haue brought examples to declare that the wordes, figure and image, signifie the truth of thinges exhibited in dede, though in secrete and priuie maner. Certaine fathers vse the wordes signum & sacramentum, that is, signe and Sacrament, in the same signification. Saint Augustine in libro Sententiarū Prosperi, De conse­cra. dist. 2. can. Vtrū sub figura sayeth thus. Caro eius est, quam forma panis o­pertam in sacramento accipimus, & sanguis eius, quem sub vini specie & sapore potamus, car [...] videlicet carnis, & sanguis est sacramentúm sanguinis, carne & sanguine, vtroque inuisibili, spirituali, intelligibili, signatur visibile do­mini nostri Iesu Christi corpus, & palpabile, plenum gratia omnium virtu [...]um & diuina maiestate. It is his fleshe that we receiue do [...]ered with the forme of bread in the Sacrament, and his bloud, that vnder the shape and sauour of wyne we drinke, soothly fleshe is a sa­crament of fleshe, and bloud is a sacrament of bloud: by the fleshe and the bloud bothe inuisible, spiri­tuall, intelligible, our lord Iesus Christ his visible and [Page 137] palpable body full of the grace of all vertues and di­uine Maiestie, is signified, or as it were with a signe noted.

In these wordes of Saint Augustine we see the fleshe of Christ called a sacrament of his fleshe, and the bloud a Sacrament of his bloud, in as much as they be coouered with the forme of bread and wyne, yet verely and in substance present, and likewise he letteth not to call this veritie or truth of the thinges them selues thus couertly exhibited, a signe of Chri­stes visible and palpable body: so that the naming of a signe doth not importe a separation from the truth, but sheweth a distincte maner of the truth ex­hibited: And therefore according to the truth of the maner of exhibiting, it is not the fleshe of Christ, but the sacrament of the fleshe of Christ, for that the fleshe doth not exhibite it selfe in his owne shape, but in a Sacrament. And therefore in an other place he writeth thus. Sic [...]t erg [...] coelestis panis, De conse­cra. dist. 2. can. Hoc est quod dicimus. qui caro Chri­sti est, suo modo vocatur corpus Christi, cum re vera sit sa­cramentum corporis Christi, illius videlicet quod visibile, quod palpabile, mortale in cruce positum est, vocaturque ipsa immolatio carnis, quae sacerdotis manibus fit, Christi passio, mors, crucifixio, non rei veritate, sed significante mysterio: Sic Sacramentum fidei, quod Baptismus intelli­gitur, Fides est. As the heauenly bread (sayeth Saint Augustin) which is the fleshe of Christ in his maner is called the body of Christ, when as in very dede it is the sacrament of Christes body, euen of that which is visible, which is palpable, and being mortall was put on the crosse, and the sacrificing it selfe of [Page] his fleshe, which is done by the priestes handes, is called the passion, the death, the crucifying of Christ, not in truth of the thing, but in mysterie signifying: So the Sacrament of faith, which is vnderstanded to be baptisme, is faith. By heauenly bread he vnder­standed not wheaten bread, but that heauely meate, which he sayeth to be the fleshe of Christ, and this farre he affirmeth the truth of his fleshe it selfe; which he sayeth to be called suo modo in his maner the body of Christ: as who should saye, whose truth notwithstāding if ye beholde on the behalfe of the maner of exhibiting, in very dede it is a Sacrament of Christes body, which is in visible shape, so as he speaketh of Christes body, that hath suffred.

In Psa. 98. In 1. cap. Ephes.Agayne S. Augustine sayeth in an other place. Non hoc corpus quod videris comestari estis. Not this body which ye see, shall ye eate. And Saint Hierom sayeth, diuinam & spiritualem carnē manducandam dari, aliam quidē ab ea quae crucifixa est. that diuine and spi­rituall fleshe is geuen to be eaten, other beside that, wich was crucifyed. Wherefore in respecte of the exhibiting, the fleshe is diuided, that in it selfe is but one: and the fleshe exhibited in mysterie, is in very dede a Sacrament of Christes body visible and pal­pable, which suffred on the crosse. And thus it folo­weth of conuenience, whereas the fleshe is not the same according to the qualities of the exhibiting, which was crucifyed, and which now is sacrificed by the handes of a priest: againe where as the pas­sion, death and resurrection are sayde to be done not in truth of the thing, but in mysterie signifying: it [Page 138] foloweth (I saye) that the fleshe is not the same in qualities, so as it was on the crosse, though it be the same in substance.

Many mo auctorities might be alleaged for the opening of this matter, but these for this present are ynough, if they be not too many, as I feare me they will so appeare to the vnlearned reader, and to such as be not geuen to earnest studie and diligent serche of the truth. By these places it is made cleare and euident, that these names figure, image, signe, token, sa­crament, and such other the like, of force of their sig­nificatiō, doo not allwaies exclude the truth of thin­ges: but doo onely shewe and note the maner of presence. Wherefore to conclude this matter, that is somewhat obscure to senses litle exercised, the figure of the body, or the signe of the body, the Image of the body, doth note the coouertnesse and secretnes in the maner of the exhibiting, and doth not diminishe any whitte the truth of the presence. So we doo ac­corde with M. Iuell in this article, touching the forme of wordes, but withall we haue thought it necessary, to declare the true meaning of the same, wich is contrary to the do­ctrine of the Sacra­mentaries.

Of pluralitie of Masses in one church in one daye.
ARTICLE XIII.

AS M. Iuell here descēdeth by diuerse pro­portions and degrees, from .xxx. to .v. first by taking awaie .x. the third parte of the whole, and then .v. from the reste three tymes: So it might haue pleased him also to haue taken awaie three from lyue the last remanent, and so to haue lefte but two in all. Which if he had done, then shuld we so haue made vp that number, as in this audi [...]e he might not other wise doo, in regarde of his owne free promisse, but allowe our accompte for good and sufficiēt. For that number we are well able to make good. And what reason hath moued the auncient fathers gouernours of the churche, to thinke it a godly and a necessarie thing, to haue two Masses in one churche in one daie, the same reason in cases either hath, or might haue moued them and their successours after them likewise, to al­lowe three or fouer Masses, and in some cases fyue or mo.

Now if that rekening could duely be made of our parte, M. Iuell perhappes would then saye, as cōmonly they saye that confesse their errour in numbring, that he had mistolde him selfe. Albe it here it is to be marueiled, that he appointeth vs to proue a number of Masses in one churche in one daie, that vtterly denyeth the Masse, and would haue no Masse in any [Page 139] church any daie at all. And standing in the denyall of the whole so peremptorely as he doth, it may se­me straunge, that he shuld thus frame this Article. For what reason is it to chalenge vs for proufe of so great a nūber, sith he taketh awaie all together?

It appeareth that being not vnwitting how good proufes we haue for the Masse it selfe, he thinketh to blanke vs by putting vs to the proufe of his number of xxx.xx.xv.x. or .v. Verely this kinde of mē fareth with the church much like vnto strōg theeues, who hauing robbed an honest welthy man of all his mō ­ney, saie afterwardes vnto him vncourteously, ah carle how camest thou by so much olde golde?Lydford lavve vsed by the gospellers. Or if it like not them to be compared with theeues, in regard of the Rome they haue shuffled them selues into, they may not vnfittely be likened to a Iudge of the Stemerie at Lidford in Deuonshire, who (as I haue heard it commonly reported) hanged a felone among the Tynners in the forenoone, and sate vppō him in iudgemēt at afternoone. And thereof to this daye such wrongfull dealing in a cōmon prouerbe is in that countrie called Lidford lawe. Sith that you M. Iuell and your felowes that now sitte on the benche, require of vs the proufe of mo Masses in one church in one daie, as it were a verdite of twelue men: of equitie and right, ye shuld haue heard our verdite, er ye had geuen sentence and condemned the Masse.Pluralitie of Masses in one church in one daye.

Now touching the number and iteration of the Masse, first we haue good and auncient auctoritie for two Masses in one church in one daie.

That eloquent and holy father Leo the first, wri­teth thus to Dioscorus bishop of Alexādria. Volumus illud quoque custodiri, vt cū solennior festiuitas conuentū populi numerosioris indixerit, & ad eam tanta multitudo conuenit, quae recipi basilica simul vna nō possit, Sacrificij oblatio indubitanter iteretur ne ijs tantū admissis ad hanc deuotionem, qui primi aduenerint, videatur ij qui postmodū confluxerint, non recepti. Cū plenum pietatis atque rationis sit, vt quoties basilicā, in quae agitur, praesentia nouae plebis impleuerit, toties sacrificiū subsequēs offeratur. This order we will to be kepte, that when a number of people cōmeth to church together at a solemne feaste, if the multitude be so great as maye not well be receiued in one churche at once, that the oblatiō of the Sacri­fice hardely be done againe least if they onely shuld be admitted to this deuotion who came first, they that come afterward maye seme not to be receiued: for as much as it is a thing full of godlynesse and reason that, how oftetymes the church where the ser­uice is done, is filled with a newe cōpanie of people, so oftētymes the Sacrifice there eftesones be offered,

By this father, whō the great General Councell of Chalcedon agnised for supreme gouernour of the churche of Christ, and honoured with the singular title of the Vniuersall Bishop, it is ordeined, that if any­where one churche could not conueniētly holde all the people together at one time they that came after the first cōpanie, shuld haue their deuotiō serued by hauing an other Masse celebrated againe. And least perhappes some might doubte wether that were lau­full so to be done or no, or be cause thē some doubted [Page 140] thereof, as now likewise some seme to doubte of it to put the matter out of doubte, he sayeth assuredly, Sa­crificij oblatio indubitanter iteretur. Let them not sticke to iterate or doo againe the oblatiō of the Sacrifice, that is to saie, let the Masse be celebrated againe, indu­bitāter, without casting perill, without sticking, stag­garing, or doubting. In that epistle he sheweth two great causes, why mo Masses then one, maye be done in one churche in one daie. The one is, least the aftercōmers shuld seme reiected, nō recepti, not recei­ued, the other is, that the one parte of the people be not defrauded of the benefite of their deuotiō ▪ As him selfe sayeth, Necesse est autē vt quaedā pars populi sua de­uotiōe priuetur si vnius tantū Missae more seruato, sacrificiū offerre non possint, nisi qui prima diei parte conuenerint. It must nedes be that a parte of the people be berefte of their deuotiō, if the custō of hauing one Masse onely kepte, none maye offer the sacrifice, but such as came to church together in the morning, or first parte of the daye. Now the people may neither be reiected, whō God hath chosen, nor sparkled abroade, whom our lord hath gathered together, neither ought they to be defrauded of their deuotion, by withdrawing the Masse from them, but rather to be styrred there­vnto by their deuout presence at the celebration of the same, where the death and passiō of our lord is liuely represented before their eyes, the very same body that suffered on the crosse, of them by the mi­nisterie of the priest offered to the father, in a myste­rie, but truly, not to be a newe Redēption, but in cō ­memoration of the redemptiō allready performed.

By this testimonie we fynde, that it was laufull within syx hundred yeres after Christ, (for Leo ly­ued about the yere of our lord 450.) to haue two Masses in one churche in one daie, for so much the word iteretur doth importe at least, and if there where mo, the case so requyring, the word will be­are it well ynough.

Now by this holy bishoppes godly will, the custo­me of hauing one Masse onely in one daie was abro­gated, and this decreed, that in tyme of two sundry resortes of people to church, two sundry Masses shuld be celebrated, for the auoiding of these two inconue­niences, least the aftercommers shuld seme not re­ceiued, but reiected like excōmunicate persones, and that a parte of the faithfull people shuld not be put besyde their deuotion. Whereuppon I make this reason. The causes standing, the effectes folowe: But the danger of the peoples seeming to be reiected, and the defrauding of their deuotiō, which are causes of iterating the Masse in one daie, did in that age in some holy daies of likelyhod thrise, yea iiij. or v. tymes happē, and in our tyme most certainely doth commonly so often, or oftener happen: wherefore the Masse may so many tymes be sayd in a daye in one churche.

Where great multitude of Christen people is, as in townes, we see some resorte to churche early in the morning, making their spirituall oblations to th'intent to serue God, or they serue man in their worldly affaires. All can not come so early. others come at their conuenient oportunitie, some at syx, [Page 141] some at seuen, some at eight, some at nyne or ten of the clocke. If they which through laufull lettes can not come at the first houres, comming afterward be rowndly tolde by the priest, come ye at such or such houres, or elles ye gete no Masse here shall not they according to Leo his saying seme to be reiected, and defrauded of their deuotion? All well disposed peo­ple about Powles can not come to postelles Masse at fouer or fyue of the clocke in the morning, nei­ther at high Masse there. Shall all such in a Terme or Parlament tyme, when great resorte is, be denyed that spirituall conforte? And if they bee, shall not they seme reiected and put from their deuotion?

Which incōuenience that it might not happen, Leo willeth not onely twoo, but three, fouer, or mo Mas­ses to be done on a daye, for his wordes reporte no lesse. Cum plenum pietatis atque rationis sit, vt quoties basilicam, in qua agitur, praesentia nouae plebis impleuerit, toties sacrificium subsequens offeratur. Let there be no sticking at the iterating of the Masse. For as much as (sayeth he) it is a thing full of godlynesse and reason, that how often the churche where the seruice is done, is filled with a newe companie of people, so often the Sacrifice there eftesones be offered. Here he willeth plainely that Masse be done, toties quoties, at euery newe resorte of the well disposed people, and that for these weighty causes, least parte of the people shuld seme not receiued, and that they be not defrauded of their deuotion. Wherefore, they that reproue the pluralitie of Masses in one churche in one daie, after the iudgement of this worthy father, [Page] be reiectours of the faithfull people and robbers of their deuotion. But they that haue vtterly abrogated the Masse, which is the outward and the euer endu­ring Sacrifice of the newe testament, by verdite of Scripture, be no lesse then the forerūners of Anti­christ.

Non licet super vno altario in vna die duas Mis­sas cele­brare: nec in altario, vbi Epi­scopus Missas di­xerit presbyter illa die Missas dicat. Cō ­cil. Anti­sioren. ca. 10. an. do­mini. 613.Here that I maye adde somewhat more for proufe of this article, If the pluralitie of Masses in one chur­che in one daye had bē vtterly vnlawfull, the fathers of the councell of Antisiodorū, would not haue de­creed, that it shuld not be lawfull to celebrate two Masses vpon one aulter in one daye: neither where the Byshop had sayde Masse, that a priest might not saye the same daye at the same aulter. For be­syde that the prohibition presupposeth the thing prohibited to haue ben before vsed, (elles prohibitiō had ben superfluouse, and so farre forth it appeareth that before the making of that decree mo Masses were sayde at one aulter in one daye) the argumēt of this decree serueth very well for proufe, that by for­ce of this councell, it was then lawfull to saye mo Masses in one churche in one daye. For this prohibi­tion of the councell is not generall but speciall, re­stricted to a particular place of the churche, in vno altario, at one aulter, which includeth not of any rea­son a more generall and larger matter then it selfe, as, neither at any other aulter in the same church the same daye it shal be lawfull to saye Masse: But of cō ­sequent this being but one speciall case forbydden inferreth a permission and good leaue in the reste eiusdem generis & subiecti, that be of the same kynde, [Page 142] and about the same matter, and not included by wor­des of reason in that prohibitiō. So that we may not argue by reason in this sorte, it is forbidden to saye mo Masses at one aulter in one daye, ergo it is for­bydden to saye many Masses at all in one churche in one daye vppon diuerse aulters: but the cōtrary rea­son foloweth, ergo ye may saye many Masses vppon diuerse aulters in one daye. And likewise ye may not saye Masse that daye on th'aulter, where the bishop hath sayde, ergo ye may lawfully saye that daye at an other aulter. For other wise the lawe would haue forbydden generally, ye shall not saye Masse in the church where the bishop hath sayde that daye: and then ye had ben forbyddē that aulter and all aulters there at one worde. but in forbidding the one aulter, the lawe grawnteth you the vse of the reste there.

And this kynde of reasoning and arguing of the lawe, that forbyddeth one case specially, to affirme the reste, that is not mentioned in the prohibition, the lawyers will defende by their prīciples against M. Iu­ell, who I thinke will not wade farre, to stande against them in this matche. For they saye,In genere permisso­rum, om­nia intelligūtur per­missa, quae specialiter non repe­riuntur prohibita [...] an edicte prohi­bitorie in such thinges which are not wholy in their kynde vnlawfull, forbydding speciall cases, graunteth the reste, and doth permitte all that, which is not spe­cially forbydden. And by that, all may be witnesses which are not specially forbyddē, all may make their proctoures to answere for thē in iudgemēt, which are not forbyddē in the speciall prohibitiō, for that the edictes of proctoures and witnesses are prohibitorie.L. Iulia. ff. de testi­bus. And because Lex Iulia dyd forbydde a womā condē ­ned [Page] for adulterie to beare witnesse in iudgement, thereof the texte of the Ciuill lawe concludeth, that women maye beare witnesse in iudgement.

Exceptio cōfirmat regulam, in nō ex­ceptis.And they saye further that exception in one case, confirmeth the generall rule, and maketh the reste that is not excepted, more sure and stable, and to be in force in contrary sense to the exception.

But I will not bring M. Iuell out of his professed studie to farre to seeke lawes. For in dede we nede not go to lawe for these matters, wherein the church hath geuen sentence for vs, but that our aduersaries refuse the iudge after sentence. Which if they had done, when order permitteth it at the begynning, and had plainely (as I feare me some of them thinke) denyed them selues to be Christians, or at least of Christes courte in his catholike churche: we shuld not haue stryued so long about these matters. We would haue imbraced the truth of God in his church quietly, whiles they sought an other iudge accor­ding to their appetites and phantasies, as Turkes and infidelles doo.

Now if M. Iuell be not so precise in his iudgemēt of allowing the first six hundred yeres after Christ, as to condemne the churche that folowed in the nexte generatiō: then we may alleage vnto him the twelfth councell of Toledo in Spaine, holden in the yere of our lorde. 680. for proufe that many Masses were celebrated in one churche in one daye. For the same appeareth plainely by this decree of the fathers there.

Can. [...]. Relatum nobis est quosdam de sacerdotibus non tot vi­cibus [Page 143] communionis sanctae gratiam sumere, quot sacrificia in vna die videntur offerre: sed in vno die, si plurima per se Deo offerant sacrificia, in omnibus se oblationibus à cō ­munione suspendunt, & in sola tantum extrema sacrificij oblatione communionis sanctae gratiam sumunt. quasi non sit toties illis vero & singulari sacrificio participandum, quoties corporis & sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi immolatio facta constiterit. Nam ecce Apostolus dicit: Nonne qui edunt hostias, participes sunt altaris? 1. Cor. 10. Certū est quòd hi qui sacrificantes non edunt, rei sunt dominici sa­cramenti. Quicunque ergo sacerdotum deinceps diuino alta­rio sacrificium oblaturus accesserit, & se a cōmunione su­spenderit, ub ipsa qua se indecēter priuauit, gratia commu­nionis anno vno repulsum se nouerit. Nam quale erit illud sacrificium, cui nec ipse sacrificans particeps esse cognosci­tur? Ergo modis omnibus est tenendum, vt quotiescunque sacrificans corpus & sanguinem Iesu Christi Domini nostri in altario immolat, toties perceptionis corporis & sangui­nis Christi se participem praebeat.

It is shewed vnto vs, that there be certaine priestes, who doo not receiue the grace of the holy cōmu­nion so many tymes, how many sacrifices they seme to offer in one daye. But if they offer vp to God many facrifices by them selues in one daye, in all those oblatiōs they suspend them selues from the cō ­munion, and receiue the grace of the holy cōmunion onely at the last oblation of the sacrifice, as though they ought not so oftētymes to be partakers of that true and singular sacrifice, as the sacrifice of the body and bloude of our lorde Iesus Christ hath ben done. For beholde the Apostle sayeth:1. Cor. 10. Be not they [Page] which eate sacrifices partakers of the aulter? It is certaine, that they, who dooing sacrifice doo not eate, be gylty of our lordes sacrament. Wherefore what priest so euer hereafter shal come vnto the holy aulter to offer sacrifice, and suspend him selfe from the communiō, be it knowē vnto him, that he is repelled and thrust awaye from the grace of the communion, whereof he hath vnsemely bereued him selfe, (whereby is meant that he standeth excōmunicate) for the space of one yere. For what a sacrifice shall that bee, where­of neither he him selfe that sacrificeth, is knowen to be partaker? wherefore by all meanes this is to be kepte, that how oftentymes so euer the priest doth sacrifice the body and bloude of Iesus Christ our lorde on the aulter, so oftentymes he receiue and make him selfe partaker of the body and blou­de of Christ.

Sacrifice taken for the Masse.Here by the word Sacrifice and offering of the sa­crifice, the fathers vnderstande the dayly sacrifice of the churche, which we call the Masse. For though the word Missa be of great antiquitie and many tymes fownde in the fathers, yet they vse more commonly the word Sacrifice. Neither can the enemies of this sacrifice, expounde this canon of the inward sacrifi­ces of a mannes harte, but of that sacrifice, which the priest cometh to the holy aulter to offer, of the sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christ our lorde offered on the aulter, (for so be their wordes) where he receiueth the grace of the holy cōmunion, which is the participation of the body and bloude of our lorde.

This much graunted, as by any reasonable vnder­standing it can not be drawen, nor by racking can be stretched to any other sense: we haue here good auctoritie for the hauing of many Masses in one churche in one daye. And where as the fathers of that councell allowed many Masses in one daye sayde by one priest, there is no reason, why they shuld not allowe the same sayd by sundry priestes in one daye. If our aduersaries saye, this might haue ben done in sundry places, whereby they may seme to frustrate our purpose touching this article: we answere, that besyde th'approuing of the Masse by thē so cōfessed, it were vaine and fryuolouse to imagine such gadding of the priestes from churche to churche for saying many Masses in one daye. Doubtelesse the fathers of that Toletane Councell meant of many Masses sayd in one place in a daye, as Leo dyd, for seruing the faithfull peoples deuotion, that resorted to churche at sundry houres, as we see the people doo now, that so all might be satisfied. Which shuld not haue ben, if one Masse onely had ben sayde.

If M. Iuell agnise and accepte for good the au­ctoritie of this Councell, as the churche doth, then must he allowe these many thinges, which he and the Sacramentaries to the vttermost of their power and cunning, labour to disproue and deface. First, the blessed sacrifice of the Masse, which the 1 fathers of this councell call the true and singular sacrifice, the sacrifice of the body and bloud of our lord IESVS CHRIST, the sacrifice of the [Page] body and bloud of Iesus Christ our lorde, which the 2 priest offereth on the aulter. Nexte, the truth and reall presence of the body and bloud of our lorde 3 in the sacrifice offered. Then aulters, which this councell calleth diuine or holy, for the diuine and holy thinges on them offered, the body and bloud of 4 Christ. Furthermore, the multitude of Masses in one daye. for they speake of many sacrifices, that is, ma­ny 5 Masses, plurima sacrificia. Lastly, priuate Masses. For the wordes nec ipse sacrificans, rightly cōstrewed and weighed, importe no lesse. For where as no worde in this decree is vttered, whereby it maye appeare the people to be of necessitie requyred to receiue, if the priestes had receiued them selues at euery Masse, no faulte had ben fownde. And if the people had receiued without the priestes, in this case it had ben reason, this decree shuld other wise haue ben ex­pressed. And so it is cleare, that at that tyme priuate Masses were sayde and done.

Now if M. Iuell refuse and reiecte the auctoritie of the churche represented in that councell, then he geueth vs a manifest notice, what marke we ought to take him to be of. Then may we saye vnto him the wordes of S. Paul.1. Cor. 11. Nos talem confuetudinem non ha­bemus, nec ecclesia Dei. We haue no such custome, nei­ther the churche of God hath not, to condemne the churche. And in this case he must pardon vs, if accor­ding to the precepte of Christ,Matth. 18. for that he will not heare the churche, we take him for no better, then a hethen and a publican.

Of Images.
ARTICLE. XIIII.

THat Images were set vp in churches with­in syx hundred yeres after Christ, it is cer­taine, but not specially either then, or si­thens to the intent the people might worship them. The intēt and purpose hath ben farre other, but right godly, as shall be declared. Wherefore the imputing of this entēt to the catholike church, is both false, and also sclaunderouse. And because for the vse of images, these newe maisters charge the church with reproche of a newe deuise, breache of Gods cōmaundemēt, and idolatrie: I will here shewe, first, the Antiquitie of Images, and by whom they 1 haue ben allowed, Secondly, to what entent and pur­pose 2 they serue, Thirdly, how they maye be wor­shiped 3 without offence.

Concerning the Antiquitie and originall of ima­ges, they were not first inuented by man,Antiqui­tie of Ima­ges. but com­maunded by God, brought into vse by tradition of the Apostles, allowed by auctoritie of the holy fa­thers and all councelles, and by custome of all ages sith Christes being in the earth. When God would the Tabernacle with all fourniture thereto belonging to be made, to serue for his honour and glorie, he commaunded Moses among other thinges to make two Cherubins of beaten golde,Exod. 25. so as they might co­uer bothe sydes of the propitiatorie, spreading ab­roade their whinges and beholding them selues one an other, their faces tourned toward the propitiato­rie, [Page] that the Arke was to be couered with all. Of those Cherubins S. Paul speaketh in his epistle to the Hebrewes.Cap. 9. Exod. 37. Which images Beseleel that excellent workeman, made at the commaundement of Moses, according to the instructions by God geuen. Againe Moses by the commaundement of God made the brasen Serpent,Num. 21. and set it vp on high for the people that were hurt of serpentes in wildernes to behold, and so to be healed. In the temple also that Salomon buylded, [...]. Reg. 6. [...]. Paral. 3. were images of Cherubins, as the scripture sheweth. Of Cherubins mention is made in sundry places of the scriptures, specially in Ezechiel the pro­phet. cap. 41. Iosephus writeth of the same in his third and eight booke antiquitatum Iudaicarum. The image of Cherubins representeth angels, and the word is a word of angelical dignitie, as it appeareth by the third chapter of Genesis, where we read that God placed Cherubins before paradise, after that Adam was cast forth for his disobedience.

It were not much besyde our purpose here to re­hearse the place of Ezechiel the prophet,Ezechi. 9. where God commaunded one that was clothed in lynnen, and had an ynkhorne by his syde, to go through the myddes of Hierusalem, and to prynt the signe of Tau, In cōmē ­tar. in Ezechielem. The signe of the Crosse cō mēded to men by gods pro­uidence. that is the signe of the Crosse (for that letter had the similitude of the Crosse, among the old Hebrewe letters as Saint Hierom witnesseth) in the forehed­des of the men, that moorned and made moue ouer all the abominations of that citie.

Touching the signe, Image, or figure of the Crosse in the tyme of the new testament, God femeth by [Page 146] his prouidence and by speciall warninges, in sundry reuelatiōs and secrete declaratiōs of his will, to haue commended the same to men,Euseb. ec­cles. hist. lib. 9. ca. 9 that they shuld haue it in good regard and remembraunce. When Con­stātine the Emperour had prepared him selfe to warre against Maxentius the tyraunt, casting in his mynde the great daungers that might thereof ensue, and cal­ling to God for helpe, as he lookte vp, beheld (as it were in a visiō) the signe of the crosse appearing vnto him in heauen as bright as fyer, and as he was asto­nied with that straunge sight, [...]. Sozomen. tripart. hist. lib. 5. cap. 50. he heard a voice spea­king thus vnto him. Constantine in this ouercomme.

After that Iulian the Emperour had forsaken the profession of Christen Religion, and had done sacri­fice at the temples of painyms, mouing his subiectes to doo the like as he marched forward with his ar­mie on a daye, the droppes of rayne that fell downe out of the ayer in a shewer, fourmed and made to­kens and signes of the crosse, both in his, and also in the souldiers garmentes.Eccles. hi­stor. lib. 10 in fine.

Rufinus hauing declared the straunge and horrible plages of God, whereby the Iewes were frayed and letted from their vaine attempte of buylding vp againe the temple at Hierusalem, leaue thereto of the Emperour Iulian in despite of the christians obtey­ned: in the ende sayeth, that least those earthquakes and terrible fyers which he speaketh of raysed by God, whereby as well the work houses, and prepara­tions toward the buylding, as also great multitudes of the Iewes were throwē downe, cast abroade, and de­stroyed, shuld be thought to happen by chaunce: the [Page] night folowing these plages, the signe of the crosse appeared in euery one of their garmētes so euidētly, as none to cloke their infidelitie, was able by any kynde of thing to scowre it out and put it awaye.

Histo. tri­part. li. 9. Cap. 29.When the temples of the painims were destroyed by the christians in Alexandria, about the yere of our lord 390. in the chiefe temple of all, which was of the Idol Serapis, the holy and mysticall letters cal­led [...], [...]. by Gods prouidence, were fownde grauen in stones, representing the figure of the crosse, the signification whereof after their interpretation was, life to come. Which thing espyed by the chri­stians and by the painimes present at the spoile, ser­ued maruelously to furtheraunce of the christen faith, no lesse then the inscription of the aulter at Athens, Ignoto Deo, Actor. 17. vnto the vnknowen God, serued to the same purpose through S. Paules preaching. Which all to­gether was before wrought by Gods holy proui­dence, as Socrates, one of the writers of the ecclesia­sticall stories, reporteth.

Thus it appeareth plainely, how Gods prouidēce hath commended vnto true beleuers, the signe of the crosse. For which cause and for remembraunce of our Redemptiō, it hath ben in olde tyme and all­wayes sithens, much frequented and honoured. For besyde that we reade hereof in Tertullian, who was neare the Apostles tyme in Apologe [...]ico, Cap. 16. we finde in the writers of the ecclesiasticall stories, that the Chri­sten people of Alexandria, Eccl. hist. lib. 11. ca. 29. auto­re Rufino after they had pulled downe and taken awaye the armes and monuments of Se­rapis the Idoll, euery man caused the signe of our [Page 147] lordes crosse in place of them to be paineted and set vp in their postes, entreis, windowes, walles and pillours, that where so euer the eye was tourned, it shuld light on the holy signe of the crosse.

Constantine the Emperour loued and honoured this signe so much,Histo. tri­part. li. 1. Cap. 9. that he caused the same to be paineted in all his flagges and banners of warre, to be stroken in his coines and monneys, to be purtrai­ted in his armes, stutchins and targets. Of this Aure­lius Prudentius maketh mention.Lib. 1. cō ­trà Sym­machum.

The sense whereof is this much in English. The chiefe bāner which was of purple, had the image of Christ in it wrought in golde and stones. The targets were paineted all ouer with Christ. The Crosse shyned fyerbright in the crestes of theire helmettes. That the banner cōmonly borne before the Emperour in warre, in Latine called Labarum, was of this sorte, it appeareth by an epistle, that S. Ambrose, wrote to Theodosius the Emperour.Lib. 5. epi­stol. 29. Neither was the figure of the crosse then onely in flagges and banners, paine­ted, wouen, embrodered, or otherwise wrought, in golde or pretiouse stones: but also made in whole golde and set vpon a long staffe or pole, and borne before men, (as the maner is now in processions) as it se­meth plainely by these verses of Prudentius.

It houeth you Madame, that gladly you acknowledge myne enseignes, in which the figure of the Crosse is either glittering in stones, or of whole golde is borne on long staues before vs. This much haue I gathered out of the auncient fathers writinges concerning the signe of our lordes crosse, the fight whereof the professours of this newe gospell can not abyde, to the entent the diuersitie of our tyme and of olde tyme maye appeare, to the maners of which fos a perfite reformatiō, these preachers would seme to bring the world againe.

Images from the Apostles tyme.Cōcerning the images of Christ and of his sainctes, that they haue ben greatly estemed and vsed in hou­ses, churches, and places of prayer from the Apostles tyme foreward, it is so euident, that it can not be de­nyed. Athanasius writeth that Nicodeme, who came to Iesus by night, made an image of Christ with his owne handes, and that when he laye in his death bedde, he delyuered it to Gamaliel, who was S. Paules scoolemaister. Gamaliel when he sawe he shuld dye, lefte it to Iames, Iames lefte it to Simon and Zachaeus. This image came from hand, to hand by succession, and continewed a long tyme in Hierusalem. From Hierusalem it was caried into Syria, and at length it was brought to the citie Berytus, not farre from Tyre and Sydon. Where how despitefully it was vsed of the Iewes, and what wōders ensued thereupō, who list to knowe, may he reade it largely declared in a litle booke written by Athanasius of that matter. Eusebius Caesariensis in the seuenth booke of his ec­clesiasticall storie,Cap. 14. writeth of the auncient image of [Page 148] Christ made in brasse, and of the woman, that was healed by our Sauiour of her bloudy flixe, in the ci­tie of Phoenicia called Caesarea Philippi, whereof that woman was a citizen. Which image he sayeth he sawe, as likewise the images of Peter and Paul kepte by some of olde tyme. And there he cōfesseth, that the images of Peter and Paul and of our Sauiour were in his tyme made, and painted in tables and set forth. After Eusebius death Iulian the renegate tooke downe this image of Christ,Lib. 6. tri­part. cap. 41. and set vp his owne in the same place. Which with violent fyer that fell from heauē, was clefte asunder in the brest, the hedde broken of with a peece of the necke, and stickt in the grownde. The rest of it so remayned long after, as a token of lightning and gods displeasur might be reserued. That image of Christ after that the pai­nimes had haled, pulled, broken, and mangled it vil­lainously, by the christiās was taken vp, set together, and placed in the church, where it is yet reserued, sayeth Socrates of his tyme. Of the miraculouse herbe that grewe at the foote of this image, which after that id had growen, so high, as it touched the images skirtes, takē and ministred was a medecine and pre­sent remedie for all diseases, as Eusebius writeth: be­cause it perteineth not specially to the matter of ima­ges, I rehearse nothing.

It is euident by Chrysostomes Masse, that there was some vse of images in the church of Constan­tinople in his tyme, for he speaketh of the image of the crucifixe. Who so euer is desyrous to see testi­monies of the fathers for prouf of images, let him [Page] read the seuenth generall councell holden in Ni­cea the citie of Bithynia against Imagebreakers, and there he shall fynde no small number.

I will not let here to recite some, which, so farre as I remember, be not fownde there, euery one, one onely excepted, which is of S. Basile, of right good and auncient auctoritie.

Simeon Metaphrastes a greke writer, describing rhe lyfe of S. Luke th'euangelist, sayeth that he made the images of Christ and of his mother Mary. Sainct Ambrose witnesseth, that in his tyme the Images of the Apostles were vsed in pictures, for where he de­clareth the maruelous appearing of the holy martyrs Geruasius and Protasius vnto him in a vision,In vita Geruasij et Protasij he sayeth, that a third person appeared with them, that tolde him where their bodyes laye, which semed like to S. Paul the Apostle, as he vnderstoode his face by viewe of his picture.

Gregorie Nyssene S. Basiles brother writing the lyfe of Theodorus the martyr, bestoweth much elo­quence in the praise of the church, where his holy relikes were kepte, commending the shape of lyuing thinges wrought by the keruer, the smoothenes of marble poolished like syluer by the mason, the liuely resemblaunce of the martyr him selfe, and of all his worthy actes, expressed and excellently set forth to the eye in imagerie with the image of Christ, by the paynter. In which images he acknowlegeth the fightes of the martyr to be declared no lesse, then if they were described and written in a booke.

Paulinus the bishop of Nola, in his booke that he [Page 149] made in verses of the lyfe of Felix the martyr, pray­seth the church which the martyrs bodye was layed in,In deci­mo Na­tali. for the garnishing of it with painted images in bothe sydes, of bothe kindes men and women, the one kinde on the one syde, and the other kinde on the other syde. Where he speaketh expressely by name of the Images of scabbed Iob, and blynde To­bye, of fayer Iudith, and great quene Hesther, for so he nameth them.

Athanasius hath one notable place for hauing the Image of our Sauiour Christ, which is not cōmon, where he maketh Christ and the church, to talke together as it were in a dialoge, in sermone de sanctis patribus & prophetis. The greke may thus be transla­ted. Age (inquit) dic mihi, cur oppugnaris? Oppugnor, (in­quit Ecclesia) propter doctrinam Euangelij, quam diligēter & accuratè teneo, & propter verum & firmum Pascha quod agito, & propter religiosam & puram imaginem tuam, quam mihi Apostoli reliquerunt, vt haberem depi­ctam arram humanitatis tuae, in qua mysterium redemp­tionis operatus es. Hic Christus, Si propter hoc (inquit) te oppugnant, ne grauiter feras, nève animum despōdeds, cum scias, si quis Pascha neget, aut imaginem, me eum negatu­rum coram patre meo, & electis angelis. Rursus verò qui compatitur mecum propter Pascha, conglorificaturum. an non audisti quid Moysi praeceperim? Facies, inquam, mihi duos Cherubinos in tabernaculo testimonij, scilicet ad prae­figurandam meam imaginem, etc.

The English of this Latine or rather of the Greke is this. Come on (quoth Christ to the church) tell me, wherefore art thou thus inuaded and vexed? de­clare [Page] me the matter. Forsooth lord (quoth the church) I am inuaded and vexed for th'exacte obseruing of the gospell, and for the keping of the feast of the true and firme Easter, and for thy reuerent and pure Image, which thy holy Apostles haue lefte to me by tradition, to haue and kepe for a representation of thine incarnation. Then (quoth our lord) if this be the matter for which thou art inuaded and set against, be not dismayed, be of good confort in hart and mynde, being assured hereof, that who so denyeth Easter, or my [...] cleane image, I shall denye him before my heauenly father and his chosen Angels. And he that suffereth persecution with me for keping of Easter, the same shall also be glorified with me. Hast not thou heard, what I commaunded Moyses the lawegeuer to doo? Make me (sayd I) two Cherubins in the tabernacle of the testimony, to be a prefigura­tion or foretokening of my image. etc.

Of all the fathers none hath a playner testimonie bothe for the vse and also for the worshipping of Images, then S. Basile, whose auctoritie for learning, wisedom, and holynes of lyfe, besyde antiquitie, is so weighty in the iudgement of all men, that all our newe maisters layed in balance against him, shall be fownde lighter then any fether.Citatur ab Adriano Papa in epistola Synodica ad Con­stātinū & Irenen. Touching this mat­ter, making a confession of his faith in an epistle in­ueghing against Iulian the renegate, he sayeth thus. Euen as we haue receyued our Christian and pure faith of God, as it were by right of heretage: right so I make my confession thereof to hym, and therein I abyde. I beleeue in one God father almighty, God [Page 150] the father, God the sonne, God the holy ghoste. One God (in substance) and these three (in persones) I ad­ore and glorifie. I confesse also the sonnes incarna­tion. Then afterward sainct Mary, who according to the fleshe brought hym foorth, callyng her Deiparam. I reuerence also the holy Apostles, Prophetes, and Martyrs, which make supplication to god for me: that by their mediation our most benigne god be mercifull vnto me, and graunt me freely remission of my synnes. Then this foloweth. Quam ob causam & historias imaginū illorum honoro. & palàm adoro: hoc enim nobis traditum à sanctis Apostolis, non est prohiben­dum, sed in omnibus ecclesijs nostris eorum historias eri­gimus. For the which cause I doo both honour the stories of their images, and openly adore them. For this being delyuered vnto vs of the holy Apostles by tradition, is not to be forbidden. And therefore we set vp in all our churches their stories. Lo M. Iuell here you see a sufficient testimonie, that Images were set vp in the churches long before the ende of your syx hundred yeres, and that they were honou­red and worshipped not onely of the simple christē people, but of bishop Basile, who for his excellent learning and wisedom, was renoumed with the name of Great.

Now that there hath ben ynough alleaged for the Antiquitie, orginall and approbation of Images,Three causes vvhy images hauen ben vsed in the church. it remayeth, it be declared, for what causes they haue ben vsed in the church. We fynde that the vse of images hath ben brought into the church for three causes. The first, is the benefite of knowledge. For [Page] the simple and vnlearned people, which be vtterly ignorant of letters, in pictures doo as it were, reade and see nolesse then others doo in bookes, the my­steries of christen Religion, the actes and worthy dedes of Christ and of his sainctes. What writing performeth to them that reade, the same doth a pi­cture to the simple beholding it,Ad Sere­nū episcopū Massi­lien. li. 9. epistol. 9. sayeth S. Gregory. For in the same the ignorant see, what they ought to folowe, in the same they reade, which can no let­ters, therefor Imagerie serueth specially the rude na­tions in stede of writing, sayeth he.

To this S. Basile agreeth in his homilie vpon the forty martyrs. Bothe the writers of stories (sayeth he) and also paineters do shewe and set forth noble dedes of armes and victories, the one garnishing the matter with eloquence, the other drawing it lyuely in tables, and bothe haue styrred many to valiant courage. For what thynges the vtterāce of the storie expresseth through hearing, the same doth the stille picture set forth through imitatiō. In the like respecte in olde tyme the worke of excellēt poetes was cal­led a speaking picture,Pictura loquēs, poe­ma tacēs. and the worke of payneters, a stille poetrie. And thus the vse and profite of wri­ting and of pictures, is one. For thinges that be read, when as they come to our eares, then we conueigh them ouer to the mynde, and the thinges that we beholde in pictures with our eyes, the same also doo we imbrace in our mynde. And so by these two, reading and painting, we acheue one like benefite of knowledge.

The second cause of the vse of Images, is the styr­ring [Page 151] of our myndes to all godlynes. For whereas the affecte and desyre of man is heauy and dull in di­uine and spirituall thinges,Sapient. 9 because the body that is corruptible weigheth downe the mynde when it is set forth before our eyes by images, what Christ hath done for vs, and what the Sainctes haue done for Christ: then it is quickened and moued to the like will of doing and suffering, and to all endeuour of holy and vertuouse life. As when we heare apte and fitte wordes vttered in a sermon or an oration: so when we beholde lookes and gestures liuely expres­sed in images, we are moued to pitie, to weeping, to ioye, and to other affectes. Wherein verely it hath alwayes ben thought, that paineters haue had no lesse grace, then either oratours or poetes.

Who listeth to see examples hereof, he may peruse the second Nicene councell,Action. 4. where he shall fynde among other most notable thinges concerning this point, one of sainct Euphemia the martyr, an other of Abraham sacrificing his sonne Isaac worthy of euerlasting memorie; that of Asterius the holy bis­shop, this of Gregory Nyssene, very elegantly des­cribed. Virgil maketh Aeneas to weepe, to hope for better fortune, to gather courage of mynde, to take good aduise and order for redresse and helpe of his great calamities, by occasion of beholding a painters worke at Carthago, wherein the bataile of Troye was expressed. Which that wise poete would not haue done, were not that pictures haue great force to moue mennes hartes.

Ouide likewise in the epistle of Laodamia to Pro­tesilaus [Page] her husband being forth at warres, maketh her so to write of his image, which she had caused to be made of waxe for her conforte in his absence, as it may well appeare, that images haue a meruelouse power to stirre vehement affectes, and to represent thinges absent, as though in maner they were present, in the myndes of the beholders.

Among all other examples for this purpose, that semeth to me most notable, which Appianus writeth of C. Iulius Caesar. lib. 2. de bellis ciuilib. After that Caesar had ben murdered of the Senatours in the counsaile house, one of his frēdes to shewe the crueltie of the facte to the people, layed Caesars bedde in the open market place, and tooke forth of it his image made of waxe, which represented three and twenty woon­des after a beastly sorte stabde in to his face and all the reste of his body, yet gaping and as it were freshe bleeding. Whith which shewe he styrred the people to more wrath and rage, then he could haue done with any oration or gesture. Which was declared forth with. For as sone as the people sawe it, not able to beare their griefe nor staye their furie any lenger, wrought great and straunge cruelties against them, that were fownde to haue committed that murder.

The third cause why images haue ben set vp in Churches, is the keping of thinges in memorie ne­cessary to our saluation. For when we cast our eyes on them, our memorie which otherwise is fraile and weake, gathereth together and embraceth the bene­fites and merites of our Sauiour Christ, and the ver­tuouse [Page 152] examples of sainctes, which we ought to fo­lowe: that if we bee such as they were, we may by gods grace through Christ atteine the blysse they be in, and with thē enioye lyfe euerlasting. And verely they that haue images in regard and reuerēce, must be so mynded, as they beholde not onely the thinges by them represented, but also performe the same in dede with most diligent imitation.

And now we are come to declare, how Images maye he worshipped and honoured without any offence.Hovv images may be vvor­shipped vvithout offence. That godly worship which cōsisteth in spi­rite and truth inwardly, and is declared by signes outwardy in recongnizing the supreme dominion, which properly of the diuines is called Latria: is de­ferred onely to the blessed Trinitie. As for the holy images, to them we doo not attribute that worship at all, but an inferiour reuerence or adoration, for so it is named. Which is nothing elles, but a recogni­zing of some vertue or excellencie protested by out­ward signe, as reuerent kissing, bowing downe, knee­ling, and such the like honour. Which kynde of ado­ration or worship, we fynde in the scriptures often­tymes geuen to creatures. The whole acte whereof is notwithstanding referred not to the images prin­cipally, but to the thinges by them represented, as being the true and proper obiectes of such worship. For although the honour of an image passeth ouer to the originall or first sampler, which the learned call archetypum, as S. Basile teacheth:Li. ad Amphiloch. cap. 18. yet that high worship called Latria, belongeth onely to the bles­sed Trinitie, and not to the reuerent images, least we [Page] shuld seme to be worshippers of creatures and of matters, as of golde, syluer, stones, woodde, and of such other the like thinges. For we adore not images as God,In questi­onib. ad Antiochū Principē. sayeth Athanasius, neither in them doo we put hope of our saluatiō, ne to them doo we geue godly seruice or worship, for so dyd the gentiles: but by such adoration or reuerence, we declare onely a cer­taine affection and loue, which we beare toward the originalles. And therfore if it happen their figure and shape to be defaced and vndone, we let not to burne the stockes, as very woodde, and being of other stuffe, to conuert the same to any vse, it maye serue best for.

S. Gregory praysing much one Secundinus, for that he desyred the Image of our Sauiour to be sent vnto him, to th'entent by hauing his image before his eyes, he might the more be stirred to loue him in his hart after a fewe wordes vttered in this sense, he sayeth further. We knowe thou demaundest not the image of our Sauiour to th'entent to worship it, as God: but for the remembrance of the sonne of God, that thou mightest be enkendled with the loue of him, whose image thou desyrest to beholde. And verely we fall not downe before it, as before God. But we adore and worship him, whom through oc­casion of the image, we remember either borne, or done to death for vs, or sitting in his throne. And whiles we reduce the sonne of God to our memo­rie by the picture no lesse then by writing, it bryn­geth either gladnes to our mynde by reason of his Resurrection, or confort by reason of his Passion. [Page 158] And if men praye kneelyng before any image or triumphant signe of the holy Crosse, they worship not the woodde or stone figured, but they honour the highest God. And whom they can not beholde with senses, they reuerēce and worship his image re­presenting him according to auncient Institution, not resting or staying them selues in the image, but trās­ferring the adoration and worship to him that is re­presented. Thus farre S. Gregorie.

Much might be alleaged out of the fathers con­cerning the worshipping of Images, but this may suf­fise. And of all this one sense redowndeth, that what reuerence, honour, or worship so euer is applyed to Images, it is but for remēbrance, loue and honour of the primitiues or originalles. As when we kysse the gospell booke, by that token we honour not the parchement, paper and incke, wherein it is written, but the gospell it selfe. And as Iacob,Gen. 37. when he kys­sed his sonne Iosephes cote embrewed with kyddes bloud, holding and embracing it in his armes, and making heauy mone ouer it, the affection of his loue and sorowe rested not in the cote, but was directed to Ioseph him selfe, whose infortunat death (as he thought) that blouddy cote represented: So Christen men shewing tokens of reuerence, loue and honour before the Image of Christ, of an Apostle, or Mar­tyr, with their inward recognition and deuotion of their hartes, they staye not their thoughtes in the very Images, but deferre the whole to Christ, to the Apostle, and to the Martyr, geuing to ech one in dewe proportion, that which is to be geuen, putting [Page] difference betwen the almighty Creator and the creatures, finally rendring all honour and glory to God alone, who is maruelous in his sainctes. Such worshipping of Images is neither to be accompted for wicked, nor to be dispysed, for the which we haue the testimonies of the auncient fathers, bothe Grekes and Latines: vnto which further auctoritie is added by certaine generall Councelles, that haue con­demned the brekers and impugners of the same.

Of the peoples reading the Bible in theire ovvne tonge.
ARTICLE. XV.

THat the laye people was then forbidden to reade the word of God in their owne tonge, I fynde it not. Neither doo I fynde, that the laye people was then, or at any other tyme commaunded to reade the word of God in their owne tonge being vulgare and barbarous. By vulgare and barbarous tonges, I vnderstand, as be­fore, all other, besyde the three learned and princi­pall tonges, Hebrewe, Greke and Latine. Which as they were once natiue and vulgare to those three peoples,Three sū ­dry opini­ons cōcerning the scriptures to be had in a vulgare tonge. so now to none be they natiue and vulgare, but common to be atteined by learning for medita­tion of the scriptures, and other knowledge.

They that treate of this Article, concerning the hauing of the scriptures in a vulgare tonge for the laytie to reade, bee of three sundry opinions.

1 Some iudge it to be vtterly vnlaufull, that the Bible [Page 154] be translated into any tonge of the commō people. Some thinke it good it be translated, so that respecte 2 be had of tyme, and of place, and of persones. Some 3 be of the opinion, that the holy scriptures ought to be had in the mother and natiue tonge of euery nation, without any regard of tyme, place, or perso­nes. The first opinion is holden of fewe, and com­monly mysliked. The third is maineteined by all the sectes of our tyme, the Swenkfeldians excepted, who would the scriptures to be in no regard. The second is allowed best of those that seme to be of most wisedō and godlynes, and to haue most care for the helth of the churche, who haue not seuered thē selues frō the faith which hath cōtinewed frō the begyn­ning. Here that I saye nothing of the first opinion, as they of the third reproue the moderation of the se­cond, so they of the second, can not allowe the gene­ralitie of the third.

That the scriptures be not to be set forth in the vulgare tonge to be reade of all sortes of people,Fiue cōsi­derations vvhy the scriptures are not to be set forth for all sortes of people to read thē vvith out limi­tation. eue­ry parte of them, without any limitation of tyme, place, and persones, they seme to be moued with these cōsyderatiōs. First, that it is not necessary. nexte, that it is not conuenient. thirdly, that it is not profi­table. Fouerthly, that it is dangerous and hurtefull. And lastly, although it were accorded the common people to haue libertie to reade the Bible in their owne tonge, yet that the translations of late yeres made by those that haue diuided them selues from the catholike churche, be not to be allowed as worthely suspected, not to be sownde and assured.

1 First, that the common people of all sortes and degrees, ought of necessitie to reade all the holy scri­ptures in their owne tonge, they saie, they could ne­uer fynde it hytherto in the same scriptures.Lib. 3. ad­uersus hae­reses. ca. 4 Irenaeus writeth, that the Apostles preached to the aliātes and barbarous people the faith of Christ, euē to those, that were aliātes and barbarous in lāguage, and sayeth that hauing heard the gospell preached, they beleued in Christ, and keping the order of tradition which the Apostles delyuered vnto them, had their saluatiō and faith written in their hart without prynte, penne, or ynke, and vtterly without letters. And further he she­weth, that if the Apostles had lefte to vs no scriptu­res at all, yet we shuld be saued by the traditiō, which they lefte to thē, whō they cōmitted their churches vnto, as many natiōs of aliantes be saued by the same.

Prologo in expla­tionem Psal.Hilarius likewise declaring that the mysterie of Gods will, and th'expectatiō of the blessed kingdom, is most and chiefly preached in the three tonges, in which Pilate wrote on the Crosse, our lord Iesus Christ to be king of the Iewes: confesseth notwith­standing that many barbarous nations haue atteined and goten the true knowledge of God, by the prea­ching of the Apostles, and the faith of the churches remayning amongest them to that daie. Whereby he doth vs to vnderstand, that the vnlearned barbarous peoples had their faith without letters or writing, whereof they had no skill, by tradition and prea­ching, as well as the other nations, who were holpen by the benefite of the learned tonges, Hebrewe, Greke and Latine.

That it is not conuenient nor semely, all sortes of 2 persons without exception to be admitted to the reading of the holy scriptures, I nede to saye nothing, euery reasonnable man may easely vnderstand the causes by him selfe. This is certaine, diuerse chapters and stories of the olde testament, conteine such mat­ter, as occasion of euill thoughtes is like to be geuen, if women, maydens, and young men be permitted to reade them. Gregorie Nazianzene,Lib. 1. Theologiae. whom the grekes called the diuine, sayeth, moued with great conside­rations, that it is not the parte of all persons to rea­son of God and of godly thinges, neither behoofull the same be done in all tymes and places, nor that all thinges touching God be medled withall. Which ad­uertisement taketh no place, where all be admitted to the curiouse reading of the scriptures in their owne vulgare tonge.

And the scripture it selfe (saye they) sheweth plai­nely, that of couenience the scriptures ought not be made common to all persons. For Christ affirmeth the same with his owne wordes, where he sayeth to his Apostles.Lucae. 8. Vnto you it is geuen to knowe the secretes of the kingdom of God: but to other in parables, that when they see, they shuld not see, and when they heare, they shuld not vnderstande. They to whom it is geuen to knowe these secretes, be none other then the Apo­stles and their successours or disciples. They to whom this is not geuen, but must learne parables, be they, for whom it were better to be ignorant of the my­steries, then to knowe them, least they abuse them, and be the more grieuously condemned, if they sette [Page] litle by them, which we see commonly done among the common people.

Vide Hilarium in Psal. 2.It is reported by sundry auncient writers of great auctoritie, that among the people of Israel, the se­uenty Elders onely could reade and vnderstande the mysteries of the holy bookes, that we call the Bible. For whereas the letters of the Hebrewe tonge haue no vocalles, they onely had the skill to reade the scripture by the consonantes: and therby the vulgare people were kepte from reading of it, by speciall prouidence of God, as it is thought, that pretiouse stones shuld not be caste before swyne, that is to saye, such as be not called thereto, as being for their vnreuerent curiositie and impure life, vnworthy.

3 Here I nede not to spende tyme in rehersing the manifolde difficulties of these holy letters, through which the reading of them to the simple and vnlear­ned people, hauing their wittes exercised in no kynde of learning, their myndes occupied in worldly cares, their hartes caryed awaye with the loue of thinges they luste after,Bernard. Super cā ­tica. is not very profitable. As the light shyneth in vaine vpon blinde eyes (sayeth a holy father) so to no purpose or profite is the labour of a worldly and naturall man taken for the atteining of thinges that be of the spirite. Verely emōges other, this incōmoditie is sene by dayly experience hereof to procede, that of the people, such as ought of right to take lest vpon them, be now becomme censours and iudges of all, despysers of the more parte, and which is common to all heretikes, mockers of the whole simplicitie of the churche, and of all those [Page 156] thinges, which the churche vseth as pappe or mylke to nourrishe her tender babes withall that it were better for them not to reade, then by reading so to be pufte vp and made insolent. Which euill cometh not of the scripture, but of their owne malice and euill disposition.

The dangers and hurtes which the common peo­ples 4 reading of the scriptures in their owne lāguage bryngeth, after the opinion of those that reproue the same, be great, sundry and many. I will here, as it were but touche a fewe of them, leauing the whole matter it selfe to the iudgemēt of the churche. First, seing the poyson of heretikes doth most infecte the common people, and all heretikes drawe their ve­nyme out of the Bible vnder pretence of gods wor­de: it is not thought good by these men, to lette eue­ry curiouse and busie body of the vulgar sorte, to reade and examine the Bible in their common lan­guage. Yet they would not the learned, discrete and sober laye men to be imbarred of that libertie.

Againe if heresie spring of wrong vnderstanding,De trini­tate li. 2. not of the scriptures, (as Hilarius sayeth, heresie is of vnderstanding, not of scripture, and the sense not the worde is a crime) who shall sooner fall into heresie, then the common people, who can not vnderstande that they reade? verely it semeth a thing hard to be­leue, that the vnlearned people shuld vnderstande that, which the best learned men with long studie and great trauaill can scarcely at length atteine.

Whereas Luther would the scriptures to be tran­slated into euery vulgare tonge, for that they be [Page] lyght and easie to vnderstande, he is confuted by the scripture it selfe. For both S. Peter, and also S. Paul, ac­knowlegeth in them to be great difficulties, by oc­casion whereof some misconstrue thē to their owne damnation,2. Pet. 3. 1. Tim 1. 2. Cor. 4. some vnderstande not what thinges they speake, nor of what thinges they affirme, and to some the gospell that S. Paul preached is hydden, euen to them which perishe. If the scriptures were playne, how erred Arius? how Macedonius? how Eunomius? how Nestorius? how many mo, men of great learning? specially seing they all tooke occasion of their er­rours of the scripture not rightly vnderstanded?

Luther sayeth that S. Hierome was ouerseen in the vnderstanding of the scripture, that S. Augustine erred in the same, that S. Ambrose, Cyprian, Hilary, Basile, and Chrysostome, the best learned doctours of Christes churche, were oftentymes deceiued. And yet in the preface of his booke de captiuitate Babilo­nica, he speaketh of them very honorably, and graun­teth, that they haue laboured in the lordes vineyarde worthely, and that they haue employed great dili­gence in opening the scriptures. If these being of so excellent learning after long exercise in the holy letters, after long studie and watche, after long and feruent prayer, after mortification of them selues, and purgation of carnall affections were deceiued, as he witnesseth: how can he saye they are cleare, plaine and easye to be vnderstanded? And if these worthy fathers were deceiued in one pointe or two, is it not likely the common people may be deceiued in ma­ny, specially their diligēce and study not being com­parable [Page 157] to theirs, and their lyues not being such, as the cleannesse of their inward affectes might lighten their vnderstāding, and the annointing of god might teach them.

And least all the vnlearned laye people shulde seme hereby vtterly reiected from hope of vnder­standing gods worde without teaching of others, it may be graunted, that it is not impossible, a man (be he neuer so vnlearned) exercised in long prayer, ac­customed to feruent contemplation, being brought by God into his inward cellares, may from thence obteine the true vnderstanding and interpretation of the holy scriptures, no lesse then any other alwaies brought vp in learning. Of what sorte S. Antony that holy and perfecte man the Eremite of Egypte, was. Who, as saint Augustine writeth,Prologo in libros de doctri­na Chri­stiana. without any know­ledge of letters, both canned the scriptures by hart with hearing, and vnderstode them wisely with thynking. And that holy man, whom S. Gregorie speaketh of, who lying bedred many yeres for siknes of body, through earnest prayer and deuout medi­tation, obteined helth of mynde, and vnderstanding of the scriptures neuer hauing learned letters, so as he was able to expounde them to those that came to visite him, who comming vnto him with pretence to bring conforte, through his heauenly knowledge, receiued conforte. But among the people how great number is there of lewed loselles, gluttōs and dronc­kerds, whose bealy is theire God, who folowe their vnruly lustes: is it to be thought this sorte of perso­nes may without meditation and exercise of prayer [Page] pearse the vnderstanding of the scriptures, and of those holy mysteries, which god hath hidden (as Christ confesseth) from the learned and wise men?

Matth. 11. The gos­pellers di­uided in to cōtra­rie sectesAnd whereas learned men of our tyme be diui­ded into cōtrarie sectes, and write bitterly one against an other, eche one imputing to other mistaking of the scriptures, if amongest them who would seme to be the leaders of the people, be controuersies and debates about the vnderstanding of the scriptures: how may the common people be thought to be in safe case out of all danger of errours, if by reading the Bible in their owne tonge, they take the matter in hande?

If any man thinke, I sclaunder them, for that I saye they be diuided into cōtrary sectes, let him vnderstād, their owne countrie men, I meane them of Germa­nie, and speciall setters forth of this newe doctrine, report it in their bookes, and complaine lamentably of it. Namely Nicolaus Amsdorffius in his booke inti­tuled, Publica confessio purae doctrinae euangelij etc. Also Nicolaus Gallus, in his booke of Theses and Hypoty­poses: who acknowlegeth the strifes and debates that be amongest them, to be not of light matters, but of the high articles of christian doctrine. For euen so be his wordes in Latine. Non sunt leues inter nos concerta­tiones, de rebus leuibus, sed de sublimibus doctrinae Chri­stianae articulis, de lege & euangelio, etc. The same man in the last leafe of his forsayde booke, with great vehemendie reporteth, haereses permultas esse prae ma­nibus, plerasque etiamnùm h [...]rere in calamo, that very many herelies be allready in hande, and many as yet [Page 158] sticke in the penne, as though he meant, they were ready to be set forth.

Of late there haue ben put out in printe two great bookes, one by the Princes of Saxonie, the other by the Erles of Mansfeld, chiefe maineteiners of the Lutheranes: in which be recited eleuen sectes, and the same as detestable heresies condemned they are con­teined in this cataloge or rolle. Anabaptistae, Seruetia­ni, Antinomi, Iesuitae, Osiādrini, Melāchthonici, Maioristae, Adiaphoristae, Suencfeldiani, Sacramentarij. Albeit the Ie­suites haue wrong to be numbred among them. This much is confessed of the sectes and controuersies of our newe gospellers by their owne princes, that stande in defence of the confession of Auspurg, and by two of the Lutherane superintendentes.

No man hath so exactly declared to the world the number and diuersitie of the sectes of our tyme,Fridericꝰ Staphylꝰ. which hath sprong of Martin Luther, as Fridericus Staphylus, a man of excellent learning, one of the Emperours counsaile that now is, who might well haue knowledge herein, for as much as he was a di­ligent student ten yeres at Wittenberg among the chiefe doctors of them, and for that tyme was of their opinion, and afterward by consyderation of their manifold disagreeinges and contētions within thē selues, induced to discredite thē, and through the grace of God reduced to a whole mynde, and to the catholike faith, and now remayneth a perfecte mem­ber of the churche. This learned man in his Apo­logie sheweth, that out of Luther haue sprong three diuerse heresies or sectes. the Anabaptistes, the Sa­cramentaries, [Page] and the Confessionistes,Protestantes. who made confession of their faith in open diete before the Emperour Charles, the princes and states of Germa­nie at Auspurg, anno domini. 1530. and for protestation of the same there, are called Protestantes. Now he proueth further by testimonie of their owne wri­tinges, that the Anabaptistes be diuided into syx sectes, the Sacramentaries into eight sectes, the Con­fessionistes and they which properly are called pro­testātes,Protestantes diui­ded into tvventy Sectes. into twenty sectes, euery one hauing his pro­per and particular name to be called and knowen by. This lamentable diuision of learned men into so many sectes in the countries where the gospell (as they call it) hath these forty yeres and is yet most busely handled, may be a warning to the gouernours of Christendome, that they take good aduisement, how they suffer the rude and rashe people, to haue the scriptures common in their owne tonge.

The perill of it is knowen by sundry examples bothe of tymes past, and also of this present age. For out of this roote hath sprong the secte of the Valden­ses, Valdenses otherwise called Pauperes de Lugduno. For Valdo a merchant of Lyons their first author, of whom they were named Valdenses, being an vnlearned laye man, procured certaine bookes of the scripture to be trās­lated into his owne language, which when he vsed to reade and vnderstoode not, he fell into many er­rours. Of the same wellspring yssued the fylthie pud­dels of the sectes called Adamitae or Picardi, Begardi, and Turelupini, and of late yeres besyde the same secte of Adamites newly reuiued, also the Anabaptistes, [Page 159] and Suenkfeldians. Wherfor that edicte or proclama­tion of the worthy Princes Ferdinando and Elizabeth kyng and Quene of Spayne, is of many much com­mended, by which they gaue streight commaunde­ment, that vnder great penalties, no man shuld trās­late the Bible into the vulgare Spanish tōge, and that no man shuld be fownde, to haue the same translated in any wise. These and the like be the reasons and consyderations, which haue moued many men to thinke, the setting forth of the whole Bible, and of euery parte of the scripture in the vulgare tonge, for all sortes of persons to reade without exception or limitation, to be a thing not necessary to saluation, nor otherwise conuenient, nor profitable, but con­trarywise dangerous and hurtefull.

Yet it is not meant by them, that the people be kepte wholly from the scripture, so as they reade no parte of it at all. As the whole in their opinion is too strong a meate for their weake stomakes, so much of it they may right holesomely receiue and brooke, as that which perteineth to pietie and neces­sary knowledge of a christen man.What partes of the scriptures appertei­ne to the people to knovve. Wherein they would the examples of the olde holy fathers to be folowed. S. Augustine hath gathered together into to one booke, all that maketh for good lyfe out of the scriptures, which booke he intituled Speculū, that is to saye, a myrrour or a looking glasse, as Possidonius wit­nesseth in his lyfe. S. Basile hath set forth the like ar­gument almost in his fouerscore moral rules pertei­ning all together to good manners. S. Cyprian also hath done the like in his three bookes ad Quirinum. [Page] Such godly bookes they thinke to be very profitable for the simple people to reade. But how much and what partes of the scripture the common people may reade for their conforte and necessary instru­ction, and by whom the same may be translated: it belongeth to the iudgement of the churche. Which church hath already condemned all the vulgare trās­lations of the Bible of late yeres, for that they be founde in sundry places erroneous, and parciall in fauour of the heresies, which the translatours maine­teine. And it hath not onely in our tyme condem­ned these late translations, but also hytherto neuer allowed those fewe of olde tyme. I meane S. Hiero­mes translation into the Dalmaticall tonge, if euer any such was by him made, as to some it semeth a thing not sufficiently proued: And that, which before S. Hierome Vlphilas an Arian bishop made and cō ­mended to the nation of the Gothes, who first in­uented letters for them, and proponed the scriptures to them translated into their owne tonge, and the better to bring his Ambassade to the Emperour Va­lens to good effecte, was persuaded by the hereti­kes of Constantinople and of the courte there, to forsake the catholike faith, and to communicate with the Arians, making promise also to trauaile in bryn­ging the people of his countrie to the same secte, which at length he performed most wickedly.

As for the church of this land of Britaine, the faith hath continewed in it thirten hundred yeres vntill now of late, without hauing the Bible transla­ted into the vulgare tonge, to be vsed of all in com­mon. [Page 160] Our lord graunt, we yelde no worse soules to God now hauing the scriptures in our owne tonge, and talking so much of the gospell, then our aun­cesters haue done before vs. This Iland sayeth Beda (speaking of the estate the church was in at his dayes) at this present, according to the number of bookes that Gods lawe was written in, doth serche and cō ­fesse one and the selfe same knowlege of the high truth, and of the true highte, with the tonges of fiue nations, of the Englishe, the Britons, the Scottes, the Pightes, and the Latines, Quae meditatione scripturorum caeteris omnibus est facta cōmunis. Which tonge of the Latines (sayeth he) is for the studie and meditation of the scriptures made common to all the other. Ve­rely as the Latine tonge was then commō to all the nations of this lande being of distincte languages, for the studie of the scriptures, as Beda reporteth: so the same onely hath alwayes vntill our tyme, ben com­mon to all the cowntries and nations of the Occi­dentall or West churche for the same purpose, and thereof it hath ben called the Latine churche.

Wherefore to conclude, they that shewe them sel­ues so earnest and zelous for the translation of the scriptures into all vulgare and barbarous tonges, it behoueth thē after the opiniō of wise mē to see, first, that no faultes be fownde in their translations, as hytherto many haue ben fownde. And a small faulte committed in the handling of Gods worde, is to be taken for a great crime. Nexte, that for as much as such translations perteine to all christen people, they be referred to the iudgement of the whole churche [Page] of euery language, and commended to the layetie by the wisedom and auctoritie of the clergie hauing charge of their soules. Furthermore that there be some choise, exception, and limitation of tyme, place, and persons, and also of partes of the scriptures, after the discrete ordinaunce of the Iewes. Amongest whom it was not laufull, that any man shuld reade certaine partes of the Bible, before he had fullfilled the tyme of the priestly ministerie, which was the age of thir­ty yeres,Praefatio­ne in Eze­chielem. as S. Hierome witnesseth. Lastly, that the set­ting forth of the scriptures in the common language, be not commended to the people as a thing vtterly necessary to saluation, least thereby they condemne so many churches, that hytherto haue lackt the same, and so many learned and godly fathers, that haue not procured it for their flockes, finally, all that haue gonne before vs, to whom in all vertue, innocencie, and holynes of lyfe, we are not to be compared. As for me, in as much as this matter is not yet deter­mined by the church, whether the common people ought to haue the scriptures in their owne tonge to reade and to heare, or no, I defyne nothing. As I esteme greatly all godly and holesome knowledge, and wishe the people had more of it, then they haue, with charitie and meekenesse: so I would, that these hote talkers of gods worde, had lesse of that know­ledge, which maketh a man to swell, and to be proude in his owne conceite: and that they would depely weigh with them selues, whether they be not con­teyned within the lystes of the saying of S. Paul to the Corinthians,1. Cor. 8. If any man thinke that he knoweth any [Page 161] thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to knowe. God graunt all our knowledge be so ioyned with mee­kenesse, humilitie and charitie, as that be not iustly sayd of vs, which S. Augustine in the like case sayde very dr [...]dfully, to his dere frende Alipius. Surgunt indocti, & coelum rapiunt, Confess. lib. 8. ca. 8 & nos cum doctrinis nostris sine corde, ecce vbi volutamur in carne & sanguine? The vnlearned and simple aryse vp, and catche hea­uen awaie from vs, and we with all our great lear­ning voyed of heart, lo where are we wallowing in fleshe and bloude?

Of secrete pronouncing the Canon of the Masse.
ARTICLE XVI.

THe matter of this article is neither one of the highest mysteries, nor one of the greatest keyes of our religion. how so euer Maister Iuell pleaseth him selfe with that reporte, thinking thereby to impaire the estima­tion of the catholike churche. The diuersitie of ob­seruation in this behalfe, sheweth the indifferencie of the thing. For elles if one maner of pronouncing the wordes of consecration had ben thought a ne­cessarie point of religion, it had ben euery where v­niforme and inuariable. That the breade and wyne be consecrated by the wordes of our lord, pronoun­ced by the priest, as in the person of Christ, by ver­tue [Page] of which through the grace of the holy ghoste, the breade and wyne are chaunged into our lordes body and bloude: this thing hath in all tymes, and in all places, and with consent of all inuariably ben done, and so beleued. But the manner of pronoun­cing the wordes, concerning silence or open vtte­raunce, according to diuersitie of places, hath ben diuerse.

The ma­ner of pronouncing the cōse­cration in the Greke and latine churches diuers. In libello de Sacra­mento Eucharistiae.The grekes in the East churche haue thought it good to pronounce the wordes of consecration, clara voce, as we finde in Chrysostomes Masse, and as Bes­sarion writeth, alta voce, that is, plainely, out alowde, or with alowde voice. Sacerdos alta voce iuxtà Orien­talis Ecclesiae ritum verba illa pronunciat, hoc est corpus meum, &c. The priest (sayeth Bessarion) after the rite or maner of the east churche pronounceth with a lowde voice those wordes, this is my body, &c. Which maner of lowde pronouncing was thought good to be vsed in the Greke churche, as it may be gathered by that Bessarion writeth (who being a Greke borne and brought vp in learning amongest the Grekes knewe rightwell the order of that chur­che) to the intent the people might therby for the better mainetenaunce of their faith, be styrred and warned to geue tokē of cōsent and of beleefe there­to: when the priest (sayeth he) pronounceth those wordes with a lowde voice, the people standyng by, in vtraque parte, that is, first, at the consecration of the body, and agayne at the consecration of the bloude, answereth amen: as though they sayde thus, truly so it is, as thou sayest. For where as Amen is [Page 162] an aduerbe of affirmyng in Hebrue, in Greke it sig­nifieth so much as truly. And therefore the people answering Amen, to those wordes, verely saie they, these giftes sette forth are the body and bloude of Christ. So we beleue, so we confesse. This farre Bes­sarion.

It is declared by Clement, lib. 8. constitut. Apostoli­carum, that the people sayde Amen, when the wor­des of consecration had ben pronounced. Whereby we vnderstande, that order to haue ben taken by the Apostles. The same custome also maye be gathered out of S. Ambrose, who sayeth thus. Dicit tibi sacer­dos, corpus Christi, & tu dicis, Amen, hoc est verum, quod confitetur lingua teneat affectus. de sacramētis lib. 4. ca. 5. The priest sayeth, the body of Christ, and thou sayest, amen, that is to saye, true. Holde with thy harte, that which thou confessest with thy tonge. He sayeth hereof likewise, de ijs qui initiantur mysterijs. cap. 9. Frustrà ab illis respondetur Amen, &c. Serm. 6. de ieiunio 7. mensis. Amen is answered in vaine by them, who dispute against that, which is receiued, sayeth Leo.

And that the people shuld geue their consent and applie their faith to this truth without errour and deceite, and that by saying Amen, they shuld then beleue and confesse the breade and wine to be ma­de the body and bloude of Christ, when it was made in deede, and not elles, for so were it a great errour:De eccle­siasticis diuersis ca­pitulis. cō stitut. 123. for this cause Iustinian the Emperour made an ordinaunce, that the bishoppes and priestes shuld to this intēt pronoūce their seruice plainely, distinctly, and so, as it might be vnderstanded, that the people [Page] might answere Amen, (wich is to be referred to eche parte of the seruice, but specially to the conse­cration) that they might beleue and confesse it was the body and bloude of Christ, when it was in deede, and not so confesse, when it was not, which might happen, if they hearde not the wordes of consecratiō plainely pronounced. And hereunto spe­cially that Constitution of Iustinian is to be restray­ned, as perteining onely to the Greke churche, wherein he lyued, and not to be stretched further to serue for proufe of all the seruice to be had and sayde in the vulgare tonge in the West churche, as to that purpose of our newe teachers it is vntruly alleaged.

Now in this West churche, which is the latine churche, the people hauing ben sufficiently instru­cted touching the beleefe of the body and bloude of our lord in the Sacrament: it hath ben thought by the fathers conuenient, the wordes of consecra­tion to be pronounced by the priest closely and in silence, rather then with open voice. Wherein they had speciall regarde to the dignitie of that high mysterie. And doubteles for this point they vn­derstoode,Lib. de spiritu san­cto. ca. 27. as Saint Basile writeth, that the Apostles and the fathers which at the begynning made lawes for the order of Ecclesiasticall thinges, maineteined the mysteries in their due auctoritie, by keping them secrete and in silence. For it is not (sayeth he) any mysterie at all, which is brought forth to the popular and vulgar eares, whereof he wrote very truly before. Ei quod publicatum est, & per se ap­prehendi [Page 163] potest, imminere contemptum. Ei verò quod remotum est ac rarum, etiam naturaliter quodammodo esse coniunctam admirationem. That, what is done openly and made common, and of it selfe maye be atteined, it is like to come in contempte and be di­spysed. But what is kepte farre of, and is sildom goten, that euen naturally in maner is neuer with­out wondering at it. And in such respecte Christ gaue warning, that pretiouse stones be not strewed before hogges.

If in the olde lawe priestes were chosen (as Saint Ambrose writeth) to coouer the arke of the Testa­ment, because it is not lawfull for all persones to see the deapth of mysteries: If the sonnes of Caath by Gods appointment dyd onely beare the arke and those other holy thinges of the Tabernacle,Nume. 4. Vide Ori­genē ho­mil. 5. in Numer. cap. 4. on their shulders, when so euer the children of Israel remoued and marched foreward in wildernes, being closely folded, and lapte within vailes, courteines and palles, by the priestes: and might not at no tyme touche nor see the same vpon payne of death, which were but figures of this: how much more is this high and worthy mysterie to be honoured with secretnes, closenes, and silence?

For this cause as they reporte,In frag­mēto Ca­roli Mag. de ritib. veteris ecclesiae. sayeth Carolus Magnus that noble, vertuouse and learned Empe­rour, wryting to his Schoolemaister Alcuinus our cowntrie man, and first teacher of Philosophie in Paris, it is become a custome in the church, that the Canon and consecration be sayde by the priest secretly, that those wordes so holy and perteining [Page] to so great a mysterie, shuld not growe in contēpte, whiles all in maner through common vse bearing them awaye, would syng them in the high wayes, in the stretes, and in other places, where it were not conuenient. Whereof it is tolde, that before this cu­stome was receiued, shepherdes, when they sang them in the fielde, were by Gods hande strooken. Luther him selfe in praeceptorio, is much against them, that would haue the Canon of the Masse to be pronoun­ced with a lowde voice for the better vnderstāding.

vvhat persons the primitiue church excluded frō presence of the sacramēt.The fathers of the primitiue churche had this Sa­crament in such reuerence and honour, that they ex­cluded some sortes of faithfull people, from being present at the celebration of it, thinking them vn­worthy not onely to heare the mysticall wordes of consecration pronounced, but also to see the formes of the outward elementes, and to be in the churche, whiles that most holy Sacrifice was offered. They were these, Cathechumeni, Energumeni, and poenitentes. The first were learners of our beleefe, who as they were daily instructed, beleued in Christ, and as Saint Augustine writeth,Tractatu in Ioan. 11 bare Christes crosse in their fo­rehead, and marked them selues with the same. The second were such, as notwithstanding they had ben christened, yet for the inconstancie of their mynde, were vexed with vncleane sprites. The third sorte were they, who for their synnes committed, had not yet made an ende of doing their open penaun­ce. All these were iudged by the gouernoures of the churche at the begynning vnworthy to be present at these holy mysteries.

Now if this great reuerence towardes the ho y thinges, in them was iustly praised, the admitting of all sortes of people not onely to be present and to beholde the same, but also to heare and vnder­stande the wordes of consecration, (that hath thus allwaies ben honoured with silence and secretnes) can not seme to wise, zelouse and godly men a thing commendable: specially in these tymes, in which the holy Christen discipline of the churche, is loo­sed and vtterly shaken of, and no difference nor accompte of any diuersitie made betwen the perfite and godly people, and them, that ought to doo open penaunce, that be possessed with deuilles, and be in­famouse for heynouse and notoriouse crimes com­mitted. Where as in olde tymes, when by holesom discipline the faithfull people were kepte in godly awe and obedience, that prayer also which was sayde ouer the oblation before consecration, was pronounced closely and in silence, and therefore it was called of the latines, secreta, of the Grekes mystica oratio, meaning thereby, that it ought not to be vttered openly and made common.

Of the priestes auctoritie to offer vp Christ to his father.
ARTICLE XVII.

Three­fold obla­tion of Christ. CHRIST is offered vp to his father after three maners. figuratiuely, truly with bloud shedding, and sacramentally or my­stically. In figure or signification, he was offered in the sacrifices made to God bothe in the tyme of the lawe of nature, and also in the tyme of the lawe written. And therefore Saint Iohn calleth Christ the lambe, which was killed from the begyn­ning of the world, meaning in figure. The sacrifices of Abel,Agnus occilus est ab origi­ne mudi. Apoca. 13. Heb. 10. Lib. 6. ca. 5 Noe, and Abraham, and all those of the people of Israel commaunded by the lawe of Moses, figured and signified Christ. For which respecte chiefly, the law is reported of Saint Paul, to haue the shadowe of the good thinges to come. S. Augustine writing against Faustus the heretike, sayeth: Testa­menti veteris sacrificia omnia multis & varijs modis v­num sacrificium, cuius nunc memoriam celebramus, signi­ficauerunt. All the sacrifices of th'olde testament, sig­nified by many and sundry waies this one sacrifice, whose memorie we doo now celebrate. And in an other place he sayeth,De fide ad Petrū dia­conum, cap. 16. that in those fleshely sacrifices, there was a signification of Christes fleshe, which he shuld offer for synnes, and of his bloude, which he shuld shedde for the remission of our synnes.

Truly and with bloude shedding, Christ was offe­red on the Crosse in his owne persone. where of S. [Page 165] Paul sayeth: Christ gaue him selfe for vs, Tit. 2. Ephes. 5. that he myght redeme vs from all iniquitie: And againe: Christ hath loued vs, and hath delyuered him selfe for vs an oblation and sacrifice to God into a swete sauour.

Sacramentally or in mysterie, Christ is offered vp to his father in the dayly sacrifice of the churche vnder the forme of breade and wine, truly and in dede, not in respecte of the maner of offering, but in respecte of his very body and bloude really (that is in dede) present, as it hath ben sufficiently proued here before.

The two first maners of the offering of Christ, our aduersaries acknowledge and cōfesse. The third they denye vtterly. And so they robbe the churche of the greatest treasure it hath or may haue, the bo­dy and bloude of our Sauiour Christ once offered vpon the crosse with painefull suffering for our re­demption, and now daily offered in the blessed Sa­crament, in remembraunce. For which we haue so many proufes, as for no one point of our Christen religion moe. And herein I am more encombred with store, then straighted with lacke, and doubte more what I may leaue, then what I may take.

Wherefor thinking it shall appeare to the wise more skylle to shewe discretion in the choise of places, rather then learning in recitall of number, thoug we are ouer peartely thereto prouoked by M. Iuelles vaunting and insolent chalenge: I intend herein to be shorte, verely shorter, then so large a matter re­quireth: and to bring for proufe a fewe such au­torities, I meane a fewe in respecte of the multitude [Page] that might be brought) as ought in euery mannes iudgement to be of great weight and estimation.

The scripture it selfe ministring euident proufe for the oblation of Christ to his father by the prie­stes of the newe testament, in the Institution of this holy Sacrament, in the figure of Melchisedech, and in the prophecie of Malachie the prophete: the au­torities of the fathers neded not to be alleged, were not the same scripture by the ouerthwarte and false interpretations of our aduersaries wrested and tour­ned to a cōtrary sense, to the horrible seducing of the vnlearned. For where as the holy Euangelistes re­porte, that Christ at his last supper tooke breade, gaue thankes, brake it, and sayde, this is my body, wich is ge­uen for you: Luc. 22. Againe, this is my bloude wich is shedde for you in remission of synnes: By these wordes, being wordes of sacrificing and offering, they shewe and set forth an oblation in acte and dede, though the ter­me it selfe of oblation or sacrifice be not expressed. Albe it to some of excellent knowledge, datur here sowndeth no lesse, then offertur or immolatur, that is to saye, is offered or sacrificed, specially the additiō pro vobis, withall cōsydered. For if Christ sayde truly, (as he is truth it selfe, and guile was neuer fownde in his mowth) then was his body presently geuen and for vs geuen, at the tyme he spake the wordes, that is, at his supper. For he sayde, datur, is geuen, not dabitur, shall be geuen: And likewise was his bloude shedde in remissiō of synnes, at the tyme of that supper: for the texte hath funditur, is shedde. But the geuing of his body for vs, and the shedding of his [Page 166] bloud in remissiō of synnes, is an oblatiō of the same: ergo Christ offered his body and bloude at the sup­per. And thus datur, signifieth here as much as offertur.

Now this being true, that our lord offered him selfe vnto his father at his last supper, hauing geuen cōmaundement to his Apostles to doo the same that he there dyd, whō then he ordeined priestes of the newe testament, saying doo this in my remembraunce, as Clement doth plainely shewe. lib. 8. Apostolicarum cōstitut. cap. vltimo: the same charge perteining no lesse to the priestes that be now the successours of the Apostles in this behalfe, then to the Apostles them selues: it doth right well appeare, how so euer M. Iuell assureth him selfe of the contrary, and what so euer the deuill hath wrought and by his ministers taught against the sacrifice of the Masse, that priestes haue auctoritie to offer vp Christ vnto his father.

That Christ offered him selfe to his father in his last supper, and that priestes by those wordes, Doo this in my remembraunce, haue not onely auctoritie, but also a speciall commaundemēt, to doo the same, and that the figure of Melchisedech, and the prophe­tie of Malachie perteineth to this sacrifice, and ma­keth proufe of the same: let vs see by the testimo­nies of the fathers, what doctrine the Apostles haue lefte to the churche.

Eusebius Caesariensis hath these wordes.De demō ­strat. Euā ­geli. lib. 1. cap. 10. Horrorem afferentia mensae Christi sacrificia supremo Deo offerre, per eminentissimum omnium ipsius Pontificem edocti sumus. We are taught (sayeth he) to offer vnto our su­preme God the sacrifices of Christes table, which [Page] cause vs to tremble and quake for feare, by his bis­shop highest of all. Here he calleth Christ in respe­cte of his sacrifice, Gods bishop highest of all bis­shops, the sacrifices of Christes table he calleth, the body and bloud of Christ, because at the table in his last supper he sacrificed and offered the same, and for that it is his very body and very bloud, imaginatiō onely, phantasie, and figure set aparte, he termeth these sacrifices, as cōmonly the auncient fathers doo, hor­rible, causing trembling and feare. And where as he sayeth we haue ben taught to offer these sacrifices to God, doubteles he meaneth by these wordes of Christ: Doo this in my remembraunce, this is my body, which is geuen for you: this is my bloud, which is shedde for you. Clement in his eight booke often cited, spea­king of the sacrifice offered by the Apostles, com­monly addeth these wordes, secundum ipsius ordinatio­nem, or, ipso ordinante: Whereby he confesseth it to be Christes owne ordinance.

That Christ sacrificed him selfe at his supper, He­sychius affirmeth with these wordes. Quod Dominus iussit (Leuit. 4.) vt sacerdos vitulum pro peccato oblatu­rus, ponat manum super caput eius, & iugulet eum coram Domino, Christum significat, quem nemo obtulit, sed nec immolare poterat, Ioan. 10. nisi semetipsum ipse ad patiendum tradi­disset. Propter quod non solum dicebat, Potestatem habeo ponendi animam meam, & potestatem habeo iterū sumēdi eam: sed & praeueniens semetipsum in coena Apostolorū immolauit, quod sciunt, qui mysteriorum percipiunt virtutē. That our lord commaunded (sayeth he the priest which shuld offer a calfe for synne, to put his hand [Page 167] vpon his hedde, and to sticke him before our lord, it signifieth Christ, whom no man hath offered, neither could any man sacrifice him, excepte he had delyue­red him selfe to suffer. For the which he sayde not onely, I haue power to laye downe my soule, Ioan. 10. and I haue power to take it agayne: But also preuenting it, he of­fered vp him selfe in sacrifice in the supper of the Apostles, which they knowe, that receiue the vertue of the mysteries. By these wordes of Hesychius we learne, that Christ offered and sacrificed his body and bloud twise. First in that holy supper vnbloudely, when he tooke bread in his hādes and brake it, etc. Without diuision of the sacrifice, for it is but one and the same sacrifice: And afterward on the crosse, with shedding of his bloude, and that is it he mea­neth by the word preuenting.

And at the same very instant of tyme, (which is here further to be added as a necessary point of Christen doctrine) whe must vnderstād, that Christ offered hem selfe in heauen inuisibly (as concerning man) in the sight of his hauenly father, and that frō that tyme foreward that oblation of Christ in hea­uen was neuer intermitted, but continewed allwaies for our attonement with God, and shall without ceasing endure vntill the ende of the worlde. For as S. Paul sayeth,Heb. 9. Iesus hath not entred into temples made with handes, the samplers of the true temples, but into heauē it selfe, to appeare now to the cowntenance of God for vs. Now as this oblation and sacrifice of Christ endureth in heauen continually, for as much as he is rysen from the dead and ascended in to heauen with [Page] that body which he gaue to Thomas to feele, brin­gīg in thither his bloud, as Hesychius sayeth, and bea­ring the markes of his woondes, and there appea­reth before the face of God, with that thorne prikte, naileboared, sperepearsed, and other wise woonded, rent, and torne body for vs: (whereby we vnder­stand the vertue of his oblation on the crosse euer enduring, not the oblation it selfe with renewing of payne and sufferaunce continewed) so we doo perpetually celebrate this oblation and sacrificing of Christes very body and bloud in the holy Masse, in remembraunce of him, commaunded so to doo vntill his comming.

Wherein our aduersaries so foolishly as wicked­ly, scoffe at vs, as though we sacrificed Christ agay­ne, so as he was sacrificed on the crosse, that is, in bloudy maner. But we doo not so offer or sacri­fice Christ againe, but that oblation of him in the supper, and oures in the Masse, is but one oblation, the same sacrifice, for this cause by his diuine ordi­naunce lefte vnto vs, that as the oblation once made on the crosse continually endureth and appeareth before the face of God in heauen for our behalfe, continewed not by newe suffering, but by perpe­tuall intercession for vs: So the memorie of it may euer vntill his second comming be kepte amongest vs also in earth, and that thereby we may apply and bring vnto vs through faith the great bene­fites, which by that one oblation of him selfe on the crosse, he hath for vs procured, and daily doth procure.

Now for further proufe of the offering and sa­crificing of Christ, of those wordes of our lord, Doo this in my remembraunce, to recite some testimonies of the fathers: First, Dionysius Saint Paules scoler, and bishop of Athenes, writeth thus.Ecclesias. hierarch. cap. 3. Quocirca reue­renter simul & ex Pontificali officio, post sacras diuino­rum operum laudes, quòd hostiam salutarem, quae super ipsum est litet, se excusat, ad ipsum primò decenter ex­clamans, Tu dixisti: Hoc facite in meam commemora­tionem. Wherefore the bishop (sayeth he) reuerently, and according to his bishoply office, after the holy prayses of Gods workes, he excuseth him selfe, that he taketh vpon him to offer that helthfull sacrifice, which is aboue his degree and worthynes, crying out first vnto him in seemely wise, lord thou hast cōmaunded thus, saying, Doo this in my remembraūce. By these wordes he confesseth, that he could not be so hardy, as to offer vp Christ vnto his father, had not Christ him selfe so cōmaunded, when he sayde, Doo this in my remembraunce. This is the doctrine touching this article that S. Paul taught his scolers, which M. Iuell denyeth.

Irenaeus receiued the same from Saint Iohn the Euangelist by Polycarpus Saint Iohns scoler. He de­clareth it with these wordes. Eum, qui ex creatura punis est, accepit, & gratias egit, dicens, Libro 4. cap. 32. Hoc est cor­pus meum. Et calicem similiter, qui est ex creatura, quae est secundum nos, suum sanguinem confessus est, & noui testamenti nouam docuit oblationem, quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens, in vniuerso mundo offert Deo. De quo in duodecim prophetis Malachias sic praesignificauit, [Page] Non est mihi voluntas in vobis dicit Dominus exerci­tuum: Malac. 1. & munus non suscipiam de manu vestra. He tooke that which by creation is bread, and gaue thankes, saying, this is my body. And likewise the cuppe, full of that creature, which is here with vs, and confessed it to be his bloud, and thus taught the newe oblation of the newe testament, which the churche receiuing of the Apostles, doth offer to God through the whole worlde, whereof Malachie one of the twelue prophetes dyd prophecie thus. I haue no lyking in you, sayeth our lord almighty, neither will I take sacrifice of your handes: because from the ry­sing of the sunne to the going downe of the same, my na­me is glorified among the nations, and incense is offered to my name in euery place, and pure sacrifice, for that my name is great among the nations. What can be vnderstanded by this newe oblation of the newe testament other, then the oblation of that, which he sayde to be his body, and confessed to be his bloude. And if he had offered bread and wine onely, or the figure of his body and bloud in bread and wine, it had ben no newe oblation. for such had ben made by Melchisedech long before. Neither can the prophecie of Malachie be vnderstanded of the obla­tion of Christ vpon the crosse, for as much as that was done but at one tyme onely, and in one cer­taine place of the world, in Golgoltha a place with­out the gates of Ierusalem neare to the walles of that citie. Concerning the sacrifice of a contrite and an humbled heart, and all other Sacrifices of [Page 169] our deuotion, that be mere spirituall, they can not be called the newe oblation of the Newe testament, for as much as they were done as well in the olde testamēt as in the newe, neither be they all together pure. Wherefore this place of Irenaeus, and also the prophecie of Malachie, wherewith it is confirmed, must nedes be referred to the sacrifice and oblation of the body and bloud of Christ dayly throughout the whole world offered to God in the Masse, which is the externall Sacrifice of the churche and proper to the newe testament: which, as Irenaeus sayeth, the church receiued of the Apostles, and the Apostles of Christ.

Now let vs heare what S. Cyprian hath written to this purpose. Because his workes be common,Lib. 2. epist. 3. to be shorter, I will rehearse his wordes in English. If in the Sacrifice, which is Christ, none but Christ is to be folowed, soothly it behoueth vs to obey and doo that, which Christ dyd, and cōmaunded to be done. For if Iesus Christ our lord and God, very he him selfe be the high priest of God the father, and him selfe first offered sacrifice to God the father, and cō ­maunded the same to be done in his remēbraunce: verely that priest doth occupie the office of Christ truly, who doth by imitation the same thing that Christ dyd. And then he offereth to God the father in the church a true and a perfite sacrifice, if he be­gynne to offer, right so as he seeth Christ him selfe to haue offered. This farre S. Cyprian. How can this Article be auouched in more plaine wordes? he sayeth that Christ offered him selfe to his father in his [Page] supper, and likewise cōmaunded vs to doo the same.

Here we haue proued, that it is lawfull, and hath alwaies from the begynning of the newe t [...]stament ben lawfull for the priestes to offer vp Christ vnto his father, by the testimonies of three holy martyrs, two Grekes, and one Latine, most notable in sundry respectes, of antiquitie, of the rome they bare in Chri­stes churche, of learning, of constancie, of faith sted­fastly kepte to death, suffred in places of fame and knowledge, at Paris, at Lions, at Carthage.

Our aduersaries crake much of the sealing vp of their newe doctrine with the bloud of such and such, who be writtē in the booke of lyes, not in the booke of lyfe, whom they will nedes to be called martyrs. Verely if those Moonkes and freres, Apostates and renegates, wedded to wiues, or rather (to vse their owne terme) yoked to sisters, be true martyrs: then must our newe Gospellers pull these holy fathers, and many thousandes mo, out of heauen. For certai­nely the faith, in defence of which either sorte dyed, is vtterly contrary. The worst that I wishe to them, is, that God geue them eyes to see, and eares to heare, and that he shut not vp their hartes, so as they see not the light here, vntill they be throwen awaye in­to the owtward darkenes,Matt. 15. where shall be weeping and grynting of teeth.

Leauing no small number of places, that might be recited out of diuerse other doctours, I will bring two of two worthy bishops, one of Chrysostome, the other of S. Ambrose, confirmig this truth. Chry­sostomes wordes be these. Pontifex noster ille est, qui [Page 170] hostiam mundantem nos obtulit: ipsam offerimus & nunc, Chrysost. in epist. ad Heb. Ho­mil. 17. quae tunc oblata quidem, consumi non potest. Hoc autem quod nos facimus, in commemorationem fit eius, quod fa­ctum est. Hoc enim facite, inquit, in mei cōmemorationem. He is our bishop, that hath offered vp the hoste, which cleanseth vs. The same doo we offer also now, which though it were then offered, yet can not be consumed. But this that we doo, is done in remem­braunce of that, which is done. For doo ye this sayeth he, in my remembraunce. S. Ambrose sayeth thus.In Psalm. 38. Vidimus principem Sacerdotum ad nos venientem, vidimus et audiuimus offerentem pro nobis sanguinem suum: sequa­mur vt possumus, Sacerdotes, vt offeramus pro populo sa­crificium, etsi infirmi merito, tamen honorabiles sacrificio. Quia etsi Christus non videtur offerre, tamen ipse offertur in terris, quando Christi corpus offertur. We haue sene the prince of priestes come to vs, we haue sene and heard him offer for vs his bloud: Let vs that be prie­stes folowe him, as we maye, that we may offer sa­crifice for the people, being though weake in merite, yet honorable for the sacrifice. Because albeit Christ be not sene to offer, yet he is offered in earth, when the body of Christ is offered. Of these our lordes wordes, which is geuen for you, and, which is shedde for you and for many, Here S. Ambrose exhorteth the prie­stes, to offer the body and bloud of Christ, for the people. And willeth them to be more regarded, then commonly they be now a dayes, for this sacrifices sake, though otherwise they be of lesse deserte.

Now for proufe of the sacrifice and oblation of Christ, by the doctoures mynde vpon the figure of [Page] Melchisedech: Lib. 2. epist. 3. first S. Cyprian sayeth thus. Qui magis sa­cerdos Dei summi, quàm Dominus noster Iesus Christus, qui sacrificium Deo patri obtulit, et obtulit hoc idem, quod Melchisedech, id est, panem & vinum, suum scilicet cor­pus & sanguinem. Who is more the priest of the hi­ghest God, then our lord Iesus Christ, who offered a sacrifice to God the father, and offered the selfe same, that Melchisedech dyd, that is, bread and wine, that is to saye, his owne body and bloud. S. Hierome in an epistle that he wrote for the vertuouse women Paula and Eustochium, to Marcella, hath these wordes, Recurre ad Genesim & Melchisedech regem Salem. Hu­ius principem inuenies ciuitatis, qui iam in typo Christi pa­nem & vinum obtulit, & mysterium christianum in Sal­uatoris sanguine & corpore dedicauit. Retourne to the booke of Genesis, and to Melchisedech the king of Salem. And thou shalt fynde the prince of that Ci­tie, who euen at that tyme in the figure of Christ offered bread and wine, and dedicated the mysterie of Christians in the body and bloud of our Sauiour. Here this learned father maketh a plaine distinction betwen th'oblation of the figure, which was bread and wine, and the oblation of the truth, which is the mysterie of Christen people, the bloud and the bo­dy of Christ our Sauiour. Of this. S. Augustine spea­keth largely in his first sermon vpon the 33. Psalme. and in the 17. booke de ciuitate Dei, cap. 20.

Of all other Oecumenius speaketh most plainely to this purpose vpon this place of S. Paul alleaged out of the Psalme, Tu es Sacerdos in aeternum secundum [...]rdinem Melchisedech. Thou art a priest for euer after [Page 171] the order of Melchisedech his wordes be these. Sig­nificat sermo, quòd non solum Christus obtulit incruentam hostiam (siquidem suum ipsius corpus obtulit) verum etiam qui ab ipso furgentur sacerdotio, quorum Deus Pontifex esse dignatus est, sine sanguinis effusione offerent. Nam hoc significat (in aeternum.) Neque enim de ea quae semel a Deo facta est oblatio et hostia, dixisset in aeternum, sed respiciēs ad praesentes sacrificos, per quos medios Christus sacrificat & sacrificatur, qui etiam in mystica coena modum illis tradidit huiusmodi sacrificij. The meaning of this place is (sayeth he) that not onely Christ offered an vn­bloudy sacrifice, for he offered his owne body, but also that they which after him shall doo the office of a priest (whose bishop he vouchesaueth to be) shall offer without shedding of bloud. For that sig­nifieth the word (for euer.) For concerning that ob­lation and sacrifice which was once made by God, he would neuer saye, (in aeternum) for euer. But (he sayd so) hauing an eye to those priestes that be now, by the mediation of whom Christ sacrificeth and is sa­crificed, who also in his mysticall supper taught them by tradition the maner of such a sacrifice.

Concerning the prophecie of Malachie for proufe of this oblation, though the place of Irenaeus aboue recited may stand in stede of many auctorities, yet I will not lette to rehearse the sayinges of a father or two, for confirmation of this Article. Chrysostom sayeth very plainely,In Psal. 95 In omni loco sacrificium offertur nomini meo, & sacrificium purum. Vide quâm luculenter quanque dilucide mysticam interpretatus est mensam, quae est incruenta hostia. In euery place a sacrifice shall be [Page] offered to my name, and that a pure sacrifice. See how plainely and clearely he interpreted the mysticall table, which is the vnbloudy sacrifice.

Saint Augustine hath many euident sayinges tou­chig this matter in his workes. One shall suffise for all which is in a litle treatise he made contra Iudaeos, vt­tered in these wordes.Cap. 9. Aperite oculos tandem aliquando, & videte ab Oriente sole vsque ad Occidentem, non in vno loco, vt vobis fuit constitutum, sed in omni loco of­ferri sacrificium christianorum, non cuilibet Deo, sed ei, qui ista praedixit, Deo Israel. Open your eyes at last you Iewes, and see that from the rysing of the sunne to the setting, not in one place, as it was appointed to you, but in euery place the sacrifice of the Christen people is offered, not to euery God, but to him that prophecied of these thinges before, the God of Israel. And euen so with that protestation which saint Au­gustine made to the Iewes, I ende this tediouse mat­ter consisting in maner altogether in allegations to M. Iuell. Open open your eyes at last M. Iuell, and see how all the holy and learned fathers, that haue preached the faith of Christ from the rysing of the sunne to the setting, haue taught this doctrine, by word and writing lefte to the posteritie, that they which vnder Christ doo vse the of [...]ce of a priest after the order of Melchisedech, haue not onely au­ctoritie, but also expresse commaundement, to offer vp Christ vnto his father. The proufe of which do­ctrine, although it depend of the weight of one place, yet I haue thought good to fortifie it with some good number, that it may the better appear to be a [Page 172] most vndoubted truth, not moued greatly with the blame of tediousnes, where no thankes are sought, but onely defence of the catholike Religion is in­tended.

Of the priestes saying Masse for an other.
ARTICLE XVIII.

VVhat you would saye M. Iuell, I wote not, what you saye, well I wote.The priest re­ceiueth not the Sacramēt for an other. Verely we do not communicate ne receiue the Sacrament for an other. Neither hath it euer ben taught in the catholike churche, that the priest receiue the Sacrament for an other. We receiue not the Sacrament for an other, no more then we receiue the Sacrament of Baptisme, or the Sacrament of penaunce, or the Sacrament of Matrimonie, one for an other. In dede the priest sayeth Masse for others, where he receiueth that he hath offered, and that is it you meane I gesse: In which Masse being the externall sacrifice of the Newe testament, accor­ding vnto Christes institution, the thing that is of­fered, is such, as maketh our petitions and requestes acceptable to God, as S. Cyprian sayeth,In sermo­ne de coe­na domi­ni. In huius (cor­poris) praesentia non superuacué mendicant lachrymae veniā. In the presence of this body teares craue not for­geuenes in vaine.

That the oblatiō of the Masse is done for others then for the priest alone which celebrateth, it may [Page] sufficiently be proued by an hundred places of the fathers, the matter being vndoubted, two or three may suffise. First Chrysostom writeth thus in an ho­melie vpon the Actes.In Acta. homil. 21. Quid dicis? in manibus est ho­stia, & omnia proposita sunt bene ordinata: adsunt angeli, adsunt archangeli, adest filius Dei, cum tanto horrorè adstant omnes, adstant illi clamantes omnibus silentibus, & putas sim­pliciter haec fieri? Igitur & alia simpliciter, & quae pro ecclesia, & quae pro sacerdotibus offeruntur, & quae pro plenitudine ac vbertate? absit. Sed omnia cum fide fiunt.

What sayest thou hereto? the hoste is in the priestes handes, and all thinges set forth are in due order. The Angels be present, the Archangels be present, the sonne of God is present. Whereas all stād there with so great feare, whereas all they stand there crying out to god, and all other holde their peace, thinkest thou these thinges be done simply and without great cause? Why then be those other thinges done also simply, bothe the thinges which are offered for plentie and abundaunce? God forbydde, but all thin­ges are done with faith. Saint Ambrose in his fune­rall oration made of the death of Valentinian the Emperour, calling the Sacrament of th'aulter the ho­ly and heauenly mysteries, and the oblation of our mother (by which terme he vnderstandeth the church) sayeth, that he will prosecute the godly soule of that Emperour with the same. This father wri­ting vpon the 38. Psalme, exhorteth priestes to folowe Christ, that as he offered for vs his bloud, so priestes offer sacrifice for the people his wordes be these, Vidi­mus principem sacerdotum, etc. We haue sene the prince [Page 173] of priestes cōming vnto vs, we haue sene and hearde him offering for vs his bloud. Let vs that be priestes, folowe as we can, so as we offer sacrifice for the people, though weake in merite, yet honorable for the sacrifice, etc.

That the oblatiō of the Masse is profitably made for others, S. Gregorie witnesseth very plainely, ho­milia, 37. expounding the place of S. Luke. cap. 14. alio­qui legationem mittens, ea quae pacis sunt postulat. Elles he sendeth forth an ambassade, and sueth for peace. Hereupon he sayeth thus. Mittamus ad Dominum lega­tionem nostram, flendo, tribuendo, sacras hostias offerendo. Singulariter namque ad absolutionem nostram, oblata cum lachrymis & benignitate mentis, sacri altaris hostia suf­fragatur. Let vs send to our lord our Ambassade, with weeping, geuing almose, and offering of holy hostes. For the hoste of the holy aulter (that is the blessed Sacrament) offered with teares and with the merci­full bountie of our mynde, helpeth vs singularely to be assoyled. In that homilie he sheweth, that the ob­lation of Christes body in this Sacrament present, which is done in the Masse, is helpe and cōfort not onely to them that be present, but also to them that be absent, bothe quycke and dead, which he proueth by examples of his owne knowledge. Who so listeth to see antiquitie for proufe hereof, and that in the Apostles tyme bishops and priestes in the dredfull sacrifice offered and prayed for others, as for euery state and order of men, and also for holesomnesse of the ayer, and for fertilitie of the fruites of the earth, etc. Let him reade the eight booke of the constitu­tions [Page] of the Apostles set forth by Clement.

Of the application of the benefites of Christes death to others by meane of prayer in the Masse.
ARTICLE. XIX.

THe vertue of Christes death and passion is grace and remission of synnes, the ap­peacing of Gods wrath, the recōciliation of vs to God, delyueraunce from the de­uill, hell and euerlasting damnation. Our aduersaries imputing to vs, as though we sayde and taught, that the priest applyeth this vertue, effecte and merite of Christes death to any man by the meane of the Masse, either belye vs of ignoraunce, or sclaunder vs of malice. Verely we saye not so. Neither doth the priest applye the vertue of Christes passion to any man by the meane of the Masse.vvhat ap­plyeth the priest vn­to vs in the Masse He doth but applie his prayer and his intent of oblation, beseching al­mighty God to applye the merite and vertue of his sonnes death, (the memorie whereof he celebrateth at the Masse) to them, for whom he prayeth.

It is God and none other, that applyeth to vs re­mission of synne, the priest doth but praye for it, and by the commemoration of his sonnes death, moueth him to applye. So as all that the priest doth, is but by waye of petition and prayer, leauing all power and auctoritie of applying to God, which prayer is to be beleued to be of most force and efficacie, when [Page 174] it is worthely and deuoutly made in the Masse: in the which the priest beareth the person of the whole churche, and offereth his prayer in the sacrifice, where­in the churche offereth Christ, and it selfe through Christ to God. Which his prayer and deuout ser­uice he besecheth to be offered vp by the handes of Angelles vnto the high aulter of God, in the sight of the diuine maiestie.Sermon [...] de coena Domini. Of what strēgth prayer made at the Masse is, the holy bishop and martyr S. Cy­prian witnesseth, where he sayeth. In the presence of this Sacrament teares craue not in vayne, and the sa­crifice of a cōtrite harte, is neuer denyed his request.

Of opus operatum, vvhat it is, and vvhether it remoue synne.
ARTICLE. XX.

IN dede the doctrine vttered in this Ar­ticle is false, and derogatorie to the glorie of our Sauiour Christ. For thereby the honour of Christes sacrifice, whereby he hath once satisfied for the synnes of all, shuld be trās­ferred to the worke of the priest, which were great wickednes and detestable blasphemie. And therefore we will not requyre M. Iuell to yelde and subscribe vnto this Article. For we graunt, this was neuer thought a sounde doctrine within syx hūdred yeres of Christes Ascensiō, nor shall be so thought within syx thousand yeres after the same of any man of [Page] sounde beleefe. Neither hath it ben at any tyme taught in the catholike churche, how so euer it liketh our aduersaries to charge the scolasticall doctours with the sclaunderous reporte of the contrary. For it is Christ onely and none other thing, that is able to remoue our synnes, and that hath he done by the sacrifice of his body once done vpon the crosse. Of which sacrifice once performed vpon the crosse with shedding of his bloud, this vnbloudy sacrifice of the aulter, which is the daily sacrifice of the churche, cō ­monly called the Masse, is a samplar, and a comme­moration, in the which we haue the same body that hanged on the crosse. And whereas we haue nothing of our selues, that we maye offer vp acceptable to God: we offer this his sonnes body as a most accep­table sacrifice, beseching him to looke not vppon our worthynes, our acte or worke: but vpon the face of Christ his most dere sonne, and for his sake to haue mercie vpon vs.

Hovv the Masse is vaileable ex opere operato.And in this respecte we doubte not this blessed sacrifice of the Masse to be vaileable and effectuall, ex opere operato, that is, not as M. Iuell interpreteth, for that the Masse is sayde and done, referring opus ope­ratum to the acte of the priest, not so: but for the worke wrought it selfe, which god him selfe worketh by the ministerie of the priest, without respecte had to his merite, or acte, which is the body and bloud of Christ. Which when it is according to his com­maundement offered vp to god, is not in regard of our worke, but of it selfe, and of the holy Institution of his onely begoten sonne, a most acceptable sacri­fice [Page 175] to him, both for quicke and deade, where there is no stoppe nor lette to the cōtrarie on the behalfe of the receiuer. The dead, I meane such onely, as through faith haue recommended them selues to the redēptiō wrought by Christ, and by this faith haue deserued of God, that after their departure hēce, as S. Augustine sayeth, this sacrifice might profite them.

But to speake of this matter more particularly and more distinctly, the terme Masse maye be taken two wayes.Masse ta­ken tvvo vvayes. Either for the thing it selfe which is of­fered, or for the acte of the priest in offering of it. If it be taken for the thing it selfe that is offered, which is the body of Christ, and is in this respecte of the scolasticall doctours called opus operatum: no man can iustly denye, but that it remoueth and taketh awaie synne. For Christ in his fleshe crucified is our onely sacrifice, our onely price, our onely redēption,1. Cor. 6 et 7. Tit. 2. Apoc. 14. 1. Ioan. 2. In 3. cap. ad Roma­nos. where­by he hath merited to vs vpon the crosse, and with the price of his bloud hath bought the remission of our synnes. and S. Iohn sayeth, he is the propitiatiō for our synnes. So Oecumenius sayeth. Caro Christi est pro­pitiatorium nostrarum iniquitatum. The fleshe of Christ is the propitiatiō for our iniquities. And this not for that it is offered of the priest in the Masse specially, but for that he offered it once him selfe with sheddīg of his bloud vpon the crosse for the redemption of all. Which oblation done vpon the Crosse, is become a perpetuall and continuall oblation not in the same maner of offering, but in the same vertue and power of the thing offered. For since that tyme the same body of Christ appearing alwaies before the face [Page] of God in heauen, presenteth and exhibiteth it selfe for our reconciliation. And likewise it is exhibited and offered by his owne commaundement here in earth, in the Masse, where he is both priest and sa­crifice, offerer and oblation, though in mysterie and by waie of commemoration, that thereby we may be made partetakers of the reconciliation performed. And so it is a sacrifice in very dede propitiatorie, not for our acte or worke, but for his owne worke already done and accepted. To this onely we must ascribe remission and remouing of our synnes.

If the terme Masse be taken for the acte of the priest, in respecte of any his onely doing, it is not able to remoue synne. For so we shuld make the priest gods peere, and his acte equall with the passiō of Christ, as our aduersaries doo vniustly sclaunder vs. Yet hath the Masse vertue and effecte in some de­gree, and is acceptable to god, by reason of the ob­lation of the sacrifice, which in the Masse is done by the offerer, without respect had to Christes institu­tion, euen for the faithfull prayer and deuotion of the partie that offereth, which the scoole doctours terme ex opere operantis. For then the oblation semeth to be most acceptable to god, when it is offered by some that is acceptable. Now the partie that offereth is of two sortes. The one offereth immediatly and personally. the other offereth mediatly, or by meane of an other, and principally. The first is the priest that consecrateth, offereth and receiueth the Sacra­ment, who so doth these thinges in his owne per­son, yet by gods auctoritie, as none other in so offe­ring [Page 176] is concurrent with him. The partie that offe­reth mediately or by meane of an other and prin­cipally, is the churche militant, in whose person the priest offereth, and whose minister he is in offering. For this is the Sacrifice of the whole churche. The first partie that offereth, is not alwayes acceptable to God, neither alwaies pleaseth him, because often­tymes he is a synner. The second partie that offe­reth, is euermore acceptable to God, because the churche is alwayes holy, beloued, and the onely spoose of Christ. And in this respecte the Masse is an acce­ptable seruice to god, ex opere operantis, and is not without cause and reason called a sacrifice propitia­torie, not for that it deserueth mercie at gods hand of it selfe, as Christ doth, who onely is in that prin­cipall and speciall sorte a sacrifice propitiatorie: but for that it moueth god to geue mercie and remis­sion of synne already deserued by Christ. In this de­gree of a sacrifice propitiatorie, we may put prayer, a cōttite harte, almose, forgeuing of our neighbour, etc. This may easely be proued by the holy fathers.

Origens wordes be very plaine.In Leuit. Hom. 13. Si respicias ad illam commemorationem, de qua dicit Dominus, Hoc facite in meam commemorationem, inuenies, quòd ista est comme­moratio sola, quae propitium faciat Deum. If thou looke to that commemoration, whereof our lord sayeth, Doo this in my remembraunce, or in commemoration of me: thou shalt fynde, that this is the onely comme­moration, that maketh god mercifull. Saint Augustine sayeth thus. Nemo melius praeter martyres meruit ibi re­quiescere, vbi & hostia Christus est, & sacerdos, scilicet, [Page] vt propitiationem de oblatione hostiae consequantur. Sermone 11. de Sā ­ctis. No man hath deserued better, then the martyrs to reste there, where Christ is bothe the hoste and the priest, (he meaneth to be buried vnder the aulter) to the intent they might atteine propitiation by the obla­tion of the hoste. But here to auoyd prolixitie in a matter not doubtefull, I leaue a number of places, whereby it may be euidently proued, that the Masse is a sacrifice propitiatorie in this degree of propi­tiation, bothe for the quicke and the dead, the same not being specially denyed by purporte of this Ar­ticle. And this is the doctrine of the churche, tou­ching the valour of the Masse ex opere operato, where­by no parte of Christes glorie is impayred.

Of calling the Sacrament lord and God.
ARTICLE. XXI.

Sacramēt tvvo vva­yes taken. THis word Sacramēt (as is declared before) is of the fathers taken two wayes. Either for the onely outward formes of bread and wine, which are the holy signe of the very body and bloud of Christ present and vn­der them conteined: Or for the whole substance of the Sacrament, as it consisteth of the outward for­mes,In sent. Prosperi. de conse. dist. 2. lib. 4. cap. 34. and also of the very body and bloud of Christ verely present, which S. Augustine calleth the inui­sible grace and the thing of the Sacrament, And Irenaeus, calleth it rem coelestem, the heauenly thing as [Page 179] that other, rem terrenam, the earthly thing. Taken the first waie, no Christen man euer honoured it with the name of lord and God. For that were plai­ne Idolatrie, to attribute the name of the Creator, to the creature. But taken in the secōd signification, it hath alwayes of Christen people and of the lear­ned fathers of the churche, ben called by the name of lord and God. And of right so ought it to be, for elles were it impietie and a denyall of God, not to call Christ the sonne of God, by the name of lord and God, who is not onely in truth of fleshe and bloud in the Sacrament, after which maner he is there ex vi Sacramenti, but also for the inseparable coniunction of bothe natures in vnitie of person, ex necessaria concomitantia, whole Christ, God and man. That the holy fathers called the Sacrament taken in this sense, lord and God, I might proue it by many places, the rehearsall of a fewe may serue for many. Origen in an homilie speaking reuerently of this blessed Sacrament, sayeth,In diuer­fos Euan­gelij lo­cos. ho­mil. 5. that when a man receiueth it, our lord entreth vnder his rooffe, and exhorteth him that shall receiue it, to humble him selfe and to saye vnto it: Domine non sum dignus vt intres sub te­ctum meum. Lord I am not worthy that thou enter vnder my rooffe.

S. Cyprian in Sermone de lapsis, telleth, how a man, who had denyed God in tyme of persecution, ha­uing notwithstanding (the sacrifice by the priest done) priuely with others receiued the Sacrament, not being able to eate it nor to handle it, opening his hādes, fownde that he bare asshes. Where he addeth [Page] these wordes. Documento vnius ostensum est, dominum recedere, cum negatur. By this example of one man it is shewed, that our lord departeth awaie, when he is denyed. The same S. Cyprian in th'exposition of the Pater noster, declaring the fourth petition of it, Geue vs thys daye our daily bread: vnderstandeth it to con­teine a desyre of the holy communion in this bles­sed Sacrament, and sayeth. Ideo panem nostrum, id est, Christum dari nobis quotidie petimus, vt qui in Christo manemus & viuimus, à sanctificatione & corpore eius non recedamus. Therefore we aske our daily bread, that is to saye, Christ, to be geuen vnto vs, that we which abyde and lyue in Christ, depart not from the state of holynes, and communion of his bodye. Here S. Cyprian calleth the Sacrament Christ, as he is in dede there present really, so as in the place al­leaged before he calleth it lord. And I wene our ad­uersaries will imbarre the Sacrament of the name of Christ, no lesse then of the name of lord or God.

Onlesse they make lesse of Christ, then of lord and God. Verely this holy martyr acknowlegeth this sacrament not for lord and Christ onely, but also for God, by these wordes in his sermon de coena Domini. Sicut in persona Christi humanitas videbatur, & latebat diuinitas, ita sacramento visibili ineffabiliter diuina se in­fudit essentia. As in the person of Christ, the man­hode was sene, and the godhed was hydden, so the diuine essence (or substaunce of God) hath infused it selfe into the visible sacrament vnspeakeably.

Chrysostom doubteth not to call the Sacrament God in this plaine saying. Nolimus obsecro, nolimus im­pudentes [Page 180] nos ipsos interimere, In priorē ad Cor. Homil. 24 sed cum honore & mundi­tia ad Deum accedamus. & quando id propositum vide­ris, dic tecum: propter hoc corpus non amplius terra & cinis ego sum, non amplius captiuus, sed liber. Let vs not, let vs not for gods sake be so shamelesse, as to kill our selues (by vnworthy receiuing of the sacra­ment) but with reuerence and cleanenesse let vs co­me to God. And when thou seest the sacrament set forth, saye thus with thy selfe: by reason of this bo­dy, I am no more earth and asshes, no more captiue, but free.

And least this sense taken of Chrysostom shuld seme ouer straunge, this place of S. Ambrose, who lyued in the same tyme, and agreeth with him tho­roughly in doctrine, may seme to leade vs to the same. Quid edamus, quid bibamus, De ijs qul mysterijs initiantu [...] cap. 9. Psal. 33. alibi tibi per prophetā Spiritus sanctus expressit, dicens: gustate & videte, quo­niam suauis est Dominus, beatus vir qui sperat in eo, in illo Sacramento Christus est, quia corpus est Christi. What we ought to eate, and what we ought to drinke, the holy ghost hath expressed by the prophete in an other place, saying: Taste and see, how that our lord is sweete, blessed is the man that trusteth in him. In that Sacrament is Christ, because there is the body of Christ. Here S. Ambrose referring those wordes of the psalme to the sacrament, calleth it lord, and that lord, in whom the man that trusteth, is blessed, who is God.

Agreeably to this sayeth S. Augustine,In collec­taneis in 10. cap. prioris ad Corinth. in a sermō de verbis Euangelij, as Beda reciteth. Qualem vocem Domini audistis inuitantis nos? Quis vos inuitauit? [Page] Quos inuitauit? Et quis praeparauit? Inuitauit Dominus seruos, & praeparauit eis cibum seipsum. Quis audeat mā ­ducare Dominum suum? Et tamen ait, qui manducat me, viuet propter me. What maner a uoice is that ye haue heard of our lord inuiting and bydding vs to the feast? who hath inuited? whom hath he inuited? And who hath made preparation? The lord hath inuited the seruantes, and hath prepared him selfe to be meate for them. Who dareth be so bolde as to eate his lord? And yet he sayeth, he that eateth me, shall lyue for cause of me.

In Ioan. lib. 4. cap. 15.Cyrillus accompteth the sacrament for Christ, and God the word, and for God, in this saying. Qui car­nem Christi manducat, vitam habet aeternam. Habet enim haec caro Dei verbum, quod naturaliter vita est. Proptereà dicit: Quia ego resuscitabo eum in nouissimo die. Ego enim dixit, Ioan. 6. id est, corpus meum quod comedetur resuscitabo eum. Non enim alius ipse est, quàm caro sua, &c. He that eateth the fleshe of Christ, hath lyfe euerlasting. For this fleshe hath the word of God, which naturally is lyfe. Therefore sayeth he, that I will raise him in the last daie. For I, quoth he, that is to saye, my body which shall be eaten, shall raise him vp agayne, for he is no other, then his fleshe, &c.

No man more expressely calleth the Sacramēt by the name of God, then S. Bernard in his godly ser­mon de coena Domini ad Petrum presbyterum. where he sayeth thus. Comedunt angeli Verbum de Deo natum, Co­medunt homines Verbum foenum factum. The angels eate the Word borne of God, men eate the Word made haye, meaning hereby the sacramēt, which he calleth [Page 181] the Word made haye, that is to witte, the Word in­carnate. And in an other place there, he sayeth. Haec est verè indulgentia coelestis, haec est verè cumulata gratia, haec est verè superexcellens gloria, sacerdotem Deum suū tenere, & alijs dando porrigere. This is verely an hea­uenly gyfte, this is verely a bountifull grace, this is verely a passing excellent glorie, the priest to holde his God, and in geuing to reache him forth to others. In the same sermō speaking of the meruelouse sweet­nes that good bishopes and holy religiouse men haue experience of, by receiuing this blessed Sacrament, he sayeth thus. Ideo ad mensam altaris frequentius ac­cedunt, omni tempore candida facientes vestimenta sua, id est, corpora, prout possunt, melius, vtpote Deum suum manu & ore cōtrectaturi. For this cause they come the ofte­ner vnto the bourd of the aulter, at all tymes ma­king their garmentes that is to saye, their bodyes, so white, as they can possibly, as they, who shall handle their God with hand and mowth. An other place of the same sermon, for that it cōteineth a holesom in­struction, besyde the affirming of our purpose, I can not omitte. I remitte the learned to the Latine. the English of it is this.

They are meruelous thinges brethren, that be spo­ken of this Sacrament. faith is necessarie, knowledge of reason is (here) superfluous. This, let faith beleue, let not vnderstanding require, least that either not being fownde, it thinke it incredible, or being fown­de out, it beleue it not to be singuler and alone. And therfor it behoueth it to be beleued symply, that can not be serched out profitably. Wherefore serche not [Page] serche not, how it maye bee, doubte not, whether it bee. Come not vnto it vnreuerently, least it bee to you to death. Deus enim est, & quanquàm panis myste­ria habeat, mutatur tamen in carnem. For it is God, and thoug it haue mysteries of bread, yet is it chaunged into fleshe. God and mā it is that witnesseth bread truly to be made his fleshe. The vessell of election it is,1. Cor. 11. that threatneth iudgement, to him that put­teth no difference in iudging of that so holy fleshe. The selfe same thing thinke thou o Christen man of the wyne, geue that honour to the wine. The cre­atour of wine it is, that promoteth the wine to be the bloud of Christ. This farre holy Bernard.

Here let our aduersaries touching this Article, consyder and weigh with them selues, whether they be Lutheranes, Zuinglianes, or Geneuians, what en­glish they can make of these wordes vsed by the fa­thers, and applyed to the Sacramēt in the places be­fore alleaged. Dominus, Christus▪ Diuina essentia, Deus, Seipsum, Verbum Dei, Ego, Verbum foenum factum, Deum suum. The number of the like places that might be alleaged to this purpose, be in maner infinite. Yet M. Iuell promyseth to geue ouer and subscribe, if any one may be fownde. Now we shal see, what truth is in his word.

In the weighing of this doctrine of the churche, litle occasion of wicked scoffes and blasphemies a­gainst this blessed sacrament shall remaine to them, that be not blinded with that grosse and fond er­rour, that denyeth the inseparabilitie of Christ, but affirmeth in this mysterie to be present his fleshe [Page 182] onely, with out bloud, soule, and godhed. Which is confuted by plaine scriptures. Christ raysed from the dead, now dyeth no more. Rom. 6. He suffereth him selfe no more to be diuided, 1. Cor. 1. Euery sprite that looseth Iesus, this is Antichrist. 1. Ioan. 4. Hereof it foloweth, that if Christ be verely vnder the forme of bread in the Sacrament, as it is other wheres suf­ficiently proued: then is he there entier and whole: fleshe, bloud, and soule, whole Christ, God and man, for the inseparable vnion of bothe natures in one person. Which matter is more amply declared in the Article of the adoration of the sacrament.

Of the remayning of Christes bodye in the sacrament so long as the accidentes be entier and vvhole.
ARTICLE. XXII.

THese fiue articles here folowing are Scoole pointes, the discussiō whereof is more cu­riouse, then necessary. Whether the faith­full people were then, that is to saye, for the space of six hundred yeres after Christ, taught to beleue concerning this blessed Sacrament preci­sely according to the purporte of all these articles or no, I knowe not. Verely I thinke, they were taught the truth of this matter simply and plainely, yet so as nothing was hydden from them, that in those quiet tymes, (quiet I meane touching this point [Page] of faith) was thought necessary for them to knowe. If sithēs there hath ben more taught, or rather if the truth hath in some other forme of wordes ben de­clared for a more euidence and clearnesse in this be­halfe to be had, truth it selfe alwaies remayning one: this hath proceded of the diligence and earnest care of the churche, to represse the pertinacie of heretikes, who haue within these last syx hundred yeres im­pugned the truth herein, and to meete with their peruerse and froward obiectiōs: as hath ben thought necessary to finde out such wedges, as might best serue to ryue such knotty blocket. Yet this matter hath not so much ben taught in open audience of the people, as debated priuatly betwen learned men in scooles, and so of them set forth in their priuate writinges. Wherein if some perhappes through con­tention of wittes haue ben either ouer curiouse, or ouer bolde, and haue ouershotte the marke, or not suf­ficiently cōfirmed the point they haue taken in hāde to treate of, or through ignoraunce, or fauour of a parte, haue in some thing swarued from reason, or that meaning which holy churche holdeth it is great vn­courtesie to laye that to our charge, to abuse their ouersightes to our discredite, and to reproue the whole churche for the insufficiencie of a fewe.

Now concerning this Article, whether we are able to auouche it by such authorities as M. Iuell re­quireth, or no, it shall not greatly force. The cre­dite of the catholike faith dependeth not of olde proufes of a fewe newe cōtrouersed pointes, that ben of lesse importaunce. As for the people, they [Page 183] were taught the truth plainely, when no heretike had assaulted their faith craftely.The do­ctrine of the chur­che. The doctrine of the churche is this. The body of Christ after due consecration remayneth so long in the Sacrament, as the Sacrament endureth. The Sacrament endureth so long as the formes of breade and wine continewe. Those formes continewe in their integritie, vntill the other accidentes be corrupted ad perishe. As if the colour, weight, sauour, taste, smell, and other qua­lities of bread and wine be corrupted and quite al­tered, then is the forme also of the same annichila­ted and vndone. And to speake of this more parti­cularly, sith that the substance of bread and wine is tourned into the substance of the body and bloud of Christ, as the scriptures, auncient doctours, the ne­cessary consequent of truth, and determination of holy churche leadeth vs to beleue: if such chaunge of the accidentes be made, which shuld not haue suf­fised to the corruption of bread and wine, in case of their remaindre: for such a chaunge the body and bloud of Christ ceaseth not to be in this Sacrament, whether the chaunge be in qualitie, as if the colour, sauour, and smell of bread and wine be a litle alte­red, or in quantitie, as if thereof diuision be made in­to such portions, in which the nature of bread and wine might be reserued. But if there be made so great a chaunge, as the nature of bread and wine shuld be corrupted, if they were present: then the body and bloud of Christ doo not remaine in this Sacrament, as when the colour and sauour and other qualities of bread and wine are so farre chaunged, as [Page] the nature of bread and wine might not bear it: or on the quātities syde, as if the bread be so small crō ­med into dust, and the wine dispersed into so small portiōs, as their formes remaine no lenger thē remai­neth no more the body and bloud in this Sacramēt. Thus the body and bloud of Christ remayneth in this sacrament, so long as the formes of bread and wine remaine. And when they faile and cease to be any more, then also ceaseth the body and bloud of Christ to be in the Sacrament. For there must be a conuenience and resemblaunce betwen the Sacra­ments and the thinges whereof they be sacraments, which done awaie and loste at the corruption of the formes and accidents, the sacraments also be vn­done and perishe, and consequently the inward thing and the heauenly thing in them conteined, leaueth to be in them.

Here because many of them, which haue cutte them selues from the churche, condemne the reser­uation of the Sacrament,Of reser­uation of the Sacra­ment. and affirme that the body of Christ remayneth not in the same, no longer then during the tyme whiles it is receiued, alleaging against reseruation the example of the Paschall lambe in the olde lawe,Exod. 12. wherein nothing ought to haue re­mained vntill the morning, and likewise of manna: I will rehearse that notable and knowen place of Cyril­lus Alexandrinus. Ad Colo­syriū Ar­senoiten Episcopū. citat Thomas parte 3. q. 76. his wordes be these: Audio quòd di­cant mysticam benedictionem, si ex ea remonserint in se­quentem diem reliquiae, ad sanctificationem inutilem esse. Sed insaniunt haec dicentes. Non enim alius fit Christus, neque sanctum eius corpus immutabitur: Sed virtus bene­dictionis, [Page 184] & viuifica gratia manet in illo. It is tolde me, they saye, that the mysticall blessing (so he calleth the blessed Sacrament) in case portions of it be kepte vn­till the nexte daie, is of no vertue to sanctification. But they be madde, that thus saye. For Christ becō ­meth not an other, neither his holy body is chaun­ged: but the vertue of the consecration and the quic­kening or lyfe geuing grace, abydeth still in it. By this saying of Cyrillus we see that he accompteth the errour of our aduersaries in this Article, no other then a mere madnes. The body of Christ (sayeth he) which he termeth the mysticall blessing, because it is a most holy mysterie done by consecration, once consecrated is not chaunged, but the vertue of the consecration and the grace that geueth lyfe, whereby he meaneth that fleshe assumpted of the word, re­mayneth in this sacrament, also when it is kepte: ve­rely euen so long, as the outward formes continewe not corrupte.

What is that the Mouse or vvorme eateth.
ARTICLE. XXIII.

VVhereas M. Iuell imputeth this vile asse­ueratiō but to some of the aduersaries of his syde, he semeth to acknowledge,Iuell cō ­trarieth him selfe. that it is not a doctrine vniuersally taught and receiued. The like may be sayde for his nexte Ar­ticle. [Page] And if it hath ben sayd of some onely, and not taught vniuersally of all, as a true doctrine for Chri­sten people to beleue: how agreeth he with him selfe, saying after the rehearsall of his number of Ar­ticles, the same, none excepted, to be the highest my­steries and greatest keyes of our religion. For if that were true, as it is not true for the greatest parte, then shuld this Article haue ben affirmed and taught of all. For the highest and greatest pointes of the ca­tholike Religion be not of particular, but of vniuer­sall teaching.

Concerning the matter of this Article, what so euer a mouse worme, or beaste eateth, the body of Christ now being impassible and immortall, sustei­neth no violence, iniurie, no villanie. As for that which is gnawen, bytten, or eaten of worme or beaste, whether it be the substaunce of bread, as ap­peareth to sense, which is denyed, because it ceaseth through vertue of consecration: or the outward for­me onely of the Sacrament, as many holde opinion, which also onely is broken and chawed of the re­ceiuer, the accidentes by miracle remayning without substance: In such cases happening contrary to the in­tent and ende the sacrament is ordeined and kepte for, it ought not to seme vnto vs incredible, the power of God consydered, that God taketh awaie his body from those outward formes, and permit­teth either the nature of breade to retourne, as be­fore consecration, or the accidentes to supplye the effectes of the substance of breade. As he commaun­ded the nature of the rodde, which became a serpēt, [Page 185] to retourne to that it was before, when God would haue it serue no more to the vses it was by him ap­pointed vnto.

The graue autoritie of S. Cyprian addeth great weight to the balance for this iudgemēt in weighing this matter, who in his sermon de lapsis, by the re­porte of certaine miracles sheweth, that our lordes body made it selfe awaye from some, that being de­fyled with the sacrifices of idols, presumed to come to the communion, er they had done their due pe­naunce. One (as he telleth there) thinking to haue that blessed body, which he had receiued with others in his hande, when he opened the same to put it into his mowth, fownde that he helde ashes. And thereof S. Cyprian sayeth, Documento vnius ostensum est, domi­num recedere, cum negatur. By the example of one man it was shewed, that our lord departeth awaie, when he is denyed. It is neither wicked, nor a thing vn­worthy the maiestie of that holy mysterie, to thinke our lordes body likewise done awaie, in cases of ne­gligence, villanie, and prophanation.

What this pronoune Hoc pointeth in the vvordes of cōsecration.
ARTICLE XIIII.

VVhat so euer hoc pointeth in this saying of Christ after your iudgemēt, M. Iuell, right mea­ning and plaine christen people,2. Thes. [...] (who through gods [Page] grace haue receiued the loue of truth, and not the efficacie of illusion to beleue lying) beleue verely, that in this sacrament after consecration, is the very body of Christ, and that vpon credite of his owne wordes,The benefite of the Geneuian Cōmuniō Hoc est corpus meum. They that appoint them selues to folowe your Geneuian doctrine in this point, deceiued by that ye teache them (hoc) to point the breade, and by sundry other vntruthes, in stede of the very body of Christ, in the Sacrament rightly ministred verely present, shall receiue nothing at your communion, but a bare piece of bread not worth a point. As for your some saye, who will haue Hoc to point indiuiduum vagum, first learne you well, what they meane. and if their meaning be naught, who so euer they be, handle them as you lyste, therewith shall we be offended neuer a deale. How this word Hoc in that saying of Christ, is to be takē, and what it pointeth, we knowe who haue more learnedly, more certainely, and more truly treated thereof, then Luther, Zuinglius, Caluin, Cranmer, Peter Martyr, or any their ofspring.

Who are the Sacramen [...]tes of Christes bodye and bloud, the accidentes, or the bread and vvyne.
ARTICLE. XXV.

FOr as much as by the almighty power of gods word pronounced by the priest in the consecra­tion of this Sacrament, the body and bloud of Christ [Page 186] are made really present, the substance of breade tour­ned into the substance of the body, and the substāce of wine into the substance of the bloud: the breade (which is consumed awaie by the fier of the diuine substance, as Chrysostom sayeth,In homil. Paschali. and now is becōme the breade which was formed by the hand of the holy ghost in the wombe of the virgine, and deco­cted with the fyer of the passion in the aulter of the crosse, as S. Ambrose sayeth:De conse. dist 2. ca. omnia.) can not be the sa­crament of the body, nor the wine of the bloud. Neither can it be sayde that the breade and the wine which were before, are the sacramentes, for that the breade is becomme the body, and the wyne the bloud, and so now they are not, and if they be not, then neither be they sacramentes. Therefore that the outward formes of breade and wyne which re­maine, be the sacramētes of Christes body and bloud, and not the very bread and wine it selfe: it foloweth by sequell of reason, or consequent of vnderstanding, deduced out of the first truth, which of S. Basile in an epistle ad Sozopolitanos, Epist. 65. speaking against certaine that went about to raise vp againe the olde heresie of Valentinus, is called, [...]. Of which sequell of reason in the matter of the Sacra­ment, many conclusions may be deduced in case of wante of expresse scriptures. Which waye of reaso­ning Basile vsed against heretikes, as also sundry other fathers where manifest scripture might not be alleaged.

And whereas there must be a lykenesse betwen the sacrament and the thing of the sacrament, (for if the sacramētes had not a likenesse of thinges whereof [Page] they are sacramentes,Aug. epis. 22. ad Bo­nifacium Episcopū. properly and rightely they shuld not be called sacramentes: as the sacrament of baptisme, which is the outward washing of the fleshe, hath a likenesse of the inward wasshing of the soule) and no likenesse here appeareth to be betwen the formes that remaine, and the thing of the Sacrament, for they consist not, the one of many cornes, the other of grapes, for thereof cometh not accident, but substance: hereto may be sayde, it is ynough, that these sacramētes beare the likenesse of the body and bloud of Christ, for as much as the one repre­senteth the likenesse of breade, the other the likenesse of wyne,De conse. dist. 2. ca. hoc est quod di­cimus. which S. Augustine calleth visibilem speciem elementorum, the visible forme of the elementes.

Thus the formes of breade and wine are the sa­cramentes of the body and bloud of Christ, not onely in respecte of the thing signified, which is the vnitie of the churche, but also of the thing cōteined, which is the very fleshe and bloud of Christ, where­of the truth it selfe sayde:Ioan. 6. The breade that I shall geue, is my fleshe for the lyfe of the worlde.

Of the vnspeakeable maner of the being of Christes bodye and bloud vnder the formes of breade and vvine.
ARTICLE XXVI.

THat the outward forme of bread, which is pro­perly the sacrament, is the signe of the body of Christ, we confesse, yea of that body, which is co­uertly [Page 187] in, or vnder the same,In libro Sentent. Prosperi. which S. Augustine cal­let, carnem domini forma panis opertam: the fleshe of our lord couered with the forme of bread. But what is meant by this terme (Lyeth) we knowe not. As through faith grounded vpō gods worde, we knowe that Christes body is in the Sacrament, so that it lyeth there, or vnderneathe it, by which terme it may seme a scoffe to be vttered, to bring the catholike teaching in contempte, or that it sitteth, or standeth, we denye it. For lying, sitting, and standing, noteth situatiō of a body in a place, according to distinction of membres and circunscriptiō of place, so as it haue his partes in a certaine order correspondent to the partes of the place. But after such maner the body of Christ is not in the Sacrament, but without circum­scription, order, and habitude of his partes to the partes of the body or place enuironning. Which ma­ner of being in, is aboue all reache of humaine vn­derstanding wonderouse, straunge and singular, not defined and limited by the lawes or bondes of na­ture, but by the almighty power of God. To con­clude, the being of Christes body in the Sacra­ment, is to vs certaine, the maner of his being there to vs vncertaine, and to God onely certaine.