at the court at whitehall the third of october, 1676. whereas his majesty and this board are informed of the bold and open repair made to several places, ... for the hearing of mass, and other worship and services of the romish church ... england. curia regis. 1679 approx. 6 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 1 1-bit group-iv tiff page image. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2009-10 (eebo-tcp phase 1). b03311 wing e840a estc r174982 52612143 ocm 52612143 179422 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. b03311) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 179422) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 2788:18) at the court at whitehall the third of october, 1676. whereas his majesty and this board are informed of the bold and open repair made to several places, ... for the hearing of mass, and other worship and services of the romish church ... england. curia regis. walker, edward, sir, 1612-1677. 1 sheet ([1] p.) re-printed by the heir of andrew anderson, printer to his most sacred majesty, edinburgh : anno dom. 1676. title from caption and first lines of text. royal arms at head of text; initial letter. list of those present follows title. signed at end: edw. walker. reproduction of the original in the national library of scotland. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng catholic church -law and legislation -great britain -early works to 1800. mass -celebration -early works to 1800. broadsides -scotland -17th century. 2008-05 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2008-08 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2008-10 mona logarbo sampled and proofread 2008-10 mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited 2009-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion honi soit qvi mal y pense royal blazon or coat of arms at the court at whitehall , the third of october , 1676. present the kings most excellent majesty his highness prince rupert lord chancellor lord treasurer duke of monmouth duke of lauderdale earl of ossery earl of sunderland earl of peterborrow earl of bath earl of craven earl of carbery viscount faconberg viscount newport lord bishop of london mr. secretary coventry mr. secretary williamson mr. chancellor of the exchequer master of the ordnance . whereas his majesty and this boord are informed of the bold and open repair made to several places , and especially to her majesties chappel at somerset . house , and the houses of forreign ambassadors , agents , and other publick ministers , for the hearing of mass , and other worship and service of the romish church ; and that the said ambassadors , agents , and ministers , do permit and suffer both daily masses to be said , and other worship and service to be performed in their houses , in a publick manner , by english , scotish , and irish priests , and also sermons in english to be preached in their said houses and chappels , which the laws and statutes of this kingdom do expresly forbid his subjects to frequent or do : his majesty taking the same into serious consideration , and being sensible thereof , as a matter highly tending to the violation of the laws of the realm , and the scandal of religion and government , and breach of good order , and in his princely wisdom weighing the dangerous consequence thereof , is resolved to take strict order for the stopping this evil before it spread any further . his majesty therefore , by the advice of his council , doth hereby forbid any of his said subjects hereafter to offend in the like kind , at their utmost perils ; and straitly commands . that no others presume to resort to her majesties chappel , but such as are her majesties domestick servants . and to the end this provision and order may be the more effectual , his majesty doth command , that forasmuch as concerneth the repair to the houses of forreign ambassadors , agents and ministers , at the time of mass , or other romish worship or service , some messengers of the chamber , or other officers or persons fit for that service , be appointed to watch at the several passages to their houses , and without entring into the said houses , or invading the freedom and priviledges belonging unto them , observe such persons as go thither at such times , without stopping or questioning any as they go thither , but at their coming from thence , they are to apprehend and bring the said persons to the boord , and such as they cannot apprehend , to bring their names . and that the ambassadors and other forreign ministers may have no cause to complain for this proceeding , as if there were any intention to wrong or disrespect them , his majesty doth likewise order , for the preventing of any such mistaking and sinister interpretation , that his principal secretaries of state ( according unto his majesties express commands now given unto them ) should be hereby authorized and required forthwith to repair to the said ambassadors , agents , and other forreign ministers , to make known unto them his majesties pleasure concerning the same ; and that as his majesty is careful not to have any the just priviledges and immunities of the said ambassadors , agents , or ministers , to be in any degree infringed or violated , so in the aforesaid particulars of permitting masses or other service to be said by any of the said priests , or sermons to be preached in english in their houses or chappels ( things never heard of or attempted by any precedent ambassadors or agents here ) or in suffering his subjects to resort unto them , his majesty is no less careful of preserving his laws , and conteining his subjects in their due obedience to the same ; and doth therefore expect the said ambassadors , agents and ministers compliance accordingly . and hereof his majesty thinks fit that notice should be first given to the said publick ministers ( the rather to testifie his respects unto them ) before the stricter course his majesty hath resolved , be taken with his own subjects , by a vigorous prosecution , and infliction of penalties and punishments for the preventing and repressing the like hereafter . and it is likewise ordered , that the massengers of the chamber , or others to be imployed in the service before specified , shall be appointed , and receive their charge from the lord archbishop of canterbury , the lord bishop of london , and the said secretaries , or some of them , who are to take special care to see this put in due and effectual execution . edw. walker . edinburgh , re-printed by the heir of andrew anderson , printer to his most sacred majesty . anno dom. 1676. the conuersion of a most noble lady of fraunce in iune last past, 1608. madame gratiana, wife to the high and mightie lord; claudius, lord of tremoille; duke of thouars; peere of fraunce, and prince of talmonde. a most christian epistle, written by her, to the ladyes of fraunce, to resolue them in the cause of her conuersion from popery, to the the profession of gods gospell: and aduising them to imitate her religious example. truely translated out of french. tremoille, charlotte brabantina, duchess of, 1580-1631. 1608 approx. 90 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 28 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2006-06 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a01148 stc 11262 estc s102563 99838335 99838335 2710 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a01148) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 2710) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1475-1640 ; 1202:13) the conuersion of a most noble lady of fraunce in iune last past, 1608. madame gratiana, wife to the high and mightie lord; claudius, lord of tremoille; duke of thouars; peere of fraunce, and prince of talmonde. a most christian epistle, written by her, to the ladyes of fraunce, to resolue them in the cause of her conuersion from popery, to the the profession of gods gospell: and aduising them to imitate her religious example. truely translated out of french. tremoille, charlotte brabantina, duchess of, 1580-1631. munday, anthony, 1553-1633. [56] p. printed by thomas purfoot, for nathaniell butter, and are to be sold at his shoppe at s. austens gate, at the signe of the pyde bull, at london : 1608. translated by anthony munday. original french title not traced. signatures: a² b-g⁴ h² . the last leaf is blank. running title reads: a christian epistle to the ladies of fraunce. reproduction of the original in the british library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng catholic church -controversial literature. mass -controversial literature. 2005-12 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2005-12 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2006-03 elspeth healey sampled and proofread 2006-03 elspeth healey text and markup reviewed and edited 2006-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the conuersion of a most noble lady of fraunce . in iune last past , 1608. madame gratiana , wife to the high and mightie lord ; claudius , lord of tremoille ; duke of thouars ; peere of fraunce , and prince of talmonde . a most christian epistle , written by her , to the ladyes of fraunce , to resolue them in the cause of her conuersion from popery , to the profession of gods gospell : and aduising them to imitate her religious example . truely translated out of french. magna est veritas , & praeualet . esdras . 3. at london , printed by thomas purfoot , for nathaniell butter , and are to be sold at his shoppe at s. austens gate , at the signe of the pyde bull. 1608. ( ⸪ ) to the right worshipfull , sir iohn swynnerton knight , alderman of london , and true louer of learning . also to the most vertuous ladie his wife : all happinesse hartily wisheth . sir , i am so bolde , as to present you and your worthy lady , with a most memorable and iudicious labour of a ladie ▪ lately conuerted from the dimme and grosse errours of superstitious poperie , to the profession of gods true religion and holie gospell . the reason of her conuersion , and many palpable abuses , ( besides blasphemies and sacriledges ) committed in poperie : shee hath set downe in an excellent epist le , and sent the same to her wonted friends and familiars , the ladies of fraunce , to encourage them in the imitation of this her godly example . my vnfained loue to your worship , your louing ladie , and all yours , i trust shall pleade my pardon for this presumption : in hope whereof , most humblie i commit you all to the heauenlie protection . to those mis-led ladies and gentlewomen of england , whome seducing seminaries and popish priests haue too much preuailed withall , to the great danger of their soules , if they continue still in blindnes . ladies and gentlewomen , this eipstle of a most honourable french ladie and duchesse , by mee presents it selfe to your gentle pervsing . i would my prayers , or ought else in me , could so farre preuaile with you , as but to reade ouer this her learned labour , in steede of those other abusing bookes , which your falsly named ghostly fathers , in secret bestowe on you ▪ then should i haue no doubt , but gods good spirit speaking by this lady to you , would open both your eyes and vnderstanding , to let you see the great danger of your enemies seducing , and call you home in time to the sheepefolde of faith , euen by her vertuous and religious example , that hath soworthily led the way before you . the booke it selfe speakes much better things vnto yee , then any way i am able to doe : therefore to it , and gods assisting grace in and by it , most humbly i leaue you . an excellent epistle , or exhortatorie letter , written by madame gratiana , wife to the high and mightie lord , claudius , lord of tremoille , duke of thouars ▪ peere of fraunce , and prince of talmond : to all the honorable ladies of fraunce . to resolue them in the cause of her conuersion from poperie , and aduising them to imitate her religious example . gracious and honorable ladies , i am sure it hath amazed some of you not a little , that i haue forsaken the societie , wherein i was woont to meete you , and haue drawen vpon my selfe that disgracefull name of an huguenot ( for so i heare you please to tearme me ) and other scandalous imputations wherewith you vpbraide me ; all which are to me no meane aduantage . to resolue you therefore ( at full ) of my departing from your companie , and requiring withall , to forbeare your daily sollicitations to realter me , peruse but this short discourse which i send vnto you , and then i doubt not but in some measure you will rest satisfied . after god had determined in his good time , to withdrawe me out of the sinck of sinne and idolatrie , to incorporate me in the communion of his sonne , within the bosome of his sanctified church , the refuge for all them that desire saluation , ( and where i wish , and desire in soule , that i could embrace you all : ) after ( i say ) god had thus disposed of my absolute conuersion , notwithstanding my many reuoltes and back ▪ slidings , by your letters , wherewith i was continually laboured , and other meanes of no small moment ; i fell vpon my knees , and as the blessed virgin marie said in her song , at that heauenly salutation brought her by the angell gabriell , euen so i spake to my god in my soule : be it lord vnto me , according to thy word . and calling to remembraunce , that in the last conference we had together , you stoode vpon certaine points of religion , wherewith you pressed me very narrowly , and i could not then so readily answere you : i entreate yee to receiue therein satisfaction from me now , and to perswade your selues withall , that it is gods cause i take vpon me ( a weake woman ) to defend , and he will thorowly strengthen me against all resistaunces . and since it hath pleased him to vse my poore seruice if not ( in this cleare light of his gospell ) to aduaunce the same as i could wish , yet at least ( like a willing labourer ) to bring stones and rubble to supply the building : you shall perceiue what knowledge his grace hath confirmed in me , which i wish were as liberallie engrasted into you , that our harts being enflamed with the desire of his glorie , we might all be of one minde in our lord sesus , expecting his comming to enlarge and release vs. pardon me then ( most honorable and worthy ladies ) if i make plaine and lay open to you , i will not say the simple abuses : but the wicked , superstitious and blasphemous i dolatries , which are daily practised and vsed in your romaine church , only thereby to ouerthrowe , the true seruice and worship of the euerliuing god. and alb eit the number of these iniuries are infinite , sufficient to fill a verie large and great volume , and whereof some of you haue ( in priuate ) tolde me your mislike : yet at this time , according to my promise in our last consultation : i will deale with the very cheefest abuse of all , euen that which is intruded by sathans instigation , into the most excellent and principall seruice of god , by you ( and by my selfe heeretofore ) tearmed the masse . perswading my selfe , that when i haue ( as it were with my finger ) pointed at the blasphemies , idolatrie and manifest sacriledges therein committed : you will suffer your eyes to be no longer blinded , with the pompe and exteriour deuotion of such deceiuers ; but rather that you will awaken your better iudgements , and looke into the impietie and prophanation , which lies masked vnder so hideous a monster . and i will shape mycourse and methode , by euerie abuse in his succinct place and ranck , and according as the nature of so weake an epistle will best beare it . they teach you , that in the masse , priests doe daily sacrifice , and offer vp the bodie of our lord iesus christ , to god the father : to deface and expiate , not only the sinnes of the priest that makes the offring , but likewise of the people , who are his assistants at the celebration of the masse . now we say , that this is a very great outrage and wronge , done to our lord iesus christ , and to his true sacrifice . first of all , in transferring to mortall men , or communicating to them , the dignitie of his supreme priesthood ; we woonder by what authoritie or allowance this should be done ? for the whole bodie of the scripture declareth plainly to vs : that he is the eternall sacrificer , according to the order of melchizedeck , yea , and that in such sort , as he is the only priest of that order , and permitteth not the receipt of successors or vicars . for , as concerning the sacrificers of the law , there were made many to succeede one after another : because they were not suffered to endure , by the reason of death . but this man ( saith the apostle to the hebrewes ) because he endureth for euer , hath an euerlasting priesthood . which needed not daily ( as those high priests under the law , to enter the holy places yearely with other bloud ) first for his owne sinnes , and then for the peoples : otherwise , it had bin needfull for him to haue suffered many times , since the foundation of the world . but now in the consummation of the world , hath he appeared once , to put away sinne , by the sacrifice of himselfe . being both the offering sacrificer , & the sacrifice offered for sinne , according to the nature of this holy sacrifice of the new testament , that the sacrifice and sacrificer should be both one . to iesus christ then only appertaineth the honor , to be the sacrificer of the new couenant : and they doe him intollerable outrage , to appoint him any successors or suffragans , in regard the apostle saith : there is one euerlasting sacrificer , which neuer ceaseth , and passeth not from one to another . nor can this honor be attributed to any other , but only he that is called of god , as aaron was . so likewise christ tooke not to himselfe this honor , to be made the high priest : but he glorified him , that saide vnto him : thou art my sonne , this day begate i thee . and as in the former place : thou art an euerlasting sacrificer , after the order of melchisedeck . it is not i ( ladies ) that haue spoken all this , but gods infallibe word the sacred scripture . and now if the priests of the papacie , would haue vs to acknowledge them for sacrificers : let them shew vs , how the charge to sacrifice iesus christ , is giuen them by god in the holy scriptures , and then we will lend a better eare to them . but this is not the proposition only , that christ iesus is the sole sacrificer of the new couenant : but there remaines a far greater matter . for his sacrifice neither can or ought to be iterated or performed againe , nor can it be by any other : because he offered himselfe once for all and it appertaineth to no man whatsoeuer , to make the like offering as he hath done . neither could he , as of himselfe , offer himselfe againe , for then he must haue suffered and died againe , as i haue prooued before by the apostle . and the offering which he made of himselfe , was once only , and that sacrifice is of perpetuall efficacie , for the clearing and wiping away of our sinnes . whereupon the same apostle saith , we are sanctified , euen by the offering of the bodie of iesus christ once made . and by one sole oblation , which he once only offered , hath he consecrated for euer them that are to be sanctified . and since he hath purchased for vs the remission of our sinnes : there remaineth no more oblations to be made for sinne , but his blood only is sufficient : whereby he is entred into the holy places , hauing obtained euerlasting redemption for vs and we haue daily libertie likewise , by the blood of iesus , to enter into the holy places : in regard that he is the eternall sacrificer , to saue all such as he shall present to god , liuing there as their continuall intercessor . in all which alleadged places , the apostle makes no mention at all , of any new oblation , or continual offering the bodie of christ , by the hands of men . who will not say then , that this is blasphemie , not only in transferring to mortall men the dignitie of the eternall priesthood of iesus christ , who neuer resigned his office to any other ; but likewise to reiterate and renew his sacrifice daily , as if the efficacie of the sacrifice , which himselfe once offered vpon the crosse , were not sufficient to endure , and for our reconciliation to god ? what shall we also thinke of this saying of the apostle : if when we were enemies , we were reconcilea to god by the death of his sonne : much more being reconciled , we shall be saued by his life . that is to say , because he is daily aliue , to intercede in our behalfe , and procure vs grace and fauour , as hath bin before declared . or , as he elsewhere saith : in regard he appeareth now for vs before the face of god , to wit , in the powerfull vertue of his sacrifice , to communicate the same to all beleeuers : there is therefore no neede , of any new sacrifice or reiteration thereof . vnderstand , good ladies , that i doe not tie my selfe , to note euery particular which is condemned , thorow the whole passage of the masle , which is very thicke sowen with blasphemies , from the beginning to the end : therein i should tier both my selfe and you . as for example , should i speake of the priests entraunce to the altar , wherein ( you knowe ) i vtter no lye . first , the priest confesseth himselfe , not only to god , but likewise both to he saints and she saints , not so much as naming iesus christ . then afterward , in the beginning of their canon , and before he goes to any consecration , he saith , that he offers that sacrifice to god ( to wit , the bread and wine , which are vpon the altar , and as yet not consecrated ) first of all , for the catholique church , next , for the redemption of all their souls , that are assistant at the masse . o deare ladies , what a blasphemie is this ? o , that it should euer be receiued among christians ; or that a sinfull man should presume to say : that he offers an oblation of bread & wine to god , and for there demption of soules . nay , admit that it were the bodie & blood of iesus christ : yet ( deare soules ) you see it manifestly prooued vnto you alreadie , that it is not now at this day to be offred againe , neither can it , by the apostles testimonie alreadie rehearsed . i passe ouer also manyp rayers ful of iniquitie , as well before , as after the consecration . as in the memento , when the priest requireth the fauour of god , by the merits and intercession of saints : as if the sacrisice of iesus christ , which they say they preferre in the formost place , were not sufficient to impetrate such grace of god. then after consecration , they commit a sinne , whereof by no meanes ( i thinke ) they can excuse themselues . for the priest prayeth to god , that the oblation which he offereth ( to wit , the bodie and the bloud of iesus christ , according to the verie words vsed by the priest ) may be caried by the hands of his holy angell , into the high altar before iesus christ . as if iesus christ himselfe had forsaken heauen , & stood in neede to be caried thither againe , and by the hands of an angell . o , honorable ladies , what a blasphemie is this , against him that hath all power subiected vnder his feete , and sitteth for euer at the right hand of god his father ? also in the priests memento for the dead , he prayeth for them , ( that alreadie are sleeping in the very height of peace ) that god would giue them a place of peace & refreshing . but to what purpose is this ? when the parties are possessed of such a peacefull place alreadie , why should they mooue any such place afterward in vaine ? there are many other things ( louing madames ) the collection whereof would be very tedious vnto you , and which you may see very learnedly confuted , ech point by point , in the booke which i shewed you at our last meeting , called the anatomie of the masse , printed for your more easie vnderstanding ▪ in our owne language , more then thirtie yeares since , and neuer ( all this while ) answered by the contrarie side . but come we now to the especiall point , concerning the confidente and peruerse opinion , ( wherein i my selfe haue sinned too often , and which you hold as no meane article of faith , ) that the masse is a worke meritorious , to cancell all our sinnes ; ex epere operato , as themselues vse to say . which is as much to say ▪ as that by the vertue of that worke , the labour is performed , without making mention of his faith and repentaunce , for whom the masse is sayd , and is therein assisted . heereby you may perceiue ( good ladies ) that the efficacie of the death of iesus christ ( whereof by true faith we are all made pertakers ) is now attributed to a work done by man : yea , & may as wel be applied to the dead , as the liuing . by which means , the sacraments shall but profit them only , which communicated in true saith and repentaunce . but then this cannot be spoken thus of them that are deceased , and departed out of this world : because they haue no more communion with the liuing , whereby to participate of their sacraments . as for the sacrifice of iesus christ , that is ( saith the apostle ) through faith in his bloud , which makes vs partakers of the propitiation thereby obtained . now the dead can haue neither faith nor repentaunce , but are gone as they placed before the end of their faith , either for the saluation of their soules , or to be punished in hell , for their incredulitie . iouerslip a great many blasphemies , which deserue ech one to be seuerally spoken of : for you haue tolde me , that some things you giue credit to , and others you doe not , especially any thing which you conceite to be damnable . but you being heerein gouerned only by your priests opinions , you hang your selues on their sleeues , and are neuer the neerer , when you shall come to make your account . and your excuse , concerning those prayers which they sing or say in their masse , that they are in latine , and you vnderstand them not , but beleeue them to be good and holy ▪ trust me ( worthy ladies ) it is idle and friuolous , for you ought to vnderstand them , and may if you will , thereby to examine and trie the spirits , whether they be of god or no. you haue them published in printed bookes , and so haue had for many yeares together : and the scriptures themselues remaine for your further instruction , which though they forbid you the reading of them , yet be you rulde by him , that saith , search the scriptures , it is they that doe beare true witnes of me . but leauing all other , there is one most signall and apparant , and such a blasphemie , whereof i knowe you are almost daily partakers , being present at masse . for both common opinion and intention , as well of the priest himselfe , as the persons there in place , doe run in this current : that it is an absolute sacrifice which is there performed by him , wherein all remission of sins is to be sought for , and all prosperitie , as well of the bodie as of the soule . for they auouch it , to be the selfe same sacrifice of iesus christ , which they but renew againe , to receiue a further fruite thereby , and so they reiterate the same as often , as they doe either sing or say masse , euen according as it was done vnder the lawe . but what saith the blessed apostle to this ? the law hauing the shadow of good things to come , & not the very image of the things ; can neuer with those sacrifices , which they offer yeere by yeere continually , sanctifie the commers thereunto . and it is imposisible , that the bloud of bulles and goates should take away sinnes . for would they not then haue ceased to haue bin offered , because that the offerers once purged , should haue had no more conscience of sins ? this is then the reason , wherfore euery priest appeareth daily sacrificing , & oft times offereth one manner of thing , which can neuer take away sinnes . but this man , after he had offered one sacrifice for sinne , sitteth for euer at the right hand of god. and wherefore one sacrifice only ? because ( saith he in the verse following ) that by that alone sacrifice , he hath consecrated for euer them that be sanctified . there is nothing ( deare ladies ) more cleare and euident , then these words of the holy apostle , to manifest openly : that the sacrifice of iesus christ , whereby we were once for all redeemed and sanctified , cannot , neither ought to be reiterated or renewed . therefore in poperie , when they doe enterprise , to reiterate , or renew , or continue the same ( for they make vse of all these seueral tearmes ) is it any thing else , but a meere renouncing of that only sacrifice , remaining fresh , in full strength and vigour , which christ once offred vpon his crosse , to sanctifie all beleeuers ? and the fruite heereof is daily presented to vs , in the preaching of the gospell , and we reeeiue the same by a true & sanctified faith , in him only . for to this end was the sacred ministerie of gods word instituted by god himselfe in his church : and not for any nouell order of sacrifices , as your ( soules heauie enemies ) doe make you to beleeue . i knowe ( honorable ladies ) and haue had such particular interest in some of you , during the time of our often conuersing in this manner together : that ( in hart ) you are far off from these grosse prophanations , and haue assured me ( in soule ) you doe much greeue thereat . let me then perswade you , not to come in such places , where the sonne of god is so highly iniuried , be not led by their outward appearaunce of deuotion , which serues but to beguile and abuse the simple . euen as is vsed in our ceremonie of meeting , and manner of courtship in the streetes or else where : a good looke is giuen , or an affable conge allowed , when falshood and trechery lurketh oftentimes in the hart . make not then your faire selues guiltie , of such foule and polluted behauiour , nor be you present where christs name is misprised , erecting another altar , against the altar of his crosse , and renewing his sacrifice , by substitution of a newe one : as if his were but a yeare old , or like to the sacrifices of brut beastes , lame or imperfect ; or as if the means which he hath ordained , for the application thereof ( as the preaching of the gospell , and administration of his instituted sacraments ) were insufficient to conuay their vertue vnto vs. for this is the fairest fruite of their pretended sacrifice , that the reiteration and daily renewing thereof , is branded with the marke of insufficiencie and imperfection , as you heare the apostle to auouch the same : when he speakes of the sacrifices of the old lawe , which were performed often . true it is , that they would faine ground their sacrifice vpon gods word : but ( good ladies ) marke in what manner i beseech you , and be iudges your selues , for the case is very cleare . behold ( say they ) iesus christ making his supper with his apostles , said : doe this in remembraunce of me . doe , that is as much to say , according to their glosse ; as make or performe this sacrifice ▪ because that christ had said before ; this is my bodie which is giuen for you . but if it pleased them to read all , they should better perceiue the words and meaning of our sauiour , which indeed are nothing lesse , then agreeing with their glossing . the euangelists doe record vnto vs , that our lord iesus hauing taken bread , and giuen thankes ; brake it , and said to his disciples : take , cate , this is my bodie which is giuen for you , doe this in the remembraunce of me . and how doe this ? why no otherwise , but euen to doe it in the same manner , that is to say : to take the bread , and distribute it among them to be eaten , for no other mention is made there , either of offering , or of sacrificing . for you see ( sweete ladies ) that christ himselfe vsed no other words , but take , and eate . and the holy apostle saint paule doth sufficiently shewe vs , that of these words , doe this , there is no other vnderstanding to be made but that which hath bin declared alreadie . for in speaking of the wine at the same supper , he reciteth likewise the same words spoken by our lord iesus christ : doe this alwayes and as oftentimes as you shall drinke , in remembraunce of me . which importeth as much , as if he had said : alwayes , or as oft entimes as you shall drinke of this wine in this sacrament : drinke it , in remembrance of me , that this may be in remembraunce of my death , or continue as a memoriall thereof . which manner or phrase of speaking , the apostle himselfe adioyneth in the following verse . for alwayes , or as oftentimes , as you shall eate of this bread , and drinke of this cuppe : you shall shewe the lords death vntill he come . consider now , good ladies i beseech you , that these are none of our glosses , but the very expresse text it selfe , where you see manifestly by saint paules owne exposition : what thing it is the lord would haue vs to doe concerning as well the people , as the pastour . for the commandement , doe this , directeth it selfe to all the faithfull , to wit : that we should eate this bread of the sacrament , and drinke the wine , in remembraunce of his death and passion . according as the words doe signifie themselues , when he spake of his bodie , which is broken and giuen for you , and likewise of his bloud , which is shed or dispersed for you . all which he spake , hauing regard to that which soone after should ensue : his bodie was to be deliuered ouer to death , and his bloud to be shed vpon the crosse , for vs poore , wreched and miserable sinners . and the reason why he spake so of the time present , which is giuen , which is shed : is the common latine verssion or translation , allowed by the counsell of trente ; expressing thereby the time to come , which shall be giuen , which shall be s●…ed , then which , nothing can be more manifest , honored ladies , if it pleased you but to open your owneeies . for then you should perceiue , that there christ made on mention of offering . and if they would presse these words , which is giuen , to conclude thereby , that euen then when iesus made his supper , he offered vp his bodie in sacrifice : of necessitie , and by the selfe same reason , they must also conclude these words , my bloud which is shed ; that euen then he did shed his bloud , which cannot be , neither could be , for his bloud was not shed but vpon the crosse . good madames , entreat the very learnedst of your romaine sacrificers , to shew vs but one place in the scripture , where it is commaunded vs , to sacrifice iesus christ againe . for the place rehearsed , maketh not any iote for them , and they know likewise well enough , that the greeke word poiein , vsed by the euangelists , reciting the words of our lord and sauiour , and saint paule after them : also the word in the siriack tongue habad , which our lord himselfe vsed , could neuer be vnderstood to sacrifice , or offer . goe we on then , to some other proprieties of the masse . i come now to the idolatrie , which we find in the second part of the masse , to wit , at the sacrament , and that is in this . they propose or hold vp a piece of bread to the people , to be adored and worshipped by them for god saying : that there is the blessed bodie of our sauiour , hidden vnder the accidents of bread , although it doe not appeare to be so , and the faithfull can discerne but bread only . to prooue their idolatrie in this point , i will goe no whither else , but to the direct institution of the supper , according as our lord himselfe did institute it , which they altogether depraue , only to confirme and establish their idoll : wherein , gentle ladies , i craue not only your patience , but also your dilligent regard . behold how iesus christ promiseth vs , that we shall be partakers of his bodie , and of his bloud , at all times , or as oftentimes , as we shall celebrate this misterie , according as he did celebrate the same with his apostles . in distributing the bread , he said , take , eate , this is my bodie which is given for you ; doe this in remembrance of me . likewise in deliuering the wine , he said : drinke you all of this , for this is my bloud . &c. where we may discerne , that he putteth the commaundement in the first place , in saying to vs , that we shall take , eate , and drinke . then he annexeth the promise , wherein he testifieth vnto vs , that that which we eate , is his bodie , and that which we drinke is his bloud . to enjoy then the effect and benefit of this promise , it behooueth , that the faithfull doe take and eate the bread , & drinke the wine which is giuen to them . in briefe , there is the communion of many faithfull , in doing that , which iesus christ representing to the whole church , did performe in this first supper : for that which iesus christ said to his apostles ; take , eate , drink ye all of this : he spake the very same to all the faithfull , euen to the ending of the world : as that which he adioyneth , sufficiently declareth ; my body which is giuen for you ; my bloude which is shed for you , so is his bodie giuen , and his bloud shed for the faithfull . hence then ensueth , that to all the faithfull , appertaineth the commaundement of taking , eating and drinking : because he made the promise generally to all ▪ and not only to the apostles & ministers of the church ▪ and we may see this testified by the apostle saint paule , speaking at large vpon this misterie , these are his words . for we that are many , are one bread and one bodie : because we all are partakers of one bread . wherefore ( ladies ) it appeareth plainly that the bodie of iesus christ , and the communion of his bloud likewise , are not to be giuen to vs in this sacrament : but when many faithfull shall communicate together , according as christ deliuered vs an example , with his apostles . take away then the communion , which iesus christ himselfe hath ordained , he being the heauenly lord , maister and author of this holy sacrament : and then the promise there unto annexed , touching his body & bloud , which he hath giuen for all faithfull communicants ; hath no place at all , but is vtterly voide , for it remaineth no longer a sacrament , nor as he ordained it , because the right vse of the sacrament consisteth heerein : that the faithfull should communicate together , according as he hath commanded , saying , take , eate , drinke yee . &c. this must be done vpon necessitie , if you would haue it to be a sacrament , or the same which iesus christ hath instituted ; namely , the communion of many faithfull assistants , to eate and drinke all together in this blessed banquet , for this is the essence of the sacrament , as you may discerne very apparantly . let vs now come to see , what is done in the masse . surely ( good ladies ) it is so farre off from being any communion : as it may be rather tearmed , a kind of excommunication . for both you and i know , and so do all else , that know what the masse is , that the priest separates himselfe from all therest of the assemblie , to eate and drinke ( by him selfe alone ) the bread and wine which he hath consecrated a part : and how doth he consecrate them ? insted of consecration , which ought to be done , by preaching and publishing openly and aloude , the promises of our lord and sauiour , directed , not to the bread and to the wine , which are proposed but as signes vnto vs : but to the faithfull persons , assisting the communion , & present there to communicate ▪ iesus christ being he that ( euen then ) consecrates the bread & wine ▪ to make them sacraments of his bodie and bloud ( by his heauenly priesthood which yet ceaseth not ) and when this misterie is celebrated according to his institution . but the priest deales quite contrarie , for he as if he were affraid to be heard of the people , makes his consecration , by blowing or breathing vpon the bread , and wine , and mutters or mumbles very softly and low , all the words of his institution . as if it could please the lord of truth and life , to haue his word murmured out of a dead mouth ( as it were ) in celebrating his sanctified misteries , of whose truth ( by this behauiour ) there iustly may arise some doubt or question . or as if it were offence to him , that stands in feare of no power whatsoeuer : to haue them pronounced with the loudest voyce , to be heard and vnderstood of all . in the gospel , the vertue , nature , and vse of baptisme , are expressed clearely and openly . iesus christ , making his supper , did not mutter in any lowe voyce , either vpon the bread or wine , to deuine or coniure therinto his bodie and bloud . but he pronounced aloude , and euidently to his apostles : that he gaue them there his body and his bloud , exhorting them to perseuere in the selfe same kinde of action , at all times , or as often as they should meete to reiterate the same , the remembrance of his death and passion . euen as if he had beene then certainely assured , that no vtilitie or benefit could be had by sacraments : except whatsoeuer was represented to the eye , might bee declared and warranted by the word of god. for otherwise , it were to abuse the people in a fond kind of deuotion ; to make a shew of ceremonies before them , and neuer to deliuer or declare what they signifie , and what coherence or agreement they haue with truth . therefore , when publike declaration is made of such mysteries , with a chearefull predication to edifie the hearers , entring into their vnderstanding , and winning impression in their hearts , by assured perswasion of the promises accomplishment ; briefely , when the grace of iesus christ is pronounced vnto vs , and his promises exposed : euen then , and in that instant , doth his glorious power descend , to performe the worke , and then is the true consecration acted indeed . hereupon saint augustine saith very well ; that the word of consecration , is the word of faith preached : and that word conioyned with the terrene outward signe , maketh the same a sacrament ; adding presently after , i meane the word of faith , which we preach . what consecration then is there in the masse , when insteed of all this , namely , exposing to the people the recited promises , and declaring aloud the words of our sauiours institution : it is done in a manner of secret coniuration , and so are the words whispered , which behauiour is more proper to charmers , then to be vsed in such a holy and diuine sacrament . what shall wee then thinke of them , when they dare forsake the rule of their lord and maister , to follow their owne fantasies ? seing then it is so , and that in the masse there is neither any lawfull consecration , nor ( as themselues cannot deny ) any such communion as iesus christ hath ordained ( for one alone doth both eate and drinke , and that is the priest , and one man alone cannot make a communion ) : it followeth then ( deere ladyes ) and very necessarily that the body of iesus christ is not in the masse , where the priest communicateth by himselfe . and therefore the bread , which he makes to bee adored then , euen as if it were the body indeed of our lord : is no such matter , but remaineth still very bread , euen as it was before his consecration , being neyther more or lesse , then as if it were in any other place , out of the churches assembly , and the priests , and whosoeuer ( for his owne pleasure ) should speake the very same words of their institution , vpon any other piece of bread . and although they perswade themselues , that they haue and do hold in their hands , the very body of iesus christ vnder the bread , or in the bread , and therefore make the people to worship it ; yet it is most certaine , that there is nothing else but an idoll , and which ( without any reason they make a meere imagination of . for the promise , wherein iesus christ offered vnto vs his body and bloud , vnder the signes of bread and wine : appertaineth to none else ( as hath beene already prooued ) but onely vnto the faithfull , that receiue the same by faith , in the lawfull communion of the euchariste , celebrating the mysterie , according to the manner , as our heauenly maister did ordaine it . wherfore , they which imagine , to haue any other thing then common bread , without the lawful vse of our lords supper : are but abused , and beleeue meere dreames , as it can be no otherwise , because they faile of the promise . for seeing that iesus christ promised vs , to giue vs his body in the sacrament , when the faithfull should communicate together after his institution : we may not be so vain or idle-headed , as to seeke it elsewhere , or according to our fantasies . let such men therfore be admonished , that they cannot excuse themselues of idolatry , both before god and men : when they are made to worshippe ( as if god himselfe were substantially present ) a round cake of bread , which is lifted vp to be seen , aboue the shoulders of the priest , and ( with exceeding great deuotion ) to be reuerenced and adored of all there present . but ladies , i haue held ye somewhat long in this point , because it is of such maine importance , yet perswading my selfe to haue said sufficient , albeit not halfe so much as i could : i will proceed to discouer another wicked idolatry , which they procure the poore people to commit ▪ euen without so much as thinking theron ▪ and that is , wheras in their masse ▪ they should obserue the communion in that kinde as our lord iesus christ did first institute it by inniting the people to communicate with the preist , they fly from his example , and indeed , ( once a yeare ) they are contented to doe so , and that is at easter , for then the people shall bee permitted to communicate , and yet it is but of one moitie onely of the sacrament , wherein likewise they intermingle many fond inuentions , yea , and all the accustomed superstitions of their ordinarie masses , without expounding , or declaring any part of the mistery to the people . according to the institution of our lord in the sacrament , they should inuite the people , and breaking the body of christ , after his example , it should be truely giuen to the faithfull communicants , according to the promise of our sauiour . notwithstanding all this , they will obserue their owne deuised manner , wherein they can no way exempt themselues from being idolaters , and making the people to commit idolatry , in their giuing worship to the bare signe . the reason is , because iesus christ in the sacrament , gaue his bodie to be lookte vpon with our soules eyes , and not to be superstitiously adored in the bread , which is no more but the outward signe , and ( by faith ) to bee eaten to euerlasting life . for ( worthy ladyes ) christ did not say , looke vpon this bread , then take , eate , and worship it : but he simply said , take , eate , this is my body . therefore whereas the sacrament should bee a helpe , to list vp the vnderstanding , of the faithfull vnto heauen , where christ iesus is , and no where else , as concerning his true body , & ( from thence ) giues himselfe in powerfull vertue , to enioy and possesse the soules of the faithfull , vnder those formes by himselfe assigned : your romanists doe abuse the supper very vildlie , and take it in a quite contrary nature , for they are onely pleas'de , with looking vpon the bare signe and worshiping it , taking the thing it selfe , for that which is meerely signified thereby , answerable to their doctrine of transubstantiation , meerely forged , against the true nature of all sacraments . they seeke not to eleuate mens vnderstandings , to the place where christ sitteth at the right hande of his father , but to lift vp their eies to their god-like idoll . whereas christ ( without all doubt ) in instituting this sacrament , neuer addressed his promise to the bread and wine simply , thereby to make them become his body and bloud , as hath beene before declared : but to the faithfull communicants , and so thereby to assure them , that he would giue them the true participation and communion of his body , answerable to that which the blessed apostle s. paule saith , he being a most faithfull expositor of this misterie . the cup of blessing which we blesse , is it not the communion of the blood of christ ? the bread which we breake , is it not the communion of the bodie of christ ? me thinkes ( honorable ladies ) these words should resolue you , that christ hath comprised nothing else vnder these signes and elements of bread and wine , but what was behoouefull for the faithfull communicants , to whom the plaine signification directeth it selfe , and whereof true faith dooth make them partakers , to vnice themselues spiritually ( with a meruailous efficacy ) into the glorious body of our lord iesus christ , to participate ( in the end ) of all his benefits , and deriue from him life and immortality . in these fewe words , vertuous ladies , you may behold both what we teach and beleeue , that our feeding on christ , is by faith onely , that is : in beleeuing the words of our sauiour , in the vse of the sacrament ; wherby we are drawne much neerer to him , and more stricktly vnited and incorporated ( euen by the incomprehensible vertue of his spirit , ) to communicate and partake of all the benefits of his death , and to be renewed by him , and nourished vnto euerlasting life : vntill such time , as he shall put vs into full possession , that is , at the departure of our soules from this world , and when our bodyes shall arise againe , at the day of our generall resurrection . this is the fruit which we make account of , and are perswaded to gather out of this sacrament , and wherevnto faith serues vs as the onely instrument : euen as with hand , eyes , and mouth , to beholde , take , and eate iesus christ , without any need of his forsaking the heauens , or of his reall appearance vnder the formes of bread and wine , and so to communicate himselfe vnto vs. wherefore , to go and adore the signe , as if the signe onely were iesus christ himselfe : or that hee should descend downe from heauen , and be newely formed ; for one of these twoo must needs ensue by their transubstantiation , which we mayntaine to be flat idolatry . neuerthelesse , we are taught in scripture , that iesus christ ought to be adored in the sacrament , and we doe dayly and religiously worshippe him : as being most especially present in the holy action , euen in our spirits and faith , to vnite vs vnto him , and to impart his blessings to vs ; when the supper is celebrated according to his institution , and wee endeuour to haue it so stil continued and ministred among vs. but the manner of our worshippe and adoration , is , in hauing our soules eleuated vp to heauen , and thither true faith is our onely conduct , there to behold him as our soueraigne assurance . we looke not for him in the naked elemēts of bread and wine : for there we haue no commandement to honour him , but wee rather choose to worship him according as we ought , and that is in spirit and truth . iudge now good madames , where reason abydeth most , on your side , or ours , and whether your priests commit not manifest idolatry in their actions : when they receiue and admit the people to the communion of a sacrament , which neuer was ordained by iesus christ . may not wee then well and truely say , that they haue no communion at all , but what is of their owne inuentions ? and that which they carry about the streets , going in a solemne procession , is but a round cake , being closed vp in a boxe , or pixe ▪ which they cause to be adored with great veneration . it remaineth now , that wee come to the third propertie , which i haue obserued in the masse , to wit , sacriledge : which already hath beene sufficiently discoursed in our former proceeding , and yet we will note a fewe obseruations more . this holy and diuine sacrament , was instituted to make a communion of the faithfull , in the body and bloud of our blessed lord , and by celebrating it commonly , in remembrance of his death and passion . but noble ladyes , your priests doe conuert all to a contrary end , not onely in that which they doe in the sacrifice ; but in meere robbery and stealth beside . for they take from the people , the communion in chiefe , yea , that which is the principall fruite of this sacrament , restraining it to the priests onely : and the people there present , are made no more but silly spectatours , of that which the priest doth alone by himselfe , without knowing , or vnderstanding what hee saith or doth . i know you will answere me , as ( god forgiue me for it ) i my selfe haue often done , that the priest , beeing the publike minister , doth communicate in the names and behalfes , of all that are present at his masse . why then let me ( faire ladyes ) mooue this question : where is any such commandement throughout the whole booke of god , that wee should see the priest to haue one supper for himselfe first , & then at his leasure , to communicate another to vs ? ●urely , as we cannot liue by that which another eateth , but of and by that which wee our selues doe eate : euen so , as needfull is it for vs , that wee should communicate in this holy and diuine sacrament , to liue in the true life of iesus christ , who hath giuen himselfe therein to vs ; not that any other there should receiue it for vs , but that wee ought and should receiue it our selues , thereby to haue christ make his dwelling in vs. alas , good ladyes , let vs not seeke to bee wiser then our lord and maister , for if wee doe , it is but in vaine . and well you know , that hee neuer saide ; behold the priest or minister of the church , bee eateth and drinketh for you , and i haue so appointed it : but hee spake plainely , without any sophistication , and said : take , eate , drinke you all of this . and after him , his faithfull seruant saint paul , writing to the children ( by adoption ) among the corinthians , said : wee are many partakers of one and the same bread . and againe , let euery man eate of this bread , and drinke of this cup. the countersaite pretence then , which they doe alleadge , can no way couer or maske their sacriledge : because the commaundement is precisely to all faithfull people , to take , eate , and drincke in this holy supper . and saint chrysostome hath spoken very well to this purpose . wee are no longer ( saith hee ) vnder the olde law , where the priest did eate his portion , and the people had the rest . but here , one body is giuen to all , and likewise one cup : and what soeuer is in the eucharist sacrament , is common as well to the people as the priest . and , gratious ladyes , desire them but to satisfie you in this one particular poynt , namely , that if they beleeue , or giue any credit to the canons of their owne popes , they cannot then but confesse and acknowledge their sacriledge , for these bee their owne words : all they that are present at the masse , and communicate not , confesse themselues to bee excommunicated . for their canons further say , that the consecration being ended , all are to communicate , or else they are depriued of entring into the church . for so did the apostles set downe the ordinance , and wee hold the same in the holy romaine church . moreouer , in the canons that beare the title , by the apostles , it is thus ordained . that all they , which continue in the church to the end of mosse , and doe not receiue the sacrament : ought to be corrected as perturbers and disquieters of the church . according to that which was ordained in the counsell of antioche ; that all they which entred into the church , should behaue themselues well , and heare the sermon ; and if they abstained from the sacrament : they ought to bee excommunicated , vntill they had bin sufficiently chastised for that vice . and therefore saint chrisostome , in his homilies vpon the epistle of saint paul to the ephesians , doth reproue them very sharpely , that in his time would be present in the assembly at the communion , and yet not communicate . what say you to this , sweete ladyes , when you see how many are present with your selues , at their daily masses , and yet none of you are suffered to communicate , but the priest himselfe onely ? besides all this , the prayers which they yet vse to say in their masse , do likewise very sufficiently conuince them : for when the church retained her wonted puritie , the people were then receiued to the communion , and behold what their prayers then contained , and yet doe . lord thou hast filled and satisfied thy familie , with thy holy giftes , to wit , the sacrament . and another speaks thus . we being filled and satisfied with the sacrifice of thy pretious body & most holy bloud , &c. and another . we pray thee lord , that these things may be carryed by the hands of thy holy ▪ angell , vnto thy high altar , ( speaking of the oblations of the faithfull , in receiuing the bread and wine vsed in the sacrament ) to the end , that all others as well as wee , that shall receiue the participation of the altar , in the blessed body , and holy bloud of thy sonne , may be filled with all happy benedictions . these are the very true words ( dere ladies ) vsed in their prayers , wherein if you will not credit me , i desire you to reade them your selues , for your further satisfaction . and doubtlesse , they would neuer haue spoken in this manner , if the priest onely had then communicated , as now a dayes you see he doth . otherwise , it had beene to say one thing , and performe the contrary , as you may perceiue hath happened since : for now they haue vtterly depriued the people of the communion . tell me then , i intreate yee , is it not a mockery of god and of the people , to tell them , that they are pertakers in those giftes of the altar , and yet ( all the while ) to giue them iustnothing at all ? in like manner they haue prouided , that the people shall vnderstand nothing that they say , for they speake to them in a strange language : but this is most certaine , and i desire you sister ladyes , to obserue it , that the prayers before mentioned , doe remaine yet in the canon of their masse , to condemne them of impudence , both before god and men . so that if a more learned iudgement , then my weake womans capacitie , should search into the originall of this euill : it would be found out ( as indeed it is very likely ) that their enioyning and constraining the people , to confesse and declare their sinnes to the priest , was purposely intended , before their admission to receiue the sacrament . and this doe they also , without any ordenance of god , who commaundeth vs , to confesse and declare our sinnes to him , and require pardon ▪ as hee promiseth to giue the same to all that are truely repentant , assuring and certifying vs thereof , yea , sealing it in our soules and consciences , by his owne word in his gospell , when hee is preached vnto vs , and when we beleeue effectually ; wherevpon , and in regard whereof , the mynisterie of the gospell is thus tearmed by the apostle : he hath giuen vs the ministery of reconciliation . the people then finding the burden of sinne to be very heauy , as indeed it is , were vainely perswaded to make a particular numeration of their sins , to the priest or minister of the church : which growing to a liberty and licence by little and little , by ignorance and malice in their pastours , the course thereof was not cut off , as it ought to haue been . but yet the people then were thereby granted this benefite , that they might communicate in the sacrament once a yeare , or twise , or thrise for them of greatest deuotion , but all the residue of the people , must leaue the priest alone at the altare , there to communicate by himselfe . and thus one errour grewe to beget another , when once they began to decline from the direct pathes of perfection , and since then , they haue made a custome of assembling the people together ( but not inuiting them to the communion ) onely to heare their masses sayd or sung in diuers angles of their temples , for which they are not ashamed ( and ladyes i am sure you know it perfectly ) to demand a price or valuation for ech seuer all masse , a thing most horrible , and the like neuer heard of . thus the communion of the sacrament , is not onely violently taken from the people , but the sacrament it selfe ( by this meanes ) is made no account of . for wheras both priest and people ought to meete together in one place , there to heare together ) the declaration of his bitter death and passion , and to participate ( in common ) in the sacrament of this vnion ▪ o deere ladyes , i cannot speake it without teares , or you heare it without much hearts griefe , if you were as you should bee ; that that diuine place , i say , should now bee become a meere faire or maket ▪ to traffique and merchandise those sacred blessings , which god out of his owne bountie made a liberail gift of , and freely bestowed vpon all his faithfull seruaunts , to their singular comforte and endlesse consolation . but not to wander too farre from mine intended purpose , i come now to another most manifest sacriledge , committed likewise in the masse , to wit , that in those masses , where they doe admit the people to the communion , eyther at the feast of easter , or when they command a generall communicating : they then defraud the people of one part of the sacrament , namely , the cup. oh what an audacious insolence is this ? iesus christ distributed the wine , as well as the bread , when hee made his supper with his apostles , and spake hee not to make publike notice thereof , when giuing them the cup , hee said : drinke you all of this ? and after him , the apostle left the very same instruction , to the church of corinth . let eoh man ( saith hee ) prooue and examine himselfe ; and so let him eate of this bread , and drinke of this cup. but your romaine disciples , vnder the shaddow of some supposed inconueniences , ( imagined onely by themselues , as if they would seeme to bee wiser than the maister ) haue ordayned , that the people shall communicate but vnder one kind , and that is of the bread only . is not this an enormous sacriledge , to separate them a sunder which god hath ioyned together , yea , and by his own expresse institution ? but let them be well assured , that the authoures and fauourers of a crime so haynous , shall one daye yeeld a most strickt account therefore . true it is , that they alleadge their concomitancy , in excuse of this matter , ( a woord expresly forged , whereby to maintaine their sacriledge ) and herein they seeme to auouch , that the bloud keeps company with the body , and therefore is alwayes with the body . but when wee answere them , that iesus christ knewe this concomitancy as well as they : and yet notwithstanding , he did not forbeare , to distribute both the signes of wine and bread ; what reply they then ? why then they further inferre in answere ( which indeed can carry it selfe for no answere at all ) it was iesus christs will , that in his supper wee should consider his bloud separate , or apart from his bodye , and that wee should represent before our eyes his death , euen as his blood was spilt and shed : and therefore in giuing the cuppe , he sayth : drinke you all of this ; for this is my bloude of the newe testament , which is shed for many , for the remission of sinnes . now , such concomitance of the body , and of the bloud , cannot agree or consent with the death of iesus christ ( because , to bee both in the body , & to bee shed out of the body , are contrary things ) wherfore , it necessarily ensueth , that that can haue no place in the sacrament , which bringeth vs directly to the confideration of the death of iesus christ , & guides vs not to the effusion of his bloud . it behooueth then , that wee haue the effusion or streaming forth of his precious bloud , euen as if it were present before our eyes , if wee would celebrate the sacrament according as iesus christ did ordaine it , because ( aboue all ) it doth most assure vs in the sacrament , that our sinnes are forgiuen vs in his bloud , which is our cleansing and washing . but if these reasons may gaine no place with you , faire ladyes , nor them that are both your aduersaries and ours , who ( for the most part ) build onely vpon traditions : at least yet , will them to allow the canons of their popes , which doe manifestly condemne them in this poynt ▪ and for a president , behold what is said in one of the canons of the pope gelasius : wee haue vnderstood , that there are some , who taking only a portion of the blessed body , do abstaine from the cup of his precious bloud . and because it is not knowne , vpon what superstition they doe this : we will that they shall receiue the sacraments together , or that they abstaine and bee barde wholy from them both . for diuision or separation in so sanctified a misterie , cannot be committed without very great sacriledge . another canon speaketh thus . you are with vs in the challice , wee take this altogether , wee doe drink together , for we live together . and another . the priesls which serue at the eucharist , shall distribute the bloud of our lord to the people there , ( for so he calleth the sacrament of the bloud . ) whether can they now betake themselues , to seeke for purgation of sacriledge , being thus therein condemned by their owne popes ? now honourable and renowned ladyes , by these grosse and most absurde abuses , which i haue beene so bold as to lay open to you , in this popish kinde of seruice , called the masse , filled full with notorious blasphemies , idolatries , and sacriledges , as i haue in some weake measure shewen vnto you , and in the order as they are rancked : you may guesse what a many more there are beside , which would aske a larger repetition , then this poore epistle of mine at this time can permit mee . let me put the case to your owne iudgement , whether the masse may be thought to be any lawfull communion in your church , or no ? surely , were it but in regard of these alleaged abuses , ( wher of there wants not store besides ) me thinkes you should abstaine from partaking with such abhominations : considering , that in shaking hands with such foule deformed sinnes , you pollute your soules with all impieties , and by your publike profession of them , you consent and adhere to all their blasphemies , albeit you are vtterly ignorant of them . for heere they meete in a full crowde together , and to all of them , you cry your selues guilty , when you seeke no way to escape out of sinfull sodome , though the flames flye daily and flashe into your faces . and i am well assured , that some of you are of my minde , in many of these recited abuses concerning the masse , though ( as i haue done ) you will not yet openly expresse it , yea , and haue in priuate confessed to mee , that your priests of romaine pollution , doe grosely sinne in infinite superstitions , which they colour vnder cloudes of deuotion and sanctitie , vsing such apish carriage and gesticulations , both in the celebration of the masse , and their friuolous preachings , as are no way conuenable with their profession , that are to entreate on the misteries of god. and yet in whatsoeuer they doe or say , both you , and the people doe solemnely assist them as spectatours onely , but no vnderstanders , and such are the greater part of the assemblie at masse . and because they shall not see into their iugling collusions , they can find both their eares , eyes , and other sences busied , with musicke , singing , and ensensing , with diuers other gestures , which deliuer some appearance of religious deuotion , onely thereby to beguile and retaine simple people . and where is all this done ? but euen in the church , where god is to bee worshipped in spirit and truth , and where hee hath ordained the holie assemblie of his seruants , to edifie & nourish all faithfull soules , in common and publike praying together , according as euerie one may well vnderstand , by faithfull expounding and interpreting the word of god , concerning those misteries which he hath established in his church : to the end , that euerie faithfull man and woman , maye there receiue effectuall fruit , both for the guyding of their liues in christian conuersation , and consolation of their soules here and in heauen . into which church of god , swept cleane and purged from all corrupt pollutions , and reformed by the rules of his heauenly prescriptions : honorarable ladyes , i haue at length found the happy entrance , where euery dilligent pastour & preacher , doe there paynefull and laborious endeuours , to expound & deliuer gods word purely to the people . and that they may easily vnderstand what is sayde vnto them , both for the edification of their faith , and further instruction in all piety , and wherof i myselfe ( to my no little comfort ) haue found a most plentifull encrease among gods seruaunts , into whose fellowshippe , i hartilie wish that you were all combined . moreouer , among vs , there is not so much as one sillable profered , either in publike praier , or explaining gods word , but it is heard , vnderstood , and most affectuously embraced . for nothing is here vttered , which hath not his firme fundation , on the expresse text of sacred scripture , or what is thence truelie and vnpartiallie deriued necessarilie cohering and agreeing therewith : without any repugnancie to the articles of the apostles creede , or the direct meaning of the scriptures . for if any of our pastours shall presume to doe otherwise , hee is grieuously censured , and reprooued according to good orders established , for preseruation of sound doctrine , and preuention of intruding mens vaine imaginations . as concerning the sacraments , of baptisme and the lords supper ( for gods institution allowing no more , wee leaue your other fiue , viz. confirmation , penance , extreame vnction , orders , and matrimonie , to your romaine sinagogue , where they were first deuised . ) and these other before named , i say , are administred in the same kinde and nature , as they were wholie receiued from our lord and maister : without addition of any thing to their wordes , or cutting off any part of their ordinance . and intelligence is publikely deliuered to the people , of the end , efficacie , and vtilitie of them , farre from those vngodly courses practised among you . nor is there any other consecration here vsed , but holy and deuout pravers , in the presence of god and his heanenly assembly : the pastor declaring openly , ( and not in any muttering or coniuring manner ) what is then done , and how it stands with the wordes and ordinaunce of our lord iesus christ ; proposing and deliuering the same so audibly , that it may bee heard of the whole congregation , and so conueniently in all poyntes applyed , that much godly benefite commeth thereby to the assembled soules at the sacraments . where iesus christ doubtlesse doth sanctifie the table , and the bread and wine there decently present , to make them the sacraments of his body and bloud , when the forme is thus obserued after his owne institution . to this communion of the lords holie supper , all the people present ( after exhortation , to prepare their comming thither , in true repentance and firme faith in gods promises ) are freely and verie louingly admitted . and none are excluded from this heauenly banquet , but such as are notoriously knowne for prophane people , of wicked and vild life , or rebellious to all good orders and discipline established by authoritie , and the reuerend fathers of the church , whose care and diligence for the good thereof , at all times and seasons is very great and painefull . and ( noble ladyes ) the bread and wine , in all reuerend manner , as our lord appoynted it , is round about distributed to euery assistant , without impayring the least iote of the institution . there is no request made , that those things may bee carryed thence by an angell , and presented vpon the high altar : our soules doe assure vs , by a liuely faith , that iesus christ is in heauen , sitting at the glorious right hand of his father , and all the communicants in our christian assembly , are so instructed and resolued , and to heauen doe they eleuate both their eyes and minds , contemplating their lord and sauiour there , and hoping to partake of eternall life there with him , whereof the present action is a sure pledge and earnest pennie . thus doe wee pronounce christes death and passion , thus doe wee acknowledge the effusion and shedding of his bloude , whereof the bread broken , and wine deliuered in the cuppe or challice ( for wee are not ceremonious of eyther word , because ( in gods feare ) eyther of them is to vs indifferent ) remaineth to vs as a perfect remembraunce , and the fruites thereof ( wee hope ) doe continue among vs , and so ( with thankfulnesse ) we all receiue his benefits . and worthie ladyes , because ( it may bee ) you would gladly know , what other obseruatiōs there are in gods church , which induced my conuersion , and in time may draw others : as a verie young scholler , scarcely yet well intred , i will set yee downe a briefe summarie , of so many , as my weake memorie , and the breuitie of time will permit me . here is no inuocation vpon any saints , no , not vpon the blessed virgin marie : yet both of her , and all other gods chosen saintes , wee hold that reuerend estimation , which wee are commaunded to doe . the adoration and worship here vsed , is to the onely euerliuing and eternall god , and according as hee hath manifested himselfe in his word , to wit : the father , the sonne and the sanctified spirit , or holy ghost . one onely and true god , in these three persons or hypostasis , in whose name likewise all heere are baptised . here are no other images admitted into our temples , but that onely which our great god hath consecrated to himselse , for his owne pecuculiar vse , and to remaine for euer . and that is the preaching of the gospell , with the true vse of the sacraments instituted by him : whereby wee discerne the nature of god , and his good will towards vs , more liuely and better figured in the whole mysteryes of our redemption , then they can bee described in a million of wodden or carued images , or in any other matter whatsoeuer . neyther is there recourse made to any other intercession , for obtaining gods fauour vnto vs , but to iesus christes intercession onely , hee being our alone mediatour and aduocate . and hee is likewise the onely reconciliation for our sinnes , and wee present none other but him to god , in all our prayers eyther priuate or publike . nor is heere acknowledged any other purgation or purgatorie , but onely the bloud of the selfe same iesus christ : thus are wee cleansed , by vndoubted faith in him , accompanyed with true and vnfained repentance , and that is to bee done in this life onely , which is the time both for beleeuing , and of well doing . in like manner , heere is no confession made of any other oblation , sacrifice or satisfaction , wherby to abolish , deface and wipe out our sinnes : but that alone , which iesus christ made once for all , vpon the tree of his crosse to god his father . nor doe wee heere hold it expedient or needefull , that there should bee any superstitious countenaunce , renewing or dayly reiteration thereof : in regarde , that hee neuer gaue any such charge to any mortall man. for wee are assured , that his owne sacrifice is daily fresh , and in full efficacy , to obtaine grace for vs , remission of our sinnes , and life euerlasting . for though hee dyed once for vs poore wretched sinners , he liueth yet againe at this day , and for euer , and sitteth at the right hand of god his father , to make continuall intercession for vs. as for the order of confession , which is here obserued , and none other else acknowledged in this church , it is in this manner . when wee assemble and meete together , wee make a publike and solemne confession of our sinnes to god : who giueth vs also true absolution of them , by his h●ly gospell , when wee ( being heartily repentant ) receiue by faith his vndoubted promises , according as they are davlie ( for that purpose ) preached and deliuered vnto vs , by the pastors and ministers of gods church , being congregated in our ecclesiasticall assemblyes . in breefe ( honourable ladyes ) heere is neyther taught , or beleeued , any other meanes for our saluation ; then that which god himselfe hath reuealed in his holie woord . and that is , to embrace and receiue in a sanctified fayth , working by loue ; the graces and mercies of god offered and presented to vs in iesus christ , by the gospell : the preaching wereof wee receiue , and giue attention vnto with all reuerence , as beeing that onely doctryne , which is able to saue our soules . and wee are perswaded , that to turne aside ( how little soeuer it bee ) from iesus christes omnisufficient sacrifice , to our owne workes , satisfactions , deseruings , or the merites of saints and their sufferings , or any other meanes whatsoeuer , to confide , or put any hope at all therein of our saluation : were flatly to forsake the cheefe corner stone , and to build vpon another foundation , then god himselfe hath layde . for there is not any other name under heauen , whereby wee can or shall bee saued , but the alone name of iesus christ . for bee was deliuered to death for our sinnes , and is risen agayne for our iustification ; there cannot bee ( then ) saluation in another . if this doctrine bee hereticall , as your romaine iesuites , and priests sticke not to proclayme it : they must then pronounce the holy apostle saint paule to bee an hereticke ; saint peter and all the rest of the apostles , to bee heretikes , who preached the very same , and haue left it so to vs in their owne writings , whereof god himselfe will one day be the iudge . censure now , discreete and well-iudging ladyes , if the singlenesse , and pure simplicitie of this approoued doctrine , maintained poynt by poynt , and warranted by the word of god , ( whereunto it hath alwayes submitted it selfe , and dare auouch her true title in the face of any counsell : ) doe deserue those slaunders and calumniations , which the diuell by his blasphemous brood , doth daylie belch foorth against it . and in the other scale of your vnpartiall opinion , ( holding an euen hand to poyze the weight , and an vpright soule , to conceiue the worth of both rightly ) consider the now romish religion , the practises , blasphemies , and abuses therein committed , and then let god direct and order your verdict . for i will not so wrong the hope i haue of you , rashly to forethink , that you will be ouerawed with pompe of ceremonies , thunder cracks of curses , the case and hollow closure for monstrous impieties : neyther that you will bee scrupulous of spirit , as to let the spacious spreading title of their church , without any truth or equitie to warrant it , altogether sway you in your opinion . for the church of christ sets not forth her selfe to sale by the luster and pompe of exteriour ornament , or by antiquitie or such like allegations ; no , nor by continued succession of popes and prelates , whereof you heare what daily boast they make . but her glory and triumph is , in the puritie of doctrine , which is as the onely soule of the church , and in the sincere administration of the sacraments , all consonant and agreeing , with the voyce of her great sheepheard and bishop of our soules , our lord iesus christ . and hee faith ; that his sheepe do know his voyce , and they will not listen or follow a stranger . this ( ladyes ) is the true touchstone of iudgement , whereby to discerne golde from corrupted mettall , to know the true church from the false : and not by crosses by miters , cardinals , bonnets , or height of steeples . that reuerend and worthy bishop of thouars , who hauing forsaken the sinagogue of sathans , and ( by his great learning and industrious paines ) discouered such a hideous heape of abhominations , vsed and maintained in the church of rome : hee , next vnto gods good spirit ( which was the principall and onely motiue ) was the secondary meanes of my conuersion , as ( god haue the glory for it ) hee hath preuailed with diuers other lords and ladyes beside , and in time may prooue to shake the proude empyre of the pope . his learned labours so lately printed , wherein hee opens all the pack of paradoxicall poperie , against bellarmine , and all the romaine faction of iesuites , conuincing them by their owne arguments and writing : i am bold ( worthy ladies ) to send you with this epistle . and where i comfarre too short of such sufficiencie as in such a cause as this is required : peruse his paines for your further satisfaction , being printed in your owne natiue tongue for your better apprehension , and so plainely set downe , as it cannot but bee easily vnderstood of you . thus haue i , noble ladyes , both briefely , and as the nature of an epistle would permit me , declared the grosse absurdities and abuses in the masse , the blasphemies , idolatries , and sacriledges therein committed , that god in his good time may open your eyes , and let you see the way out of that brutish babylon . i haue also ( in a meane measure ) shewed you the order and gouernement of our reformed church , as well for the ministerie and doctrine thereof , as also for the neere affinitie and true forme , which therein is continually vsed and obserued , with the example of the chiefe schoole-maister iesus christ himselfe , and confirmed by his blessed apostles : as if it would please god to rancke you with vs , the truth should make more manifest to you . for heere is nothing done palliated , or in secret conspiring , to betray poore peoples opinions , and deceiue their soules : all our actions are openly exposed euen to the apparant view of god and men , yea , euen in all things , that concerne the order and policie of gods ▪ church . heere , women and the weakest capacities , may vnderstand whatsoeuer is done or said : for here is no strange language vsed among vs. and s. paul saith : strange tongues are for a signe , not to them that beleeue , but vnto infidels that beleeuenot . i confesse , honorable ladyes ▪ that my discourse hath extended it selfe beyond the purposed limitation : but indeed , the merit of the subiect handled ; may pleade my pardon one way , and the endeared affection i beare to you , with desire of your conuersion ( for your soules sauing health ) i trust will safely support me the other way . if god haue chosen me as his meanest instrument , to worke but the very least measure of your better instruction : his name haue the glory , and his powerfull word the deserued praise , which carries much more weight and efficacy , then mens smoothest eloquence , or the very subtillest arguments produced to the contrary : whether it bee of antiquitie , or vniuersalitie , of counsels , of traditions , or whatsoeuer else . if now ( this day ) you will listen to his voyce , and not harden your hearts ; if you be not carelesse of his gift , by me his vnworthy seruant offred vnto you ; if you close not vp your eyes , against the cleare light that shineth euery where ; if you quench not the spirit , which god himselfe hath kindled in you : all will redound to your endlesse consolation , and you bee renowmed to future posterities . feare therefore ( deare ladyes ) this heauie threat of the diuine wisdome . because i haue called , and you haue refused ; i haue stretched out mine hand , and you would not regard ; but haue despised all my counsell , and would none of my correction : i will laugh at your destruction , and mocke when your feare commeth . then shall you call vpon mee , but i will not answere , they shall seeke me earely , but they shall not finde mee . &c. from thouars this 1. of iune . 1608. finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a01148-e310 after her conuersion , she wrote this epistle . luke 2. 38. a vertuous acknowledgment of a godly lady . she takes on her , to note the abuses in the masse . her course intended in this epistle . christ his office of priesthood , transferred to men . hebr. 7 9. 23. 24. 25. 26. hebr. 9. 24. 25. 26. iesus christ is the only sacrificer , without any successor or vicar . hebr. 9. 26. heb. 5 4. 5. the popish priests must shewe their warrant out of scripture . no man can offer as christ hath offered . hebr. 10. 13. 14. 18. no mention is made in scripture , of any new or continued offering . rom. 5. 1● . hebr 9. 14. she dealeth not with euerie particularerror in the masse . the priests confession . sacrifice offered before consecration , for the redemption of soules liuing . the priest in his memento . the priests prayer after the consecration . the priests memento for the dead . the anatomie of the masse , printed in french. the masse ameritorious worke , to deface all sinnes . concerning the dead . rom. 3. 25 1. pet. 1. 9 iohn . 3. 18. of the prayers said or sung in the masse . iohn . 5. 19. the priest and peoples opinion present at masse . hebr. 10. 1. 2. 3. the meaning of the holie apostle . some perticular ladies , not altogether popish . the fruite of the sacrifice in the masse . hebr. 10. 9 ▪ some of them say : make this in my remembrance , and so they would haue it . luke 22. 19 the euāgelists record of our sauiours words . lu. 22. 19. 1. co. 11. 25. the meaning of christs words in the sacrament . 1. co ▪ 11. 26. her admonition to the ladies , concerning the exposition of s. paule . an excellent note , & well worth the observation . concerning the greeke word poiein , and the siriaque , habad . idolatrie in holding vp the bread to be adored as god. how christ promised vs to be partakers of his body and bloud . luke 22.19 christs commandement is in the first place . christs words to his disciples , is to all be faithfull to the worlds end . the promise is made to all and not to the apostles onely . 1 ▪ cor. 10. 17. take away the communion , and the promise is ended . the right vse of the sacrament , wherein it consisteth . what is don in the masse how consecratiō ought to be done . how the priest makes his consecration in the masse . doubt and question may arise vpon such priuie whispering . mark this , good ladyes h●w people may be easily abused . s. augustines words concerning consecratiō . the priest coniures in sted of consecrating . no lawfull consecration in the masse the priest hath not any part of christs body in his bread , which he makes an idoll of . the people are deceiued in the masse . they worship a round cake in stead of god. she proceedeth to another idolatry commutted by the ignorant people . the people doe communicate but in one kinde . the priests are idolators and make the people to cōmit idolatry . christ did command no worship to the bread . the romanists doe abuse the lords supper . christ directed not his promise to the bread & wine only . 1. cor. 10. 16. the summe of our christian doctrin and beliefe the expected benefit of the sacrament . how we doe adore christ in the sacrament . we honour god in bread and wine , as being his blessings bestowed vpon vs. the priest carries their sacrament about the street . the third propertie of the masse the priests rob and deceiue the people . the priests answere for themselues . a witty cōparison of receiuing the communion . we cannot be wiser the our maister christ. 1. cor. 10. 17. 1. cor. 11. 28. chrysost . hom. 18. super cap. 8 2. cor. the popes canons doe cōfesse their sacriledge . can. peracta de consecra●dist . 2 can. omnes fideles de consecrat . dist . 1. chrysost . in hom 3. none suffered to communicate , but the priest onely . prayers in their masse , making against themsèlues . they say one thing , & do another , meerely begutling the people ▪ they speake to the people in a strange language . god will haue vs confesse our sins to him onely . 2. cor. 5 18 the peoples growing to number their sinnes . where god is neglected , one sinne begetteth another . the sacrament is now made no account of . another sacriledge cōmitted in the masse . 1. cor. 11. 28. they sunder what god hath ioyned together . concomitācy , their co●ned excuse ▪ the bloud separated from the bodie . matth. 26. 27. 28. the contrariety of concomitancy . 1. iohn . 1. 7 traditions are their only foundatiō . can. competimus de consecrat . dist ▪ 2. can. quia . & can. in coena de consecrat ▪ dist . 1. can. sacerdotes . 1. qu. 1. she referreth this matter of the masse , to the censure of the ladyes thēselues . they partake with sin , that seek not to auoid it . the apish gesture and behauiour of the priests . how highly god is dishonored in their churches ▪ of gods vndefiled church . her desire of their happy vnion in faith . the order obserued in the reformed churches . of the sacraments of baptisme , & the lords supper reiecting the other fiue . no priuate whispering , as is vsed in the masse . how the people are admitted to the communion : & who are excluded . farre from that which is vsed in poperie , her further offer to the ladies . no inuocation vpon saints , but on the euerliuing god , in trinitie of persons . no allowance of images , but that onely which god hath appointed . no intercession , but to christ only . 1. iohn . 2. 2. no sacrifice but christ iesus onely . rom. 2. 3. what kinde of confession is vsed in this church of the meanes of our saluatiō . galat. 5. 6. 1. cor. 3. 11 act. 4. 12. an especiall note to be obserued . of the truth and sincerity of this doctrine . the pompe and ceremonie of poperie . the nature of the church of christ . ioh. 10. 4. 5 a booke of much learning & main importance , which likewise will bee very shortly published in english . truth needs no secret corners . 1. cor. 14. 22. her conclusion to the ladyes . prou. 1. 24. 25. 26. 27. a dissertation with dr. heylyn: touching the pretended sacrifice in the eucharist, by george hakewill, doctor in divinity, and archdeacon of surrey. published by authority. hakewill, george, 1578-1649. this text is an enriched version of the tcp digital transcription a86378 of text r19900 in the english short title catalog (thomason e157_5). textual changes and metadata enrichments aim at making the text more computationally tractable, easier to read, and suitable for network-based collaborative curation by amateur and professional end users from many walks of life. the text has been tokenized and linguistically annotated with morphadorner. the annotation includes standard spellings that support the display of a text in a standardized format that preserves archaic forms ('loveth', 'seekest'). textual changes aim at restoring the text the author or stationer meant to publish. this text has not been fully proofread approx. 100 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 30 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. earlyprint project evanston,il, notre dame, in, st. louis, mo 2017 a86378 wing h208 thomason e157_5 estc r19900 99860771 99860771 112896 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a86378) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 112896) images scanned from microfilm: (thomason tracts ; 28:e157[5]) a dissertation with dr. heylyn: touching the pretended sacrifice in the eucharist, by george hakewill, doctor in divinity, and archdeacon of surrey. published by authority. hakewill, george, 1578-1649. 56 p. printed by j. r. for george thomason, and octavian pullen, and are to be sold at the rose in pauls church-yard, london : 1641. reproduction of the original in the british library. eng heylyn, peter, 1600-1662 -early works to 1800. church of england -doctrines -early works to 1800. lord's supper -early works to 1800. mass -early works to 1800. transubstantiation -early works to 1800. a86378 r19900 (thomason e157_5). civilwar no a dissertation with dr. heylyn:: touching the pretended sacrifice in the eucharist, by george hakewill, doctor in divinity, and archdeacon hakewill, george 1641 17033 50 25 0 0 0 0 44 d the rate of 44 defects per 10,000 words puts this text in the d category of texts with between 35 and 100 defects per 10,000 words. 2007-02 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2007-02 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2007-03 mona logarbo sampled and proofread 2007-03 mona logarbo text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a dissertation with dr. heylyn : touching the pretended sacrifice in the eucharist , by george hakewill , doctor in divinity , and archdeacon of surrey . published by authority . london , printed by j. r. for george thomason , and octavian pullen , and are to be sold at the rose in pauls church-yard . 1641. a dissertation with dr heylyn , whether the eucharist be a sacrifice , properly so termed , and that according to the doctrine and practise of the church of england now in force . this the doctor , that he may the better defend the situation of the lords table altarwise , confidently maintaineth in sundry places of his antidotum lincolniense . nay so farre he goeth in the maintenance hereof , as if without this nothing else but ruine and confusion , were to be expected in the church of god . and on the other side i am as confident , that he is the first of the reformed churches who ever published this doctrine ; nay all divines of those churches , as well forraign as our own ( whom i have read on that subject ) with one generall consent constantly maintain the clean contrary , as i trust i shall make it evidently appear in this ensuing treatise , wherein i will first shew the defects , which i conceive to be in the doctors discourse , secondly i will endeavour to answer his arguments , and thirdly i will produce such testimonies drawn from the writings of our divines as make against him . chap. i. of the defects of the doctors discourse , of this subject . two things me thinks i finde wanting in this his discourse , whereof the one is the definition of a sacrifice , properly so called , the other is how it can properly be termed a sacrifice , and yet be onely commemorative , or representative as he cals it . touching the first of these , unlesse the thing be first defined , whereof men dispute , all their disputation must needs prove fruitlesse in the end , this then because the doctor hath omitted , i will indeavour to finde out the definition of a sacrifice properly so called . saint augustine in his 10. book de civit. dei and 6. cap. teacheth that , verum sacrificium est omne opus quod agitur ut sancta societate inhaereamus deo relatum scilicet ad illum finem boni , quo veraciter beati esse possimus . where by verum i do not beleeve that he understands a truth of propriety , but of excellency , and so much i think will easily appear by those words of his in the chapter going before . illud quod ab hominibus appellatur sacrificium , signum est veri sacrificii , where undoubtedly by the true sacrifice he understands either the inward sacrifice of the heart , or the sacrifice of religious actions flowing from thence , which he makes to be the true sacrifice in regard of excellency , though improperly so called , and the outward sacrifice to be but a signe of this , though properly so called ; in which regard bellarmine in his first book de missa , and second chapter rejects this definition , or rather description , as not agreeing to a sacrifice properly so called , which he proves by many reasons , and thereupon brings another of his own which is this , sacrificium est oblatio externa facta soli dea , qua ad agnitionem humanae infirmitatis & professionem divinae majestatis à legitimo ministrores aliqua sensibilis & permanens ritu mystico consecratur & transmutatur . the particular parts of this definition he afterwards explicates , and tels us that the last word transmutatur is therefore added , quia ad verum sacrificium requiritur , ut id quod offertur deoin sacrifi●ium planè destruatur , id est ita mutetur ut desinat esse id quod antea erat . and least we should mistake him , within a while after he repeats the same in effect again , giving us a double reason thereof , whereof the latter is quia sacrificium est summa protestatio subjectionis nostrae ad deum , summa autem illa protestatio requirit ut non usus rei deo offeratur sed ipsa etiam substantia , & ideo non solum usus sed substantia consumatur . and this condition in a sacrifice properly so called is likewise required by our own men , as namely by doctor field in his appendix to his third book of the church . if we will sacrifice a thing unto god ( saith he ) we must not onely present it unto him , but consume it also . thus in the leviticall law , things sacrificed that had life were killed , things without life , if they were solid , were burnt , if liquid , powred forth and spilt . now this ground being thus laid , i would willingly learn of the doctor what sensible thing it is in his sacrifice , which is thus destroyed or consumed in regard of the being or substance thereof . a he must of necessity answer ( as i conceive ) that either it is the elements of bread and wine , or the sacred body and bloud of christ ; but how the bread and wine may be said to be consumed in regard of their substance , without admitting transubstantiation i cannot imagine , unlesse perchance he will say that it is by eating the one , and drinking the other ; but these being acts common to the people , with the priest , if the essence and perfection of the sacrifice should consist in this , he will be forced to admit of so many sacrificers , as there are communicants , which i presume he will not acknowledge . and if he will have it stand in the eating and drinking of the priest alone , in case he should put it up again before it be consumed , the sacrifice must needs be frustrated , and if he keep it within him , and so consume it by digestion , the altar will rather be his stomack , then the lords table . besides , the sacrifice of christians properly so called , being but one , and that by many degrees more noble and excellent then any , either before or under the law , b if bread and wine were the subject matter thereof , it would both overthrow the unity of the sacrifice , in as much as both these are often renewed , and in it self be of lesse valew and dignity then many of the jewish sacrifices , which i think the doctor will not grant . but happily he will say that those elements , though in themselves they be of no great value , yet in regard of mysticall signification , they farre excell the sacrifices of the jews . whereunto i answer , that those of the jews besides , that they were sacrifices indeed properly so called , in themselves they had the same signification , and were chiefly to that end ordained by the author of them , the main difference being , that they looked unto christ to come , but we unto the same christ already come , by meanes whereof our happinesse is that , that now by gods blessing we need no sacrifices properly so called , but rest onely and wholly upon that all-sufficient sacrifice which he once for all offred up for us . it remaines then that if the bread and wine be not the subject matter of this sacrifice , the body and bloud of christ must be , and that not symbolically , but properly , otherwise the sacrifice it self cannot be proper , which assertion will of necessity inferre either the transubstantiation of the pontisicians or the c consubstantiation of the ubiquitaries . and again , if the body and bloud of christ be the subject matter of the sacrifice , it must be visibly and sensibly there , according to bellarmines own definition before laid down ; neither will it suffice to say ( as he doth ) that it is visible under the species of bread and wine , for so it may be visible to the faith of those that beleeve it , but to the sense ( which is the thing he requires as a necessary condition in a sacrifice properly so called ) it is not visible . neither can that be said properly visible , which is not so in it self , but in another thing , for then the soul might be said to be visible , though it be onely seen in the body , and not in it self ; nay , the soul might better be said to be seen in the body , then the body of christ in the bread , in as much as the soul is the essentiall form of the body , but i trust they will not say , that the body of christ is so in regard of the accidents of bread . lastly , how the body and bloud of christ may be truely , and properly said so to be consumed , ut planè destruatur , ut desinat esse id quod ante erat , ut substantia consumatur , ( which the cardinall likewise requires in his sacrifice properly so called ) d for my part i must professe , i cannot possibly understand , for to say as he doth , that the body of christ is consumed in the sacrifice not secundum esse naturale , but sacramentale , cannot reach to his phrase of planè destruitur , substantia consumitur , as any weak scholler may easily discern , and in truth he doth in the explication of this point ( touching the essence of this sacrifice , wherein it consists , and the manner of consuming the body of christ therein ) so double and stagger as a man may well see he was much perplexed therein , wandring up and down in a labarynth , not knowing which way to get out , and so e i leave him . the other defect which i finde in the doctors discourse , touching this point is , that he doth not shew us how a commemorative , or representative sacrifice ( as he every where termes it ) is a sacrifice properly so called . this proposition that the eucharist is a commemorative sacrifice properly so called , i shall easily grant if the word properly be referred to the adjunct not to the subject . commemorative it is properly called , but improperly a sacrifice . and herein i think do all writers agree , as well romish as reformed ( i mean that it is a sacrifice commemorative ) and therefore bellarmine disputes the point in no lesse then 27. chapters of his first book de missa , against the reformed divines to prove that it is a sacrifice properly so called , and yet acknowledgeth that his adversaries confesse it to be a sacrifice commemorative , but himself and his adherents , though together with the protestants they acknowledge it to be a sacrifice commemorative , yet they rest not in that , because they knew full well , it was not sufficient to denominate it a proper sacrifice . and in very truth it stands with great reason that the commemoration or representation of a thing should be both in nature and propriety of speech distinct from the thing it commemorates or represents ; as for the purpose , he who represents a king upon the stagef , is commonly called a king , yet in propriety of speech he cannot be so tearmed , unlesse he likewise be a king in his own person ; and therefore it is that we confesse the jewish sacrifices to be properly so termed , because they were not onely prefigurative of the sacrifice of christ upon the crosse , but were really and absolutely so in themselves , and if this could once be soundly demonstrated of the eucharist , the controversie would soon be at an end , but till then in saying we have a representative sacrifice can no more prove it to be a sacrifice properly so called , then the prefiguration of the jewish sacrifices without any further addition could prove them so to be , which i presume no divine will take upon him to maintain . now that which confirmes me herein is that both the master of the sentences , and aquinas , the two great leaders of the schoolemen terming the eucharist a commemorative , withall they held it to be an improper sacrifice , and to this purpose they both alleage the authorities of the fathers ; which makes me beleeve that they conceived the fathers , who in their writings frequently call it a sacrifice to be understood and interpreted in that sense ; the former of them in his 4. book and 12. destinction makes the question , quaeritur si quod gerit sacerdos propriè dicatur sacrificium vel immolatio , & si christus quotidiè immoletur vel semel tantum immolatus sit , to which he briefly answers , illud quod offertur & consecratur à sacerdote vocari sacrificium & oblationem , quia memoria & repraesentatio veri sacrificii & sanctae immolationis factae in ara crucis ; which is as much in effect as if he had said it is a commemoration of the true and proper sacrifice of christ upon the crosse , but in it self improperly so called , and that this is indeed his meaning it sufficiently appears throughout that distinction . with lombard doth aquinas herein likewise accord , parte . 3. quaest. 73. art . 4. in conclusione eucharistiae sacramentum ut est dominicae passionis commemorativum , sacrificium nominatur . where it is observable that he saith not sacrificium est , but onely nominatur , and what his meaning therein was , appears of that article which is this . hostia videtur idem esse quod sacrificium , sicut ergo non proprie dicitur sacrificium ita nec proprie dicitur hostia . which though it be an objection , yet he takes it as granted that it is sacrificium improprie dictum , at leastwise as it is commemorativum or representativum ; and therefore to that objection doth he shape this answer , ad tertium dicendum quod hoc sacramentum dicitur sacrificium in quantum repraesentat ipsam passionem christi , &c. dicitur autem hostia in quantum continet ipsum christum qui est hostia salutaris . chap. ii. of the sacrifice pretended to be due by the light of nature . from the defects in the doctors discourse , we now come to his arguments drawn from the light of nature , from the institution of the eucharist , from the authority of the fathers , from the doctrine and practise of the church of england , and lastly from the testimony of the writers thereof , i will follow him step by step , and begin first with the light of nature , with which he begins his fifth chapter . it is ( saith he ) the observation of eusebius , that the fathers which preceded moses , and were quite ignorant of his law , disposed their wayes according to a voluntary kinde of piety , {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} framing their lives and actions according to the law of nature . which words ( saith the doctor ) relate not onely to their morall conversation as good men , but to their carriage in respect of gods publike worship as religious men . but by this glosse i doubt he corrupts the text of the author , sure i am , the words he alleageth out of him do not reach home to his interpretation , neither do i think it can be maintained , or that it was the minde of eusebius , that the patriarchs before moses worshipped god , according to a voluntary kinde of piety . which is by the apostle in expresse terms condemned , col. 2. 23. and if their worship had relation to the messias that was to come ( wherein all divines i presume agree ) i do not see how he can affirm that they framed their religion according to the light of nature , which without the help of a supernaturall illumination could not direct them to the messias . it is indeed said of abraham , that he saw the day of christ and rejoyced , no doubt but the same might as truly be verefied of all the other beleeving patriarcks , as well before , as after him ; but that either he or they saw christs day by the light of nature , that shall i never beleeve , and i think the doctor cannot produce me so much as one good author who ever affirmed it ; but on the other side with one consent they teach , that as in morall actions they lived according to the light of nature , so in religious they were in a speciall manner inspired and directed by god himself . if that of the apostle be true . that whatsoever is not of faith is sin ; and again , that without faith it is impossible to please god . faith being grounded upon the commandements , and promises of god , it cannot be that their worship should be acceptable unto him without speciall command from him . from the worship of god in generall the doctor descends to the particular by way of sacrifice , affirming that it is likewise grounded upon the light of nature ; which if it be so , undoubtedly it binds all men , the law of nature being common to all , and consequently to us christians , as well as to the patriarcks before moses . now that some kinde of sacrifice is f●om all men due unto almighty god , i do not deny , but that outward sacrifice , properly so called ( which is the point in controversie ) should be from all men due unto him by the light of nature ; that i very much doubt . it is the conclusion of aqu●nas . omnes tenentur aliquod interius sacrificium deo offerre , devotam videlicet mentem , & exterius sacrificium eorum ad quae ex praecepto tenentur , sive sint v●rtutum actus sive certae & d●term●natae oblationes ; and farther for mine own part i dare not go . the doctor instanceth in the sacrifices of cain and abel , which he seemeth to say were offred by the light of nature , whereas of abel we read , that by faith he offered unto god a more excellent sacrifice then cain . now faith there cannot be without obedience , nor true obedience without a precept , and if perchance it be said that the excellency of the sacrifice was from faith , not the sacrifice it self , for then cain should not have offered at all , i thereunto answer that although cain did not offer by faith , or inspiration from god , yet it may well be that he did it by instruction from his father , who was inspired from god . and besides his sacrifices being of the fruits of the earth might rather be called an offring ( as in the text it is ) then a sacrifice properly so termed according to bellarmines definition . and for abel it is the resolution of the same bellarmine ( which for mine own part , i take to be sound ) deus qui primus sine dubio inspiravit abeli & aliis sanctis viris usum sacrificiorum voluit per ea sacrificia , sacrificin̄ omniū ficiorum praestantissimum adumbrari . the doctors next instance is noahs sacrifice , touching which the same may be said as formerly of abels , neither indeed can we with reason imagine that god should in other matters by divine inspiration , so particularly instruct him , and leave him onely to the light of nature , in the worship of himself , or that adam in the state of incorrupt nature was instructed by god in the duties of his service , and his posterity therein left to the light of corrupt nature . besides this , somethings there are by the doctor affirmed of this sacrifice , not so justifiable i doubt as were to be wished ; as first that it was an eucharisticall sacrifice , not typicall , whereas all divines that i have seen , make all the sacrifices commanded by god , as well before the law , as under the law to have been typicall . that is some way significant of christ to come , they being all as so many visible sermons of that all s●fficient sacrifice , through which god is onely well pleased with those which worship him . and again , the text making it by the doctors own confession an holocaust or burnt offring which noah offred , i see not how he can onely make it eucharisticall , in as much as philo the jew ( who should know what belonged to the distinction of sacrifices ) in his book purposely written of that subject , thus writes of them . sacrificia omnia ad tria redegit legislator , holocaustum , pacifica sive salutare , & sacrificium pro peccatis . noahs sacrifice then being a burnt offring , it could not be meerely eucharisticall , but i rather beleeve it might participate somewhat of all three kindes , and as little doubt but that it was in all three respects significative of christ to come . the doctors third instance , is in melchisedech , who indeed is said to have been a priest of the most high god , and that being a priest , he offred sacrifice , i make no doubt , but very much doubt whether he offred sacrifice , or were a priest by the light of nature , especially considering that christ himself was a priest after the order of melchisedech . now whereas the doctor confidently makes sem to have been the eldest sonne of noah , he hath therein against him , not onely the learned iunius , but lyranus , tostatus , genebrard , and the hebrew doctors . and again , whereas he seemes to follow the common opinion heretofore received , that melchisedech was sem ; i think he cannot be ignorant that both paraeus and pererius have proved the contrary by so invincible arguments , as there needs no further doubt to be made thereof . the doctors conclusion of this argument drawn from the light of nature is this , that there was never any nation , but had some religion , nor any religion ( if men civilized ) but had altars , priests , and sacrifices as a part thereof , or dependents thereupon . the former part of which position i will not examine , though our planters in virginia and new-england , can not ( as they report ) finde any acts of religion exercised by the natives of those countries , but for the latter part thereof , i know not why he should exclude the uncivilized nations , from acts flowing from the light of nature , such as he makes the use of sacrificing to be , unlesse withall he will exclude them from the use of reason . and surely were the use of sacrifices grounded upon the light of nature , not upon divine precept ; i do not see why the jews should be tyed to offer them onely at ierusalem ; nor yet why the mahometans ( who farre exceed the christians in number , and in civility are little inferiour to many of them ) should use no sacrifice at all . lastly for the grecians , romans , and other nations , who used sacrifices as the principall act of their religion , it may well be that they borrowed it from the church of god by an apish imitation , or that they received by tradition from their predecessors , who were sometimes of the church of god ( which are the conjectures of the doctor himself ) either of which might serve without deriving it from the light of nature . chap. iii. of the institution of the eucharist , whether it imply a sacrifice , and of the altar mentioned by st paul , hebrews 13. the doctor bears us in hand , that our saviour instituted a sacrifice perpetually to remain in his church , and a new priesthood properly so called , when he ordained the sacrament of the lords supper , and to this purpose he brings the words of irenaeus , novi testamenti novam docuit oblat●onem ; but that irenaeus intended not a sacrifice properly so called , the learned zanchius in his first book de cultu dei externo , hath made it as clear as the noon-day , and to him i referre both the doctor and the reader , who desires satisfaction therein . from the testimony of irenaeus , the doctor comes to the words of institution recorded by saint paul , 1 cor. 11. and indeed here should in all likelyhood have been the place , to lay the foundation for a new sacrifice and priesthood if any such properly so called had been intended by our saviour under the gospell , but neither there , nor in the evangelists do we finde any mention at all of either of these ; which the doctor perceiving well enough , goes on from the words of institution , vers . 23 , 24 , 25. and tels us that if they expresse not plain enough the nature of this sacrifice to be commemorative , we may take those that follow by way of commentary , vers . 26. for as often as ye cate this bread , and drink this cup , ye do shew the lords death till he come . which words are doubtlesse directed to all the faithfull in the church of corinth and in them to all christians , so as the doctor will be forced either to prove his sacrificing from eating and drinking , and withall to admit all christians to do sacrifice ( against both which in the same leaf he solemnly protests ) or to seek out some other place to prove it . but for the priesthood he pretends to have found that in the words of our saviour , hoc faite , for the apostles ( saith he ) and their successours in the priesthood , there is an edite and bibite as private men of no orders in the church , but there is an hoc facite belonging to them onely as they are priests under and of the gospell . hoc faecite is for the priest who hath power to consecrate , hoc edite both for the priest and people , who are admitted to communicate . and again , within a while after , the people being prepared may edere and bibere , but they must not facere , that belongs onely to the priests who claim that power from the apostles , on them conferred by their redeemer . thus he , as if facere and sacrificare were all one , which indeed some of the romanists endeavour to prove , but so vainly , so ridiculously , so injuriously to the text , ( as my lord of duresme hath learnedly shewed ) as it appears to be a foundation too sandy to lay such a building upon it . but will the doctor be pleased to hear bishop iewells opinion of these words , whom he seemeth in some places to reverence . that incomparable bishop then in his defence of his 17●h article thus writes thereof . neither did christ by these words , do ye this in remembrance of me , erect any new succession of sacrificers to offer him up really unto his father , nor ever did any ancient learned father so expound it . christs meaning is clear by the words that follow , for he saith not onely , do ye this , but he addeth also in my remembrance , which doing pertaineth not onely to the apostles , and their successors , ( as mr harding imagineth ) but to the whole congregation of corinth , as often as ye shall eat this bread , and drink this cup , ye shew forth the lords death untill he come . likewise saint chrysostome ( saith he ) applyeth the same , not onely to the clergy , but also to the whole people of his church at antioch . and truely i think this doctor is the first of the reformed churches , that ever restrained those words of our saviour to the clergy alone , or grounded the priesthood upon them . nay the romanists themselves finde this ground to be so feeble , as by the evidence of truth it self , they are beaten from it , and even forced to forsake it . iansenius bishop of gant in his commentaries on the gospels , cap. 131. sunt qui sacramentum illud esse sacrificium ostendere conantur ex verbo facite , quia illud aliquando accipitur pro sacrificare , at hoc argumentum parum est firmum . alanas cardinalis lib. de eucharistia , c. 10. p. 255. hoc facite ] pertinet ad totam actionem eucharisticam à christo factam , tam a presbyteris quam à plebe faciendam . hoc probat ex cyril . lib. 12. in ioh. ca. 58. ex basilio . lib. regularum moralium regul. . 21. cap. 3. maldonatus l. 7. de sacram. tom. 1. part . 3. de eucharistia , non quod contendam illud verbum facere illo loco sign ficare idem quod sacrificare . estius comment . in 2. ad cor. 11. v. 24. non quod verbum facere sit idem quod sacrificare quomodo nonnulli interpretati sunt praeter mentem scripturae . and howsoever bellarmine where it makes for his purpose , come in with his certum est . it is certain that upon the word facite , is grounded the priesthood and power of sacrificing , yet in another place when it made not so much for his purpose , he tels us another tale ; videtur sententia iohannis à lovanio valde probabilis qui docet verba domini apud lucam ad omnia referri , id est , ad id quod fecit christus & id quod fecerunt apostoli , ut sensus sit , id quod nunc agimus , ego dum consecro & porrigo , & vos dum accipitis & comeditis , frequentate deinceps usque ad mundi consummationem . and within a while after , paulum autem idem author docet , potissimum referre ad actionem discipulorum , id quod ex verbis sequentibus colligitur ; quotiescunque enim manducabitis panem hunc & calicem bibetis ; mortem domini annuntiabetis . thus farre the words of iohannes a lovanio , whose opinion bellarmine confesseth to be very probable , that which followeth in the same place i take to be his own ; et praeterea idem planum fieri potest , ex instituto & proposito b. pauli , nam apostolus eo loco emendabat errorem corinthiorum , corinthii autem non errabant in consecratione sed in sumptione , quia non d●bita reverentia sumebant ; quare accommodat ca verba ad suum usum , ac docet christum praecepisse ut actio caenae celebraretur in memoriam passionis , & ideo attente & reverenter sumenda esse tanta mysteria . by all which it appears , that neither the words of institution hoc facite are sufficient to ground the priesthood , and power of sacrificing upon them ; nor yet that they are to be restrained to the clergy as the doctor would have it ; nay those words of the apostle , which he brings as a commentary upon the words of institution to clear the point , do indeed prove the contrary . and if we should grant that which he demands , that hoc facite were to be referred onely to the actions of christ himself , and directed onely to the apostles and their successours , yet it must first be proved that christ himself in the institution of the sacrament , did withall offer a sacrifice properly so called ; which for any thing that appeares in the text cannot be gathered from any speech which he then uttered , or action which he did , or gesture which he used . that he consecrated the elements of bread and wine to a mysticall use , as also that he left the power of consecration onely to his apostles and their successours we willingly grant , but that at his last supper he either offered sacrifice himself , or gave them commission so to do , that as yet rests to be proved . neither do i yet see what the doctor will make to be the subject of his sacrifice , either bread and wine , or his own body and bloud ; if the former , he will ( for any thing i know ) stand single ; if the latter , in a proper sense , he will be forced to joyn hands with rome , and so fall into a world of absurdities ; lastly , whereas the doctor disputes wholly for a commemorative sacrifice , that if our saviour could not be so , in as much as commemoration implies a calling to remembrance of a thing past , but his sacrifice upon the crosse , which we now commemorate , was then to come ; prefigurative it might be , commemorative it could not be . the doctor goes on , and confidently assures us that s. paul in whom we finde both the priest and the sacrifice , will help us to an altar also , and to that purpose referres us to the last to the hebrews , habemus altare : we have an altar , whereof they have no right to eat that serve the tabernacle . an altar ( saith he ) in relation to the sacrifice , which is there commemorated : but his passage of the apostle bellarmine himself hath so little confidence in , and so weak authority to back it , as he forbears to presse it ; and truely i think had the doctor himself read on , and well considered the next verses , he would never have urged it to that purpose which here he doth . aquinas his exposition in his commentaries upon the place , is in my judgement , bo●h easie , and pertinent , istud altare vel est crux christi in qua christus immolatus est , vel ipse christus in quo & per quem preces nostras offerimus , & hoc est altare aureum de quo , apoc. 8. to him doth estius the jesuite strongly incline , and to him do the divines of collen in their antididagma firmly adhere ; which notwithstanding some there are i confesse , who understand the words of the apostle to be meant of the lords table , which i grant may be called an altar ; but whether in a proper sense it be so called by the apostle in the passage h alleaged , that is the question , and i have not yet met with any , who in full and round terms hath so expressed himself ; and till that be sufficiently proved , the apostles altar cannot certainly prove a priesthood , and sacrifice properly so called . chap. iv. whether the authority of the fathers alleaged by the doctor , prove the eucharist , a sacrifice properly so called . the doctor from the scriptures ( where in my poor judgement he hath found very little help for the maintenance of his cause ) comes in the next place to the authority of the fathers , some of which are counterfeits , and the greatest part by him vouched ( as by him they are alleaged ) speak onely of sacrifices , priests , and altars , but in what sense it appears not , whereas the question is not of the name , but of the nature of these . now among those fathers whom he names , two there are and but two , who speak home to the nature thereof irenaeus and euscbius , yet both of them speak even by the doctors pen in such sort , as a man may thereby discern they intended no● a sacrifice properly so called . i will take them in their order . first then for irenaeus , look on him ( saith the doctor , and he will tell you , that there were sacrifices in the jewish church , and sacrifices in the christian church , and that the kinde or species was onely altered , the kinde or nature of which christian sacrifice , he tels us of in the same chapter , viz. that it is an eucharist , a tender of our gratitude to almighty god for all his blessings , and a sanctifying of the creature to spirituall uses . offerimus ei non quasi indigenti , sed gratias agentes donatione e●us , & sanctificantes creaturam . in this we have the severall and distinct offices , which before we spake of , sanctificatio creaturae , a blessing of the bread ( for bread it is he speaks of ) for holy uses , which is the office of the priest , no man ever doubted it ; and then a gratiarum actio , a giving of thanks unto the lord for his marvellous benefits , which is the office both of priest and people ; the sanctifying of the creature , and glorifying of the creator , do both relate unto offerimus , and that unto the sacrifices which are therein treated of by that holy father . hitherto the doctor in his allegation of irenaeus ; but is any man so weak as from hence to inferre a sacrifice properly so called ? the sanctifying , or blessing , or consecrating of the bre●d to holy uses , we all grant to be the proper office of the priest or presbyter , and the giving of thanks common to him and the people , but that either of these is a sacrifice properly so called , that we deny and i desire to see proved . the other of the two before named is eusebius upon whose testimony the doctor largely insists , for that we cannot take ( saith he ) a better and more perfect view thereof then from him , who hath been more exact herein then any other of the ancients . and having culled out from eusebius what he conceived most advantageous for his own purpose in conclusion , he thus epitomizeth him . so that we see ( saith he ) that in this sacrifice prescribed the christian church , by our lord and saviour , there were two proper and distinct actions , the first is to celebrate the memoriall of our saviours sacrifice , which he intituleth the commemoration of his body and bloud once offred , or the memory of that his sacrifice , that is ( as he doth clearly expound himself ) that we should offer {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} . this our commemoration for a sacrifice ; the second , that we should offer to him the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving , which is the reasonable sacrifice of a christian man , and to him most acceptable ; finally he joynes both together in the conclusion of that book , and therein doth at full describe the nature of this sacrifice , which is this as followeth . therefore ( saith he ) we sacrifice and offer , as it were with incense , the memory of that great sacrifice , celebrating the same according to the mysteries by him given unto us , and giving thanks to him for our salvation , with godly hymnes and prayers to the lord our god , as also offering our whole selves both soul and body , and to his high priest which is the word . s●e here ( saith the doctor ) eusebius doth not call it onely the memory or commemoration of christs sacrifice , but makes the very memory and commemoration in and of it self to be a sacrifice , which instar omnium , for and in the place of all other sacrifices we are to offer to our god , and offer with the incense of our prayers and praises . in this discourse out of eusebius the doctor foreseeing that what he had alleaged , did not reach home to his purpose , endeavours to make it up by the addition of this last clause , as if eusebius made the memory or commemoration of the sacrifice of christ to be in and of it felf a sacrifice ; and this he would collect from these words of his {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} , which he translates for , and as a sacrifice , whereas both bishop bilson , and doctor raynolds , and others of our best learned divines translate it insteed of a sacrifice . now that which is insteed of a sacrifice , cannot be indeed , and of it self properly so called . and besides , how we should be said to offer up our commemoration for a sacrifice , as the doctor affirmeth , i cannot understand , since k commemoration is an action , and being so , it cannot ( as i conceive ) in propriety of speech be the thing sacrificed , which must of necessity be a substance as it stands in opposition to accidents ; so that if neither the sanctification of the creature , nor the commemoration of the sacrifice of christ , nor the offering up of our selves , or praise , and thanksgiving can amount to a sacrifice properly so called , surely the doctor hath not yet found it in the fathers , but will be forced to make a new search for the finding of it . chap. v. whether the eucharist be a sacrifice properly so called , by the doctrine and practise of the church of england , and first by the book of ordination . this the doctor undertakes to prove from the book of ordination , from the book of articles , from the book of homilies , and lastly from the common-prayer book . his proof from the book of ordination , is that he who is admitted to holy orders , is there cal'd a priest , as also in the liturgy , and rubricks of it . for answer whereunto , we grant that he is so called indeed , but had it been intended that he were properly so called , no doubt but in the same book we should have found a power of sacrificing conferred upon him ; and in very truth a stronger argument there cannot be , that our church admits not of any sacrifice or priesthood properly so called , for that we finde not in tha● book any power of sacrificing conferred upon him , who receives the order of priesthood , no nor so much as the name of any sacrifice in any sense therein once mentioned . read t●orow the admonition , the interrogations , the prayers , the benediction , but above all the form it self in the collation of that sacred order , and not a word is there to be seen of sacrificing , or offring , or altar , or any such matter ; the form it self of ordination runnes thus [ receive the holy ghost , whose sinnes thou doest forgive they are forgiven , and whose sinnes thou doest retain , they are retained , and be thou a faithfull dispencer of the word of god and his holy sacraments , in the name of the father , and of the sonne , and of the holy ghost , amen . ] then the bishop shall deliver to every one of them the bible in his hand saying . [ take thou authority to preach the word of god , and to minister the holy sacraments in the congregation where thou shalt be appointed . ] here we have a power given him of forgiving and retaining of sinnes , of preaching of the word and administring the holy sacraments , but of any sacrificing power , not so much as the least syllable : which had been a very strange and unpardonable ne●lect , had the church intended , by the form expressed in that book , to make them priests , properly so called . this indeed the romanists quarrell at , as being a main defect in our church ; but the learned champion of it , and our holy orders , hath in my judgement fully answered that crimination of theirs , and withall clearly opened the point , in what sense we are in that book of ordination called priests : if you mean ( saith he ) no more by priest , then the holy ghost doth by presbyter , that is a minister of the new testament , then we professe , and are ready to prove that we are priests , as we are called in the book of common-prayer , and the form of ordering , because we receive in our ordination authority to preach the word of god , and to minister his holy sacraments . secondly , if by priests you mean sacrificing priests , and would expound your selves of spirituall sacrifices , then as this name belongeth to all christians , so it may be applyed by an excellency to the ministers of the gospel . thirdly , although in this name you have relation to bodily sacrifices , yet even so we be called priests by way of allusion . for as deacons are not of the tribe of levi , yet the ancient fathers do commonly call them levites alluding to their office , because they come in place of levites , so the ministers of the new testament may be called sacrificers , because they succeed the sonnes of aaron , and come in place of sacrificers . fourthly , for as much as we have authority to minister , the sacraments and consequently the eucharist , which is a representation of the sacrifice of christ , therefore we may be said to offer christ in a mystery , and to sacrifice him objectively , by way of commemoration . ] in all these respects we may rightly and truely be called priests , as also because to us it belongeth , and to us alone to consecrate the bread and wine to holy uses , to offer up the prayers of the people , and to blesse them , yet in all these respects , the speech is but figurative , and consequently our priesthood and sacrifices cannot be proper . now for the liturgy , it is true that the minister is there likewise sometimes called a priest , and as true it is that sometimes also he hath the name of a minister there given him ; but the lords table though it be there often named , is never called an altar , nor the sacrament in which he represents , and commemorates the death of christ , is in that respect , so much as once called a sacrifice , muchlesse properly so termed , as will appear when we come to examine the doctors arguments for a sacrifice drawn from that book . in the mean time i must professe i cannot but wonder that the doctor should derive our priesthood from melchisedech ; i had thought the priesthood which we have , had been derived from the high priest of the new testament , who indeed is called a priest after the order of melchisedech , not because he derived it from melchisedech ( god forbid we should so conceive ) but because of the resemblances which he had to , and with melchisedech , as that he was not onely a priest but a king , a king first of righteousnesse , then of peace , without father , without mother , having neither beginning of dayes , nor end of life . thus was our saviour a priest after the order of melchisedech , as his own apostle interprets it ; so as if we will challenge to our selves a priesthood after his order , we must likewise be kings as he was , without father , without mother , without beginning of daies , or end of life , as he was , which will prove i doubt too hard a task for any man to make good . the romanists indeed assume to themselves a priesthood after the order of melchisedech ( though from melchisedech , i do not finde that they derive it ) but that any of the reformed churches ; besides our doctor hath done either of these , i do not yet finde , nor i dare say the doctor himself will ever be able to finde it . i will conclude this point touching the priesthood of our church , with the observable words of profound hooker , who was well known to be no enemy thereunto . because ( saith he ) the most eminent part both of heathenish , and jewish service did consist in sacrifice , when learned men declare what the word priest doth properly signifie according to the minde of the first imposer of the name , their ordinary scholies do well expound it to imply sacrifice ; seeing then that sacrifice is now no part of the church ministry , how should the name of priesthood be thereunto rightly applyed ? surely even as s. paul applyeth the name of flesh , unto that very substance of fishes , which hath a proportionable correspondence to flesh ; although it be in nature another thing , whereupon when philosophers will speak warily they make a difference betwixt flesh in one sort of living creatures , and that other substance in the rest , which hath but a kinde of analogy to flesh . the apostle contrariwise having matter of greater importance whereof to speak , nameth them indifferently both flesh . the fathers of the church with like security of speech , call usually the ministery of the gospel , priesthood in regard of that which the gospel hath proportionable to ancient sacrifices , namely the communion of the blessed body and bloud of christ , although it have properly now no sacrifice . as for the people , when they hear the name , it draweth no more their mindes to any cogitation of sacrifice , then the name of a senator , or of an alderman causeth them to think upon old age , or to imagine that every one so termed , must needs be ancient because yeers were respected in the first nomination of both . wherefore to passe by the name , let them use what dialect they will , whether we call it a priesthood , or a presbytership , or a ministery ; it skilleth not , although in truth the word presbyter doth seeme more fit , and in propriety of speech more agreeable then priest , with the drift of the whole gospel of j●sus christ , for what are they that imbrace the gospel , but sonnes of god ? what are churches , but his families ? seeing then we receive the adoption and state of sonnes by their ministery , whom god hath chosen out for that purpose , seeing also that when we are the sonnes of god , our continuance is still under their care which were our progenitors , what better title could there be given them , then the reverend name of presbyters , or fatherly guides ? the holy ghost throughout the body of the new testament , making so much mention of them , doth not anywhere call them priests . the prophet isaiah i grant doth , but in such sort as the ancient fathers by way of analogy . a presbyter according to the proper meaning of the new testament , is he unto whom our saviour hath committed the power of spirituall procreation . by which learned discourse of this venerable man , and as the doctor himself somewhere calls him incomparable now a blessed saint in heaven , it evidently appears that he held both a sacrifice , and a priesthood in the church , but neither of them in a proper signification , and consequently in his opinion the doctor hath gained little to his purpose from the book of ordination , and surely as little i presume will he gain from that which follows , and comes now to be examined . chap. vi . whether the book of articles , the book of homilies , or the common-prayer book afford the doctor such proofes as he pretends . two wayes there are ( saith he ) by which the church declares her self in the present businesse ; first positively in the book of articles , and that of homilies , and practically in the book of common prayers . first , in the book of articles the offering of christ once made is that perfect redemption , propitiation and satisfaction , for all the sinnes of the whole world both originall and actuall , and there is no other satisfaction for sin but that alone . this sacrifice or oblation once for ever made , and never more to be repeated , was by our saviours own appointment to be commemorated and represented to us for the better quickening of our faith , whereof if there be nothing said in the book of articles , it is because the articles r●lated chiefly to points in controversie , but in the book of homilies , &c. thus the doctor . why , but he had told us before , that the church declares her self positively in the book of articles , touching this present businesse , and now when we expected the declaration to be made good , he puts us over to the book of homilies , and yet had he gone on in that very article by him alleaged , he should there have found somewhat against popish sacrifices , which that article calls ( or rather our church by that article ) blasphemous fables , and dangerous deceits . nay the very first words vouched by the doctor out of the article , are in my judgement sufficient to cut the throat of any other sacrifice of christ , or any christian sacrifice properly so called . for if the offring of christ once made be perfect , it cannot be again reiterated , commemorated it may be , and must be reiterated , it cannot be ; now reiteration , it is which makes it a sacrifice properly so called , not a bare commemoration or representation , as hath already been shewed . and besides the doctor might have found another article touching the supper of the lord , where it is called a sacrament of our redemption by christs death , but of any sacrifice not a word , though there had been the proper place to have spoken of it , had our church conceived that any such had been properly so termed ; but on the other side , transubstantiation is there condemned as being repugnant to scriptures , overthrowing the nature of a sacrament , giving occasion to many superstitions ; yet how a sacrifice of the body and bloud of christ properly so termed , can be admitted without the admission of transubstantiation together with it , i must confesse for mine own part i am yet to seek , and shall be willing to learn from any that can farther instruct me . but the doctor reposing little confidence , it should seem in the articles , refers us to the homilies ; to them let us go , and truely , if i be not much mistaken , he will finde as little help from these , as from the articles : that which he alleageth , is taken from the first words of the homily sacrament , the words are as followeth : the great love of our saviour christ to mankinde doth not onely appear in that dear bought benefit of our redemption , and satisfaction by his death and passion ▪ but also , that he hath kindly provided that the same most mercifull work , might be had in continuall remembrance , amongst the which means is the publike celebration of the memory of his pretious death at the lords table ; our saviour having ordained and established the remembrance of his great mercy expressed in his passion in the institution of his heavenly supper . here ( saith the doctor ) is a commemoration of that blessed sacrifice which christ once offred , a publike celebration of the memory thereof , and a continuall remembrance of it by himself ordained . yea , but that which the doctor from these words ( picked here and there in the homily ) should have inferred , and concluded is a sacrifice in it self properly so called , not a memory , a remembrance , a commemoration of a sacrifice . and besides , he who attentively reads that part of the homily , will easily finde that it there speaks of the commemoration thereof , not so much by the priest , as by the people ; neither doth it so much as once name any sacrifice at all , save onely in disavowing , and disallowing it , as may be seen in the page there following , part wherof the doctor taketh for his own purpose , as namely , that the lords supper is in such sort to be done and ministred , as our lord and saviour did , and commanded it to be done , as his holy apostles used it , and the good fathers in the primitive church frequented it . so that ( saith he ) what ever hath been proved to be the purpose of institution , the practise of the holy apostles , and usage of the ancient fathers , will fall within the meaning , and intention of the church of england . doubtlesse it will , but that a sacrifice properly so called , hath been proved to be either the purpose of the institution , or the practise of the apostles , or the usage of the ancient fathers , that i utterly deny . and surely it should seem that the church of england denies it too , by the words there following within a few lines ; we must take heed ( saith the homily ) least of the memory it be made a sacrifice , least of a communion it be made a private eating , least of two parts , we have but one , least applying it to the dead , we loose the fruit that be alive ; let us rather in these matters follow the advice of cyprian in like cases , that is , cleave fast to the first beginning hold fast the lords tradition , do that in the lords commemoration , which he himself did , he himself commanded , and his apostles confirmed . whereby it should seem they held the purpose of our saviours institution , and the practise of his apostles to have been , not a sacrifice properly so termed , but onely a commemoration of his death and passion . and this to have been indeed their meaning farther appears toward the latter end of the same part of the homily , where speaking of the death of christ , and the efficacy thereof to the worthy receiver , they thus go on . herein thou needst no other mans help , no other sacrifice , or oblation , no sacrificing priest , no masse , no means established by mans invention . by which it is evident , that they held all other sacrifices , beside that of christ himself on the crosse , and all other sacrificing priests , beside christ himself to be established by mans invention , and how the doctor professing that he offers up a sacrifice properly so called , can possibly free himself from the title and office of a sacrificing priest , i must professe is beyond the compasse of my brain . all which considered , i think his safer way had been not to have touched upon the homily , specially considering that the lords table is there named above or about twenty times , but is not so much as once called an altar . but perchance he will finde some better help from the liturgy , which comes now to be examined . we will next ( saith he ) look into the agenda , the publike liturgy of this church ▪ where first we finde it granted , that christ our saviour is the very paschall lamb that was offred for us , and hath taken away the sinnes of the world , that suffering death upon the crosse for our redemption , he made there of his own oblation of himself once offred , a full , perfect and sufficient sacrifice , oblation and satisfaction , for the sinnes of the whole world ; and to the end that we should alwayes remember the exceeding great love of our master , and onely saviour jesus christ , thus dying for us , and the innumerable benefits which by his pretious bloudshedding he hath obtained to us , he hath instituted and ordained holy mysteries as pledges of his love , and continuall remembrance of his death , to our great and endlesse comfort instituting , and in his holy gospel commanding us to continue a perpetuall memory of that his pretious death , till his coming again . in which words i do not see , what it is that makes for the doctors purpose , but somewhat i see which makes against him ; as namely , the sacrifice of christ upon the crosse is full , perfect and sufficient in it self , which being so , surely there needs no more sacrifices , no more priests , no more altars , properly so called ; and for the memory or remembrance there mentioned ( if i be not much mistaken ) he will never be able thence to inferre such a sacrifice ; and surely i think the church never intended he should . in the next place he instanceth in the consecration . then followeth ( saith he ) the consecration of the creatures of bread and wine , for a remembrance of his death and passion , in the same words and phrases which christ our saviour recommended unto his apostles , and his apostles , unto the fathers of the primitive times , which now as then is to be done onely by the priest , [ then the priest standing up , shall say as followeth ] to whom it properly belongeth , and upon whom his ordination doth conferre a power of ministring the s●crament , not given to any other order in the holy ministry . had the book said , then shall the priest stand up , and offer sacrifice , it had been to the doctors purpose ; but then shall the priest stand up and say , makes little for him , unlesse he had been injoyned to say somewhat , which had implyed a sacrifice which i do not yet finde ; words indeed of consecration i finde , and those proper to the priest , but any words of sacrificing in that act , i finde not , yet had our church conceived , that to have been a sacrifice there , indeed had been the proper place to have expressed her self . that the ordination appointed by our church , conferreth upon the person ▪ so ordained , a power of ministring the sacrament not given to any order in the ministry , i shall easily grant ; but that his ordination giveth him , not any power of sacrificing ( which is the point in question ) hath already out of the form it self established by authority been clearly shewed . from the words of consecration , the doctor goes on to the prayer , after the communion , and here indeed he findes a sacrifice , but such a one as ( all things considered , he hath very little reason to triumph therein . the memory or commemoration of christs death ( saith he ) thus celebrated , is called a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving , a sacrifice representative of that one and onely expiatory sacrifice , which christ once offred for us , all the whole communicants , beseeching god to grant that by the merits and death of his sonne jesus christ , and through faith in his bloud , they and the whole church may obtain remission of their sinnes , and all other benefits of his passion ; neither stay they there ( saith he ) but forthwith offer , and present unto the lord themselves , their soules and bodies to be a reasonable , holy , and lively sacrifice unto him . and howsoever as they most humbly do acknowledge , they are unworthy through their manifold sinnes , to offer to him any sacrifice , yet they beseech him to accept , that their bounden duety and service ; in which last words , that present service which they do to almighty god , according to their bounden duties , in celebrating the perpetuall memory of christs pretious death , and the oblation of themselves , and with themselves the sacrifice of praise , and thanksgiving in due acknowledgement of the benefits , and comforts by him received , is humbly offred unto god for , and as a sacrifice , and publikely avowed for such , as from the tenour and coherence of the words , doth appear most plainly . hitherto the doctor , as if now he had spoken home and full to the point indeed ; whereas if we take a review of that which hath been said , we shall soon finde it to vanish into smoak . that prayer then af●er the communion , beginning in this manner . o lord and heavenly father we thy humble servants , entirely desire , thy fatherly goodnesse , mercifully to accept this our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving . i would demand of the doctor , first of what kind this sacrifice of thanksgiving is , and then by whom it is offred ; for mine own part i never heard that the eucharisticall sacrifice of christians , was other then spirituall , improperly termed a sacrifice ; and i presume the doctor himself will not stick to grant as much as he doth , that the people joyn with the priest in this prayer . from whence it will infallibly follow , that either the people together with the priest offer unto god a s●crifice properly so called , or that the sacrifice thus offred by them , both ●s so called improperly ; let him take which he please of the two , and then tell me what he can make of this sacrifice . now that which hath been said of this eucharisticall sacrifice , of praise and thanksgiving , is likewise to be understood of the obedientiall sacrifice ( if i may so call it ) which follows after , consisting in their offring to the lord , their selves , their souls and bodies , as a reasonable holy and lively sacrifice unto him : and in truth i cannot but wonder , that the doctor should insist upon this , considering he requires a materiall altar for his sacrifice , derives his priesthood from melchisedech , appropriates it to the apostles and their successors , makes it stand in commemoration or representation , and lastly , every where with scorn enough , excludes the people from any right thereunto , but thus we see how a weak cause is driven by all kinde of means , be they never so poor to fortifie it self : and yet , as if now he had made a full , and finall conquest , he concludes this argument drawn from the authority of our church ; put all together ( saith he ) which hath been here delivered from the book of articles , the homilies , and publike liturgy , and tell me if you ever found a more excellent concord then this , between eusebius , and the church of england , in this present businesse ; and then goes on to parallell the words of eusebius with those of our liturgy , which i confesse agree very well , but neither the one , nor the other speak home to his purpose , or mention any sacrifice properly so called , to be offred in the church of christ , as he hath been sufficiently shewed . chap. vii . of the testimony of some writers of our church alleaged by the doctor . will you be pleased ( saith he ) to look upon those worthies of the church , which are best able to expound , and unfold her meaning ; we will begin ( saith he ) with bishop andrews , and tell you what he saith , as concerning sacrifices . the eucharist ( saith bishop andrews ) ever was and is by us considered , both as a sacrament , and as a sacrifice . a sacrifice is proper and applyable , onely to divine worship . the sacrifice of christs death , did succeed to the sacrifices of the old testament , which being prefigured in those sacrifices before his coming , hath since his coming been celebrated per sacramentum memoria , by a sacrament of memory , as saint augustine calls it ; thus also in his answer to cardinall bellarmine . tollite de missa transubstantiationem vestram , nec diu nobiscum lis erit de sacrificio . the memory of a sacrifice , we acknowledge willingly , and the king grants the name of sacrifice to have been frequent with the fathers ; for altars next , if we agree ( saith he ) about the matter of the sacrifice , there will be no difference about the altar . the holy eucharist being considered as a sacrifice ( in the representation of breaking the bread , and powring forth the cup ) the same is fitly called an altar , which again is as fitly called a table , the eucharist being considered as a sacrament , which is nothing else but a distribution and application of the sacrifice to the severall receivers , so that the matter of altars make no difference in the face of our church . thus farre the doctor out of bishop andrews . for answer whereunto , if we take the passage at large , as it is quoted by that truely reverend bishop out of s. augustine , it will suffice to shew both his , and the bishops judgement herein . the words then are these . hujus sacrificii caro & sanguis ante adventum christi per victimas similitudinum promittebatur , in passione christi per ipsam veritatem reddebatur , post adventum christi per sacramentum memoriae celebratur . now had he conceived the eucharist to be a sacrifice properly so called , in all likelyhood , he would have termed it sacrificium memoriae in relation to the sacrifices as well before the death of christ , as the sacrifice it self of his death , sacramentum memoriae then is that saith the bishop , which with s. augustine we hold , and no christian i think will deny , nay more then so , we may safely with the bishop grant , that it is not onely a sacrament but a sacrifice , but whether in a proper signification that is the question , and this the doctor doth not clear out of the bishop , but rather the bishop , the contrary out of s. augustine . the next passage quoted by the doctor out of this learned bishop , is taken from his answer to bellarm●ne , which he lived to publish himself , and thus begins it , credunt nostri institutam à domino eucharistiam in sui commemorationem , etiam sacrificii sui , vel ( si ita loqui liceat ) in sacrificium commemorativum . see the modesty of this deep divine , making doubt whether he might give it the name of sacrificium commemorativum or no , which doubtlesse he would never have done , had he thought it had been a sacrifice properly so called ; neither would he so often in that page have taken up vocem sacrificii , rather then sacrificium , nihil ea de voce rex : sacrificii vocem scit patribus usurpatam : nec à voce vel sacrificii vel oblationis abborremus ; placeret loca videre quae citat nisi vocem propter quam citat videret lector nobis non displicere . surely so weary , and so wise a man would never have repeated vocem so often , had he beleeved the thing . to the words by the doctor stood upon , tollite de missa transubstantiationem nec diu nobiscum lis erit de sacrificio ; it may be replyed in the bishops own words immediately following , which may well serve as a commentary upon these going before : memoriam ibi fieri sacrificii damus non inviti , so as his meaning seems to be lis non erit de sacrificio , conditionally that by sacrificium they understand memoriam sacrificii , as we do , neither in truth do i see how the crutch of tranfubstantiation being taken away , a sacrifice properly so called , can well stand upon its own feete . from the bishops answer to the italian cardinall , the doctor leads us back again to his answer to the french cardinall , and there hath found an altar suteable to his sacrifice ; if we agree about the matter of the sacrifice , saith the bishop , there will be no difference about the altar , ] but about the former , sure i am , we agree not as yet , nor i doubt ever shall agree ( they making that the subject which we make onely the object of this sacrifice ) and consequently the difference is like still to remain about the altar . that the lords table may fitly be called an altar , the bishop indeed affirmeth , but that it may properly be so called , that he affirmeth not , nor as farre as we may conjecture by his words ever intended it : fitly , i grant it may be so called , and yet figuratively too . that christ was fitly called a lamb , we all willingly yeild , yet withall that he was not properly but figuratively so called , no man i presume will deny . the altar ( saith the bishop in the same chapter ) in the old testament , is by malachy called mensa domini ; and of the table in the new it is said habemus altare , as then the altar is by the pr●phet improperly called a table in the old , so likewise is the lords table , by the apostle improperly called an altar in the new testament . neither indeed can the bishop ( as i conceive be otherwise understood , the sacrifice which he allows , consisting ( by his own description thereof , in the same place ) in representation by the breaking of the bread and powring forth of the cup ) which may objectively , that is improperly be called a sacrifice in relation to the al-sufficient sacrifice of christ upon the cr●sse , but subjectively , that is properly , it cannot be so called . as bishop andrews wrote at king iames his motion , against car●inall bellarmine ( saith the doctor ) so isaac casaubon , writ king iames his minde to cardinall perron , and in expressing his minde affirmeth , veteres ecclesiae patres &c. that the ancient fathers did acknowledge one onely sacrifice in the christian church , which did succeed in place of all those sacrifices in the law of moses , that he conceived the said sacrifice to be nothing else , nisi commemorationem ejus quod semel in cruce christus patri suo obtulit ; that oftentimes the church of england hath professed , she will not strive about the word , which she expressely useth in her publike liturgy . ] yea but if casaubon , or the king by casaubons pen expressed himself , that he conceived the christian sacrifice , now in use to be nothing else but the commemoration of christs sacrifice offred to his father upon the crosse , surely they could not withall conceive it to be a sacrifice properly so called , and in saying that the church of england will not strive about the word , what is it but as if they had said , she will strive about the thing , as it is most aparent that she doth , as well in her doctrine as practise . nay one thing more , that learned writer hath , or rather that learned king , by the hand of that writer , which the doctor hath omitted , though he take the words both before and after , perchance because they made little to his purpose . quare beatus chrysostomus , quo frequentius nemo hujus sacrificii meminit , in nonum caput epistolae ad hebraeos , postquam {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} nominasset , continuo subjungit , sive explicationis , sive correctionis leco {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} {non-roman} which words , whether they be taken by way of explication or corrections evidently shew , that s. chrysostome held not the eucharist to be a sacrifice properly so called , and that herein both the king , and casaubon adhered to s. chrysostome the best interpreter of scripture among the greek fathers . the next testimony is taken from archbishop cranmer , who ( saith the doctor ) distinguisheth most clearly , between the sacrifice propitiatory made by christ himself onely , and the sacrifice commemorative , and gratulatory , made by the priest and people . ] this i easily beleeve , though the book it self , i have not now by me , but that the archbishop anywhere affirmeth either the commemorative or the gratulatory sacrifice to be properly so called , that i very much doubt , and surely if it be made both by the priest and people , as the doctor voucheth him , at leastwise for the latter there can be no question of his opinion therein . let us go on then to my lord of duresme , who ( saith the doctor ) doth call the eucharist a representative and commemorative sacrifice , in as plain language , ●s the doctor himself , although he doth deny it to be a proper sacrifice . ] deny it ? why he doth not onely deny it , but strongly proves it against bellarmine and other romish writers , in two entire chapters taking up no lesse then seven leaves in folio , so strongly , as i verily beleeve , i shall never see a full , and sufficient answer thereunto . the last testimony produced by the doctor , is from my lord of chichesters appeal , whom the doctor thus makes to speak unto his i●formers ; i have so good opinion of your understanding , though weak , that you will conceive the blessed sacrament of the altar , or the communion table ( which you please ) to be a sacrifice . ] and the doctor having a while infisted upon these words , in answer to his adversary , goes on out of the bishops book . walk you at random , and at rovers in your bypaths if you please , i have used the name of altar for the communion table , according to the manner of antiquity , and am like enough sometimes to use it stil ; nor will i abstain notwithstanding your oggannition to follow the steps and practice of antiquity , in using the words sacrifice and priesthood also . finally ( saith the doctor ) he brings in bishop morton , professing thus , that he beleeveth no such sacrifice of the altar as the church of rome doth , and that he fancieth no such altars as they imploy , though he professed a sacrifice and an altar . ) now for answer to this testimony , he that will be pleased but to peruse that chapter , will i presume , desire no farther satisfaction , the bishop having therein so clearly and fully unfolded himself , as if the doctor will stand to his judgement in the point , he will undoubtedly be cast . to the first allegation then , where the doctor makes a stop , the bishop thus goes on . not propitiatory , as they call it ( i will use this word . call it , lest you challenge me upon popery for using propitiatory ) for the living and the dead , not an externall , visible , true , and proper sacrifice , but onely representative , commemorative , spirituall sacrifice ; where the bishop as we see in downright and direct tearms denies the euch●ist to be a sacrifice properly so called , and for this immediatly he voucheth the testimony of doctor rainolds , and bishop morton , doctor rainolds ( saith he ) and bishop morton have granted , that though we have no proper altar , yet altar and sacrifice have a mutuall relation and dependance one upon another . and herein doth the bishop professe himself fully to accord with them . to the second allegation ; the bishop between the words vouched by the doctor , brings in these ; saint paul calleth the pagan altars ( which were indeed and truely altars ) tables , and why may not we name the lords table an altar ? whereby it appears , that he held the lords table an altar in none other sense than as the pagan altars were tables , that is both improperly . to the third allegation touching bishop morton , he thus brings him in not farre from the beginning of that chapter : but i rather choose ( saith he ) to speak in our bishop mortons words , apologizing for protestants against papists ; it may be i have taken licence in use of tearms , but no errour in doctrine can you finde , for to put off your imputation , from farther fastning , i beleeve no such sacrifice of the altar , as the church of rome doth , i fancy no such altars as they imploy , though i professe a sacrifice and an altar . ] in the same reverend bishops words , the lords table being called improperly an altar , can no more conclude a sacrifice understood properly , than when as saint paul calling titus his sonne according to the faith , which is improperly , a man may contend saint paul was his naturall father , according to the flesh . ] in which words we have both the bishops , and those excellently learned in terminis terminantibus , directly opposite to the doctors opinion , though by him alleadged in maintenance thereof . chap. viii . containing the testimonies of other reverend prelates , and great divines of our church , who have likewise opposed the proper sacrifice maintained by the doctor . vvith forraigne divines of the reformed churches i will not meddle , there being not so much as one of them , i thinke , of what partie soever , who in this point sides with the doctor , i will content my selfe with the suffrages of our owne divines , for learning and dignity the most eminent in our church , and consequently the fittest interpreters of her meaning . — doctor white lord bishop of ely , in his reply to fisher , pag. 465. the new testament acknowledgeth no proper sacrificing priests but christ jesus only , heb. 7. 23. 27 , 28. & cap. 10. 21. neither is there any word or sentence in our saviours doctrine concerning any reall sacrifice , but onely of himself upon the crosse , neither was any altar used and ordained by christ and his apostles ; and if in all reall sacrifices the matter of the oblation must be really destroyed and changed , and no physicall destruction or change is made in the body of christ , or in the elements of bread and wine by transubstantiation , then romanists have devised a reall sacrifice in the new testament , which hath no divine institution . doctor davenant , lord bishop of sarisbury , professor of divinity in the vniversity of cambridge , in his determinations , qu. 13. missa pontificia non est sacrificium propitiatorium pro vivis & mortuis . pontificii in hoc suo missatico negotio tres gravissimes errores nobis obtrudunt . esse nimirum in missa reale , externum & propriè dictum sacrificium . esse inihi sacerdotem qui actionem sacrificandi propriè dictam exercet ; esse denique potestatem huic sacerdoti pro voluntate & intentione sua applicandi tam vivis quam mortuis praedicti sacrificii efficaciam salutarem . nos è contra asserimus , primo in missa nihil posse nominari aut ostendi quod sit sacrificabile aut quod rationem & essentiam realis , externi & propriè dicti sacrificii , quamvis quae adhiberi in eadem solent preces , eleemosynae , gratiarum actiones , spiritualium sacrificiorum nomen sortiantur ; quamvis etiam ipsa representatio fracti corporis christi & fusi sanguinis figuratè sacrificium à veteribus saepenumero vocetur . secundo contendunt pontificii presbyteros suos esse secundarios quosdam novi testamenti sacerdotes , & in missa sua actionem sacrificandi propriè dictam praestare . sed nobis iesus christus est solus & aeternus , neque successorum , neque vicariorum indigus novi testamenti sacerdos . quaero enim cui bono alii sacerdotes substituerentur ipsi christo , non ut sacrificium ejus adumbrent , tanquam futurum est enim olim deo exhibitum , non hodie exhibendum , non ut significent tanquam factum , nam repraesentare illud ut factum est sacramentum celebrare non sacrificiū offerre . non denique ut agant quod actum fuit ab ipso christo seipsum offerente , nam hoc & mutile esset si fieret , & plane impossibile est ut fiat . hactenus igitur in missa pontificia , neque sacrificium propriè dictum , nequesacerdotem , neque actionem ipsam sacrificandi , vel ipsi missarum opifices ostendere potuerunt . doctor hall lord bishop of exeter in his book , intituled no peace with rome . sect. 9. what opposition is there betwixt the order of melchisedech and aaron , betwixt christ and the priests of the old law , if this office do equally passe and descend in a long pedigree of mortall successors ? or why were the legall sacrifices of the jewish synagogue so oft repeated , but because they were not perfect ? and how can or why should that which is most absolutely perfect , be reiterated ? what can either be spoken or conceived more plainly then those words of god . once offred , one sacrifice , one oblation , and yet these popish shavelings ( devout men ) take upon them to crucifie and sacrifice christ again . we will remember the holy sacrifice of christ ( as cassander well advises ) and celebrate it with a thankfull heart , we will not repeat it ; we will gladly receive our saviour offred by himself to his father , and offred to us by his father , we will not offer him to his father ; which one point , whilest we stick at ( as we needs must ) we are straight stricken with the thunderbolt of the anathema of trent ; here can be therefore no possibility of peace . doctor abbot late lord bishop of sarisbury , and publike professor of divinity , in the vniversity of oxford in his counterproof , against doctor bishops reproof of the defence of the reformed catholike . cap. 14. pag. 364. it is truely said by cyprian , that the passion of christ is the sacrifice which we offer , and because the passion of christ is not now really acted , therefore the sacrifice which we offer , is no true and reall sacrifice . now therefore the oblation of the altar , of which s. augustine speaketh hath no reference to the masse , which they hold to be a proper and reall sacrifice . but now strange it should seem , that the apostle in those words should be thought to have any intention of the sacrifice of the masse , who in the epistle to the hebrews ( if it were he ) whilest he destroyeth the jewish priesthood , for the advancing of the priesthood of christ , argueth impregnably to the disavowing of all reall sacrifice thenceforth in the church of christ . whilest he affirmeth but one priest in the new testament , insteed of many in the old , he absolutely taketh away all the ranke and succession of popish priests . doctor bilson late lord bishop of winchester in his book of the true difference between christian subjection , and unchristian rebellion , the 4 part. p. 691. if the death of christ be the sacrifice which the church offreth , it is evident that christ is not onely sacrificed at this table , but also crucified , and crufied in the self same sort and sense that he is sacrificed , but no man is so mad to defend , that christ is really put to death in these mysteries , ergo neither is he really sacrificed under the formes of bread and wine . his reasons why we do not use the word s●crifice so often as the fathers did , pag. 702. there are reasons why we do not think our selves bound , to take up the freq●ent use of their terms in that point , as we see you do , for first they be such words as christ and his apostles did forbear , and therefore our faith may stand without them . next they be dark , and obscure speeches , wholly depending on the nature and signification of sacraments . thirdly , we finde by experience before our eyes how their phrases have entangled your senses , whiles you greedily pursued the words , and omitted the rules which should have mollified and directed the letter : these causes make us the waryer , and the willinger to keep us to the words of the holy ghost , though the fathers applications , if you there withall take their expositions , do but in other terms teach that which we receive and confesse to be true . bishop jewell the iewell of bishops , in defence of his 17. article , which book is by publique authority to be kept in every church . even so s. ambrose saith christ is offred here on earth , ( not really and indeed , as master harding saith ) but in like sort and sense , as s. iohn saith , the lamb was slain from the beginning of the world that is , not substantially , or in reall manner , but in signification in a mystery , and in a figure . as christ is neither daily borne of the virgin mary , nor daily crucified , nor daily slain , nor daily riseth from the dead , nor daily suffereth , nor daily dyeth , but onely in a certain manner of speech , not verily and indeed , even so christ is daily sacrificed onely in a certain manner of speech , and in a mystery , but really , verily , and indeed , he is not sacrificed . archiepiscopus spalatensis , while he was ours , that is while he was himself , de rep. eccles. lib. 5. cap. 6. nobis satis est apud chrysostomum , eucharistiam in se continere sacrificium quoddam commemorativum , ac consequenter in ea non fieri verum sacrificium . confirmat haec omnia bellarminus ex eo quod in ecclesia antiquus sit usus & nomen altarium altare vero & sacrificium sunt correlativa . ] respondeo quale sacrificium tale altare , sacrificium impropriè , altare impropriè . esse verum sacrificium nunquam usque ad postrema cor rupta saecula invenio aut dictum , aut cogitatum , aut traditum aut practicatum in ecclesia . doctor rainolds , professor of divinity , extraordinary in the university of oxford , in his conference with hart. c. 8. divis . 4. sith the sacrifice offered in the masse , is a true and proper sacrifice ( as you define it ) and that of the fathers is not a true sacrifice , but called so improperly , it remaineth to be concluded that the fathers , neither said masse , nor were masse priests . laurence humphrey , doctor of the chair in oxford in his answer to campian de conciliis , p. 424. quale est sacrificium , talis est sacerdos , qualis sacerdos tale esse debet altaere , sive de christo propriè loquamur , sive de nobis christianis impropriè . de sacrarum literarum sententia , pag. 155. sacramentum propriè ab omnibus , metaphoricè à nonnullis patribus sacrificium nuncupatur . doctor field dean of glocester in his appendix to his third book of the church . pag. 207. christ was sacrificed on the crosse , when he was crucified and cruelly put to death of the jews ; but how he should now be really sacrificed , sacrificing implying in it a destruction of the thing sacrificed , it is very hard to conceive . doctor crakanthorp in his answer to spalat●nsis . cap. 74. sed nec omnino v●●um & propriè dictum sacrificium in missa ullum est . doctor whitaker publike professor of divinity in cambridge , in his answer to mr rainolds , cap. 4. p. 76. you cannot pull in sunder these two offices , but it you will needs be priests , and that properly according to the order of melchisedech , then seeing that order of priesthood hath a kingdome inseperably annexed to it , it must necessarily follow that you are also kings , and that properly , which were a very proper thing indeed , and greatly to be accounted of . doctor fulke , in his answer to the rhemists , on heb. 7. vers 12. neither doth any ancient father speak of a sacrifice in the form of bread and wine , although many do call the sacrament which is celebrated in bread and wine , a sacrifice unproperly , because it is a remembrance of the one onely sacrifice of christs death , and because the spirituall sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving is offered therein , not by the minister onely , but by the whole church that is partaker thereof . again the same author in hebr. 13. vers. 10. the apostle meaneth christ to be this altar , who is our priest , sacrifice , and altar , and not the table whereon the lords supper is ministred , which is called an altar , but improperly , as the sacrament is called a sacrifice . doctor willet , in his synopsis , controv. 13. quaest . 2. if there remain still in the church a read , externall sacrifice , then there must be also a reall and externall priesthood , and so a multitude of sacrificing priests , but this i● contrary to the scripture , that maketh this difference between the law and the gospel , that then there were many priests , because they were not suffered to endure by reason of death , but now christ hath an everlasting priesthood , heb. 7. 23 , 24. 50. so that he is the onely priest of the gospel , ergo , there being no more sacrificing priests , there is no such sacrifice , for it were a derogation to the everlasting priesthood of christ , to ordain other priests beside . master perkins , in his reformed catholique . 11. point of the sacrifice of the lords supper . heb. 7. 24 , 25. the holy ghost makes a difference betwixt christ the high priest of the new testament , and all leviticall priests in this , that they were many , one succeeding another , but he is the onely one , having an eternall priesthood , which cannot passe from him to another . now if this difference be good , then christ alone in his own very person , must be the priest of the new testament , and no other with or under him , otherwise in the new testament , there should be more priests in number than in the old . alexander nowell , dean of pauls , in his catechism , ordained for publique use , and so allowed in our church . m. an fuit instituta a christo coena ut deo patri hostia pro peccatis expiandis immolaretur ? a. minimè , nam christus mortem in cruce occumbens unicum illud sempiternum sacrificium semel in perpetuum pro nostra salute obtulit , nobis vero unum hoc tantum reliquum esse voluit , ut maximum utilitatis fructum , quem sempiternum illud sacrificium nobis praebet , grati ac memores percipiamus , quod quidem in caenae dominica praecipuè praestared bemus . thus have we seen that neither by the light of nature , nor by the definition of a sacrifice , nor by the institution of our saviour , nor by the practice of his apostles , nor by the suffrage of the primitive fathers , nor by the authority of our church , nor by the testimony of the most eminent writers therein , it yet appears , either that our ministers are properly called priests , or our sacrament of the eucharist properly a sacrifice , or our communion-table properly an altar , but rather the contrary that they are all improperly so called . which being so , whether the proper situation thereof should in congruity be either table-wise for the administring of a sacrament , or altar-wise for the offering of a sacrifice , i leave that to the prudent governours of our church , and better judgements than mine own to consider and determine of . finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a86378e-160 cap. 5. p. 26. cap 6. pag. 44. & 67. pag. 207. lib. 1. de missa cap. 27. ioh. 8 , 56. ●om 14. 23. 〈◊〉 . 11 6 22. qu. 85. a● . 3. heb 11. 4. lib. 1. de m●ss . cap 2. lib. ● . ca. 32. cap. 16. of the sacrament , lib. 6. ca. 1. de sac●am . eucharist . lib. 4. cap. 25. in sinc . lib. 1. de missi . cap. 14. com. in locum . de miss● sacrificio . lib. 4. cap. 34. de demonst. evingel . li● . 1. fr. mason of the consecration of bishops in the church of england . 〈◊〉 . 5. p 6. heb ● . heb. 7. lib 5 cap. 78. art. 28. part. 1 pag. 198. answ . to p●rron c. 6. re●p . ad card be●l . cap. 8. answ . to perron . cap. 7. l de civitate dei lib. 17. cap. 20. m e●ist . ad card. perron . defence of his fisth book against gardiner . cap. 29. pag. 365. pag. 424. pag. 427. pag. 204. pag. 280. pag 281. reas. 4. a treatise of the holy sacrifice of the masse, and excellencies therof. written in spanish by the r. f. ant. de molina, a carthusian monke, & translated into english by i.r. of the society of iesus. vvith order, hovv to be present at the said holy mystery, vvith deuotion & profit molina, antonio de, d. 1619? 1623 approx. 155 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 154 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2005-12 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a07609 stc 18001 estc s112780 99848024 99848024 13096 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a07609) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 13096) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1475-1640 ; 1635:09) a treatise of the holy sacrifice of the masse, and excellencies therof. written in spanish by the r. f. ant. de molina, a carthusian monke, & translated into english by i.r. of the society of iesus. vvith order, hovv to be present at the said holy mystery, vvith deuotion & profit molina, antonio de, d. 1619? floyd, john, 1572-1649, attributed name. wilson, john, ca. 1575-ca. 1645? [14], 288 p. english college press]permissu superiorum, [saint-omer : m.dc.xxiii [1623] i.r. = john floyd?--cf. stc. place of publication and printer from stc. "the epistle dedicatory" signed: i. vv. [i.e. john wilson]. running title reads: the excellencies of the sacrifice of the masse. reproduction of the original in the british library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng mass -celebration -early works to 1800. 2004-12 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2005-02 spi global keyed and coded from proquest page images 2005-04 olivia bottum sampled and proofread 2005-04 olivia bottum text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-10 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a treatise of the holy sacrifice of the masse , and excellencies therof . written in spanish by the r. f. ant. de molina , a carthusian monke , & translated into english by i. r. of the society of iesvs . vvith order , hovv to be present at the said holy mystery , vvith deuotion & profit . ihs permissu superiorum . m.dc.xxiii . to the right honovrable and most vertvovs gentlewoman , mrs . mary petre &c. the constant report of your deuotion to the most holy mystery of the masse , hath emboldened me to present vnto your seruice , this infant of a spanish descent , clad in english attyre , to attend vpō you in your chappell at such publicke or priuate solemnities . not doubting but that he shall receaue such entertainment at your deuout hands , as his educatiō deserueth ; & especially at this tyme , when so happy a vnion , & firme friendship is novv most happily concluded , between two so mighty kingdomes , by so fortunate and hopefull a mariage . wherto , if i should adde my commendacions of his worth , i might therby rather do him wronge then honour ; knowing his tallents , and other good parts to be such , as may beseeme his seruice ; though perhaps not so familiarly acquainted with the fashions of your english court , as is required : yet because i know your disposition to be noble , and your minde greatly addicted to piety & deuotion , and also that the present cannot be but acceptable ; i do in the best manner i can , commend him to your honourable custody & protection , & my selfe to your vertuous prayers , resting your assured seruāt in christ iesus . i. vv. the table of the contents of the ensuing booke . chap. i. that in the catholike church there is a true and proper sacrifice , which is that of the holy masse . pag. 1. chap. ii. that the name of masse was giuē vnto this sacrifice by the apostles , euer vsed in the church : and the signification therof . pag. 18 chap. iii. that the masse is an embassage vnto the most holy trinity , in the behalfe of humane kind , about the most important affaires in the world. pag. 32 chap. iiii. that the masse is a liuely representation of the mysteries of our sauiour , which are renewed and mystically performed againe therin . pag. 49 chap. v. that the masse is a true and proper sacrifice , the same , and of the same value , as that which christ offered on the crosse. p. 76 chap. vi. that the sacrifice of the masse , hath all the titles and reasons for which sacrifices are offered vnto god. pag. 100 chap. vii . that the masse is a most perfect holocauste . pag. 113 chap. viii . that the masse is a most perfect sacrifice of thanks-giuing . pag. 123 chap. ix . that the masse is a most perfect sacrifice of propitiation for sinnes . pag. 129 chap. x. that the masse is a most efficacious sacrifice to obtayne whatsoeuer we demand . pag. 139 chap. xi . that the masse is the thing most venerable which is in the church . pag. 152 chap. xii . that the masse , is a thing of greatest honour vnto god. p. 167 chap. xiii . that the masse , is a present most gratefull vnto our sauiours humanity , & vnto the most blessed virgin. pag. 187 chap. xiiii . the externall reuerence and worship , to be vsed in the holy masse . pag. 206 chap. xv. of the reuerence , due vnto churches , & holy places . p. 233 chap. xvi . of being present , and hearing the holy office of masse , which hath alwayes byn in most high esteeme , & publickely celebrated euery where , both among the syrians , the grecians , and the latines , euer since the tyme of the apostles . pag. 259 approbatio . hvnc pium tractatum in anglicanum sermonem ex hispanico versum , magnam legentibus consolationē afferre posse , iudico . io. floydus soc. iesu theol. a treatise of the holy sacrifice of the masse , and the excellencyes thereof . that in the catholicke church , where is a true & proper sacrifice , which is that of the holy masse . chap. i. in the first place we must lay for foundation , that in the christian church , there is some speciall and proper sacrifice to be offered vnto god ; which is a truth , so certayne and so cleere , that no doubt can be made therof , but by men impertinent and without iudgment , wherof the heretickes of our tyme may seeme destitute . for amōgst diuers absurdities vnto which through rashnes and pertinacity they are fallen , this is one : that there is no true and proper sacrifice in the christian church . wherin they stand not only against the venerable antiquity of the fathers and doctours of the church , against the definitions of the sacred coūcels , against the manifest testimonies of the scriptures , which can be vnderstood in no other sense ; but also against the very light of reason . for it is a thing necessary and essentiall to euery well ordered common-wealth to be furnished with sacrifices wherby to honour god , as euen heathē philosophers acknowledge , plato , aristotle , xenophon , & others . neyther was there euer in the world any cōmon-wealth , howsoeuer rude and barbarous , that had not some kind of sacrifice for the worship of god , or of that thinge which they were perswaded to bee god. how then can any man with reason imagine , that christ our lord , hath left his church which is the most perfect of all cōmō-wealths , imperfect & defectuous in a matter so much importing and essentiall ? specially the doctrine of s. thomas receaued by the consent of deuines , being most true , that men are bound to offer sacrifice vnto god euē by the law of nature , why shoud our sauiour leaue no meanes to his faithfull how to comply with this law ? seing also according to true theology , grace destroyes not nature , but addes perfection thereunto . and seeing these three thinges law , priest-hood , sacrifice , are so ioyned and combined togeather , that change or innouatiō being made in ony one of them , the same must needs redoūd to both the other , as the apostle proueth effectually , writing vnto the hebrews , that the priest-hood being translated , the translatiō of the law must also needes be consequent therevpon ; it is cleare that christ our sauiour as he changed the old law into another , new and better , the auncient priest-hood into another new and more perfect : so likewyse in the same measure and proportion , he ordayned another sacrifice to succeed the elder , by so much more excellent then those were , by how much the new law surpasseth the old . it being also a thing so certayne that in the law of the ghospell there be priests , that euen heretikes cannot deny it , ( though they vnderstand the same amisse , & peruert the meaning therof : ) certayne also it is there must be a sacrifice which these priests are to offer , otherwise what neede or vse should there be of priests ? the lyke argumēt is drawn from the aultar , which to be found in the christian church is a thing most certaine , being affirmed by s. paul , by the third canon of the apostles , and vniformely by all the saints : it is most vndoubted that there is a sacrifice to be offered on this aultar , because for this end is the aultar built , aultar and sacrifice being correlatiues . wherefore the errour of vnfortunate heretickes , is in this particular so strange , and so contrary to the light of reason , that it could haue entred but into minds , afore through malice obstinate , and through infidelity blinded , who from errours run into errour still greater and more foule . but heerin they are ministers of the diuell , who by their mediation endeauoureth to doe the holy church all the mischiefe he is able ; and the cursed caytiffe knowes the greatest mischiefe he can doe , is to driue away or hinder the most holy sacrifice of the altar , as de facto he hath driuen away and exiled the same , out of townes and countries wherin preuayle these errours and pestilentiall doctrines . wherin also they declare themselues percursors of the most wicked antichrist , cōcerning whome the saints of god commonly affirme , that the first and principall thing he shall attempt to the detrimēt of the church , is with most extreme rigour to inhibite the exercise of the most holy sacrifice of the aultar . thus many fathers and graue authours vnderstand that which daniel sayth in his prophecy , that in the thousand two hundred and ninety dayes , that is , in the three yeares and halfe , that antichrists raigne shal continew , the continuall sacrifice shall be taken away frō the church ; & he shall cause his image to be placed in the temple , that himself alone may be adored as god : the text sayth : he shall take away the continuall sacrifice , and destroy the place of sanctification : & strength against the cōtinuall sacrifice is giuen him , in regard of sinnes . this drift which the diuel shall then prosecute by the meanes of antichrist he now endeauours to settle by the help of these hereticks , who by procuring to take frō the catholicke church the most holy sacrifice , bringe therwith innumerable and inestimable mischiefes : and would haue the christian people , which hath receaued more of god , and greater benefits , to be more vngratefull vnto their god , then any other nation in the world . this the holy and venerable abbot petrus cluniacensis , liuing in the same age with s. bernard , well noted , and signified in these wordes : they that attempt to take from the church of christ the sacrifice , by the diuells suggestions , doe their best , that that nation which hath byn graced of god with more singular benefits and fauours , should be lesse thankefull to him , and yield him lesse worship and honour . but i will leaue these heretickes , as men without discretion and common sense to thēselues , my purpose not being to dispute this controuersie with them , but only to giue a warning vnto the faythfull of their errours & impertinēcies . al catholike christians are to belieue , as a most sure and infallible principle , that in the catholicke church there is a proper , true , and most excellent sacrifice , which is offered vnto the eternall father by the handes of priests , as being minister of christ iesus , the high priest and soueraigne bishop . for this hath euer byn the beliefe of the holy church since the tyme of the apostles , this the doctrine perpetually deliuered by the holy fathers , this the fayth determined & established in the sacred councels , and last of all in the holy councell of trent , in these words : whosoeuer shal say , that in the masse is not offered a true and proper sacrifice vnto god , or that the sacrifice is no other then the giuing of christ to be eaten , let him be accursed . the holy masse then is the only , and most holy sacrifice of the new testamēt , instituted by christ our lord , not when he did offer himselfe on the crosse , ( though then he offered a sacrifice , but that was a bloudy sacrifice , consumed with payne and wounds , & the conuulsions of death , in which manner only , he would offer it that tyme ) but in his last supper when he consecrated his pretious body & bloud vnder the formes and accidents of bread and wine . for then he not only gaue it vnto his disciples , as a sacramentall food , for the sustenance of their soules , but also offered the same vnto his eternal father as an vnbloudy sacrifice , & made them priests , with faculty to offer in the like manner , granted vnto them & vnto their successors vnto the worldes end , saying : do this in remembrance of me , that is , the same thing that i doe , you likewise doe in my name & memory . wherfore two doctrines as most firme and catholicke truth are settled by the premisses ; the one , that in the christiā church there is a true and proper sacrifice , the other that this sacrifice is offered only in the masse , of the excellencies whereof we now are to treate . that the masse was giuen vnto this sacrifice by the apostles , euer vsed in the church : and the signification thereof . chap. ii. heretickes not only deny , and would take from the church the most holy sacrifice of the masse , but also cannot endure the very word & name of masse : and soe they haue declared to affirme with sacrilegious mouth , that the masse is the inuention of the pope and his followers . the most impious martin luther captayne of these wicked sectaries , hath written a booke with this title , de abroganda missa . the title is lyke the booke , and the booke lyke the authour , and the whole lyke the matter hādled therin , wherin he doth acknowledge that by conferēce had with the diuell appearing to him , he was perswaded to abrogate the best thing , the most sacred and venerable that is in the church . and though neyther my drift , nor the ayme of this treatise be to dispute with heretickes , which thinge graue writers of this age haue fitly performed : yet for the confirmation of catholickes , as also for confusion of hereticks who sticke not to vtter whatsoeuer they can imagine to be disgracefull to the church , without care whether they speake true or false , i thinke it reason briefly to set downe the truth of this matter . it is therfore to be known , that not only the sacrifice of the masse was instituted by our sauiour in his last supper , but also the name of masse was giuen vnto it , by the apostles themselues , & frō that tyme hath euer been vsed by the holy church . the first that sayd masse after our sauiours ascension , is thought to haue byn s. iames the yoūger , termed brother of our lord. for though s. peter were superiour and head of all , as being the soueraigne bishop , yet he would yield that honour vnto this glorious s. iames , because he was bishop of hierusalem , which was the first church in the world : & it is thought , this church to haue byn the sacred cenacle where christ kept his last supper , and where afterward the holy ghost came downe vpon the disciples . in this masse did the holy apostles and disciples communicate , and the most sacred virgin , then first receaued in the most holy sacrament , her glorious and immortall sonne , whome before she had receaued and apparelled with flesh in her immaculate wombe . this blessed apostle did ordayne a certayne forme of seruice or saying masse , and gaue it the title of masse , as baronius a most learned and exact hystorian affirmes and proues . of this liturgy or masse , composed by s. iames , mention is made in the sixt generall synod , in 32. canon thereof , and by s. proclus bishop of cōstantinople . the same title of masse is vsed by s. cyrill bishop also of hierusalem , who receaued and amplified the office or liturgy left by his predecessour the apostle s. iames. s. clement pope and martyr disciple of s. peter , in one of his epistles commandes that clergy-men and priests doe nothing but with the bishops leaue ; in particular , let them not say masse without his consent : and agayne , it is not lawfull to sacrifice or celebrate masse , but in the places which their proper bishop shall appoint . abdias bishop of babilon ordayned by the apostles , ( who doth affirme of himselfe , to haue seene our lord iesus christ in flesh ) in his history of the apostles , sayth of s. matthew that he was martyred by the aultar , hauing celebrated the mysteries of our lord , and sayd the masse of the church . s. alexander pope and martyr , the sixt after s. peter , sayth , that with the solemnities of the masse , the passiō of our lord is to be mingled , so to celebrate his passion , s. whose body and blood is consecrated . telesphorus also pope and martyr , in his epistle vnto the faythfull ordaynes that in the masse , the angelicall hymne be sayd , and that three masses be solemnized in the night of the natiuity of our lord. all this was appointed in the primitiue church within the first hūdred yeares , & afterward the holy fathers and doctors of the church , as s. cyprian , ambrose , gregory , leo , and many sacred councels haue vsed the sayd word . this supposed , let vs now declare the signification of this name deriued by successiue tradition from the apostles , which may giue light towards the vnderstanding of the excellencyes of the masse : concerning which , laying a side some significations of lesse credit , i will only prosecute two that are most followed by graue and learned authors . the first makes the word missa to be latin , deriued of the word mitto , which signifies to send , because in the holy sacrifice of masse the eternall father sends vs his only begotten sonne that we may offer him in sacrifice . as in the beginning he sent him to become man , & to offer him for men on the crosse , so now he sends him , that vnder the sacramētall formes , he may offer himself an vnbloudy sacrifice : & also the holy church retournes him , and sends him vnto his eternall father offering him in sacrifice vnto him , as s. thomas signifyes saying , that the sacrifice is tearmed missa , because the people by the priest , the priest by the angel sends prayers vnto god. the second explication makes the word missa to be deriued of the hebrew word missach , which signifies , a voluntary oblation , as appeares by the 16. chapter of deuteronomy v. 10. where our translation hauing spontaneous oblation ; the hebrew word corresponding therunto is missach . this explication , or aetymology is also of great credit approued by graue authors , amongst whom cardinall baronius sayth , that he doth not doubt but the blessed apostles tooke this name of the hebrew , and the latin church receauing it of them hath still cōserued the same . and seing the apostles and their disciples euen before masse was sayd in latin , vsed the word missa , as hath byn proued , it is very probable , that missa is an hebrew word signifying a voluntary offering made vnto god , in gratitude for his benefits , and specially for that of the freeing his people frō the seruitude of aegypt . for this signification doth very properly agree to our most holy sacrifice of the masse , in which is offered vnto the eternall father , his only-begotten sonne , who voluntarily , and of self-accord offered himself , as esay testifieth , he was offered because he would : and our sauiour to his enemies that were solicitous to lay plots how to bereaue him of life : i giue my soule , and take the same againe , no man is able to take it from me , but i of my self giue it . for i haue power to giue it , and power to take it againe . on mens behalfe likewise the oblation is voluntary , because with free and liberall hart they offer vnto god that most holy sacrifice , in thankes giuing for all the benefits receaued from his bountifull hande , and singularly for the benefit of mans redēption , which this sacrifice doth represent : eyther of these explications or etymologies , is probable , and of authority , and from each of them , doctrines and cōsideratiōs may be drawne , of great importance to make the excellency of the sacrifice of the masse vnderstood , as we shall now declare . that the masse is an embassage vnto the most holy trinity , in the behalfe of humane kind , about the most important affaires in the world. chap. iii. the masse contaynes in it so many , so hygh , so diuine , so soueraigne mysteries , that one definition is not sufficient to declare the same , nor to make manifest the notion therof . wherfore to explicate what the masse is , we shall vse the way vsed in declaring thinges that are immense , and imbrace within thēselues a kind of infinity , which are declared by many & different descriptions ; because many put togeather may discouer what one only by it selfe were not able to do . let this thē be the first descriptiō gathered frō the first etymology of the word missa , to wit , that the masse is an embassadge sent by mankind vnto the most holy trinity , that is , vnto the true and liuing god. by mediation of the priest , that in the name of all , he treate the affaires of most weight and moment that euer were or can be treated of in the world , as now we shall declare first the masse to be an embassadge sent vnto the most b. trinity is cleere , because to god only sacrifice is to be offered , and not to any creature , no not vnto the most holy virgin mary , the most excellent of all creatures . so the priest whē he beginnes to offer sayth , suscipe sācta trinitas hanc oblationem , accept o holy trinity this oblation : which in the canō he repeats againe , to thee they offer their vows and prayers , the true eternal liuing god. that this embassage to be sēt by mākind , or by the whole catholicke church , the preist himselfe signifies , saying in the canon , this oblation of our seruice and of thy whole family . it is tearmed the offering or sacrifice of our seruice , that is , of vs priests and ministers of the aultar , who are peculiarly your seruāts dedicated vnto your diuine worship and seruice , and we offer this sacrifice in acknowledgment of the seruice and subiection we owe you . and it is not only our offering , that as consecrated ministers offer it , but of your whole family , that is , of the whole catholicke church , and all your faithfull who by our handes and ministery offer , & in whose name we make this oblation vnto you . the same the priest repeates agayne straight vpon consecration saying , wherfore being mindfull , we thy seruants and thy holy people . we priests that are peculiarly thy seruants and ministers , and thy christiā people all ioyning togeather do offer this holy sacrifice . this also the sacred councell of trent declares , defining all masses though priuate and not sayd in publicke , are & ought to be estemeed common , because the priest , as publicke minister offers them not for himself only , but generally for all the faythfull that belong vnto the mysticall body of christ. in summe , is it the most certayne and vniuersall doctrine of the holy fathers and deuines , that the masse is sayd in name of the whole catholicke church , and of the whole christian people ; not only the faythfull that liue yet in the world , but also the deceased that are detayned in purgatory , because they haue their proper part of fruit in the masse , being in so great necessity therof ; all which the company of the faithfull both liuing and departed send the priest as embassadour to deale their affaires with god. yea which is a thing to be pondered , the priest goeth this embassadge in name not only of the faithfull that are in the militant church , but besides of the sayntes that now rest in the triumphant , because also to them reacheth part of the fruite of the masse . for though they haue no need to satisfye for their sins , from which they are already perfectly cleansed , nor to demaund fauours for themselues , being in the blisfull possessiō of whatsoeuer they can desire : yet the masse auayles them vnto accidētall glory , and helpes them to giue thankes vnto god for the benefits he hath bestowed and still bestowes vpon them ; which thing is to them occasion of very speciall contēt , because they still acknowledge themselues charged towardes god with an infinite debt of gratitude , & that they can neuer fully and perfectly discharge themselues therof . this is that , vvhich the church signifyes in the seruice of the masse , saying that she offers the sacrifice , to the glory of the most holy virgin mary , and the blessed apostles , that the same may auayle vnto the honour of them , and all saints . so that by the masse honour and accidentall glory comes to all the saints , and a speciall ioy which they conceaue in regard of the glory that is therin giuen vnto god , and of the thankes so effectually presented vnto him . the affaires in like manner which the priest treates in this embassadge , are of highest importance , as any eyther be , or can be in the world . for the busines treated is the acknowledgment of subiection & vassallage , which all creatures owe to their creatour , and of the maiesty & dominiō which the same lord hath ouer all : & in acknowledgmēt heerof to pay him the great tribute , and present him with a gift of inestimable pryce : to giue him thākes for benefits that from him they receaue , to obtayne pardon of their offences committed against them , to request great graces and fauours and reliefe of all necessities , and finally to craue ayde and assistance to attayne vnto glory & blessednes euerlasting : which thinges without any contradction or question , are the greatest that are possible . hence we may gather & ought much to consider , the great authority of a priest being at the aultar , how great a personage he beares , being as it were the sollicitour general of al human kind , and ( as s. crysostome sayth ) like a common father of the whole world ; and so it is his duty to haue care of all , as god hath whose vicegerent he is : or as the same father saith in another place , as a mediatour betwixt god and humane nature , bringing from thence benefit vnto vs , & conueying from hence our prayers thither . s. hierome affirmes , that for this respect the priest is tearmed , the angell of our lord , because he is the messenger or embassadour , that carryeth mens negotiations vnto god , & bringes backe againe answers from god vnto men . s. laurence iustinian confirmes the same , auerring , that the priest in the celebration of the masse , hath the office of mediatour , and therfore ought to be intercessour for all sinners . which office of embassadour s. paul attributes to himself and other preists saying ; pro christo legatione fūgimur , we are the legats or embassadours in the name & place of christ. for christ is the principall embassadour , chosen to be the intercessour and mediatour of all mankind , to obtayne them pardon of all their offences , & all other benefits they haue need of , which office priests now exercise in his name . and the fathers note , that for this reason that the priest of the old testament who was a figure of the priesthood of the new , in his sacerdotall garment did carry pictured the whole world , as the holy ghost doth clearly signify in the book of wisedome . because as s. hierome , and others note , by the colour , matter and fashion of the priestly garment were signifyed the fower elements , of which this inferiour world doth consist , as also the celestiall globes , the starres and planets , euen vnto the caelum empireū , which is the court and hall where the blessed assist . by the leafe of gold , which he wore on his forhead , wherin was ingrauē the ineffable name of god , was represented the lord himself and creatour of all , who as monarche , standes and rules ouer the whole hierarchy of creatures . all this doth declare the maiesty of a priest , adorned in his sacerdotall robes , when he celebrates the most holy mysteries as the messenger or sollicitour generall of all mankind : which considerations are deduced from the first signification of the word masse , which signifyes a message , or a thing sent . that the masse is a liuely representation of the mysteries of our sauiour , which are renewed and mystically performed againe therin . chap. iiii. let this be another definition of the masse . the masse is a liuely and perfect representatiō of the mysteries of christ iesus our lord his incarnation , natiuity , & most holy life , his passion , death , glorious resurrection and admirable ascension into heauen . al which is done with so much truth , life , propriety and perfection , that christ iesus himselfe really is there present , and by himself , acteth his owne person and part , performing by himself the most diuine and sacred mysteries , a thing worthy of all veneration and reuerence , and of most high & attent consideration . that this may be better vnderstood , we must call to minde a point of most certaine christian theology , to wit , that christ our lord , is the supreme and principall priest , who by himself really , properly , and efficiently worketh the effect of all sacraments . thus though the priest say i baptize thee , yet christ is the person , that as principall & efficient cause , washeth the soule , cleansing it from the stayne of sinnes : and though the priest in the sacramēt of pennāce say i absolue thee , yet christ is he that absolueth & releaseth men , freeing them from the giues of sinne , by the mediation and ministery of the priest , & of that sacramētall action . this is yet more properly & singularly true in the most sacred mystery of the eucharist . christ is he that worketh that wonderfull transubstantiation , and conuersion of bread into his body , and of wine into his bloud , and the priest is no more but the instrument & minister that pronounceth the wordes , in the place & name of christ himself . and so when the priest saying in the canon , he tooke bread into his sacred & venerable handes , himself taketh the bread into his own sinfull handes : and though he say , this is my body , & this is my bloud , yet the conuersion is not made , into the body and bloud of the priest , but into the body and bloud of our lord. wherfore the holy fathers teach expresly , that he by himself worketh these mysteries and offers that sacrifice , yet by the handes & ministery of the priest , as s. chrysostome affirmes . these be not workes of human power : he that did them in that supper , the same now also doth them : we haue the office of ministers , but he that works , sanctifies , changeth , is christ himself : which thing is also defined by the councell of trent . and for this reason is christ in the psalmes tearmed priest for euer , according to the order of melchisedech . for he should not be tearmed perpetuall priest according to the order of melchisedech , if he offered the sacrifice but only once ; but he is perpetual priest , because he still offers the sacrifice by the ministery of priests , and neuer ceaseth to offer , and shall not cease to offer vnto the worlds end . yea to speake more properly , he only is the sole & principall priest , for though we be tearmed , and are verily priests , yet we are so only as his instruments and deputies , not his successors in priesthood but his substitutes , who offer in his name sacrifice , yet the principall offerent is only himself . hence we may vnderstand that difficile passage of s. paul to the hebrews where he sayth ; that in the old law , it was need there should be many priests , because they were mortall men , and there was a necessity that one should succeed another , that so priest-hood might be continued : but in the new law , we haue an eternall preist which liues and continues for euer , and so there is no necessity there should be more then one , as in very truth there is no more , but only one that as principall cause , and in his owne name consecrateth the mysteries , and offers the diuine sacrifice . and according to this the difference is , that in the old law , the children succeeded in the priest-hood , vnto their fathers , not as their deputies or ministers , but as their successors in the sacerdotall office , exercising the same with the self-same authority as their predecessours . but in the euangelicall , christ only is the prinlicall priest , who still actually offers sacrifice where & when he will haue the same offered . other priests though they haue the name & office of preists , yet they be not successours of christ , nor do offer in their owne name , nor by that authority as he did vse , but as his instruments and ministers . for this reason the councell of trent affirmes , in the prealledged place , that though the priest be naught and a sinner , this can not destroy nor diminish the value and efficacy of the sacrifice , for this dependes of , and is answerable vnto the worthynes of the principall offerent , and not of the instrument , as is made cleere by this example . if a prince giue a great almes and send it by the handes of his seruant ; though the seruant be naught and a sinner , and giue it with an ill will , yet the almes therby looseth nothing of his goodnes and merit , because this depēds of the will and vertue of him that is the principall giuer therof , though he vse anothers hand . in this sort we , how wicked soeuer we be , cannot hinder or impayre the vertue of the sacramēts , because we are no more thē ministers and instruments , celebrating in the person of christ iesus our lord. hence it followes , that it is a great honour and priuiledge of the sacred mysteries of the new testamēt , that such a priest & bishop doth cōsecrate & performe them . this s. paul pondered when he sayd : it was decent , that we should haue such a priest , holy , innocent , vnspotted , seuered from sinners , and higher then the heauens : for the law appoints priests subiect to infirmity , but the word of the father appoints the sonne for euer perfect . oh let all creatures blesse our god for euer , that would honour and grace vs , by giuing vs for our priest and bishop , not any person lesse then his only begotten sonne , and making vs his ministers in working so soueraigne sacraments . but it is to be noted , that christ our lord is sayd to be the sole high-priest and principall offerent of the holy mysteries , not only for the reason declared already , because all oother priests offer and consecrate them in his name , by his authority , and as his ministers : for though this cause be good and sufficient in case there were no other , yet the more principall , excellent , and admirable cause is , because christ himselfe truly and really is present , at as many times , and in as many mysteries , as the most sacred mysteries are consecrated , and he concurres thereunto as principall and efficient cause , to worke and bring them to effect , by meanes of the priest who is his instrumēt & vicegerēt . hence also proceedeth that the representatiō of the mysteries of the life & death of our sauiour made in the masse , is so liuely , proper , and naturall , that many father 's not cōtēt so say that the masse is a representatiō of the mysteries of our sauiour , as hath been sayd ; but exaggerate the thing further , affirming that the sayd mysteries are celebrated and wrought a new . blessed s. gregory in one of his homilies sayth , that christ our lord dyed once in mortall flesh , but now being raysed from the dead , and that he cannot retourne agayne to dy , nor to suffer in fashiō as then he did , he will haue his passion and his death renewed and repeated in the mystery of the masse , in which he suffers and vndergoes againe his passion in mysticall manner , for our profit and perfection . in which sense s. cyprian also sticketh not to say , the passion of our lord is the sacrifice we offer . s. martiall one of the seauenty-two disciples , & s. peters companion , sayth that what the iewes in hatred of christ to rid him and his name out of the world did massacre vpō the crosse , the same , vnto our owne saluation , do we performe vpon the sanctified aultar , this being the meanes of giuing life and chasing away of death , commanded by our lord himself saying , doe this in remembrance of me . in lyke sort , if we cast a right accompt , the whole life of our lord christ iesus frō the instant of his incarnation , vntill he last breathed on the crosse , was no other thing , but as it were the saying of a masse . in the bowells of the most blessed virgin , as in a celestiall sanctuary and diuine sacristy , he vested himself with humane flesh , the pontificall and sanctified ornament , in which he was to offer his sacrifice : & from thence girded which fortitude , he came forth full of ioy , as a giant the runne the race of redemption· the whole time he liued in this life , was a continuall preparation of the sacrifice he was to offer , in so much as he made not a steppe which was not guided to this end , as himself signified saying , i am to be bathed , and how am i straitened vntill be performed , to wit , the bath of his pretious bloud wherwith he was bathed , shedding the same when he offered sacrifice on the crosse. the seauenteen howers that his passion endured , to wit , from his prayer in the garden when falling into mortall agonyes he was couered with sweat of bloud , vntill he gaue vp the ghost on the crosse , all this tyme he spent in offering vp the sacrifice . the three houres he liued fastened with nayles to the crosse , consuming away through most cruell payne , & much more through the fire of his burning loue towardes man. these houres he spent in the consumation of that diuine holocaust , and in the concluding of that sacred masse , vntill hauing taken the ablution of gall and vinager he came to say ite missa est , whē he pronunced the words , it is consummated , & bowing down his head gaue vp his spirit . these things so great and magnificent , so diuine and soueraigne , are represented liuely and properly , or to speake with more force and expression , these thinges we celebrate , we repeate , we performe in mysticall manner , in the most sacred mystery of the aultar : and this is properly to say masse . moreouer the former definition of the masse , by all the mysteries of the life and death of our sauiour , may be made particuler , and determinat by application therof to one only mystery in this sort . to say masse is to celebrat really the supper our lord made with his disciples , in the night of his passion , and to sit with him at table , and receaue from his hand his sacred body & the cupp of his precious bloud ; & this not by representation , not by figure , but truly , really , properly , as if he were sitting with his apostles . for the company of the apostles cannot be wanting where is personally the very master and lord of the apostles consecrating his body and bloud , and giuing the same to his apostles with that very loue & affection as he then gauē it : and so s. chrysostome had reason to say : this is the same table , the same banquet : the lord that there gaue his body & bloud to his apostles , the very same now giues it to his faithfull : he that did consecrate then , consecrates now , the same meate is giuen to be eaten , the same cuppe is giuen to be drunken of . and so we must consider , that speach of the canon , which we vse when we take the chalice to consecrate it , in like manner , when supper was ended , taking also this excellent chalice , which signifies that the chalice we now drunk , is the same that christ consecrated and gaue to his apostles , not the same chalice of syluer , for that these are different , & this , be it the same or not the same , makes not much to the purpose , but chalice is takē for the drinke contayned therein , as we commonly say , that a pot of water is drunke vpp not the pot it selfe , but the water therof . and this speech is vsed because wine cannot be takē into our handes but in the cup , and so it could not be sayd , that he tooke the wine into his handes in the manner as he is sayd to haue taken the bread ; and for this reason we say he tooke the chalice . and because that which is contayned in our chalice , when we take it into our handes , is a thing of the same kind , as that was contayned in the chalice our sauiour tooke into his , to wit wine , made of grapes of the wine , and that which is giuen afterward to drinke , is the selfe same not only in kind , but also the same in number , to wit , the true bloud of iesus christ : hēce it is that with reason & truth it is sayd that our sauiour tooke into his hāds the self-same chalice , we now vse , and as he did consecrate it then , soe doth he consecrate it now , and giue it saying , this chalice is my bloud which is offered in remissiō of all sinnes wherfore seing our lord that keepes the feast is the same , seing the meate that is taken is the same , seing the chalice of drinke is the same , finally seing the intention & drift of supping is the same , it is cleere that the supper & banquet is the same . and so our lord supping with his disciples sayd vnto them , do this in remembrance of me : he sayd not , represent this , nor doe another thing like vnto this , which may signify this , but doe this very same that i now doe , in remembrance of me . let him be for euer praysed by the angels in heauen , that left vs such a memoriall vpon earth . that the masse is a true and proper sacrifice , the same , and of the same value , as that which christ offered on the crosse. chap. v. another definition of the masse is gathered from the second etymology or signification of the word , which is , as hath byn sayd , a voluntary oblation made vnto god. the masse is a true sacrifice offered vnto god the most perfect , the most excellent , and the most acceptable vnto god that was euer offered , or can be offered vnto him . this is the proper definition , and that which doth most essentially declare , what the masse is ; all other definitions that haue been , & may be brought , being made complete and perfect by the oblation vnto god of that most diuine sacrifices , for the true purposes & ends thereof . and this is the most proper office of the priest , & for this , peculiarly and singularly is giuen the order and power of priesthood , and in his soule is imprinted a character or spirituall marke , wherby he is designed to offer vnto god sacrifice in the masse . for declaration whereof we are to remember , that mankind being lost by the fall of their first father , god out of the bowels of his inestimable mercy resolued to repayre the losse , by making men able to offer vnto god a sacrifice of such value , as might euen in rigour of iustice require pardon of their sinns , reconciliation with god , the bestowing of grace and fauour , as much as they should neede ; that so they might seeme to haue deserued their pardō , as they were lost by their owne fault . this was an inuention of infinite wisedome ; but in all mankind , yea within the cōpasse of all created things , there was no possibility to offer such a sacrifice . for , sinne against god concluding within it selfe demerit and malice , in manner infinite , it was requisite , that the sacrifice for the redēption of sinne , should be of infinit worth and value , which was not to be found in the whole vniuerse of creatures , much lesse within the boundes of only mankind , who were all by sinne enemyes of god. to ouercome these many difficulties and impossibilities , gods infinite wisedome and goodnes , inclining him from the beginning to loue men , ( loue being the master of strange deuises ) soūd out a wonderfull way and stratageme , so strange that the like was neuer seene in the world , & euen the very seraphims were put into admiratiō therof . for in the supreme court of the most blessed trinity , it is resolued , that the word of god and his only begotten sonne should become man , that being made partaker of the nature of men , their losses & their restitution might concerne him as their kinsman , and brother of them all . hence flowed an obligation in him to be the priest & sollicitour generall , of all humā kind & their surety , taking vpō him their debts , & their discharge by offering a propitiatory sacrifice vnto god. this sacrifice , being offered by a man of the same nature as are the rest , was a true and proper sacrifice , & might be of merit and satisfaction , specially being offered by the party indebted & engaged , or by his agēt & surety . and on the otherside , the person offering the sacrifice , being the true god , ( for this neuer ceased nor could cease to be ) the sacrifice came to be of infinite value and merit , to reconcile men vnto god , and to satisfy for their sinnes , and to obtayne whatsoeuer their manifold necessityes might require . and as the priest was of so supreme dignity , the true and naturall sonne of god , & the cause of offering sacrifice so mayne , and of such high importance , it was reason also , that the victime to be sacrificed , should also corresponde and haue proportion heereunto . this proportion was not found in any creature existing , nor in any that could be made creatures , being inferiour & without any comparison or proportiō vnto the dignity of christ the priest. and so it was conuenient that this priest should offer no other oblation or victime , besides his owne human flesh , taken of man , which as being vnited personally vnto the eternall word , without any cōparison , exceedes all creatures , & being true nature of man , mortall & passible as others are , was very fit to be offered in sacrifice , as s. augustine obserueth in these wordes . what priest more iust and holy then the sonne of god ? what could be more conueniently offered for men , & by men , thē flesh ? & what thing more fit , and apt to be sacrificed or immolated then mortall flesh ? what thing more cleane could be giuen for the cleansing of sinne , then the flesh of god borne of the virginall wombe ? and what gift could be more gratefully eyther offered or receaued , then the flesh of our sacrifice , made the body of our priest. this was the counsell & designe of the diuine wisedome , so much lōging , and so entirely wishing the deliuery of mankind . and the son of god straight accepted of this office and priesthood , & tooke to his charge the redemption of men , and to offer himself in sacrifice for them . and from that instant he offered vnto his eternall father all that which in due subsequent tyme he was to performe or suffer for men : which oblation was so pleasing in the sight of the eternall father , that euē thē straight he pardoned the sinnes of men , and receaued them into his friendshipp , bestowing on them great benefits and fauours , all in trust , and in the vertue of that sacrifice which was to be offered for them : a sacrifice already offered and accepted in the aforeseing knowledge and goodnes of god. and though it be a most certayne truth , that all the fauours god shewed vnto men were shewed thē in trust , and confidence of that sacrifice that was in the end to be offered for them , yet his diuine maiesty was pleased to require of men for the receauing of these graces , that thēselues should still be offering pledges and pawnes , that at the time appointed the full and sufficient price of their ramsome should be payed . this was the cause of the sacrificing of bruite beasts , and other thinges vnto god , which were figures and representations of this most diuine sacrifice , and a kind of protestatiō , that all these fauours they receaued vpon trust & confidence thereof . hence came it to passe that iust & holy men by the instinct of god , euen frō the beginning of the world , still offered him sacrifices , as did the innocēt abel of the best & fattest of his flocke , whose sacrifice god approued , shewing his approbation thereof by a visible signe , sēding frō heauen fire that consumed the same , as s. hierome writeth . afterward the iust noe , the great continuing storme of the vniuersall floud being blowne ouer , built an aultar & offered thereon a sacrifice of the cleane beasts that had been preserued in the arke . the sacred text sayth , that god was pleased with the sweet odour of the sacrifice , & that thereupon he promised by oath , neuer more to destroy the world by water , and that in testimony therof he would place his raynebow vpon the cloudes , for the comfort of men , and their assurance that god was still mindfull of his promise . after this agayne , noe his sonne the great priest melchisedech offered the mysterious sacrifice of bread and wine , as also the great patriarch abraham , noe his nephew in the eight degree of descent from him , is read to haue made aultars , & offered sacrifices in diuers places . so likewise did isaac , iacob , the iust & patient iob , & other saynts . in the law of moyses giuen him imediatly of god , the greatest part thereof contaynes the ceremonies and manners of offering sacrifices , which without question were acceptable vnto god , not in respect of what they were in themselues , but as they were figures , and representations of that true and most excellent sacrifice , that was to be offered by his only begotten sonne . for this reason the law so often repeates , that her sacrifices were a most sweet odour vnto god , certainly not for their owne naturall odour which rather was stronge & noysome , as proceeding frō the bloud and entralls of brute beasts , but because they figured and represēted the sacrifice of his only begottē son , of whome s. paul sayth , that he loued vs , and gaue himselfe for vs an oblation vnto god , and a sacrifice of sweet odour . whē the time of grace was come , which s. paul fitly tearmes the perfection of the law , and christ now had offered that most diuine sacrifice of the crosse , and thereon built , and established his church , it was not decēt that this most perfect religious common-wealth should want proper sacrifices to giue honour and worship vnto god. nor was it cōuenient or sutable with the dignity of the new testament to offer the aunciēt sacrifices , seing these were but figures of what now was put in execution : and truth being come , the figure was to cease . therefore christ iesus our lord the day before he offered this bloudy sacrifice vpon the aultar of the crosse , in his last supper with his disciples , doing the office of the true priest , according to the order of melchisedech , ( as the councell of trent noteth , ) ordained , that perpetually in his church should be offered the same sacrifice he was to offer on the crosse ; notwithstanding he would not haue this perpetuall sacrifice bloudy , nor with those fits and accidents of death , but vnbloudy vnder the formes , and accidents of bread and wine , yet in such māner that in substance and in essence it should be the very same . and to the end that the defects and vnworthynes of priests might not preiudice in any kind , or diminish the value and dignity of a sacrifice so high and diuine , he would himselfs still remayne with the office and stile of eternall priest , really , and in truth sacrificing , by himselfe , as principal priest , other priests being but his instruments , performing the exteriour ministery : and this is that we do , in the masse , offer vnto the eternall father , as ministers of christ , the same sacrifice his sonne offered on the crosse. and in saying , we offer the same sacrifices , we say a world of magnificēces , dignities & excellēcies . for being the same , it must needs haue the same vertue , the same value , the same sufficiency , the same merit , as it then had , & other innumerable honours worthy of much consideration . now that the masse is the same sacrifice really & essentially , is a truth most certaine seing the same victime is offered , the same priest is the principall offerent , the same god vnto whome it is offered , and the same reason of offering , as the councell of trent defineth , only the manner of offering being different , that of the crosse being bloudy , and with the extremities of death , this vnbloudy couered with the externalls of bread & wine , without woundes or sores , or accidents of mortality . to this purpose pertaine the wordes of s. ambrose , saying , one and the same is our sacrifice with that christ offered . for he is our high-priest who offered the cleansing victime for vs ; the same we offer now that was offered then . do this ( sayth he ) in remēbrance , not another sacrifice , as did the priests in the old law , but the same we still offer . and s chrysostome , the sacred oblation what priest soeuer offers , it is still the same with that christ gaue his disciples : neyther hath this any thing lesse then that had . for men do not sanctify this victime , but christ himself : who consecrated that , doth in lyke manner sanctify this : which are wordes of great comfort , and worthy of the noting . and for this reason s. paul affirmes so many tymes in his epistle to the hebrews , that we haue not in the church , and that we haue no other sacrifice , besides that which christ offered on the crosse. and it is the truth , that that sacrifice was most sufficient , and that we neyther need nor haue any other , but the same sacrifice we daily repeate and renew on the sacred aultar , for a continuall memoriall and thankesgiuing as our lord himself ordayned , to the end that the vertue of that most sufficient sacrifice , may be in particular , with efficacity , applyed to euery one , as the councell of trēt faith , that the holesome vertue thereof be imployed , & applyed for the remission of such sinnes as we dayly commit . that the sacrifice of the masse , hath all the titles and reasons for which sacrifices are offered vnto god. chap. vi. that we may better vnderstand the dignity and excellency of the masse , we must note , that besides the reason alleadged , why men did aunciently offer sacrifices vnto god , to wit , to figure and represent the true & most perfect sacrifice that was to be offered for the redemption of mankind , in which reasō the masse without comparison , surpasseth them all , as being not a meere representation , but to the very workes of our redemption mystically performed , as hath been sayd . besides this reason ( i say ) there were many other , binding men euen by the law of nature to offer sacrifices vnto god , as they were taught by the very instinct of the light of naturall reasō , as also by the speciall inspiratiō & releuation made to some iust and holy men . which reasons gathered out of s. thomas , and other graue authours though in themselues they be many , yet they may be reduced vnto fower . the first , to acknowledge and professe the maiesty , soueraignty , and excellency of god , and the supreme absolute dominion he hath ouer all , as being the creatour and vniuersall lord of all , and to pay him the tribute of honour and veneration , due vnto him for these respects : this is the highest and most perfect reason of offering sacrifices vnto god , which only regardes him , according to that he is in himself , and for this respect is due to him all honour and veneration , that creatures can possibly yield . and for the satisfying of this reason was instituted peculiarly that kind of sacrifice tearmed holocauste , in which some brute beast was offered , burnt & consumed with fyre , wholly & entirely , nothing remayning therof , to signify that whatsoeuer a creature is , all is due vnto god , and all to be offered for his honour and glory . and if god would vse his vttermost rigour , & not regard men with a louing and gratious eye , he might most iustly chalēg that they should offer him in sacrifice their very liues , or the liues of their deerest children , or other things ( if they haue any ) more deare and pretious vnto thē . for this cause he commanded in his law , that to him should be offered all the first begotten of man or beast , in acknowledgment that he is lord of all , and the best and most beloued thing is due vnto him , often repeating this reason thereof , mea enim sunt omnia : for all is mine . thus he charged his friend abraham to offer in holocaust his only sonne , whome he loued as his owne soule , yet being satisfied with the promptitude of his obedience , and readines to offer euen his owne life , if had god made request thereof , he procured him a ramme , to be offered in liew of his sonne . and with his people , he was contented with that complement and ceremony of offering their first begotten sonnes , with protestation that they were gods and due vnto him , and his maiesty tooke possession of them and receaued them as his owne , but straight restored them backe againe to their parents , neuer permitting that in effect any humā person should be sacrificed vnto him . only god gaue his consent , that in his only begotten sonne , this rigour should be vsed of being offered in sacrifice , because he alone did suffice for all , as being the first begotten of all creatures . on the other side , the diuell , as being proud and ambitious of diuine worshipp , and a cruel enemy of mankind , required of people , deceaued and brought vnder his tyranny , that they should adore him by sacrificing & massacring their sonnes and daughters vnto him , as also they did in effect sacrifice a great multitude of innocent infants vnto their idols , according to that of the prophet dauid they did immolate their sonnes and daughters vnto the diuells & spilt innocent bloud . the second reason or title , that men should offer sacrifice vnto god , is , to giue them thanks for the fauours he doth them , and to acknowledge that all good thinges come from him , and in gratitude and in place of tribute , to giue him some part of these goods , as salomon , what from thy hand we receaued , we haue offered vnto thee , and this kind of sacrifice is tearmed pacificall and sacrifice of prayse , and of thankesgiuing . in this sacrifice though the beast were wholly offered vnto god , yet all was not burnt , but only the fatt and entralls , & the remaynder was for the foode of the priest , and of the officers , to signify hereby , that the goods which god giues vs , he will haue vs offer them vp to him , referring all to his glory , with a good hart & inward content ; and that the rest be for vs , and for our profit . the third reason is satissatisfactiō for sinnes , which is called propitiatory sacrifice , or sacrifice for sinne , or for offences . this kind of sacrifices were very ordinary in the old law , where are set downe peculiar sacrifices for euery sinne , which are ordayned , and recorded at large in the booke of leuiticus . the fourth title and reason of offering sacrifice is , to request , and obtayne of god the fauours and benefits we stande in need off . for euē god is of this disposition , that with him gifts and offerings are of great importance and force to purchase vs the graces , for which we are suppliāts vnto him . and this sacrifice is tearmed impetratory , or victime of saluation . now if all this that hath been sayd , be well considered , and put by meditation togeather , it will most euidently appeare , that this most holy sacrifice we offer in the new testament , hath incomparable dignityes , & vnspeakable eminencies aboue all the sacrifices that aunciētly were offered . for in this only sacrifice , with great aduantage and excellencies , concurre the former fower reasons and tytles , & innumerable other that may be called to minde , as the holy church iudgeth and signifyeth in one of her collects or oraisons saying : o lord that by the perfection of one sacrifice hast fully established & set downe vnto vs all the differences of the legall victimes . and so we shall more largely & perfectly declare how fully the fower afore-mentioned reasons agree vnto our sacrifices . that the masse is a most perfect holocauste . chap. vii . as cōcerning the first title , of acknowledging the maiesty and greatnes of god , what holocauste , to professe and signifye the same , could there be offered more full and complete thē this , wherein is sacrificed the first begotten of all creatures , whose life alone , is of more esteeme without comparison then all the creatures ioyned together . and so by this sacrifice we protest , and acknowledge the maiesty , magnificence , and dignity of our god to be so great , that no lesse is due vnto him then a sacrifice of infinit worthynes & value . the prophet isaias , did much exaggerate and magnify the maiesty of god , in saying , that all the nations of the world are before him as a dropp of morning dew , and as the smalest grayne of weight , put into the ballance , to counterpoise the cōtrary scale ; yea that before him they are as if they were not . and that so great is his worthynes , as that to offer a sacrifice answerable vnto his greatnes , all the flocks of sheep and heardes of cattle that feed on the mount libanus would not be sufficient to make such an holocaust , nor all the trees that grow thereon able to make fyre great inough to consume the same , libanus non sufficiet ad succendendum , & animalia eius non sufficient ad holocaustum . the prophet sayd much , yet without falshood he might haue sayd more , that the whole world and what soeuer is comprehended therein , would not be sufficient for this end ; though all men should offer their liues in sacrifice , though with mē the angels of heauē should enter into the sacrifice , though all creatures ioyning togeather should consume themselues in one holocaust ; yet this would not be condigne , yea this would be much short of gods greatnes and maiesty . wherefore we may herein euer admire the wysedome , goodnes , and power of christ iesus shining in this mystery , that could deuise , was able to effect , willing to giue , and indeed hath giuen vnto his church such a sacrifice , as hath not only a conformity or proportion , but also equality with gods greatnes and maiesty : so that with truth we may affirme that we offer a sacrifice as good , and as excellent as euen infinite excellēcy deserues . and this is also another dignity , this sacrifice hath , to magnify god , because therein we make a most high protestation of his infinit power , wisedome & goodnes , the three more principall diuine attributes vnto which the rest are reduced . gods power and supreme lordship ouer all creatures we professe , in this sacrifice , by belieuing that all , without contradiction , obey his worde and will , and that he may at his pleasure dispose of all both in heauen and in earth ; seing at the only signification of his will , the substance of bread , is changed into the body of christ , and the substance of wine into his precious bloud , the accidents which naturally are still in some substance , and haue an essentiall relation therunto , remayne by themselues single , without any substance wherein they inhere , as if themselues were substance . the body lykewise of our sauiour , exalted vnto the empyreall heauen , aboue all creatures , garnished roūd about with immense glory puts it self , ( by the power of gods word commanded ) vnder the accidents of bread to be eaten of the faythfull . the diuine wisedome lykewise wōderfully shewed it selfe , in inuenting a most full and conuenient way , how to cōpasse things most difficile , & in the iudgment both of men and angels impossible . this inuention is , that the whole ofspring of mē being in sinne , and enemies of god , a mā of this stock , should be foūd to offer vnto god a sacrifice so gratefull and acceptable , that euen in rigour of iustice the same deserues : the redemption of man togeather yieldes vnto god the whole worship and reuerence that is due to him with great aduantage and excesse , repayring the losses incurred by sinne , so many reasons of profit & conueniency concurring therin , that they can neyther be declared , nor imagined . now it seemes that the goodnes of god cannot present vnto men greater demonstrations of it selfe . for the nature of goodnes being to communicate it self , who can imagine , a more full communication , or a more straite vnion then this is , where god made man vnder the formes of bread and wine , giues himselfe to be eaten of all men , and of euery one in particular shutting vp himselfe within their breasts , vnited vnto them as perfectly and inwardly , as meate is conioyned with the person that feedes theron . so that we may now well conclude , that the masse is a most perfect holocaust , and that therein in highest māner we acknowledge our creatours most soueraigne infinite maiesty , with the rest of his diuine excellencyes , and yield him the honour and worship that is his due . that the masse is a most perfect sacrifice of thankes-giuing . chap. viii . as touching the second reason of sacrificing , to wit , thereby to giue thankes vnto god for his benefits done vs , it is apparant with what eminency thankes are giuen vnto god by this our most holy sacrifice , aboue all other that haue been at any tyme offered in the world . for in other sacrifices , howsoeuer great and precious the oblatiōs were , yet mē did not offer all that they had , but only a small portion , reseruing the farre greater part for themselues : as iacob sayd in his vow vnto god , i will offer thee the tithes , or the tēth part of all the things that thou shalt giue me . what great thing is it , that a man , vnto him that giues all , returne backe agayne the tenth part therof by way of gratitude , retayning nyne partes for himselfe ? wherfore this kind of gratitude , is more esteemed by the inward affection of thākesgiuing , in tokē wherof the sacrifice is offered , thē by the value and sufficiency of the gift . but in our most diuine sacrifice we offer a thing , of farre greater price , thē is all that which he hath giuen vs , because we offer him his very son , whome also he gaue vs that we might offer him , and by this oblation repay whatsoeuer we owe him , seing he doth no lesse discharge the debt that payeth it by that which is freely giuen him , then he who payeth it out of his owne stocke . and if respect be had vnto the inward affection , it is certayne , that the gratitude of all creatures put togeather is lesse then the benefits they receaued of god ; to supply which defect we offer the affection & the gratitude of our lord iesus christ. for he knowing our insufficiēcy in this behalfe , himselfe gaue thankes vnto his father for all the benefits done vs , & particularly for the gracious gift of this most soueragne sacrament , when he tooke the bread into his handes to consecrate the same , he did as the euangelists write , lift vp his eyes vnto heauen & gaue thankes vnto his father , hereby preuenting and by anticipation , making recompense for the want and default of our gratitude . and as often as we celebrate , we repeate this action of our sauiour , & when we take the bread into our handes we say of him , he tooke the bread , lifting vp his eyes vnto heauen , and giuing thankes , as if we sayd vnto the eternall father , that if we be not sufficient to giue him worthy thankes for this soueragne mystery , that he remēber his sonne our lord , who rendred vnto him most perfect thākes , in the name of vs all ; & that he receaue these thankes of his sonne , to supply the defect of ours , who for this reason offer him this sacrifice , because it contaynes all that is due to him : and for this cause it is called eucharist , or sacrifice of the eucharist , that is to say , of thankesgiuing . that the masse is a most perfect sacrifice of propitiation for sinne . chap. ix . as concerning the third title of satisfaction for sinne , the difference is perspicuous betwixt the auncient sacrifices and this , because they were not sufficient to satisfy for one only sinne , as the apostle saint paul many tymes affirmeth , specially in his epistle to the hebrews , where he sayth , that it is impossible that by the bloud of bulls or goates sinne should be abolished . and in the same chapter he writes to the same effect , euery priest is occupied in offering againe & againe the same victimes or sacrifices ; but this priest ( christ iesus ) hauing offered one sacrifice sits for euer at the right-hād of god. for this respect the same apostle calleth them many tymes weake sacrifices , impotent and defectuous , infirma & egena elementa . and not only this is so , but also all creatures put togeather are not able of themselues to satisfy for one only sinne : whereas our great high-priest christ iesus , by one only sacrifice satisfyed for all the sinnes of the world , and of a thousand worldes were there so many : & this satisfaction is not only sufficient , but also abundant , not only equiualent and equall , but also obtaying pardon euen in rigour of iustice as is the most common true doctrine of the theologers : for ( as s. paul sayth ) vna oblatione consummauit in aeternum sanctificatos , by one oblation he consummated for euer the sanctification of men ; which most sufficient , & superabundant satisfaction , he applyes efficaciously vnto vs , as often as we do offer the most holy sacrifice of the masse . this is the reason that the most holy councel of trent defines , that this sacrifice is truly propitiatory : because god by this oblatiō appeased , by granting the grace and gift of pennance , pardons mayne and heynous crimes . hence it is , that a most graue & deuout authour affirmes , that a man hauing committed many & most grieuous sinnes , by one only masse , which he should say , with the conuenient disposition , if there be no default on his part , might be as perfectly freed frō them all , by vertue of the sacrifice , as he was before he sinned : so that he might strayght enter into heauen without any impediment . and herein he vtters a most certayne truth , because the vertue and efficacy of the sacrifice , as for within it selfe , hath no limitation nor any measure , but that which the meannesse of mans disposition giues vnto it . wherfore the holy coūcell of trent sayth absolutly , and without restraint , that by the vertue of this diuine sacrifice , all our sinnes are pardoned how heynous soeuer . in the forme of consecration christ lykewise sayth , and we repeate the same dayly in his name , that this is the bloud of the new testamēt , which was shed and offered for the remission & pardon of sins : and pope iulius , as gratian relates , sayth : omne crimen atque peccatum oblatis deo sacrificijs deletur , that euery sinne and crime is cancelled by the oblation of sacrifice vnto god. s. gregory in his dialogues writes in this manner : this victime , doth singularly saue the soule frō eternall destruction , which mystically represents vnto vs the death of gods only begotten sonne . and in another place the same holy doctour reportes of a man that was captiue in the handes of his enemies lodē with fetters & yrons , whose wife hearing no newes of him , and therefore belieuing him to be departed this life , caused euery weeke vpon a certayne day masse to be sayd for him . and as often as the sacrifice of the masse was offered on that day , the fetters and yrons fell off from him , and he remayned free for them , to his great admiration , he not knowing the cause of so great a wonder , vntill retourning into his countrey , and relating this strange thing , he found by conferring togeather the dayes and houres , that it was the very time that masse was sayd for him . hence the holy doctour inferres , what greate force and efficacy is in this most diuine sacrifice , to release men from the spirituall fetters of sin , wherin was so great strength to vndoe and breake the chaynes of the body . the auncient formes of masse deliuer the same truth : that of s. iames , speaking with god , thus prayeth , that the sinnes we haue committed may be abolished ; that thou , o lord , be propitious and mercifull vnto thy people ; that by the oblation of this gratious & diuine sacrifice , we may be held worthy of eternall life . the masse of s. basil sayth : let this sacrifice be acceptable for our sinnes , & for the ignorances of the people . s. chrysostomes : make vs worthy to offer the gifts , and this speciall sacrifice for our sinnes , & grant that we may find fauour in thy sight . and now in the canon of the masse we say , that we offer this sacrifice , for the redemption of our soules . that the masse is a most efficacious sacrifice to obtayne whatsoeuer we demand . chap. x. as cōcerning the fourth title , and reason of offering sacrifices , to the end to obtayne of god , that which we demaund , it is cleere , that our sacrifice doth farre excell all other . for if the offering vnto god of a lambe , or kidd , or some other bruite creature , was so efficacious a meanes , to obtayne the thing desired , and therefore such kind of sacrifices were ordinarily offered ; how much greater efficacy is there in the offering vnto him , his very son with the whole treasure of his merits ? without doubt this is greater beyond cōparisō . if god made such promises vnto abrahā , cōfirmed by oath to do fauours vnto him , and to all his posterity , only in regard of the will he had to sacrifice his sonne ; what benefits , and graces will he bestow on thē that offer and sacrifice vnto him , really & truly , his only begottē sonne ? what fauours will he not grant ? what can one aske with such a present that he will not giue ? with reason we may heere vse the wordes of the apostle saint paul : he that spared not his only sonne , but gaue him for vs all , how can it be , that he hath not giuen vs all togeather with him ? or how can he deny vs any thing that we can aske ? if the lawes both human and diuine , so strictly prohibite vnto iudges , and princes ( whose office is to gouerne the affayres of the commō-wealth , & to pronounce sentence in cases of difference ) to receaue gifts or presents , because receauing them they remaine euen in nature obliged to requite them , and to gratify such as gaue them , so that it seemes impossible that they should not fauour them ; why may we not presume that god is in a certaine māner bound to do vs fauours , hauing receaued of vs a gift so great and precious as we offer him in the masse ? and if the prouerbe , that gifts breake rocks , be true , as experiēce shewes it is , there being no hart so hard , which presents do not make relent & yield vnto the giuer ; how can we thinke that god hauing an hart , not of stone , nor hard , but most sweet louing , mercifull , & inclined to do vs fauours , will forbeare to do vs any thing we shall request , hauing taken of vs such a rich gift as we present him in our sacrifice ? certayne it is , that the holy sacrifice of the masse is a most efficacious meanes to obtayne of god , all that we desire , so that the church did euer vse to say masses , to aske of god health , peace prosperity , & other benefits generall , and particular , as well corporall as spirituall , neither need i stay lōger in prouing so cleere and receaued a truth . wherefore i will only here set downe a most prudent and pious consideratiō of a graue and learned diuine of our age , most true , & conformable both vnto theology & holy scripture . this is , that christ our lord now in heauen though he be not in the state to merit or satisfy for vs a new , yet he is in a state where he may pray and make intercession for mē , as in verity he doth , according as the apostle doth witnesse , that he doth pleade for vs , and at the iudgment seate of god is our sollicitour , and as s. iohn sayth , we haue an aduocate vnto god the father , christ iesus the iust. hereupon this learned authour sayth , that it is a thing very credible & likely , that christ our lord , as often as the sacrifice of the masse is offered , doth intercede and pray for them that offer it , and also for thē for whome it is offered . a consideration most true : for seing it is most certayne , that christ our lord doth actually and in truth exercise the office of our priest and aduocate , seing also that the proper office of priest is to pray & intercede for the people , we may rest in this persuasion without any doubt , that our lord being in all his actiōs most perfect , will completly performe this office , not only by offering the sacrifice particularly for them , for whome it is offered , whereof there is no questiō , but also by praying & interceding actually for thē , that they may obtaine what they request and desire , if the same agree with their saluation , and gods glory . and it may seeme that the apostle s. paul , in his epistle to the hebrews , doth signify , or insinuate this truth , where treating of the eternall priest-hood of christ , he sayth , that he can saue for euer them , that by him haue accesse vnto god , who liues euer to intercede and pleade for vs : and thereupon he straight addeth , it was conuenient that we should haue such an high-priest . where he seemes to conioyne praying and interceding for vs , with the office of priesthood , signifying that to discharge that duty perfectly it is necessary that he pray , and intercede for them that are vnder his charge , and more particularly for them for whome he offers his sacrifice : which thing is no wayes inconuenient in christ , but very agreeing with reason , as the venerable father dionysius carthusianus notes in his declaration of this speech of the apostle , qui etiam interpellat pro nobis . which also is the doctrine of that great saint laurēce patriarch , who wrytes thus in a certayne sermon . when christ is sacrificed vpon the aultar , our sayd redeemer cryeth for vs vnto his father , shewing the sacred marks of his woundes , to saue men from eternall punishments by his intercession . this being so ( as i do firmely belieue it is ) what a soueraigne and excellent thing , and full of reuerence and veneration is the holy sacrifice of the masse ? if we do highly esteeme that some saints in heauen pray particularly & actually for vs , or some person liuing vpon earth whome we know to be vertuous & in singular fauour with god ; how much more ought we to prize the only son of god his praying and intercession for vs vnto his eternall father ? out of all which it is sufficiently proued , that this one sacrifice of the new testament contaynes in it , most excellētly , & with great excesse all the perfection , sanctity , and efficacy of all the sacrifices of the old , as the same afornamed saint doth elegātly & briefly set down in these words . it is cleere that no sacrifice can be offered more acceptable vnto god , eyther to giue him honour , or to render him thankes , or to obtayne pardon , or to deserue glory , then the most holy sacrifice of the body , and bloud of christ. the masse is the thing most venerable , that is in the church . chap. xi . ovt of that which hath byn sayd we may cōclude , that the masse is a thing of greater reuerence , grauity and sanctity then any other in the catholicke church , there being nothing eyther equall or comparable to it . so that neyther the benediction of the agnus dei , which the pope doth with so great solemnity , nor the consecration of a bishop , which with so many graue , and solemne ceremonyes is performed , all which of necessity three bishops are to present , besides him that is consecrated ; nor the dedicatiō of a church , nor any other thing , done with the greatest and solemnest rites , none of these thinges are comparable for reuerence , grauity & sanctity with the masse . this is the reason that the saints adorne this sacrifice with so many choice & exquisite epiphets and tearmes , calling it a mystery , dreadfull , terrible , diuine , deificall , sacro-saynt , full of diuinity , honorable , supreme , singular , and other such names , that euery where occurre in the writings of the holy fathers . out of whome omitting many very excellent thinges which they say of the dignity of the masse , i will only set down two or three short sentēces , which to me seeme most notable . s. chrysostome writes , that being present at masse , we must not imagine we are vpon earth , but that we are carryed vp into heauen , & that we are seated amongst the quires of angels , and seraphims . his wordes are these . when thou doest behold our lord sacrificed , the priest performing his office therin , and the people bedewed , and as it were grained and purpled with his pretious bloud , do not thinke that thou art amongst men , nor that thou dost abide vpon earth , but rather that thou art transtated into heauen : and so casting away all carnall imaginations and earthly thoughts , with a pure minde contemplate the things of that celestiall court. oh miracle ! oh benignity of god! who sitting aloft with the father , at the same tyme is taken into the handes of men , and giues himselfe vnto such as will receaue him . to the same purpose s. gregory wryteth in this sort . what christian can doubt but that in the tyme of consecration , the heauens open at the voyce of the priest ; and at this very mysterie of christ iesus , the quires of angels assist ; earth is conioyned with heauen ; this wale of teares with the pallace of blisse ; and that visible and inuisible things meete togeather in one . a wonderfull , dreadfull , & venerable thing , that at the voyce of a priest the heauens should open , that the glorious court should come down vnto earth , that with the faythfull of the militant church , though poore and sinfull , the triumphant church should ioyne , the king of glory and his courtiers descēding , so that of heauen and earth is made one company and church . what thinge of greater veneration or more strange , then that when the priest is at the aultar , many millions of angells kneele with greate reuerence about the same , adoring the most holy sacrifice , & the handes of the priest that holds it ; acknowledging his dignity in this regard to be greater then theirs , seeing to none of them such power and authority was euer giuē ; praysing our lord , giuing him the thankes , which wee through our grosnes do not render vnto him ; and supplying other defects which we in this duty commit . oh holy angels , how often am i ashamed , & do i blush to consider that you are present , seeing you shall be at the day of iudgment witnesses of our vngratitude & rudenes , that god hauing placed vs in so high a state of honour , we do neyther know it , nor esteeme it , nor exercise it with the decency and reuerence that is due . in fine , that quires of angells assist at the time that masse is sayd , is a most setled and receaued doctrine of the saynts , namely of s. ambrose in his bookes written of the dignity of priest-hood . and s. chrysost. deposeth to haue heard the same of venerable and holy men , to whome god granted the fauour to see this , euen with corporall eyes . s. cyrill in the life of s. euthimius relates of him , that at the tyme when he sayd masse , he saw angels assisting about the aultar , some ministring vnto the priest , some prostrate adoring the sacrament , and all shewing great reuerēce . and the apostle s. paul may seeme to insinuate this thing making a comparison and differēce betweene the mysteries of the old testament , and these of the new , and betweene the maiesty wherwith god descended to giue the law on the mount sina , & that maiesty wherwith now he comes downe vpon the holy aultar in an inuisible manner , he sayth thus . you are come not vnto a mountayne , that is felt with the handes , nor vnto a fire which is seene with the eyes , nor vnto stormes and mystes , tempests & the sound of trumpets , but you are come to the mount sion , and the citty of the liuing god , and the heauenly ierusalem , and vnto the company of many thousand angels , and vnto the mediatour of the new testament iesus , and the sprinkling of his bloud , speaking in better manner then that of abel . and without doubt if god should opē our eyes , as he did vnto the seruant of elizeus , we might there behold celestiall armyes , and we should learne the veneration and reuerence wherwith they assist vnto their king and lord , & perceaue how much they are offēded at our irreuerence and rudenes . and to conclude this point , omitting many other sayings of the saints , concerning the veneration and reuerence due to the holy sacrifice of the masse , i will only relate the words of the most deuout , learned and elegant father saint laurence patriarch of venice , who wrytes in this manner . there is not any oblation greater , none more profitable , none more amiable , none more gracious in the sight of the diuine maiesty , then the holy sacrifice of the masse , which restores honour vnto god , company vnto angels , heauen vnto banished men , which causeth the worship of religion , the right of iustice , the rule of sanctity , the obedience of the law , giues fayth vnto nations , ioy vnto the world , comfort vnto belieuers , peace vnto people , light vnto the minde , hope vnto them that trauayle , the sight of god vnto them that runne out their race . for by the celebration of these diuine mysteries is renewed the memory of the tormēts of our sauiour , the contumelies he endured , the scourges he receaued , the drafts of vinager and gall , the woundes of the nayles and lance . christ iesus his assumpted humanity is offered vnto the eternall father , that he may acknowledge whome he begot , and whome he sent into this world , and by his mediation grant pardon vnto sinners , his hande vnto the lapsed , life vnto the iustified . we may well belieue that at the tyme of this sacrifice the heauen is opened , the angels behold with admiration , the saints singe with ioy , the iust exult , the captiues are visited , the fettered are released , hell mourneth , and the holy church our mother reioyceth in spirit . hence is gathered with what veneration the priest ought to assist , to whome the office & authority is giuen , to consecrate this sacrifice , and to intercede and pray for the whole world , who therefore ought to be a louer of gods honour , religious towardes himself , humble of hart , and full of compassion towards the sinnes of his neighbours . wordes worthy of the great spirit of this saynt , and sufficient to comfort and inflame him that readeth them , and to make him conceaue great respect and reuerence towardes the most holy mystery of the masse . that the masse , is a thing of greatest honour vnto god. chap. xii . svch is the excellency of the masse , that the greatest worshipp of religion and diuine honour is contayned therein , and the most gratefull vnto god , & that giues him most content of all things that are done , or can be don in the world . which is auerred by the same most holy patriarch in these wordes . verily by no sacrifice is god more praysed and honored then by this immaculate victime of the aultar , which , to the end that complete worship & perfect prayse might be giuen vnto god , christ did institute in his church , wherein the mysteries and passages of his holy passion are mystically renewed , so that nothing can be more acceptable vnto god. the truth of this saying is perspicuous by that which we haue shewed before , that in the masse is offered vnto the eternall father the sacrifice of his only begotten sonne , with the whole treasure of his merits , which without question is a thing of more valew and dignity then were a sacrifice consisting of all creatures put togeather , and by this only sacrifice more honour and worship is giuē vnto god , then if all creatures were offered vnto him at once , and a greater protestation of the eminency and soueraignty of the diuine nature , seeing hereby we acknowledge him worthy of a sacrifice , of infinit perfection , valew , and dignity . and not only this diuine sacrifice is more gratefull & acceptable , then any other , but also , to speake with more propriety , nothing is , nor hath euer byn pleasing vnto him but in vertue of this sacrifice , which is signifyed by the speach of the eternall father in the baptisme and transfiguration of his sonne , this is my beloued sonne , in whome i am well pleased , as if he had sayd , he only pleaseth me for himselfe , and all other please me for his sake , and for his merits , and for as much as they be like vnto him , and not in other sort , as the apostle declareth in his epistle to the ephesians saying : he made vs gracious in his beloued sonne , al the grace we haue of god , stowes as frō the fountayne from that most abundant & copious grace wherwith his most beloued sonne is gratious in his sight . to this effect , the holy euangelist s. iohn hauing sayd , that christ our lord is full of grace and truth , as the only begotten sonne of the father , addeth out of hand , saying , out of his fulnes haue we all receaued grace for grace . from this plenitude , and height of grace which makes the sōne gracious vnto the father , is communicated vnto vs all the grace we haue , without want of any . yea it is a generally receaued truth , that al the grace which hath byn giuen , or shall hereafter be giuen , eyther vnto men , or angels , proceedeth from the grace of christ ; and that no creature hath euer beene , or shall euer be gratious vnto god , but in him & through him . and answerably herevnto , it is very cleere and certayn , that nothing can be so gratefull and acceptable vnto him , as this sacrifice wherin christ himself is offered , togeather with all his merits : which truth may be yet further declared in this sort . if the charity which mē haue had frō the beginning of the world , vnto this day , or shall haue hereafter vntill the consummation thereof , with all their merits , and all the prayse & honour which they haue giuen vnto god , be put togeather ; if the torments and sufferings of all the martyrs , who with such excessiue charity and heroicall fortitude , offered their liues for the honour of god , if the pious and vertuous exercises of holy confessours , patriarchs , prophets , monkes , anchorets , eremits & other who by another kind of martyrdome , of longer continuance , and in some sorte more painfull and difficult haue crucified & massacred themselues with fastings , wearing of hayre-cloth , watchings , pennance , and mortifications : finally if all the vertue and perfection both of men and angels , be layd togeather in one , yet all this put togeather doth not please god so much , as doth one only masse , sayd by the poorest priest in the world . and to proceede yet further , the charity of the blessed , is much more perfect & excellēt , then that of the greatest saynt that liueth in the world , because it is charity proceeding from the cleere & perspicuous vision of the diuine essence . for this respect our sauiour hauing extolled the sanctity of the glorious s. iohn baptist so farr , as to say of him amōgst the sonnes of womē there neuer arose any greater , nor more holy , he strayght added , yet the last in the kingdome of heauen , is greater then he . now this being so proceeding higher in the forsayd consideration , i say , that though vnto the merits and vertues of all saints that haue byn , or euer shall be , be added also the charity of the blessed in heauen , both of men , angels , and of the most sacred virgin queene of thē all , all these put togeather cannot giue vnto god so much honour , nor so much prayse , nor so much contēt as a masse doth , offered by any priest. and the reason hereof , hath been signifyed before , to wit , that in all , and euery masse , christ our lord is the principal priest , who actually makes the oblation of that sacrifice : and the proper office & duty of priesthood is to giue prayse and honour vnto god. so that christ in euery masse is the chiefe worshipper and honour of god , & to make amends for our defects , he , as the chiefe and supreme offerer , giues the thankes , the honour , prayse , and worship that is due vnto him : and most certayne it is , that all creatures put togeather , cānot yet yield vnto god so great honour , prayse , and content , as his only sonne alone can doe . whence it is consequēt that the sacrifice of the masse , aswell in regard of the thing offered , as also in respect of the person that offers : incomparably exceedes all religion , worship , and glory which may be rendred vnto god , by all the creatures , both of heauen and earth , that thus priests may vnderstād what soueraigne treasures and richesse god hath put into their handes , whereby they may supply their wants , & enrich their pouerty . it is great pitty to behold with what facility & carlessenes many depriue themselues of such inestimable treasures , only because they will not take a little paynes to prepare themselues , and make pure their consciences . this most high and noble consideration , i find to my great content , in an authour very spirituall & contemplatiue of this age . and because his stile and manner of writing makes mee probably iudge , that he receaued that doctrine by speciall inspiration of the holy ghost , i will set downe his very wordes . considering with my selfe many tymes , the most high mysteries of the holy masse , and the office which god , out of great loue hath bestowed vpon vs , to consecrate his most sacred body and precious bloud , and handle the same so familiarly , and receaue the same into our bowells : i haue iudged , and do dayly more and more cleerly and assuredly iudge , that the glory and pleasure which the eternall father receaues , when the priest offers vnto him , his most beloued sonne , couered and inclosed within the most venerable sacrament , is so great , that the glory & pleasure which all the quires of angels , and of the rest of the blessed in heauē offer him , in comparison hereof is as nothing . for the works of creatures how noble & high soeuer that they be , haue no proportiō with the works of the creatour : and the priest that offers vnto the eternall father , and vnto the whole most blessed trinity , the most venerable person of the sonne , in the sacrament , offers god vnto god , and consequently infinite prayse , infinite glory , infinit content , and finally all goodnes that is , the true and eternall goodnes . and the angels with the whole celestiall court , how great soeuer their seruices are that they do vnto god , how great soeuer the honours and contentments they yield him , though they continew for all eternity , yet doe they not offer god vnto god , and consequently all is little or nothing in respect of this most diuine oblation , in the which god himselfe is offered . to this consideration , another succeedes no lesse excellent then this , of the great fauours that god doth continually bestow vpon men , and the motiues men haue to loue him , and to render him infinit thankes , honour , prayse and contentment . being in this cogitation , i felt within my selfe a certayne internall voyce , saying , that if i wished and desired this , that then no meanes could be found more fit for that purpose , then to receaue in the state of grace , and with due preparation , the most holy sacrament of the aultar : and after that i haue receaued and layd hold thereof , hauing it within my breast and in my power , being at is were maister and owner thereof , to giue and offer it agayne vnto the eternall father ; retyring my selfe for this end , vnto some quiet place , or recollecting my selfe with quiet of soule , in the place i should find my selfe . this oblation is to be made with the most inward desires of the hart , and with most affectious acts of the will , and with all the humility and reuerence that is possible . for giuing and offering vnto the eternall father this gift and oblatiō , infinite glory , prayse , and content is giuen and offered vnto him in regard of the dignity thereof , which neyther the angels of heauen , nor all the blessed saynts , can giue vnto god by any other way . hitherto be the words of this authour , god of his mercy make vs able to vnderstand them well , that we may practise accordingly . that the masse , is a present most gratefull vnto our sauiours humanity , and vnto the most blessed virgin. chap. xiii . another excellency of the masse that is consequēt out of what hath byn sayd , is , that the masse is a thing that most pleaseth , & giueth greatest content vnto the most sacred humanity of our lord iesus christ , and whereby we do him more seruice and honour , then by any other seruice , or seruices that we can do him . this truth is cleere out of the doctrine that hath been set down . for the will of our sauiour being so vnited and conforme vnto the will of his father , he knowing that his father by this oblation , receaues so much honour and glory ; in lyke sort his blessed soule cannot but receaue the same pleasure and content , seing that ( as he sayd ) euen whylest he liued in this world , all his pleasure and content was to fulfill the will of his father . besides which , there is another speciall reason of this doctrine , to wit , in regard of the representation which is made in the masse , of the life , passion , death , and all the mysteries of our sayd lord iesus christ. for declaration we must know , that all the blessed that are in heauē receaue great ioy , complacence , and content in all the thinges that pleased god , and gaue him content in this lyfe , and herein their content is so much the greater , by hovv much the thinges they ioy in , were more gratefull and acceptable in god his presence . and this is amongst thē so settled an affection , that any of thē if it were possible , would leaue the glory whereof he is possessed , to do , or suffer the same againe and againe many tymes ouer . the martyrs reioyce and be glad of their former torments and paynes , the monkes and heremits and the rest of the confessours of their fasts , watchings , pennances and mortifications : and they would all haue done and suffered more for god his honour . and seing it is not possible now to returne into this world to suffer againe , they receaue new ioy & accidētall glory , that we vpon earth make cōmemoration of their martyrdomes labours and merits : and that we offer them vnto god , & that we giue him thanks that he gaue them such grace as they might do him such excellent seruices . that which to none of the saints is grāted , is grāted vnto the humanity of our blessed sauiour , which being vnited vnto the diuine persō , may haue , or do whatsoeuer the same will wish to haue , or do . and he finding that his passion and death , so pleased , and gaue such ioy content and glory vnto his father , he both was able to inuent , and sufficient to affect a meanes , whereby the same may be renewed , and repeated ouer many tymes in such manner , as his father at euery repetition thereof should receaue no lesse ioy , content , & honour , then he receaued the first tyme the same was suffered and offered on the crosse : which manner is this , that seing he now being risen frō death , and glorious in heauen , cannot returne to suffer and dy againe , he hath ordayned the most sacred mystery of the masse , wherein his passion and death is so liuely represented , as if he did euē now suffer and dy againe . and this is not only represented , but also in mysticall manner performed , effectuated , and repeated the very same sacrifice he offered on the crosse , being offered a new vnto the eternall father , with the same valew , merit , and powerfulnes as it then had , and as able to giue him pleasure , content , glory , and honour . this we doe when we celebrate masse , and consequently we yield vnto christ our lord the greatest pleasure and cōtent , and we doe him the best seruice , that can possibly be giuen vnto him , and ( if we may so speake ) we doe him the greatest charity that may be , & herein shew ourselues to be his seruants and friends more then in doing for him all other thinges in the world . and verily we should esteeme this , as a great felicity and treasure , and our selues herein most fortunate , that we haue some thinges wherein we may do seruice , and yield pleasure and content vnto our most louing lord and master christ iesus , specially a thing that we may haue so good cheape , a thing so dew vnto him , who with so much payne , and at the deare rate of his pretious bloud procured the same for vs , not sparing any labour , nor stying any difficulty to make the same profitable vnto vs. and what is sayd of the most sacred humanity of our lord iesus christ , may be extended vnto , and with a kind of proportion vnderstood of the most sacred virgin his mother , and euery other saynt , that we can do them no better seruice , we can giue them nothing of greater content , nothing can we more shew that we are their most affection at friēds , then in offering vnto god the holy sacrifice of the masse , in their name & honour . for though we may not offer sacrifice vnto any saynt , no not to the most glorious virgin mother , queene of heauen , for this the sacred councell of trēt declareth to be vnlawfull , yet we may make commemoration of their merits , & giue thankes vnto god for the benefits he bestowed on them , and for the glory wherwith now they are made blessed ; offering also their meritts vnto god , which they togeather with vs also offer vnto our common lord and maister , to supply our defects in their name , as the aforesayd most deuout and contemplatiue authour declareth in these wordes . if we be , ( as it is reason we should be ) desirous to giue vnto the most glorious queene of the angels , as much honour and glory , as is due vnto her , we must coming from the masse , or holy communion with the like ardent charity , humility and reuerence , offer vnto her most pure armes her most sweet & louing sonn , whome we haue in our custody . for this oblation she receaueth with more content , & the same is to her of more honour and glory , thē any whatsoeuer other , that eyther all men or all angels can offer vnto her , if it be not likewise the gift and oblation of god , and of her sonne as this is . and thus we may at any tyme so longe as we haue our sauiour within our breast , that is , vntill the sacramentall formes of bread and wine be consumed by the naturall heate of the stomacke . the like oblation may be made vnto any saynt , or vnto all the saynts in the aforesayd manner , in their honour , and the honour of god. wherefore , it being a thing cleere , what great glory , honour , prayse , and content priests , & all other christians may giue vnto god , & vnto the soueraign virgin empresse of heauē , and the other saynts of the celestiall ierusalem , by meanes of the most holy sacrament of the aultar ; let all that haue notice hereof , consider what great cause they haue to spend themselues , and to doe the vttermost of their power to be continually so prepared and disposed , that no day may passe , wherin they do not eyther celebrate the holy masse , or receaue the most holy mysteries . whereunto besides what hath byn sayd , this consideration may likewise encourage them , that they may assure themselues , that by the meanes of this rich present , sooner then by any other , they shal obtayne of the father of mercyes , & of the blessed virgin mary our b. lady , & all the saints of the heauēly citty , whatsoeuer they shall demande . which confidence may iustly be the greater in this respect that by this oblation made in the manner aforesayd vnto the saynts , we get thē to be our aduocats , and friends obliged to pray and intercede for vs. all these are the words of the afore-mentioned authour , worthy , that all consider & practise the things counselled therein , and benefit themselues by an aduise so important , facile and profitable . other innumerable dignityes , excellencyes , and magnificencies , may be sayd of the holy masse , and are gathered of the former definitions , declarations , and explications giuen thereof , which if we should particularly declare , this treatise would grow of too great a bignes . for example , that the masse is of greater glory ioy , and comfort vnto the saynts and angels of heauen , thē any other thing that is don , or can be don in this world . that the same is of greater profit and vtility , to the militāt church , of greater force to helpe & relieue the soules in purgatory , of greater importance and efficacy for our spirituall progresse and increase in perfection ; and this with so great excesse , that if we put in one side of the balance , all that we doe in the day and night , supposing we spend them wholly in vertuous and holy exercises , all this togeather weigheth not so much as a drame , in comparison of one masse , that we say with the due required disposition . wherefore , though for no other reason , yet at least in respect of our interest and profit , and to spare greater paynes and labour , and to enrich our pouerty , to supply our wants out of treasury of the merits of our lord iesus christ , we ought to procure with all diligence to dispose our selues , to celebrate , and to assist at the most sacred mysteries of the masse , and to receaue the most diuine sacrament , with all purity and perfection possible . the externall reuerence and worship , to be vsed in the holy masse . chap. xiiii . hitherto we haue set downe considerations that may stirre vp in vs inward reuerence , and deuotion towardes the holy sacrifice of the masse aswell in priests that celebrat , as in other christians that assist thereat . and although where inward reuerēce and worship is found , there externall reuerence , grauity , composition , and all other decent gate will not be wāting , yet to make this treatise more full , it will be cōuenient to adde something also concerning this second kind of reuerence , the wāt whereof is scandalous , and occasion to many to thinke lesse reuerently of the holy mysteries . also the time we liue in , may seeme to require , both of priests and laymen , that in this externall reuerēce , they be most punctuall and exact concerning the sacred ceremonies , and externall rites of this diuine oblation , because the heretickes of our tyme do oppose specially against these ceremonies , & impugne the externall rite and worship vsed by the catholike church in the diuine seruice . wherfore it is good reason that we , who thinke ourselues happy in that we are catholicke christians , and by gods singular mercy , true children of the sayd catholicke church : it is good reason , i say , that we should think it part of our honour to be opposite vnto the foolish fancies of hereretikes , as much as may be : & by how much they more reprehend and despise the sayd ceremonies , by so much we ought to be more careful and religious to performe them with the greatest reuerence & exactnes that may be . and to vnderstand the ground of these externall ceremonies and rites , we are to note , that man being compounded of two substances , to wit , soule and body , and god being creatour and authour aswell of the one as of the other , is boūd to acknowledg worship to god , and adore him not only with soule , but also with body , for with the hart one belieues vnto iustice , & with the mouth he confesseth his fayth vnto saluation . so that it is not inough to belieue with our hartes , but also we must make professiō thereof with our mouth , and so religion bindes vs not only to worship god internally with our soule , but also to yield vnto him externall reuerence and honour with our bodyes . thus we see that from the very first beginning of the world iust & godly mē , began to honour god with externall ceremonyes , bending their knees , lifting vp their hādes , casting vp their eyes vnto heauen , building aultars , and offering sacrifices , as did the iust and innocent abel , which practise went still continuing and increasing in all iust men & religious towardes god , as doth appeare by diuers hystories of holy writ . prophane hystory lykewise shewes , that the gentills in their impious worship of idols , vsed sundry and diuerse crremonies . for the diuel , who was adored by thē in those idols , as he still perseuered in his first pride , and sottish enuy , seeking to vsurpe to himselfe the honour and adoration due vnto god , knowing that externall reuerence is a signe and a character of the interiour , and in this respect most due vnto the true god ; required of his deceaued adorants , and ordayned that they should adore him , and sacrifice vnto him with great variety of externall reuerences , rites , and ceremonyes . and in the holy scripture we reade , that those most vnfortunate priests of baal , did inuocate him with sacrifices , & with clamors , bending their knees , prostrating themselues on the ground , and being barbarous & inhumane , lyke to the diuell they serued , with knifes did lance themselues till they were all embrued in blood . the difference which in this poynt hath been according to the variety of liues and states , is that in the first state called , the law of nature , as god had not giuen them any written forme of religion , or law , there was no set order of these kind of ceremonies , but euery one followed the internall instinct and inspiration of god , who taught them in what manner he would be honored & worshipped by them . but afterward when god gaue vnto his people a written law , a most principall part therof pertayned vnto the ceremonyes , and diuerse sorts and fashions of worship to be by them vsed , in their offering sacrifices ; praying , and other duetyes belonging to the diuine seruice . also there were appointed diuers kindes of ministers for the more full accomplishment of these thinges , some being priests , some leuits , some singers , some porters , some exorcists , and diuerse other kindes , euery one hauing his office and ministery assigned him , with most strict and seuere commandments , that each of them should be most punctuall & exact in his owne office , without medling with the office of others , enacting most grieuous punishment vnto any that should fayle , though but in small matters : all which appeares by the books of the law , specially by that of leuiticus , and deuteronomy . it is true that all these precepts and ceremoniall lawes are now ceased and abrogated by the law of the ghospell , that now is not necessary , yea now it were a sinne to obserue them ; but in their place other ceremonies doe succeede , better and perfecter , more proportionable and conueniēt , with the perfection of the law of grace , which the church gouerned by the ho. ghost hath established , as receaued and deriued by tradition from christ and his apostles . for though some particular ceremonyes haue been altered and changed , according to the state and conueniency of tymes , yet most certaine it is , that some of them were vsed by christ himselfe in tyme and place , and as they were conuenient to his person . thus we reade , that sometymes he prayed on his knees , positis genibus orabat , sometymes standing , as in the prayer he made after his last supper , sometymes prostrate on his face , procidit in faciem suam , sometymes lifting vp his eyes vnto heauen , subleuatis iesus oculis dixit . and whē he instituted the most venerable sacrament , hauing ended the ceremonies of the old testament , he washed the feete of his disciples , sat downe at the table , tooke bread into his hands , cast vp his eyes vnto heauē , gaue thankes vnto his father , blessed the bread , consecrated it , deuided it , gaue it to his disciples , which were the ceremonyes for that tyme , place , and season . after our sauiour was ascended vnto heauen , the blessed apostles hauing receaued the holy ghost , begā presently to vse ceremonyes in the masse , and ordayned such as were to be obserued , as appeares by most auncient formes of masse by thē composed , and by s. clement their disciple , and successour of s. peeter , and by the decrees of other popes , and councels very aunciēt , which to auoyde prolixity i omit . the apostle s. paul in his epistle to those of corinth , appoints that womē be in the church with their heades couered , and men with their heades bare , as also many thinges concerning the order that they were to keepe , when they did meete togeather to receaue the most blessed sacrament , saying in the end , cetera cùm venero disponam , i will giue order by word of mouth , about the rest of these thinges when i come my selfe . certayne it it that the apostle was not to appoynt the thinges essentiall vnto the sacraments , ( for these our sauiour ordayned , and he only could , and had power to ordayne them ) but only certayne ceremonies concerning the vse of the sacraments . and so it is a most certayne truth , that the ceremonies of the church speaking of them in generall be very auncient : & many particular ceremonies come by traditiō from christ and his apostles , others frō the chiefe bishops , and councells . for it was not conuenient that the vse of ceremonies and exteriour religious rites in the holy sacrifice of masse , should be left to the liberty of euery one , because such liberty might be occasiō of many errours , ignorances , and superstitions , but that the church should haue the appointment of them . the ground of which exteriour obseruances is found in the holy scripture set downe by s. paul in the first epistle to those of corynth the 14. chapter , omnia secundum ordinem fiant in vobis , let all things be don with order amongst you , which shewes that it is requisite that the church should ordayne & appoynt order to be kept , euen about the least thinges that concernes this most holy sacrifice . for if this were left to the choyce & iudgment of euery one , many indiscreet and vnseemly ceremonies would be vsed : neyther ought any thinge that cōcernes so high a mystery , be thought little , or of small esteeme , as not to be done with grauity , and decency : the direction s. cyprian giues , being here of speciall vse , we ought to endeauour the pleasing of the diuine eyes , euen in the outward gate and composition of our body . and this vniformity in externall ceremonies , serues more to set forth the maiesty of the ecclesiasticall office , shewes the vnity and consent of the church , togeather with the care and sollicitude of her pastours . and if god in the old testament , did with such rigour and seuerity exact the perfect keeping of the ceremonies thereof , as appeares by the words of deuteronomy the 7. chap. verse 11. keepe my precepts , statutes , and ceremonies , which i this day commaund vnto thee . and in the 8· chapter the 11. verse , take heed thou do not forget thy lord god , nor neglect his commandments , ceremonies , and iudgmēts : & the same precept is in other places repeated and inculcated ; if i say , god did require so perfect and punctuall obseruance of those auncient rites , and ceremonies , that were but figures , and shadowes of the mysteries of the new testament ; how sacred , venerable , and worthy of obseruance , are these ceremonies of the church , which wayte and attend immediatly vpō the most sacred mysteries themselues now present & effectuated ? these ceremonies were vsed to the end that with due exteriour decency might be performed the sacrifice of a lambe , or calfe , or of some other bruite beast , or were exercised about the handling and honoring of the arke of couenāt , the bread-loues of propositiō & other such things ; but our ceremonies are vsed about the sacrifycing & cōsecrating the most holy body of iesus christ , and his pretious bloud , and to handle and worship with due & religious reuerēce , the same true and liuing mysteries , which by those dead figures & shadowes were signified . wherfore looke what excellency truth challengeth aboue the figure , the body aboue the shadow , the prototype aboue the picture , the new testament aboue the old ; the same excellency haue the ceremonies now vsed aboue those that then were receaued . and so we may & ought to reason , that that if of those ceremonyes , & the obseruation of them , god made so great an account , greater account without question he makes of these , seing they are ( as hath byn sayd ) in many respects much more excellent then the other were . we may also giue a ghesse , at great and diuine thinges by consideration of what passeth human thinges , that in respect of them are vayne vile , and childish . it is a wonder to see noblemen , & knights that liue in the court , how perfect they are in the knowledge of ceremonies , how curious and punctuall to keepe them . all is reduced vnto rules and principles , euery one knowes who is to be couered in the presence of the king , and who is to be bareheaded , the termes of salutations and courtesies that are to be vsed , and many other curiosityes ; then reason it is that in them and their exact obseruance , we learne what is to be done and kept in a thing of truth and importance , such as are the ceremonies of the holy masse . whē the king drinks it is a sight to behold the respect , the order , the leasure , the attention vsed , one of the greatest princes takes the goblet , and with a certayn number of ceremonyes he makes his reuerence , and kneeles whylest the prince is drinking , with such an humble kind of reuerence that it may seeme he would euen put himself vnder the ground . and yet what is a king compared with god ? surely , but a corruptible worme , that hath the name of king made fast vnto him as it were with pins , which yet are not so stronge , but a little blast of infectious ayre is able to take it from him . on the other side cōsidering what we doe , or rather what we omit to do , through negligence , rudenes , want of carefull exactnes in the worship and seruice of the immortall king of all worldes & ages , who hath not imbrodered in his garments , but also written in his flancke king of kinges , and lord of lordes , serued by thousandes and thousandes , before whome ten tymes an hundred thousandes of angels , and seraphims , and princes of glory assist , all with great reuerence and most profound humiliation , as before their creatour , and the vniuersall and true lord of all . let all these prayse him for euer , seing notwithstanding this his so great maiesty & highnes he doth not disdaine , to choose such poore creatures as are men for the exercise and celebration of mysteries so soueraigne and diuine . of the reuerence , due vnto churches and holy places . chap. xv. i will conclude this treatise with this poynt of the respect and reuerence , that is due vnto temples , churches , and other holy places , where the holy sacrifice of the masse is offered . to stire vp in vs this reuerend affection , it may suffice that we open our eyes of fayth and consideration , & marke that churches are truly & properly the houses of god. by this title they are honoured by our lord himselfe , in many places of holy scripture , and particularly in the second chapter of s. iohn , where he saith , make not the house of my father , an house of negotiation . and in the one & twentith chapter of s. matthew , our sauiour alleadgeth in confirmation hereof the saying of the prophet , my house is the house of prayer . the fact of our sauiour related by both these euangelists in those places , is very notable , and of great consideration for our purpose . for the modesty and mildnes of christ iesvs , being exceeding great and wonderfull , that in all the tyme of his lyfe , we do not reade , that he chastised any offence with his owne handes ; hauing seen and dayly seeing so many , and so grieuous , and hauing had so many occasions to doe it , that once they would haue cast him downe headlong from a mountayne , and an other tyme they tooke stones to stone him to death , & diuers tymes they vsed vnto him rude and blasphemous wordes : in all these and many other like occasions , our sauiour behaued himselfe with very great modesty and mildnes : & towardes all sinners in generall he shewed this meekenes in great excesse , scarse euer in any occasion shewing displeasure or indignation . yea he did sharply rebuke at a certayne tyme some of his disciples , because they asked him leaue , that they might make fire come downe from heauen , vpō the samaritās that had byn so discourteous towardes him , as not to let him haue any lodging or entrance into their citty . all this being so , yet the first tyme that he ascended vnto hierusalem with his disciples , finding some that had lost all respect and reuerence towardes the holynes of the temple , buying and selling , and negotiating in the same , though these negotiations were about thinges belonging vnto the sacrifices that were therein dayly and howerly offered , yet he tooke such indignation and displeasure against thē , that he made a whippe of certayne cordes he there found , and therewith set vpon them , and droue them out of the temple , threw downe their tables , cast their siluer and moneys on the ground , rebuked them sharply & with hard tearmes , in a manner calling them theeues , saying , make not of the house of my father a denne of theeues . this happened not only once in the beginning of his holy predication , but also the second tyme he did the very same , towardes the end of his life , the very last time , or the last sauing one that euer he entred into the temple . by this fact giuing vs to vnderstād , what great account he maketh , that all decency & religious respect should be vsed towardes his house , and holy temple , because only against the breach hereof he shewed such extraordinary displeasure , and with demonstratiō of anger against the prophaners of his house , he would beginne and conclude the course of his preaching . wherupon the holy euangelist noteth , that his disciples reflecting vpon this his fact , called to mind and vnderstood , that to him agreed that which is writtē in the psalme sixty eight , the zeale of the house of god , eateth vp my very bowells , and the disorders of them that beare not respect vnto it , fall vpon me , and are an heauy and burdensome load vnto me . now we are to note , that our churches are tearmed the house of god , not only for the reason in regard of which the temple of ierusalē was so entitled , which many times , and absolutly is tearmed in holy scripture , the house of god , because there lodged the ark of couenāt , there god was worshipped and adored , there sacrifice offered vnto him , there he gaue audience vnto men , and heard the petitions they made vnto him . not only for these respects christians churches be tearmed the house of god , but also vpon greater reasons , in regard of which this honorable stile , doth belonge vnto them , much more properly then it did vnto the auncient temple , to wit , because god himselfe dwelleth in them really & personally in the most blessed sacramēt , in which the person of the worde , and only begotten sonne of god abides in more particular manner then in any other parte , or creature in the world . for not only there he is according to his diuinity , in regard of which he is euery where , by essence , presence , & power , but also the most sacred humanity of our lord iesus christ , the which is seated in heauen at the right hand of the eternall father ; this selfe-some humanity with the selfe same glory , maiesty , and greatnes is really and personally in the most holy sacrament , though couered with the sacramentall formes of bread , so that his presence is inuisible , but only vnto eyes enlightned with fayth , who see his wordes verified , this is my body , and his promise accōplished , behold i am with you all dayes , vnto the consummatiō of the world . this is the glory , and most singular priuiledge of the christiā people , to haue iesus christ the true god for their neighbour , & a soiourner in all the churches of christianity , in such sort that there is not any catholike towne , or villadge , how small and contemptible soeuer , wherein our lord hath not his proper and peculiar house : so that , if in a village there be but twelue neighbours , he maketh the thirteenth . thus god would honour and fauour the christian people , a thing most worthy to be esteemed and honoured in farre more excellent manmer then we doe honour and esteeme the same . for this cause i sayd in the beginning of this chapter , that there is no need to say much of this poynt , but only that we open the eyes of fayth , and consider attentiuely , that temples be the house of god , and that in euery one of them iesvs christ our lord is really , and personally present with all his glory and maiesty ; a truth most sure & certayne , yea that also many thousāds of angels accompany him , making the church his court therein , yielding him perpetuall prayses and continuall honour . and so in the prayer of the holy diuine office , wherewith the last houre and compline is concluded , sayth in this manner : visit we beseech thee o lord , this habitation , and let thyne angels who dwell therin , keepe vs. the glorious apostle s. paul in epistle to the hebrews seemes to affirm no lesse where he sayth , you are not come to a materiall mountayne , nor vnto a fire that may be seene , but you are come to the mountayne of syon the citty of the liuing god , the heauenly ierusalem , the resort of many thousandes of angels , the church of the primitiues . if this be so , as without question it is , to the end that we beare due respect , reuerence , and veneration vnto holy places , no more is needfull , but that we open our eyes , and consider the great reuerence and veneration that is due vnto the holy places , which are the true houses of god where he is present , & hath his aboade , togeather with his celestiall courtyers . and if we looke into holy scripture we shall find it a very auncient custome of holy men , to beare great respect vnto such places where god was present , or did manifest himselfe in particular manner . in genesis is written of the patriarch iacob , that flying from the house of his father to auoyde the wrath of his brother esau , the first dayes iourney he was benighted , in a forlorne place . there falling a sleep he saw a great ladder which did reach from heauen vnto earth , vpon the which angels went vp & downe , and god stood on the toppe thereof . the holy iacob awaking out of his sleepe , conceaued so great reuerēce vnto that place , because he had seene the former vision therein , that full of feare and astonishment he sayd : how dreadfull is this place , verily here is nothing else but the court of god & gate of heauen . in testimony wherof , he cōsecrated the sayd place as far as he could , raysing vp the stone that he had laid that night vnder his head , anointing it with oyle ( which was still taken for the signe of consecration ) and leauing the same there as a tokē that the place was sacred , and honour and veneration due vnto it , because god had therin shewed himself : and vnto the citty that was neere vnto that place called luza , he gaue the name of bethel , which signifyes house of god. in exodus , it is recorded that holy moyses leading the flocke of his father-in-law through the most solitary & woodiest part of the mount horeb , god appeared vnto him in a very strāg and meruaylous manner , to wit , in a bush which did burn with a great fire , but did not consume . and when moyses did approach to see the sayd miracle more distinctly nigh at hande , the angell that represented the person of god cryed vnto him : stand still , approach no nearer for the place wher thou art is holy land . moyses hearing the voyce declaring god to be there present fell prostrate on his face , not dearing to lift vp his eyes , nor to cast them towardes the place where god did abide . and from that tyme euer after the mountayne was held in great veneratiō , and called the holy mountayne , the mountayne of god , as appeares by the third booke of kinges , the ninteenth chapter . in this respect the apostle s. peter calleth the mount thabor the holy mountayne where our sauiour was transfigured , because there he once , shewed his maiesty and glory . now if these places , because god once appeared in them became so specially venerable , and reuerenced , how much more ought our temples to be honoured where our lord himselfe makes his mansion and his aboade , as in his ordinary residence and pallace , where he worketh dayly so many wonders , and bestoweth on men so many fauours ? if those holy patriarchs worshipped with such humble respect the place , where once or twice they saw god , or an angel that spake to thē in his name ; what honour would they beare , what respect would they shew to our churchs , had they liued in so happy an age as we liue in , but through rudenes and ingratitude , doe not esteeme nor acknowledge our happines ? if the holy patriarch iacob conceaued such dread and reuerence to the place , where in his sleep he saw a lader on which the angels went vp and down , what reuerence and dread would he conceyue should he see ( as we dayly see with the eyes of fayth ) the very son of god to come down , and place himselfe in the handes of priests . and this not seene in sleepe or in a dreame , but by sight more certayne , & more infallible then any thing can be , that we see with eyes , and feele with handes ; with how far greater reason would he exclayme : verily dreadfull is this place , verily god is in this place ? and with much more truth haue sayd , verily this is the house of god and entrance of heauen ? if holy moyses cōceaued such feare and reuerence , not daring to looke on the bush out of which an angell spake vnto him in the name & person of god , what reuerence would he conceaue , what deuotion would he declare , if he should enter into our churches and see the most venerable sacrament , knowing as certaynly as we do ▪ that there god is in person being made man for our sake , and so sweet and courteous towardes men , that he is receaued and eaten of them . oh holy patriarches , me thinkes , that frō your seates of heauenly glory you behold vs on earth , and are ashamed to see our stupidity and rudenes , who know not how to esteeme and honour such sacred and venerable places as are our churches , nor how to enter into them , and stay in them with the dread and reuerence , as reason requireth of vs. one day you shal be our iudges , and condemne vs as rude & vnmannerly , seing we do not imitate your example in worshipping holy places , our temples being with great excesse , more venerable and glorious then those which you did so highly esteeme and honour . of being present , and hearing the holy office of masse , which hath alwayes byn in most high esteeme , & publickly celebrated euery where , both among the syrians , the grecians , and the latines , euer since the tyme of the apostles . chap. xvi . a prayer before masse . lord iesu-christ , the pure light of harts , and the eternall truth , stay i beseech thee , and collect mine euer-wandring & distracted mind , that i , may be attentiue , & with reuerence present in the sight of thy infinite maiesty , whiles this holy office of masse is celebrated , and reape thence true fruit , healthfull to my soule and others , and especially that i may with thankes-giuing call to mind thine vnspeakeable charity , wherwith thou offered'st thy self to a most cruell death for my redemption . to thee be al praise & thans-giuing , thou being the priest & the host , and our bishop according to the order of melchisedech , who hast taught priests to offer a cleane oblation , and euery where to sacrifice vnto the eternall god , vnder the likenes of bread and wine . then blessing thy selfe , begin with the priest thus . in the name of the father , and of the sonne , and of the holy ghost . amen . i will enter vnto the altare of god ; to god , who maketh my youth ioyfull . the 42. psalme ivdge me , o god , & discerne my cause from the nation not holy : from the wicked , and deceitfull man deliuer me . because thou art god my strength : why hast thou repelled me ? and why goe i sorrowfull , whiles the ennemy afflicteth me ? send forth thy light , & thy truth : they haue conducted me , and brought me into thy holy hill , & into thy tabernacles . and i will enter vnto the altar of god : to god , who maketh my youth ioyfull . i will confesse to thee on the harpe , o god , my god , why art thou sorrowfull , o my soule : and why doest thou trouble me ? hope in god , because yet will i confesse to him : the saluation of my countenance , and my god. glory be to the father , and to the sonne &c. euen as it was in the beginning , and now , and euer , and world without end . amen . i will enter vnto the altare of god : to god , who maketh my youth ioyfull . our help is in the name of our lord : who hath made heauen and earth· the generall confession . i confesse vnto almighty god , vnto the b. virgin mary , to b. michael the archangell , to b. iohn baptist , to the holy apostles peter , and paul , to all the saintes , and to you , o father , because i haue grieuously sinned in thought , word , and deed , through my fault , my fault , my most grieuous fault . therefore i beseech the b. virgin mary , the b. michael the archangell , the b. iohn baptist , the holy apostles peter & paul , all the saints , & you , o father , to pray to our lord god for me . amē . almighty god haue mercy vpon vs , forgiue vs all our sinnes , and bring vs to life euerlasting amen . thou , o god , conuerted wilt giue life vnto vs ▪ and thy people shall reioyce in thee . lord shew vnto vs thy mercy : and giue vs thy saluation . lord , heare my prayer : and let my crye come vnto thee . the prayer . take from vs , o lord , we beseech thee , all our iniquities , that hauing hart and mind pure and vndefiled , we may deserue to enter into the holies of holies . though christ our lord. amen . lord haue mercy vpō vs. lord haue mercy vpon vs. lord haue mercy vpon vs. christ haue mercy vpon vs. christ haue mercy vpon vs. christ haue mercy vpon vs. lord haue mercy vpon vs. lord haue mercy vpon vs. lord haue mercy vpon vs. adde heere three tymes , pater noster &c. for thy sinnes committed in thought , word , & deed , that the holy trinity , in whose name thou art baptized , may pardon thee thy offences ; & that being dead to sinne , thou mayest for the tyme to come liue to iustice . the angels hymne , gloria in excelsis . glory in the highest to god , & in earth peace to men of good will : we prayse thee , we blesse thee , we adore thee , we glorify thee . we giue thee thankes for thy great glory . lord god , king of heauen . god the father almighty . lord the only begottē sonne iesus-christ , lord god , lābe of god , sonne of the father . who takest away the sinnes of the world , haue mercy vpon vs. who takest away the sins of the world receiue our prayers . who sittest on the right hand of the father , haue mercy vpon vs. because thou art alone holy , thou alone our lord , thou alone most high , o iesus-christ , with the holy ghost in the glory of god the father . amen . s. augustines briefe confession , touching the holy trinity . we do with our whole hart & mouth cōfesse , prayse & blesse thee god the father vnbegotten , thee the only begottē sonne , thee the holy ghost the paraclete , the holy & vndeuided trinity . glory be to the father , who hath created vs. glory to the sonne , who hath redeemed vs. glory to the holy ghost , who hath sanctified vs. glory to the most soueraigne & vndeuided trinity , one god world without end amen . after the epistle is read , which commonly cōprehēdeth the admonitiō of the apostle , whē the priest cōmeth to read the gospell , stand vp , and be attentiue vnto it , & in the beginning make the signe of the crosse vpō thy forehead , mouth & breast , and say from thy hart these wordes : glory be to thee o lord. and when the gospell is ended , prayse be to thee , o christ , who by thy selfe , & by thy apostles , hast vouchsafed to preach the gospell to the world , & to giue the incredulous and vnbelieuing , the true light of faith . say the creed with the priest. i belieue in god the father almighty &c. when the priest hath made the oblation , say thus . let vs giue thākes to our lord god , for that it is truely a worthy thing , and iust , & meete , and healthfull that we alwayes and euery where yield thee thanks , holy lord , father omnipotēt , eternall god , by christ our lord. by whom the angels prayse thy maiesty , the dominatiōs adore it , the powers trēble before it , the heauens and the vertues of the heauens , & the blessed seraphims doe with ioynt exultation celebrate it . with whom we also beseech thee to commaund that our voyces maybe admitted & heard , with humble confessiō saying : holy , holy , holy lord god of sabaoth . the heauens and the earth be full of thy glory , osanna in the highest . blessed is he who cōmeth in the name of our lord. osāna in the highest . heere , in honour of the fiue wounds of our redeemer ( which cannot be honoured inough ) say , pater noster fiue tymes , that both liuing and dying thou mayest receiue the aboundant vertue of them , and of all our sauiours passion , and therby obtayne the remission of sinnes , and all manner of grace , both for your selues and others . a prayer to christ. blessed be thou , o lord iesu-christ , sonne of the liuing god , who hauing compassion vpon vs , camest downe from heauen , & being a true sacrifice for our sinnes , liberally offredst vpō the altar of the crosse thine innocent body and bloud , which thou tookst of the b. virgin. prayse and glory be to thee , because of the same body and bloud of thyne , thou hast instituted not only the bread of life , which we are to receiue in the sacrament , but also a sacrifice to be offered vpon the altare by the priests : and hast left it to be celebrated till the worlds end , that thy church might haue a perpetuall and pure sacrifice to celebrate all the world ouer . iesu of nazareth crucified for vs , be mercifull to me , and to all sinners , and graunt that we may receiue the effectuall fruit and vertue of the sacrament , and of this sacrifice , to the profit of both body & soule , and to all prosperity and consolation of the faithfull . at the eleuation of the holy host , and chalice . we adore thee , o lord iesu-christ , our king & high priest , and we blesse thee , who by thy holy crosse , and bloudy oblation of this thy sacred body & bloud hast redeemed vs , and recōciled vs , being lost creatures , to god the father . by thine infinite goodnes i beseech thee , make me , and all thy church , participant of all thy redemption , and to receyue in vs the fruit of thy death , resurrection , and ascension to life euerlasting . amen . hayle the worlds saluation , the eternall word of the father , the true host , liuing flesh , perfect deity , & life euerlasting . thou art my lord , and my god , whome i humbly adore , and faythfully inuocate , being present vpon this altare in body & bloud , that i may haue thee my redeemer , propitious and fauourable vnto me in prosperity and aduersity , in life and in death ; and finally may behold thee face to face , raygning in heauen . who with the father , & the holy ghost , liuest and raygnest world without end amen . the soule of christ sanctify me , the body of christ saue me , the bloud of christ inebriate me , the water of christs side wash me , the passion of christ strengthē me . o good iesu vouchsafe to heare me , and permit me not to be separated frō thee . from the malignant angell defend me . in the houre of my death call me , and will me to come vnto thee , that together with thine angels i may prayse thee for euer & euer . amen . for whome we ought most of all to pray in masse-tyme . most soueraygne bishop , and redeemer of the world , iesu-christ , who discouerest thy self vnto vs not only on the crosse , but also in this venerable sacrament , togeather with thy body and bloud , in so much as thou sufferest thy selfe to be touched , offered , & eaten by sinners : haue mercy vpō vs , who without thy grace are not able to do anything , & giue thine assistāce to thy catholike church , spread ouer the whole world , that by thee the true catholikes may haue peace , and by thy conduct may be safe & defended against their enemies whersoeuer . establish sufficiēt pastours ouer thy flock , and contayne all magistrats in their office , that they may rule , and profit the christiā common-wealth , conformably to thy will & pleasure . conuert , o lord , all miserable sinners , who are strayed from their faith , that by thine inspiratiō they may returne to the way of truth : giue the light of fayth to infidels , comfort the afflicted , restore the sicke to their health , help the miserable ▪ succour the needy & poore : protect also our parēts , kinsfolks , benefactours & friēds , conserue thē that they may carefully imbrace and loue those things that appertayne to fayth and catholicke obedience . and through thy goodnes & clemency , take away from vs whatsoeuer is displeasing vnto thee , and giue vs strength and vertue to auoyd all sinne , and imbrace all good , that we may fulfill thy will and our own vocation . admit this healthfull sacrament offered by the catholicke priest , in full satisfaction of our sinnes , for an aboundant supply of our negligences , and for a particuler thankes-giuing for all thy benefits whatsoeuer bestowed vpon vs : & graunt pardon & euerlasting rest , not only to the liuing , but also to the faithfull departed . for the obtayning of peace . lambe of god , who takest away the sinnes of the world , haue mercy vpon vs. lambe of god who takest away the sinnes of the world , haue mercy vpon vs. lambe of god , who takest away the sinnes of the world , giue peace of tyme , of hart , and of eternity : to wit , that we may haue a perfect vniō with our nighbours , enioy a peacefull cōscience , and come to that eternall repose in heauen , whereunto all the elect doe aspire . for the publicke peace of the church . graunt peace , o lord , in our dayes , because there is not any other who fighteth for vs , but thou , o lord. vers. peace be made in thy vertue . resp. and aboundance in thy towers . the prayer . o god , frō whome flow all holy desires , right counsayles and iust workes ; giue vnto thy seruantes that peace , which the world is not able to giue : and that our harts being bent to the obseruance of thy commandemēts , & the feare of our enemies being taken away , the tymes may be through thy protection profitable . o god the author & louer of peace , whose knowledge is life , and whose seruice is a kingdome , protect thy seruants from all oppressions and assaults , that we , relying vpon thy defence , may not feare the force of any hostility , and may be deliuered from all tentations that trouble vs. by iesu-christ thy sonne our lord. amen . at the end of the masse , when the priest blesseth the people , reuerently kneele downe , and as one who expecteth an heauenly benediction & blessing from god , with an ardent faith , say . omnipotent & most merciful god , the father , the son , & the holy ghost , blesse vs and keep vs. iesus of nazareth , king of the iewes , the tytle of triumph , blesse and defend vs from al euill . amen . this done , blesse thy selfe , and say with the priest , s. iohns gospel , in these words . in the beginning was the word , and the word was with god , and god was the word . this was in the beginning with god. all things were made by him : and without him was made nothing that was made . in him was life , and the life was the light of men ; & the light shined in darcknes , and the darcknes did not comprehend it . there was a man sent from god , whose name was iohn . this man came for testimony , to giue testimony of the light , that all men might belieue through him . he was not the light , but to giue testimony of the light . it was the true light , which lightneth euery man that commeth into this world . he was in the world , and the world was made by him , and the world knew him not . he came into his owne and his owne receyued him not . but as many as receyued him , he gaue thē power be made the sonnes of god , to those that belieue in his name . who not of bloud ▪ nor of the will of flesh , nor of the will of man , but of god are borne . and the word vvas made flesh , and dwelt in vs ( and we saw the glory as it were , of the only begotten of the father ) full of grace and verity . resp. prayse be to thee , o christ. finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a07609-e810 plato dialog . 8. de legibus . arist. l. 8. ae● 1. c 9. cice. de natura deorū . s. tho. 22 q. 88. ● . 1 . heb. 10. iren. l. 5 c. 25. hilar. auct . imper . in matt. ●4 . hieron . beda . dan. ● . dan. 12 sess ▪ 22. c. 1. & can. 1. de missa priuata tom . 9. ger. fol 28. catec . mystag . 5. clem. epist. ● alex. epist. 1 4. epist. ad omnes xpīfideles . ●e bellarm l. 1. de missa c. 1. ● p.q. ●3 . a. 4. ●d 9. baron . an ch● . 34. isa. 53. ● 7. ●oa . 10. ● . 17. & ● . chrys. hom . 6. super . 1. tim. 2. hom. 5. in c. 6. esa. hieron super c. 1. malach serm. de xpī corpor . 2. cor. 5.20 . sap 18.24 . hom. 83 in mat. trid. sess. 22. c. 1. & 2. psa. 109. v. 4. hom. 37 in euāg . hom. 83 in mat. l. 4. de trin. c. 14. gen 4. in qq . hebra . ephes. 5.2 . gal. 4. sess. 2. c. 1. sess. 22. c. 2. super hebra . c. 10. homil. 2. in 2. tim. sess. 22. c. 1. 1.2 . q. 102. & 2.2 . q. 85. exod. 13 gen. 12. esa. 40 decret . d. 2. c. cùm omne . greg. 4. dial. c. 5. ● . suare 8 ▪ tom. 3. in 3. p. disp. 79. sect . 2. rom. ● hebr. 6. 1. ioa. 2. heb. 7. chry. l. 3. de sacerd. 4. reg. 4. serm. de xpī corpore matth. 3. & 17 ephes. c. 1. ioan. ● . mat. ●● f. iohn de angelis . tract . 2 of the spirituall cōflict the 13. chap. ioan. 4. f. iohn de angelis . col . citato . rom. 10. gen. 4. luc. 22. mat. 26. ioan. 17 1. cor. 14. deut. ● . 10. v. 13 & 11. v. 1. leuit. 5 v. 15. ezech. 44. v. 5. & 15. apoc. 19. dan. 7. isa. 56. heb. 12. the displaying of the popish masse vvherein thou shalt see, what a wicked idoll the masse is, and what great difference there is between the lords supper and the popes masse: againe, what popes brought in every part of the masse, and counted it together in such monstrous sort, as it is now used in the popes kingdome. written by thomas becon; and published in the dayes of queene mary. becon, thomas, 1512-1567. 1637 approx. 175 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 166 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2005-03 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a06744 stc 1719 estc s115076 99850295 99850295 15486 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a06744) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 15486) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1475-1640 ; 653:08) the displaying of the popish masse vvherein thou shalt see, what a wicked idoll the masse is, and what great difference there is between the lords supper and the popes masse: againe, what popes brought in every part of the masse, and counted it together in such monstrous sort, as it is now used in the popes kingdome. written by thomas becon; and published in the dayes of queene mary. becon, thomas, 1512-1567. [4], 331, [1] p. printed by a. g[riffin] for the company of stationers, london : 1637. printer's name from stc. at foot of title page: cum priuilegio. reproduction of the original in the cambridge university library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng mass -controversial literature. 2003-06 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2003-06 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2004-12 ben griffin sampled and proofread 2004-12 ben griffin text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-01 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the displaying of the popish masse : wherein thou shalt see , what a wicked idoll the masse is , and what great difference there is between the lords supper and the popes masse : againe , what popes brought in every part of the masse , and counted it together in such monstrous sort , as it is now used in the popes kingdome . written by thomas becon ; and published in the dayes of queene mary . psalme 73. they that forsake thee ( o lord ) shall perish : and all them , that commit whoredome against thee , thou shalt utterly destroy . ier. 15. fly away from babylon , let every man save his life , that yee be not rooted out with her wickednesse . for the time of the lords vengeance is come . apocalyps 18. i heard a voice from heaven saying : come away , &c. matth. 15. every plant that my heavenly father hath not planted , shall be plucked up by the roots . london , printed by a. g. for the company of stationers . 1637. cum privilegio . r. p. d. d. ioannes parkhurstus episcopus noruvicensis ad thomam baeconum . vidi & perlegi doctos baecone libellos , quo tua nonpridem sancta minerva dedito dispercam siquid legi unquam sanctius , aut si quid potuit populo tradier ut liu● . auspice perge deo tales vulgare libellos , variloquax sed nec lingua timenda tibi est . sic christum possis avido iaculare popello , sic possis nomen condecorare tuum . the displaying of the popish masse . if i were not led ( o yee massing priests ) with a naturall and fervent affection toward this our common country , which as a most tender mother , hath tenderly brought me forth , and as a most loving nurse , hath hitherto sweetly embraced , kindly fostered and carefully kept me up , whose destruction and utter desolation ( if provision betimes be not made ) i see unfainedly to be at hand : againe , if i were not moved with very pitie and tender compassion towards you my country-men , greatly lamenting and even from the very heart bewailing the miserable and wretched state wherein at this present yee stand , perceiving also your dreadfull damnation , besides the corporall plagues , which with other ye shall suffer , not to be farre off , except yee shortly repent , turne unto the lord our god , and leave your abominable idoll service : i would chuse rather quietly to goe forth in giving my minde to the studie of the holy scriptures according to my profession , and in calling on the name of god by fervent prayer for the redresse of the great abominations , which now of late dayes as most fierce & outragious flouds have violently burst in , overflowed and utterly deformed the christian common-weale of this our realme of england , than breaking off my present studies to take upon me at this time to write unto you , and especially of such a matter as some brainsicke persons straightwayes will condemne as hereticall , but all wil judge it superfluous , seeing the matter whereof i entend to write , doth but a little agree with the common opinion of religion , yea rather superstition , that is now received among us against the which to strive , who will not count it a thing of great folly , being so defenced not onely with lawes and statutes , but also with the power of the head rulers , with the wily subtilties of the fleshly hypocrites , and with the consent of the grosse multitude : as i may speake nothing of the untowardnesse , yea , rather frowardnesse and malicious madnesse of a number of you masse-mongers , to whom these my letters bee directed , which have been so rooted from the beginning of your greasie priest-hood in this wicked kinde of massing , taking it for most perfect , pure , true , sound , godly and christian religion , and have found so great ease , quietnesse , lucre , gaine and advantage in it , that it shall be more easie , except god setteth to his helping hand , to make a man of inde white , than to plucke many of you from your old accustomed and cankered trade , so hard a thing is it to use an old dogge to the reine , or to cure that disease that is bred in the bone . but notwithstanding , having a good opinion , although not of all , yet of some of you , which sinne not of obstinate malice against the truth , but of simplicitie , ignorance and blindnesse , offend for lacke of better knowledge , whom also peradventure god hitherto hath suffered to remaine in errour , that he now at the last thorow the riches of his mercy , might bring you into the glorious light of his blessed gospell , and make you of sauls , pauls ; of ravening wolves , faithfull shepheards ; of cruell persecutors ; christian preachers , of abominable idolaters , true worshippers of god : that by this meanes ye may beleeve and be saved : i will attempt even for your sakes , even to the uttermost of my power , as time shall serve , to declare unto you my minde concerning the great abuse , yea , the abominable idolatry , which ye commit in the most wicked and divellish masse , while yee take upon you contrary to the word of god , to defile the blessed sacrament of christs body and bloud , to minister it in your masses unto your selfe alone ; contrary to christs institution , to offer it for a sacrifice unto god for the sinnes of the quicke and dead , to avouch it to bee of no lesse excellencie , price , dignitie , efficacie , might , vertue and power , than the sacrifice , which our saviour christ offered on the altar of the crosse , and to make a shew of it to the people , that they may fall downe and worshippe it as a god , yea , god himselfe creator and maker of all things , that yee having the knowledge of these your errors may from henceforth cease to offend the lord our god , give over your idolatrous massing , repent you of your former life , and become godly ministers in the church of christ unto the glory of god , and the profit of his holy congregation . and that wee may the better discerne the truth from the falsehood and the prophanation of the sacrament from the true ministration thereof , i will compare christs doing in this behalfe and yours together , that when ye shall perceive how farre ye dissent and swarve from the truth , ye may forsake your errour , and follow no more the trifling traditions of antichrist , the bishop of rome , and of his adherents , but rather embrace that godly and faithfull order , which our saviour christ hath set and appointed in his holy word for the due ministration of his blessed communion . it is not unknowne to you , that the lord iesus after he had eatē the paschall lambe , with his disciples , according to the law of moses , that same night wherein hee was betrayed , knowing that the time appointed of his heavenly father frō everlasting , wherein he should offer himselfe a sweet smelling sacrifice to god for the sinnes of the world , was at hand , and willing to leave behinde him a memoriall of his glorious passion and precious death to his holy congregation , that the fruits , commodities and benefits , which the faithfull penitent sinners have by the offering up of his blessed bodie , should not be forgotten , but had in an everlasting remembrance , first of all preached a most fruitfull and comfortable sermon to his disciples , and afterward as he sate at the table with them , hee tooke bread into his hands , and after he had given thankes to his heavenly father ( as his manner was ) for his corporall gifts , but specially for the deare love , that hee of his owne meere mercie and free heartie good will bare toward mankind , he brake bread , and gave bread unto his disciples , saying : take yee , eat yee , this is my body , which is betrayed for you . doe this in remembrance of me . and as hee tooke the bread and made it a sacrament , that is to say , an holy signe , figure , token , and memoriall of his body breaking , so likewise he took the wine , and made that a sacrament , holy signe , figure , token , and memoriall of his bloud shedding , and after thankesgiving to his heavenly father for the benefits aforesaid , he delivered the cup unto his disciples , saying : drinke of this all ye . this cup is a new testament in my bloud , which is shed for many for the remission of sins . doe this so oft as yee shall drinke it , in the remembrance of me . and this heavenly banket once done , they said grace , that is to say , they praised god , by saying either certaine psalmes of david , or some other thankesgivings , and so departed . here is the whole institution of the lords supper . now let us compare christs supper with your popish and idolatrous masse , and see how well christs doings and yours agree together . if ye be the ministers of christ , and not of antichtist , the servants of god , and not of the divell , then will you follow your master christ , which saith , i have given you an example , that as i have done , so likewise yee should doe . let us now then goe in hand with the matter . first , we reade , that christ before hee fed his disciples , with the mysticall food of his body and bloud , made a sermon unto them , wherewith , as with a certaine most wholesome preparative , hee made meet the minds of his disciples , unto so worthy a banket , giving all faithfull ministers an example , that whensoever they with the congregation doe come together to celebrate the lords supper , there should be some sermon or exhortation made unto the people , that they might the better examine themselves , and the more deepely consider the thing that they goe about . and according to the example of christ , not only the apostle , but all the holy fathers also of the primitive church used the trade , and so did it continue in the church of christ , till antichrist , the bishop of rome , had driven christ out of place , and set up himselfe as god : againe , till hee had expulsed the supper of the lord , and set up his owne peevish , yea theevish idolatrous masse , as wee may see in the monuments of the ancient writers . they continued , saith blessed luke , in the apostles doctrine and fellowshippe , and in breaking of bread , and in prayers . and saint paul saith , as often as ye shall eat this bread , and drinke of the cup , shew , set forth , declare and preach the lords death till he come . a practise hereof have we in the acts of the apostles , where wee reade ; that upon one of the sabbath dayes , when the disciples , came together for to breake bread ( so termeth s. luke the receiving of the sacrament of christs body and blood ) blessed paul preached unto them , and continued the preaching unto midnight . and the sermon ended , they brake bread , ate , thanked god and departed . for if the sacrament of christ be never so comfortable , yet if they bee not known what they are , to what use they were instituted , what joyfull promises are annexed unto them ; what they signifie and preach unto the faithfull receivers , &c. what other things are they to us , thā the pretious stone was to aesops cock ? a sacramēt ministred without preaching of the word is but a dumb ceremony , a glasse offered to a blind man , and a tale told to one that is deafe . the apostles before the ministration of any sacrament preached , and so did the holy fathers of the primitive church . saint iohn baptist the sonne of the priest zachary , preached unto the people before hee baptized them . our saviour christ a little before his ascension , said to his apostles ; ●oe and teach all nations , baptizing them in the name of the father , and of the sonne , and of the holy ghost . here is baptism & the preaching of the word joyned together . and as concerning the blessed sacrament of christs body and blood did not our saviour christ preach at the institution and ministration of it ? are we not also commanded by the holy apostle , that whensoever wee come to receive the blessed communion , the death of the lord should be preached , declared , and set forth ? did not the apostles of christ , and all the godly bishops of the primitive church , observe the same order ? they considered right well how little the ministration of the sacraments availeth , without the preaching of the word : for as s. paul saith , how shall they believe without a preacher ? faith commeth by hearing , and hearing commeth by the word of god. none therefore of the lords sacraments ought publickely to be administred without preaching of the word ; yea , & that not in a strange tongue , but in such a speech as the people understand or else it were as good to speake the words unto a s●rt of sheepe or geese as unto them that are gathered together at the ministration of any sacrament . and this meant saint augustine , when hee said , take away the word , and what is water but water ? but let the word bee added to the elemēt , & it is made a sacramēt . whence hath the water such a power that it should touch body , and wash the heart ? but by the vertue of working of the word , not because it is spoken , but because it is beleeved . the word signifyeth here not only the speaking of ego baptizote , &c. or hoc est corpus meum , &c. pronounced by the priest in a strange tongue , but the preaching of the word of god uttered by the mouth of the ministers in such a language as the people understand , or else how shall they beleeve ? it is not the utterance of gods word in an unknowne speech that bringeth faith , but when it is so spoken , that it is understood of them that heare it , and that faith through the operation of the holy ghost ensueth , which otherwise is cold , lyeth idle , and worketh nothing in the heart of the hearer : for as s. augustine saith , take away the word , and what is water but water ? that is to say , take away the preaching of gods word from the sacramēt of baptism , which declareth what baptisme is , who instituted it , to what use it was ordained , what fruits and commodities wee receive by it , &c. and what doth the water of baptisme profit , i speake concerning such as are come to the use of reason , or such as are present at the ministration of baptisme . and so likewise may wee say of the sacrament of christs body and bloud . take away the word , and what is bread but bread ? what is wine but wine ? that is to say , take away the preaching of the lords death from the holy cōmunion , and what doth it profit to eat & drinke the sacramentall bread and wine ? seeing the mystery is not knowne nor understood . but put the preaching of the word to the elements , water , bread , and wine , and so are they made holy and honourable sacraments , full of singular joy and great comfort , as saint augustine saith , let the word be added to the element , and it is made a sacrament . therefore where the lords supper is rightly ministred , there is declared the death and passion of christ , there is shewed forth the misery of man , from the which hee could have beene no otherwise released , but only by the death of christ ; there is taught what the sacrament is , what it signifyeth , and to what use christ our saviour did institute it , there are the people exhorted not rashly , nor with unwashed feet , as they use to say , to come unto the lords table , but to prove , trie , and examin themselves , whether they come with such faith and love unto that most worthy mystery , as they ought , least they eat and drinke their own damnation , there are they stored up unto the workes of mercie toward the poore , and unto hearty thankesgiving to god the father for the death of his son christ , there also are they put in remembrance that after they have tasted those heavenly mysteries , & have spiritually fed upon the body & bloud of christ , which through faith are present , and truly received in spirit of faithful cōmunicants , and are become one body with christ , they ought no more to returne unto their old sinfull & wicked conversation , but from henceforth to serve their lord god in holines & righteousnes all the daies of their life . is there any such thing done in the popish masse ? who preacheth ? who maketh the exhortation ? who moveth the people to repentance , faith , love , and amendment of life , mutuall recōciliation , workes of mercie , or unto thankesgiving to god the father for the death of his sonne christ ? who playeth the schoolmaster , and giveth the people such exhortations , that they goe home from your masses better learned than they came thither ? what theese ever lest his theft ? what false lawyer gave over his bribing ? what whore forsooke her whordome ? what wicked man at any time repented him of his wickednesse , by comming unto your masse ? yea , rather they goe from your masse so well instructed , that they thinke that now they have heard a masse , they may doe all the day after what they will. amends is made beforehand if they bribe , poll , pill , steale , lye , slander , blaspheme , kill , murder , runne on whoring , play the harlot , fall to drunkennesse , to dicing , to carding , and doe all other unlawfull things ; it maketh no matter , for they have heard masse . they have satisfyed for the sinne , before it be committed . the hearing of masse hath dispatcht al the matter aforehand . and what marvaile is it , though such abomination followeth of your massing , seeing the people heareth no goodnesse at it , but rather are confirmed in all kind of ungodlinesse ? the chiefest jewell of all , i meane the preaching of gods word , is utterly exiled from your masse , as all goodnesse is besides . there is none of you all , that stand up in the pulpit , that lift up your voice to declare unto the people either their wickednesse , or preach unto them the most joyfull , pleasant , and comfortable gospel of our saviour christ. if there bee any preaching at all , the bells make it , when the popish clark ringeth to masse . the bells being hanged up tell the people somewhat which they understand , namely , that there is a popish masse ready at hand , come heare it who list , and be never the better when yee have done . but ye speake nothing at all that the people understand , and so are yee worse than the bells . oh how often have i seene here in england at the ministration of the holy communion , people sitting at the lords table , after they have heard the sermon , or the godly exhortation set forth in the booke of common prayer , read unto them by the minister , bitterly weep , heartily repent , and sorrowfully lament their too much unkindnesse and unthankfulnesse toward the lord god for the death of his sonne christ , and for his other benefits ; againe , their negligence in doing their duty toward their poore neighbours ? what free and large gifts also have i seene given to the poore mens boxe ? what laying aside of al enmity , and renewing of unfained mutuall reconciliation ? what loving embracing and holy kissing of one another ? what assurance of heartytty friendship for ever to continue , where immortall hatred was before ? what godlinesse also of life have i seen afterward practised by them , that were the communicants ? what alteration of manners ? what newnesse of conversation ? the covetous man to abhorre his covetousnesse , the adulterer to leave his adultery , the whore to defie her whoredom , the proud man to detest his pride , the vsurer to give over his usury , and so forth , by hearing the word of god preached , and by the worthy receiving of the holy communion , hath full oft bin seen in england , when the doctrine of the gospell flourished among us . never saw i one point of like godlinesse practised of any man by hearing your popish masses , but as they have come thither wicked and ungodly , so have they departed againe with the same ungodlines , and wickednes , rather being the worse than the better by hearing that your idolatrous masse , and yet ( oh god be mercifull unto us , and forgive us our sinnes ) the glorious and blessed cōmunion is now through the craft and subtilty of the devil , and through the wilinesse of his sturdy & stout champions , that filthy synagogue of sathan , utterly banished out of this realme , unto the great dishonour of god , and unspeakable sorrow of all true christians , and that most vile , most stinking , most pestiferous , most abominable , most wicked , most devillish & most idolatrous popish private masse received again , set up , and magnifyed above the starres , yea , and above god and his holy ordinance , when indeed of all idols , the masse is most to be abhorred of such as feare and love god. but though your masse were never so good , as indeed it is starke naught without comparison , yet forasmuch as it is done without the preaching of the word , and in a strange it is altogether unprofitable , yea , and abominable . notwithstanding , behold the hypocrisie and counterfeit holinesse , yea , rather your double dissimulation and devillish deceiving of the simple people : when yee have stood awhile pattering , like a sort of asses , yee know not what at the lower end of the altar , saying the introite or office of the masse , as they call it the kyrrys , the gloria in excelsis the collects ; the epistle , the graduall the allelujah , the tract , or the sequence , and all in latine , because such as are there present should keepe counsell , and not bewray your subtill secrets ; yee remove , as men soone weary of a place , from the one end of the altar to the other , and like prettie fellowes , you take up the masse-booke in your hands , making the people beleeve that now yee will speake somewhat whereby they shall greatly be edified , and well grounded in the knowledge of christ. and because like politicke and wise men , ye will not stumble in your doings but the better see what ye shal speake , ye have a candle lighted , though the day bee never so faire , and the sunne shine never so bright . besides this , that yee may bee in the better readinesse to doe some great nothing , yee pray to god or i know not to whom , in this manner : i 〈◊〉 domine benedicere . o lord command me to speak well . a prayer very necessary for your selves , which very seldome speake well , but nothing meet for the purpose that you goe about . for ye intend to speake nothing to the people , whereby they shal take any profit . neither purpose yee , for all your bragging , any more to preach to your masse-hunters , than yee intend with your bird bolt to shoot downe the weather-cocke of pauls steeple . and because god is not at hand , but far enough from vour elbow , and very s●ldom commeth at such mens callings , ye your selves take the paines to answer on this manner : dominus sit in corde meo , & in ●re meo , ad annunciandum populo sanctum evangelium de● . that is to say , the lord might be in my heart and in my mouth , to set forth , preach , and declare to the people the holy gospell of god. oh most vaine prayer . o wicked dissemblers both with god and man. ye wished that the lord god might be both in your heart , and in your mouth to set forth , preach and declare to the people the holy gospell of god , and yee intend nothing lesse . for as god is neither in your heart , nor in your mouth ; so doe ye not preach the holy gospell of god to the people , but onely yee rehearse a few latine sentences out of the gospel , which neither ye your selves , for the most part , nor yet the simple people understand . and notwithstanding , the silly sheepish simple soules solemnely stand up and give good eare , as though they should heare some notable thing , and goe home the better instructed , but all in vaine : for they learne nothing . onely when yee rehearse the name of iesus , they learne to make solemne courtesie , and so a peece of the gospell being once read , they stroke themselves on the head , and kisse the naile of their right thumbe , and sit down againe as wife as they were afore . and yee your selves , in the ste●d of your petronilla , kisse the book , and turne yee to the people and say , dominus vobiscum , god be with you , as though you could tarry no longer , but had some great journey to goe , and yet doe vee tarry there still till all good people be weary both of you , and of your popish masse . here is all your preaching . here is the whole summe of your exhortations . are not the people well taught ? have yee not played the good schoole-masters ? have ye not wel deserved your dirge groat and your dinner ? have ye not followed christ aright ? tell mee of goodfellowship , whose disciples are ye masse-mongers ? christs that preached , or antichrists that preach not ? looke whose order yee follow , his disciples are yee . but christs order follow yee not , therefore are ye not the disciples of christ , but the vile slaves of antichrist . here see yee then one foule fault , which you masse-mongers commit in your wicked masses . the best part ye utterly leave out , i meane the preaching of the gospell , which our saviour christ his apostles , and all true ministers in all ages , chiefly practised at the ministration of the holy communion . and in this behalfe yee agree not with christ , neither is your masse any thing like the lords supper . after the sermon christ came to the table , where he ministred the sacrament of his body and bloud to his disciples . now compare your doings with christs . christ came to a table to minister his holy supper . you come to an altar for to say your popish and idolatrous masse . christ tabled the matter , and yee alter it . oh , how well-favouredly ye agree ? even as christ and belial . god and the divell , light and darkenesse , or as the use to say , like haroe and harrow . christ ministred his supper at a table , and so did it continue certaine hundred yeares after in the church of christ , who used no altar at all , but at a table at the ministration of the lords supper , following the example of christ , which is the selfe truth , and example giver of all perfection and righteousnesse . but if you , following the example of antichrist , like bloudie sacrificers , fall in hand with altars , as though ye had sheepe and oxen to kil . christ willing to declare that all bloudie offerings and sacrifices were come to an end , which were but signes , figures , and shadowes of him , being the true and alone acceptable sacrifice for the sinnes of the world , came not unto an altar , but unto a table , and there ordained & ministed his holy supper , shewing thereby , that not onely the bloudie sacrifices , but also all altars which were built for bloudie sacrifices sake , doe now cease , and are utterly abolished . but yee whose desire alwayes is to come as neere unto christ , or unto his holy ordinance , as the hare covets to come nigh unto a tabret , refuse christs order , and dispise the table , spitefully calling it an oyster-board , and like heathenish and iewish priests , yee build altars , and upon them you offer your vile and stinking sacrifice , not unto god , but unto the divell , and unto antichrist . christ and his apostles , with all the holy bishops and reverend fathers of the primitive church ministred the lords supper at a table , and dare ye , o yee massemongers , contrarie to christs order , whose example in this behalf is , as it were , a commandement , and contrary to the practise of christs apostles , and of the primative church , minister it at an altar ? the holy scripture makes mention of eating the lords supper at the lords table , but at an altar to have it ministred , not one word . wee have none altar but one , which is iesus christ the lord , and he is in heaven onely concerning his humamanitie , and not here in earth ( as the idle brained papists dreame ) upon whom , and by whom we doe offer sacrifice of praise alwayes to god , that is to say , the fruit of those lips , which confesse his name . for he is our alone intercessour , our alone mediatour , and our alone advocate . besides this altar ( christ ) the faithfull congregation knoweth none , neither in heaven nor in earth . all other altars , therefore , which ye have in your churches , chappels and oratories , are idolatrous and abominable , and by no meanes to be suffered , where god is truely honoured , and his holy name faithfully called upon . and what other thing doe yee by maintaining your altars , than shew your selves very antichrists , and adversaries to gods holy ordinance , and as much as in you is , declare that christ is not yet come , or at the least have not offered himselfe a sacrifice to god the father for the sins of the people ? all bloudie sacrifice for sinne , cease now in the new testament , for the which altars served , therefore christ ministred unto his disciples the sacrament of his body and bloud , not at an altar , but at a table . but you , as though all bloudie sacrifices for sinne were not yet gone , have still your altars , and offer sacrifice upon them , as the heathenish and iewish priests did . they killed and sacrificed bruit beasts upon their altars , and you take upon you to sacrifice the sonne of god , and to make him me●t when it pleaseth you , if yee bee perswaded , that whatsoever christ did at the ministration of the holy communion , is best and most perfect , why then doe yee not follow him , and minister at a table as hee did , are yee wiser than christ ? are yee better learned than the wisedome of god ? have ye gone so long to schoole with that romish antichrist , that you dare take upon you to teach christ the master of all perfection ? and to find fault in his worke , as the cobler played with apelles picture ? i would have you to remember apelles answer . ne sutor ultra crepidam . againe , if ye beleeve that all bloudy sacrifices be ceased , and that the lord christ by the once offering up of his bodie , hath paid a full , suffic●ent and perfect ransome for the sinnes of all them that repent and beleeve , why then doe ye stand at the altars like baals priests , and take upon you to offer sacrifice for the sinnes of the people , as though all such things were not perfectly ended in the passion and death of christ ? if your altars be of god , shew it by the holy scriptures . but this can you not doe , therfore are your altars not of god , but of the divell ; not of christ , but of antichrist . is this to walke as christ hath walked ? is this to doe as christ hath given example ? is this to bee christs minister , or rather christs controller ? god amend you , and once againe destroy those your idolatrous and bominable altars . when christ came to the table to minister the holy communion , he came in such comely apparell , as he used daily to weare . but how come yee in the name of god , that we may see how well yee follow christ in this behalfe also ? yee come unto your altars , as a game-player unto his stage . and as though your own apparell , or else a faire white surplesse were not seemely enough for the due administration of the sacrament , ye first put upon your head , an head-peece , called an amice , to keepe your braines in temper , as i thinke , then put yee on also a linnen albe in stead of a smocke , to declare how well ye love women , specially other mens wives , and that albe you gird unto you for catching of cold , though it bee in the middest of summer . after this you cast a stoale about your necke in stead of an halter , which signifieth that ye wil persecute and strangle with an halter , or else burne with fire so many as speake against your abhominable apish masse , and such other wicked traditions . againe , upon your left arme ye put on a fannell , much like to a manacle , or a fetter . and this hath also a solemne mysterie . for it preacheth , that so many as yee can come by , that unfainedly favour the truth of christs gospell , yee will man●cle , fetter , locke , stock , imprison , chaine , and doe them all the mischiefe you can . last of all , come on your fooles coat , which is called a vestment , lacking nothing but a coxcombe . this is diversly daubed . some have angels , some the blasphemous image of the trinity , some flowers , some pecockes , some owls , some cats , some dogs , some hares , some one thing , some another , and some nothing at all● but a crosse upon the backe to 〈◊〉 away spirits . this your fooles coat gayly gawded ▪ signifyeth your pleasant finenesse and womanly nicenesse , and your delectation in the varietie , or change of venus pastimes , because ye will not be cumbred with one lawfull wife . thus as men well harnessed for an interlude , yee come forth to play hickesc●rners part with your shamelesse , smooth , smi●ling faces , and with your lustie broad , bald , shaven crownes , antichrists brood of rome , to signifie unto such nice nymphs as know your secret subtilties , and jolly juglings , that yee are beasts of that marke that will never faile lady venus , nor none of her kind kitlings ; but above all other , both for your idlenesse and belly-cheere , are most meet at all times , like stout , sturdie , stowre , strong stalents to play priapu● part , and to furnish the place , per alium , when perse is out of the way , such is your unchast chastitie , o yee filthy haters of godly matr●monie . but whence have ye your game-players garments ? of the heathen and idolatrous priests ? but with such have the christians nothing to doe ? of the iewish ministers ? but that law is abrogated by christs comming , of whose vertues the garments of the priests were figures & signes , whereof ye have none at all . had yee them of the divell , and of antichrist of rome ? send them thither againe betimes , lest ye goe to the divell with them for company . wheresoever yee had them , certaine am i that yee have them not of the authoritie of the holy scripture . christ and his apostles used no such ●ond coats at the administration of the sacrament , christ alloweth no pompe nor pride , but all simplicitie and plainenesse ▪ therefore plainly and simply , without any such hickescorners apparell , did christ deliver the sacramentall bread and wine to his disciples . the more simply , so that it bee comely , the sacrament is ministred , the neerer is it unto christs institution . but i know not whether your gay , gawdie , gallant , gorgious game-players garments , w ch ye weare at the masse , are more to bee disallowed , thā your blind and corrupt judgemēt is to bee lamented in the wearing of them . for the most part of you have such spiced & nice cōsciences in the use of them , that if ye lacke but the least of these fooles bables , ye dare not presume to say masse for a thousand pound . the laudable order of our mother holy church is broken . yee cannot consecrate aright . yee have not al your tools . therefore can ye not play cole under candlesticke cleanely , nor whip master winchard above the boord , as ye should doe . and gratiously considered . for what is a worke-man without his tooles ? god have mercie on you , and give you grace to bee better minded , and to lay aside such apish toyes , and to put on the lord iesus christ , that yee may know him to be your alone saviour , and garnish your life with his most godly vertues , practising that in your ministration , whereof ye have him a president in his conversation . and this is also to bee noted , that when christ came in his owne usuall apparell unto the table , he did not kneele as the papists doe , nor yet stand as the iewes did in the old law , but hee sate downe at the table . how do ye agree with christ at your masse in this behalfe ? christ sate , yee sometime stand upright , sometime leane upon your elbowes , sometime crouch downeward , sometime kneele , but sit doe yee never , because ye will still contrary christ , and bee one ace above him . and although gestures in this behalfe in some mens judgements seeme to be indifferent ; yet the nearer we come to christs order , the better it is . for who can prescribe a more perfect trade for all things to bee done at and about the ministration of the lords supper , than the which christ used himselfe ? indeed , the iewes when they received their sacrament , i meane the paschal lambe , which was also a figure of christ to come and to be slaine , as ours is a signe and token that hee is alreadie come , slaine and gone , stood upon their feet , with their loynes girded , and staves in their hands , to signifie not onely that they were strangers and pilgrims in this world , and had here no dwelling citie , but also that there was a further journey yet to goe in the religion of god , and that other sacramēts were to be looked for . but christ and his disciples did sit at their supper to declare that all things afore figured in the law , are now perfectly fulfilled in christ , that lambe of god , which was slaine from the beginning of the world , and there are no more sacraments to bee looked for , nor none other doctrine to bee enquired for , neither the iewes talmuth , nor mahomets alkaron , nor the popes decretals , nor yet the emperours interim , but the doctrine onely , which christ hath alreadie taught , and left in writing by the hands of his apostles . the christian religion both concerning sacraments and doctrine , is now by christ brought to such a consummate perfection and perfect consummation , that nothing ought to be added as necessarie also for our salvation . therfore doth christ with his apostles sit at the receiving of the sacrament , and not stand ; after the manner of the iewes , even as they , which travelling by the way , are come unto their journeyes end , are wont to sit downe and to take their rest . here have wee an example of christ to sit at the lords table , when wee receive the holy communion , and not to kneele . but this doe ye papists neither observe your selves , nor suffer other so to doe . ye are like those lewd lawyers , subtill scribes , boysterous bishops , sawcie sadduces , fine pharisees , pratling priests , and hollow hypocrites , against whom our saviour christ thundereth on this manner . woe unto ye scribes and pharisees , ye hypocrites , for yee shut up the kingdome of heaven before men , ye neither goe in your selves , neither suffer ye them that come , to enter in . there may bee no sitting at your ministration , though wee have christ for a president never so much . the servant may not follow his lord , nor the disciple his master . whatsoever christ practised , we may not doe , but what antichrist deviseth , that must we needs doe . therefore doe ye papists , which be alwayes enemies to christ and to his holy ordinances , binde all your captives to kneel at the receiving of the sacrament , and so makes them plain idolaters in worshipping the bread for a god . o wicked soule-slayers ! but why binde ye the people rather to kneel at the ministration of the lords s●pper , than at the ministration of baptisme , seeing christ is no lesse present at the one , than at the other , and by his holy spirit worketh no lesse effectually in baptisme , than he doth in the supper ? why doe yee not also compell the people to kneele at the preaching of gods word seeing it is of no lesse authoritie , than the sacrament of christs bodie and bloud . but i know your subtilties right well . ye will say , the sacrament of the altar ( i use your own tearmes ) is god and man in forme of bread , and therefore it cannot have too much reverence , worship and honour given unto it . i answer : it is sooner said , than proved . as the old idolaters in times past had gods of their own making , and worshipped them , so have yee a god of your owne devising , which ye your selves worshippe , and compell other so to do likewise . and as the old idolatrous priests by boasting the dignitie of their feigned gods , whom they served , lived an idle and voluptuous life , and were fed of the painfull labours of other mens hands , so likewise ye new idolaters and priests of baal advance , set forth , and blow out at paul● crosse , and in all other places , the majesty , excellencie , dignity and worthinesse of your new baken little great god , that by this meanes yee may bee had in admiration among the foolish simple ideots , and bee nourished of the sweat of other mens browes , you your selves like idle , lazie , loytering lubbers , and very pestilences of the common-wealth , onely borne to consume the good fruits of the earth , going idly up and downe swinging with your long gowns , sarsnet tippets , and shaven crowns , like very caterpillers of aegypt . a wonderfull god it is that yee set forth to the people to be worshipped . not many dayes past , it was corn in the plough-mans barne , afterward the miller ground it to meale , then the baker mingling a little water with it , made dough of it , and with a paire of hot printing irons , baked it . now at the last come you blustering and blowing , and with a few words spoken over it , yee charme the bread in such sort that either it ●rudgeth straightwayes away beyond the moone , and a faire young childe above fifteen● hundred yeares old come in the place of the bread , or else , as the most part of you papists teach , of the little thinne cake , yee make the very same body of christ that was borne of marie the virgin , and dyed for us upon the altar of the crosse , the bread being turned into the natural flesh of christ , and the accidents of the bread onely remaining , according to the doctrine of pope nicholas , and pope innocent . o wonderfull creators and makers ! o marveilous fathers , which beget a childe elder than the father ! and after yee have made him , yee teare him in pieces , yee eat him , yee digest him , and send him downe by a very homely place . o cruell and unmercifull fathers , so to handle your poore young old child ! and this is the goodly god whom the people may not receive sitting nor standing , but kneeling upon their marrow-bones . o false and subtil hypocrits , right cousens to the idolatrous priests of babylon ; for as they made the king beleeve , and his nobility , with all the commons , that bel was a living god , and that there must bee prepared for him every day twelve cakes , forty sheepe , and sixe great pots of wine , to eate and drinke ; so doe yee make the queene , her counsell , the nobility and commons of this realme for the most part beleeve that the little thin round white cake , which ye hold up above your head , at your abominable masse , after yee once said these five words over it , hoc est corpus meum , and have blowed , blasted , and breathed over it , is straightwayes both a living god , and a very living man , even christ god and man , as he was borne of marie the virgine . but full falsely doe ye lie , and dissemble with the queene , with her couunsell , and with the commons of this realme , even as those idolatrous priests of babylon did with the king , and with hi● subjects . for as that idol bel was not a living god , but an image made of clay within , and of metall without , so likewise for all your consecrating , blowing , blasting and breathing , your little cake is neither a living god , nor a living man , but as it was bread before yee brought it to your idolatrous altar , so is it , when yee both hold it up and eat it . but as the idolatrous priests of babylon taught the people plainely , that bel was a living god , that they by that meanes might live in wealth and idlenesse , so do ye likewise stoutly both at pauls crosse , and else where preach unto the people , that the sacrament of the altar is the true , naturall , reall , corporall , carnall , and substantiall body of christ , god and man , even he was borne of virgin marie , & hung on the altar of the crosse , flesh , bloud and bone , that ye by this meanes may maintaine your popish kingdome , and live idly and pleasantly of the labours of other mens hands . but if a daniel might sit at the queens table , talke with the nobility , and preach to the commons of england , the jugling of the papists should soone be espyed . god for his mercies sake & for the deare heart-bloud of his most deare son , send us a daniel , and open the eyes of the queene , of her councell , and of all the inhabitants of this realme , that they perceiving your subtle iugling and crafty daubing , may know you to be , as yee are , even very antichrists , hisse you out of all honest company , and for ever after beware of your pestilent & damnable doctrine . amen , amen . after that our saviour christ was set downe at the table with his disciples , and had eaten the paschall lambe , willing to institute an holy memoriall of his passion and death , he tooke bread and gave thanks , saith the scripture . now let us see what yee doe . first ye come solemnly forth in your gay , galant and game players garments , which as isidore and polidore write , was the invention of pope steph●nus about the yeare of our lord two hundred fifty and six , borrowed , as it may seeme of the iewish priests . ye come to the altar with your masse-book corporasse ▪ chalice , & bread , with such other trinkets . your altars brought into the church first of all pope sixtus the secōd , about the yeare of our lord two hundred threescore and five . and pope felix the first adioyned the hallowing of altars commanding that no masse should bee sung upon any altar , except it were first hallowed . in the yeare of our lord two hundred seventy and sixe . and p. boniface appointed white linnen clothes to be laid upon the altars about the yeare of our lord 610. the corporasse was the devise of pope sixtus ( as platina and sabellicus write , about the yeare of our lord an hundred and twenty and five . the cup wherein the sacrament of christs bloud was ministred , which wee now commonly call the chalice , was in the time of the apostles and the primitive church made of wood ; but pope zepheri●us commanded chalices of glasse to be used in the yeare of our lord 202. and afterward pope vrbanus enjoyned , that the chalices should be made either of silver , or of gold , in the yeare of our lord 227. the bread appointed for the communion was indifferent , whether it were leavened or unlea vened , till pope alexander came , which a● they write , in the yeare of our lord iii. commanded that onely unleavened bread should bee used at the lords supper . notwithstanding the greekes from the apostles time unto this day , have ever used leavened bread in the ministration of the holy communion , as they use also wine onely in their cup , whereas the latine church customably mingle water with the wine , which was also pope alexanders device . now standing before the altar , after yee have crossed your selves upon your forheads and breasts for feare of wicked spirits , ye say the confiteor , and make your confession , which was the ordinance of pope dam●sus about the yeare of our lord 370. but to whom do you make your confession ? to god alone ? none of that . but to blessed mary , and all the saints of heaven , and & v●bis , ye might say , & bobus , well enough . for many times besides the boy and parish clerke that wait upon you , there bee in the church as many white bulls and fat oxen , as there bee men and women . but where have yee learned to confesse your sinnes to the blessed mary , and to all the company of heaven , which heare not one word that yee speake ? ye have sinned against god , and you confesse your faults to mary , peter , 〈◊〉 , th●mas , a●an , abel , ni●● , abrah●m , ioh● baptist , and i know not to whom , not to how many . this is new catholike divinity , found in portasse and m●ss●ll , but in no part of gods blessed boo●e . divinity meete for such divines . again , whom doe you desire to pray for you ? our s●viour christ which alone is our intercessour , mediatou● , and advocate ? nothing lesse . yee make no mention of him . he is utterly forgotten . yee desire holy mary and all the saints of god to pray for you . but where learned ●ou this tyrologie ? for theologie it is not . even of your father antichrist of rome . but as mary and the other heavenly citizens heare your confession , so pray they for you . but they heare not your confession , neither do they pray for you . o vaine bablers and talkers of trifles ! your masse having so good a beginning , must have a glorious ending . it beginngth with lies , wee shall find it also to proceed with lies , yea , and to end with lies , that it may bee prooved a monster of lies . after that you have made your confession to god and to our lady , and to all the holy company of heaven , and have given your selfe absolution for lacke of a ghostly father , yee approach to the altar , and making a crosse upon it , yee kisse it in stead of some other , whom you love better . then fall yee in hand with your massing , and ye beginne the introite , or office of the masse , which pope celestinus brought in about the yeare of our lord 430 that done , ye say the kyry , which , as some report , pope gregorius the first put to the masse about the yeare of our lord 600. some ascribe it to pope silvester , which lived about the yeare of our lord 330. but it seemeth to bee borrowed of the greeke church , forasmuch as the words are greeke , and sound in english , lord have mercie on us . after these things ye goe unto the midst of the altar , and look up to the pixe , where you thinke your god to be , and making solemne curtesie , like womanly ioane , ye say the gloria in excelsis , a godly both thankesgiving & prayer , & very fruitfull and comfortable , if it were spoken in the english tongue . the author hereof some affirme pope stephanus to be , who lived in the yeare of our lord seven hundred and seventy . some ascribe it to pope telesph●rus , which was in the yeare of our lord one hundred and thirty . some to pope symachus , who lived in the yeare of our lord five hundred . some to saint hilarie bishop of pict●ve , about the yeare of our lord three hundred forty and five . these things dispatched out of the way , yee have a pleasure to see who is in the church , and how well your masse is frequented , and therfore yee turne yee to the people , if any bee there , and bid them god speed in latine , with dominus vobiscum , because they understand nothing but english. turning againe to the altar , yee say certaine collects , wherof although some of them bee good , yet many of them bee very superstitious and starke staring naught . for in them yee set foorth before god the intercessions and merits of saints , and yee desire for the nity and worthinesse of them to be heard , to have forgivenesse of sinnes , and everlasting life . o blasphemous idolaters ! what is it to robbe christ of his priesthood , if this be not ? what spoileth christ of his merits , if this doe not ? what treadeth under foot the pretious bloud of our saviour christ , if the saying of such abominable blasphemous collects doe it not ? the authour of the collects some make pope gelasius , which lived in the yeare of our lord three hundred & ninetie . some p. gregorie , of whom ye heard before . the collects once done , yee reade the epistle , but in such a tongue as the people understand nothing , as yee doe all other things . some say that pope telesphorus , of whom wee spake before , added the epistle to the masse . some make hierome the authour of it , which lived about the yeare of our lord three hundred eighty seven . then doe ye say the grayle , whereof they make pope gelasius the authour , of whom wee spake before . immediately followeth the allelujah , which they say , pope gregorie brought in , of whom also wee spake before . some say , it was borrowed of the church of ierusalem , and so brought into the church of rome in the time of pope d●masus . it soundeth in english , o praise the lord. here is latine , greeke , and hebrew , in your popish masse , wherof the people understand nothing , but as for english , which the people understand yee meddle nothing with-all , because you will make them your riding fools , and keep them still in blindnes . then followeth the tract , or the sequence , one brought in by pope telesphorus the other by abbot nothg●rus , who lived in the yeare of our lord 845. after that yee have mumbled over all these things , yee take up your masse-booke , and away ye goe to the other end of the altar to reade the gospel . but first of all yee uncover the chalice , and look whether your drinke bee there or no , least you should chance to bee deceived , when the time of your repast come . if it bee there you make solemn curtesie to your little idoll , that hangeth over the altar , and so goe in hand with the gospel . and all in latine , because it shall doe no man good . the authour of adding the gospel to the masse , some make pope telesphorus , some saint hierome , of whom wee spake before . pope anastasius , who lived in the yeare of our lord 404. ordayned that the people should stand up when the gospel is read , that they might heare and understand the doctrine of the gospell , and frame their lives according to the same . this use is observed at this day in the popish masses , i meane the people st●●d up and make courtesie , when they heare the name of iesus , but they understand not one word . it were as good in such sort to bee read to swine and dogges , as to the christian people , seeing they understand it not . the gospel ended , with another kisse upon the booke , yee say the creed , which as they write , pope marcus made , about the yeare of our lord 335 & cōmanded that the clergie & the people should sing it together for the confirmation of their faith . after the creed upon solemne feasts ye use to cense the altar , which was first brought in by pope leo , about the yeare of our lord 876. these things done with all solemnitie , ye turne you again into the church , to see whether your customers bee come or no , and so bidding them god-speed , yee turne again to the altar , and goe forth with your businesse . then doe you say your offertory , which pope eutichi●●● brought in , who lived about the yeare of our lord 285. after the offertory is said , yee take the chalice up in your hands with the little round cake , lying upon the p●tine or cover of the chalice , and lifting up your eyes , yee pray on this manner : suscipe sancta trinit●s , &c. take o holy trinitie this oblation , which i unworthy sinner offer in the honour of thee , of blessed mary the virgin , and of all thy salu●s , for the salvation of the living , and for the rest and quietnesse of all the faithfull that are dead . the authour of this prayer i cannot finde . it is so good , that i thinke hee was ashamed to tell his name . but what thinke yee of this prayer ? bee judges your selves , whether any thing may be uttered more unto the dishonour of god , and the utter defacing of christs bloud , than this your popish , and blasphemous orison . first of all , what offer ye ? yee must answer , either the little round cake , or else the chalice , or the wine and water that is in it . to whom doe yee offer it ? to mary the virgin , and to all the saints of heaven , because yee will lacke no company , but gratifie a multitude with a thing of nought . wherefore doe ye offer that oblation ? for the salvation of the living , and for the rest or quietnesse of all the faithfull that are dead . ah , who ever heard of such a sacrifice or oblation ? a wafer cake , which is yet but meere bread , and no sacrament , and a chalice with a spoonefull of wine mingled with two or three drops of water to be offred for the salvation of the living , and for the rest or quietnesse of all the faithful that are dead ? o abomination ! o intollerable blasphemie ! if adams posteritie might have beene saved by such trifling oblations , what needed the son of god to have died for us ? if a morsell of bread and a full of wine offered up of an idolatrous priest bee of such vertue , that it may obtaine salvation for the quicke and the dead : was not christ greatly overseene to suffer so great paines for the redemption of man ? if thousands of great oxen , bulls , kine , calves , goats , sheepe , lambes , doves , &c. in the old law could not take away the sinnes of the people , although they were offered at the commandement of god , is it to be thought , that a wafer cake and a spoonefull of wine mingled with water , and appointed to bee offered by antichrist , is a sufficient oblation to purchase salvation for the living and rest and quietnesse for the dead ? o damnable idolatrie ! there is no sacrifice that can save us , but the glorious passion , and precious death of our lord and saviour christ iesus alone , as saint paul saith : god forbid , that i should rejoyce in anything but in the crosse , that is to say , in the passion and death of our lord iesus christ. and to whom doe yee offer your new solemne sacrifice . to god alone ? nay , but to blessed mary also , and to all the company of heaven . in this also , if your oblation and sacrifice were good , doe ye grievously offend . for yee may offer sacrifice to none but to god alone . therefore you making your oblation to mary , to peter , to paul , to magdalen , to iohn , to iames , to erke●●ald , to grymbald , and i cannot tell to how many thousands more , are abominable idolaters , seeing that as much as lyeth in you , ye make of the saints gods , and so doe ye rob god of his glorie . god saith by the prophet , i am the lord , this is my name , i will give my glory to none other . and the saints themselves crie in this manner : not to us , o lord , not to us , but to thy name give the glory . after that your prayer , yee set your chalice downe againe , saying these words : acceptu●s sit omnipotenti deo hoc sacrificium novuns . that is to say , o that this new sacrifice might be thankfully taken of almighty god! why , d ee yee doubt of the matter ? is your prayer so good , and your faith so strong , that yee doubt , whether god will heare you , and receive your sacrifice or no ? indeed you may right well call it a new sacrifice , for it was never heard of afore ; that a wafer ▪ cake and a spoonefull of wine mingled with water , should be an oblation and sacrifice for the salvation of the living , and for the rest and quietnesse of all the faithfull that are dead . but notable is your doing afterward . when ye have thus sacrificed and offered , yee trudge straight-wayes to the altars end , and wash your hands . to what end i know not , except it bee , that you have defiled your selves with your new stinking sacrifice , w ch you even now offered unto god , to blessed mary , and to all the company of heaven , for the salvation of the quicke , and for the rest and quietnesse of all the faithfull that are dead , and thinke by the washing of your hands , to be cleansed from the abominable spirituall whoredome , which yee have committed against god. i suppose yee learned this washing of your hands of pilate , which when for favour of the iewes , and for feare of caesar , he had unjustly condemned christ unto death , called for a bason of water to wash his hands , and said , i am cleane from the bloud of this righteous man. but as he for all his washing escaped not the vengeance of god , but dyed a most miserable death , even so may yee bee sure , though yee wash your hands never so oft , not to escape the heavie hand of god , for speaking such blasphemies against the lord and his annointed , except yee out of hand cease from your abominable massing , which is nothing else but very idolatry , meere blasphemy , great dishonour to god , and extreme injury to the precious bloud of christ , while yee ascribe that unto bread , wine , and water , which only appertaineth unto the passon and death of our saviour christ. after ye have washed your hands , ye returne again to the altar , holding your hands before you , like maidenly priests , and manerly bowing your selves to your little great god that shal be , ye make a crosse upon the altar , and kisse it in stead of your pretty petronilla , and then having peradvēture a good mind to behold some shee saint in the church , yee turne your selves , looking downe to the people , and saying , orate pro me fratres & sorores . o pray for mee ye brethren and sisters , when many times there is no bodie in the church , but the boy that helpeth you to say masse , and so making solemn courtesie like womanly ioue , ye returne unto your accustomed pattering . what ye say , no man can tell . for now comes in your subtill secrets . and they may right well bee called secrets , for they are so secret , and so secretly spoken , that no man is the wiser for them . but whatsoever they are , good stuffe i warrant you they are . and for as much as they bee certaine collects , they father them upon pope gelasius , and pope gregory , of whom we spake before . when ye have once done with your subtill , solemne , sleepy secrets , ye burst out into open words , and exhort the people to lift up their hearts unto god , and to consider the mysteries that are now in hand , and to be thankefull to god for the benefits of their redemption . ah , would god , yee so spake the words , that the people might bee edified by them . but ye speake in such sort , that it were much better for you to hold your peace , and the people to be at home asleepe . for yee doe nothing else than beat the ayre with your breath . the people understand nothing at all , neither doe they consider any thing , but only are there present as vaine gasers . these admonitions to the people , of lifting up their hearts unto god , and to be thankfull to him for his benefits , set forth in the death of his son christ , were used in the primative church as we may see in saint cyprian and saint augustine . the authour of these godly exhortations is not knowne . immediately followeth the preface , and because there bee divers , they father them upon pope gelasius , and pope gregory , as they doe all other things , whereof they can finde no certaine authour . but this is most certaine that the ancient church used but one preface , which is called the quotidian or daily preface . these things passed over , yee fall in hand with the sanctus , w ch lifting up your hands , ye speake with a loud voice , & that ended , ye kisse the masse-booke , because some other is not at hand . the s●●ctus , as they say , was brought in by pope sixtus , which was about the yeare of our lord 125. and commanded to be sung in the church . now commeth in your holy masse canon , whereof be diverse authors . for it is an hotch-potch devised & made by a number of popes , and by others also . it is a very beggers cloke , cobled , clouted and patched with a multitude of popish ragges . and yet the papists affirme it to bee the holiest part of your masse . and it may soone be . for there is not one part of the masse , that can worthily be called good , as it is used at this present . all things are so far out of order without edifying , and contrary to gods holy ordinance . the authors of this their goodly and godly canon they make pope ale●ander , pope gelasius , pope gregory , pope sixtus , pope leo , and a certaine man called scholasticus , with other . and here beginne yee wonderfully to crosse , and to pray for the universall church , first for our lord pope , secondly for the bishop of the diocesse wherein yee dwell , thirdly , for your king and queen , last of all , for all those that be of the catholike faith . and now come yee to your first memento , which serveth for the living , where yee stand nodding like a sort of drunkards , and praying , yee say for all your good friends and benefactors , for all that uphold and maintaine the kingdome of the clergie , and defend our mother holy church against the assaults of the gospellers , and here ye alledge a sort of saints , and ye desire that for their merits and prayers sake , yee may bee saved and preserved from all evill . o abhominable blasphemers ! this done , yee fall to crouching and beholding the little cake and chalice , & speaking a few little good words in latine , yee blesse and crosse wonderfully the cake and chalice , as though they were haunted with some ill spirits . while yee are thus blessing , the boy or parish clerke rings the little sacry bell , which biddeth the people lay all things aside now , and lift up their heads , behold their maker , kneele down and worship their lord god , which sir iohn shall straight-wayes make with as much speed as may be , and shew him unto them above his head . before it was sursum corda , lift up your hearts unto the lord , but now is sursum capita , come in , lift up your heads , and looke upon your maker betweene the priests hands , with his arse turned towards you , because no woman at that present shal be inamored with his sweete and loving face . come off , kneele downe , looke up , knocke your brest , behold the apple-maker of kent , and marke well him that killed thy father . this is the lord thy god. let us fall downe and worship him . o unsufferable idolatrie . notable is the doctrin of the nicene counsell , which commandeth that wee shall not direct our mindes downeward to the bread and cup , but lift them up to christ by faith , whith is ascended up into heaven really and corporally , and not present carnally in the sacramental bread , as the papists teach . christ , while we live in this world , is not to be seen with the eyes of this body , but of the spirit by faith . if we wil see and worship christ aright , we must see and worship him in spirit , sitting in his glory and majestie above in heaven at the right hand of god his father , and not behold him in the sacramentall bread with the corporall eyes , where nothing is to be seene , felt , tasted , or received with the mouth , but bread onely . but before wee come to your consecration , to your sacring , and to the lifting up of your litle great young old god , we will first see what christ did , afterward compare your doings with his . christ sitting at the table , tooke bread , and after hee had given thankes , he brake the bread , and gave it to his disciples for to eat . christ sate at the table , yee stand at an altar . christ tooke bread to make it a sacrament of his body , yee take a little thinne round cake , or rather a thinne piece of starch to make it the naturall body of christ , god and man , and to offer it for a sacrifice for the sinnes of the quicke and the dead . christ delivered the bread to his disciples , to eate it in the remembrance of his death , ye take the bread , and hold it up above your head , and make a shew of it to the people , and when yee have once so done , ye alone devoure and eate it up . christ brake the bread , signifying thereby the breaking of his body on the altar of the crosse for the salvation of the world , according to this his promise in the gospell of saint iohn i am that living bread which came downe from heaven . if any man eateth of this bread , hee shall live for ever . and the bread that i will give is my flesh , which i will give for the life of the world . ye breake the bread also , which yee say is the naturall body of christ , flesh , bloud , and bone . but very fondly ye breake it . for yee breake your host ( i use your own tearmes ) in three parts , holding it over the chalice , while you breake it , i thinke because yee would lose none of the bloud , that should issue out of the body , which ye newly have made , and now suddainely yee breake and destroy againe . when ye have broken your new formed god in three parts , two pieces you keepe still in your hands for flying away , and the third yee let fall downe into the chalice , to lie there awhile a sleeping , or to put you in remembrance of your nappy ale and tost , which your pretty parnell hath full lovingly prepared for you against your masse bee done , lest you should chance to faint for taking so great paines at your butcherly altar . many significations have the papists invented for those 3. broken pieces of the cake , which all here to rehearse were too long . i will rehearse one , and if yee desire to know more , enquire of your brethren the papists , and they shall easily teach you . the first part say they , which is both the longest and the greatest , doth not onely signifie , but also is a sacrifice of thanksgiving to god the father for his benefits declared to mankinde in the death of christ his sonne . the second is a sacrifice propitiatory for the sinnes of the people , that ●ee living in this world , but specially for the sinnes of such as have bought the masse for their money , that they may bee delivered a poena & culpa toties quoties . the third piece , which is let downe into the chalice , is a satisfactory sacrifice for the soules that lie miserably puling in the hot fire of purgatorie , to deliver them from the grievous paines and bitter torments that they there suffer , and through the vertue and merits of that sacrifice to bring them unto everlasting glory . o intollerable abomination . here is the breaking of your host , with the goodly mysteries thereof . christ , say the evangelists , took bread , brake it , and gave it to his disciples , saying , take , eat , this is my body , which is broken for you . doe this in remembrance of me . yee also take bread and breake it , but ye give it to your selves . but as christ gave the bread to his disciples , willing them to eat it in remembrance of his passion and death , so ought yee to doe to the faithfull congregation that are present , and not like swinish beasts to eate and drinke up all alone your selves , and afterward to blesse the people wi●h an empty cup , as ye doe at your high and solemne feasts . but this doe yee not , therefore are ye plaine antichrists . take this bread , saith our saviour christ. take it in your hands . hand off , say yee papists . gape , and wee will put it in your mouths , and feed yee as children use to feed their iack-dawes . handle so pretious a relique ? marry sir , god forbidde . the woman peradventure hath lien with her husband all night , or the husband with the wife , and shall such touch the pretious body of our lord with their handes ? marry sir , god forbid . that were a piteous case . but yee abominable whoremasters , ye filthy fornicators , yee stinking sodomites , ye deceitfull deflowrers of mayds , yee devillish defilers of mens wives yee cankred corrupters of widowes , and yee lecherous locusts , may lie with your whores and harlots all night , and the next day after goe to masse , consecrate , make , touch , handle , breake and devoure your god , and yet ye defile the sacrament nothing at all . o abominable whorehunters . o monstrous massmongers . honest matrimonie , after your corrupt judgements defileth the sacrament of christs body and bloud , but filthy fornication , abominable adultery , wicked whoredome , and stinking sodomitrie advanceth the dignity thereof . o right chaplins of that filthy idoll priapus . but come off i pray you , what hath the hand more offended than the mouth that it may not touch the sacrament ? are they not both the good creatures of god ? are they not made both of one substance ? and to say the truth , there commeth not so much evil from the hand , as there doth out of the mouth for out of the mouth come blasphemies , cursed speakings , evil reportes , bannings , slanders , lies , malicious words , filthy tales , idle talke , singing of bawdy ballads , &c. but from the hand commeth vertuous occupation , honest labour , painefull travaile , getting of thy living , helping of our neighbors , and almes-giving to the poore . but yee are alwayes like your selves , that is to say , very antichrists . for yee are evermore contrary to christ. christ delivered the sacrament into his disciples hands , and you put it into the communicants mouths , as though the people were not so wise , as to put a morsel of bread in their owne mouthes . the people are much bound to you , that have so good opinion of them . ye make them momes indeed , asses , louts , and your very riding fools god once open their eyes , that they may perceive your jugling . ye are well worthy to have your tithes and offerings truely payd , yee doe your duty so well . verily , they that give ought to find you masse-mongers withall , and to maintaine you in your abominable massing , doe nothing else but offend god , dishonor christ , tread under foote the pretious bloud of christ , make christs death of no price ▪ maintaine idolatrie , defie the holy communion , destroy the christian common-weale , uphold antichrists brood , cherish satans chaplains , pamper priapus pildepates , make fat venus stout stallions , enrich bacchus sacrificers , and nourish such monsters as doe nothing else than murther , kill and slay the soules of so many as follow your damnable doctrine , and hant your idolatrous masses . let the christians therefore beware , how and upon whom they bestow their goods , lest by giving to massing priests , they get to themselves everlasting damnation . the doer and maintainer shall receive like punishment . he that readeth the practises of the ancient church , shall evidently see , that the manner of the godly ministers at that time was not to put the sacramentall bread into the peoples mouths , as yee doe at this present , but to give it them into their hands . for it was not then taken and honored for a god , as it is now , but it was reverently used and taken as an holy and worthy sacrament of christ. but what marvaile is it though yee will not suffer the people to handle the sacramentall bread , seeing yee will not suffer the cōmunicants to touch your popes holy chalice , wherein notwithstanding is not the sacrament of christs bloud , but only meere wine dedicated and appointed to no godly use . ye are contrary to christ in all things . god amend you . take , eat , saith our saviour christ. nay , say ye masse-mongers , neither take yee , nor eat , but come & heare masse devoutly , & see us take and eat up altogether , and it is enough for you . fall down , kneele & worship your maker , that wee shew unto you . honor your god that is hanged up in the pixe over the altar , and so shall yee be good catholickes , and deare children of our mother holy church . if yee come at easter according to p. zepherinus commandemēt , and then receive your maker devoutly , it is enough for you . at all other times we wil receive the sacrament for you , and it shall do you as much good , as though you had eaten it your selfe . o false and subtile hypocrits , o wicked corrupters of the lords blessed testament . if other men shold eat up your dinners and suppers in your stead , as ye eat up the sacramēt from the people , ye should not have so fat panches as yee have , nor yet so frie in your grease as you doe . christ delivered the sacramental bread to his disciples , and bade them eate , but yee eat up all your selves , and will give no man part with you . o cankred carles , o churlish chuffes ! and here may we , note by the way , to what end the sacramental bread is ordained , not that it should be kneeled to , nor honored as a god , nor gazed on , nor carried about in popish pompous processions , nor offered up for a sacrifice for the sins of the quick & the dead , nor yet to reserve it , & to hang it up in the pixe over the altar , as yee papists doe , but that it should be received , and eaten of the faithfull communicants , at the lords supper , in remembrance of christs death , take eat , saith our saviour christ. hitherto have wee heard , that your peevish , popish , private , pedlary , pelting masse , agreeth with the lords blessed supper and holy communion nothing at all . let us now see , how well ye behave your selves in the words of consecration , as yee call them , wherein after your opinion hangeth all the matter . christ said , this is my bodie , which is betrayed for you . doe this in the remembrance of me . now let us behold your consecration . taking the little cake in your hands , yee say these words . the day before hee suffered , hee tooke bread into his holy and worshipfull hands , and lifting up his eyes unto heaven , to the god his father almightie , and giving the thanks , he blessed , brake and gave to his disciples , saying , take and eat of this all ye . for this is my body . the author of these words as they bee here recited , was pope alexander , about the yeare of our lord 112. here doe yee not rehearse the words truely , as our saviour christ spake them . some words yee added , and some yee have taken away . but i much marvell at your grosse ignorance in this one thing . yee put a difference betweene blessing and thankesgiving . for when yee rehearse this word be●edixit , he blessed , you crosse and blesse the bread with your greasie fingers , as though christs blessing in that place were the wagging of his fingers , and not rather thankesgiving . for where saint marke hath , cum benedixisset , when he had blessed . saint matthew , luke and paul hath , cum gratias egisset , when he had given thankes . so that to blesse , after markes phrase , is nothing else than to give thankes , to praise and to magnifie . and so is it taken in divers places of the holy scriptures , both in the old and new testament . again , ye put to these foure words of christ , hoc est corpus meum , this word enim , and ye say , hoc est enim carpus 〈◊〉 , one word more than ever christ put in , because ye may be found still as ye are , even abominable liars . but for putting in this one word enim ( which is of so great vertue , say ye , that without it there can bee no perfect consecration , and then what is to bee thought , i pray you , of christ , and of his apostles , of the primative church , and of the greekes at this day , which never used that word ) being your owne superfluous addition , yee most wickedly leave out these most necessary words , that christ spake , which is betrayed for you , doe this in the remembrance of mee . this joyfull promise , that christs body was betrayed , given and broken for us , with the residue , ye leave out , as a thing pertaining nothing to the purpose . and yet are they so necessary , that without the knowledge of them , the sacrament profiteth nothing at all . if i receive the sacrament a thousand times , & yet if i know not to what use it was instituted of christ , what profits and benefits i have by the worthy receiving of it . if i doe not set before the eyes of my minde the death of christ , and faithfully beleeve to have remission & forgivenesse of al my sins by the breaking of christs body , & by the sheadding of his most pretious bloud , &c. it profiteth me no more , thā the pretious stone did profit . aesops cock. again , those words , which christ spake openly to his disciples , unto their great joy and comfort , you partly leave out , and partly whisper in hocker mocker to your selves , that no man may bee the better for your doings , and that the people may bee kept still in blindnesse . our saviour christ saith , what i tell you in darkenesse , that speake yee in light . and what ye heare in the eare , that preachye on the house tops . but ye doe cleane contrary . for that which christ spake openly to his disciples , ye mutter it softly to your selves . o cruell soule-slayers , and bloudie murtherers . but is this your dexterity , uprightnes , and true dealing with the word of god ? so to corrupt and mangle the words of the glorious testament of the sonne of god ? it is not lawfull to alter a mortall mans testament , and dare ye presume ( o yee antichrists ) to alter and change the blessed testament and heavenly will of the king of glory ? are ye faithfull ministers , which deale so unfaithfully with your lord and master ? ye that deale so wickedly with god , how wil ye deale with man ? god keepe all faithfull people out of your clawes . after ye have once spoken these five words , hoc est enim corpus meum , over the bread , and have blasted , breathed , and blowed upon it , yee kneele down to it , and worship it like abominable idolaters , and afterward ye hold it up above your pestilent , pilde , shaven , shamelesse heads , that the people by looking upon it , and worshipping it , may be partakers also of your abominable idolatry , not being contented with your own damnable estate , except ye bring other also into the same danger . the author of your levation & lifting the bread above your head , was pope honori ▪ the third about the yeare of our lord 1 : 10. which commanded that the host should bee lifted up above the priests head at masse , and that all the people should fall downe and worship it . o antichrist . here may all men see , how ancient a thing your holy sakering is , which is counted the best and chiefest part of your masse when notwithstanding it is the most wicked and most abhominable part of your idolatrous masse . verily it is not much more than three hundred yeares old . let the lying papists therfore bee ashamed to brag , that their divellish masse came from the apostles , seeing it is proved to be a new and late invention of antichrist . and although the whole masse of the papists be utterly wicked and abhominable , yet this part , which they call the sakering , is most wicked and abominable , for as much as it provoketh the people that are present , to commit most detestable idolatries . for the people take it to be their god . they beleeve that bread , w ch the priest heaveth above his head , to bee christ , perfect god , & perfect man. therfore kneel they down unto it , knocke their breasts , lift up their heads , worshippe and honour it . when the bel once rings ( if they cannot conveniently see ) they forsake their seats , and runne from altar to altar , from sakering to sakering , peeping here , and tooting there , and gazing at that thing , which the pilde-pate priest holdeth up in his hands . and if the priest bee weake in the armes , and heave not up high enough , the rude people of the countrey , in divers parts of england , will crie out to the priest , hold up sir iohn , hold up . heave it a little higher . and one will say to another : stoupe downe thou fellow afore , that i may see my maker . for i cannot be merry except i see my lord god once in a day . o abomination . ah , woe worth you , yee masse-mongers , that are the authors of this abominable idolatrie , and through your wicked massing send thousands to the devill , except the mercy of god bee the greater . better were ●e masse-mongers to leave your fat benefices , your rich prebeuds , your wealthy deanries , your honourable chaplainships , your long gownes , your sarsene● tiopets and your shaven crownes , and become watertankard-bearers in london , or to cobble a shoo , or goe to plough and cart , yea , to have a milstone tyed about your neck , and be cast into the bottome of the sea , than your most stinking , wicked and vile massing to provoke so many people unto idolatry , and to bring the wrath of god and everlasting damnation upō them , except they repent and amend . verily i say unto you , it shall bee easier for the land of so dome at the day of iudgement , than for you . but i know what yee will say : that we hold up is the very natural bodie of christ , god and man , therefore may we all justly worship it . i aske you , how prove ye it to be the naturall bodie of christ ? yee answer , by the vertue of these words , hoc est enim corpus meum . i reply , christ spake these words of the bread , as the holy scriptures and all ancient writers doe witnesse , and so then followeth it , that bread is christs body , and christs bodie is bread . and by this meanes it must needs be granted , that christ hath two bodies , one made of bread , and another of flesh , which he received of mary the virgin . but yee answer , christs calling is making . christ called the bread his body , therefore is it made his bodie . i answer againe , christ called himselfe a vine , a doore , a shepheard , and called his heavenly father a plough-man , is christ therefore made a naturall vine , a materiall doore , a rusticall shepheard , and his father an husband-man of the country ? christ called iohn baptist elias . is iohn therefore made that elias the thesbite , which preached in the time of wicked king achab ? christ called iohn the evangelist maries son , and called mary his mother : is iohn therefore made the naturall son of mary the virgin , christs mother ? and is mary made the very true and naturall mother of iohn evangelist ? i am sure yee will not so say . no more is the sacramentall bread christs naturall body , although christ called it his bodie , but his bodie in a mystery , and in a figure , as the old writers testifie . tertullian that most ancient doctor saith : iesus taking bread , and distributing it among his disciples , made it his bodie , saying : this is my bodie , that is to say , a figure of my body . hereto agreeth the saying of saint augustine , christ did not sticke to say , this is my body , when he gave the signe of his bodie . and saint hierome saith , that christ did represent the truth of his body and bloud by the bread and wine . an infinite number of like sentences concerning this matter , are found in the ancient authors , which prove evidently , that this saying of christ , hoc est corpus meum , this is my body , is a figurative speech . signes or sacraments in the holy scripture are called by the names of the things , whereof they bee sacraments and signes , as we reade of the arke , of circumcision , of the paschal lambe , of the sacrifices of the old law , of baptisme , which saint paul calleth the laver or fountaine of regeneration , and the receiving of the holy ghost . and after this sort is the sacramental bread called by the name of christs body , because it is the sacrament , signe and figure of his bodie . those things which doe signifie , saith saint cyprian , and those things which be signified by them , may bee both called by one name . and saint augustine rehearsing divers sentences which were spoken figuratively , numbreth among thē these words of christ , hoc est corpus meum , this is my body , whereby he declareth plainly , that christ spake these words figuratively , not meaning that the bread was his body by substance , but by signification . moreover it is directly against the veritie and truth of christs naturall body , to bee at more places at once than in one , as hee must be in an hundred thousand places at once , if your doctrine bee true . a stinking sodomite , or a wicked whoremonger being dressed in his fooles coat , and standing at an altar with a little thinne round cake in his hand , shall with these five words , hoc est corpus meum , and with blowing and breathing upon the bread , make christ the king of glory to come from the right hand of his father , and to touch himselfe in the accidents of the little cake , untill yee have eaten him , and then trudge up againe to heaven , till hoc est enim corpus meum fetch him down again if your doctrine bee true . o proud lucifers ! and oh poore wretched christ , who at every filthy masse-mongers commandement art compelled to come down from the glorious throne of thy majestie , and to bee handled as the papish please , either to bee torne asunder with their teeth , or else to be hanged up with an halter in their popish pixe . but know yee , o ye vile and blasphemous papists , that though yee whisper your five words never so oft at your idolatrous altars , and breath blast and blow , till yee be windlesse , yee shall never plucke the son of god from the right hand of his father , nor make that thinne cake of yours christs naturall body . the article of our faith is that christ is gone up into heaven , and sitteth on the right hand of god the father almighty , and from thence hee shall come to judge the quicke and the dead . our saviour christ told his disciples full oft , a little before his passion , that hee should leave the world , and goe up againe unto his father . saint mark saith that christ was taken up into heaven , and sitteth on the right hand of god. saint luke saith , that christ went away from his disciples , and was carried up into heaven . the angell of god said to the apostles , when christ did ascend up into heaven : yee men of galile , why stand ye gazing up into heaven . this iesus , which is taken up from you into heaven , so shall hee come , as ye have seen him going into heaven . of these words of the angells wee learne , that as christ went up visibly , and was seene with the corporall eyes of men , but never man saw him yet comming downe with his corporall eyes , therefore never came he downe corporally since his ascension . s. stephen indeed saw christ even with his bodily eyes as wee reade in the acts of the apostles . but where ? heere on the earth between the priests hands ? nay , but in heaven standing on the right hand of god. saint paul heard christ speake , but from whence ? from the popish pixe ? yea rather from heaven . saint peter saith , as blessed luke testifyeth , that iesus christ must receive heaven , till the time that all things which god hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets , since the world beganne , bee restored againe . this time is till the day of judgement . if ye will have christ therefore bodily at your masses , yee must tarry till the day of iudgement . for till that time , saith blessed peter , hee must keepe heaven . alasse , where is your hoc est enim corpus meum after your grosse understanding become ? moreover , s. paul in divers places of his epistles declareth , that christ is ascended into heaven , and sitteth on the right hand of god , and maketh intercession for us to god his father . so likewise doe the other apostles in their writings . iesus christ , saith saint peter , is on the right hand of god , and is gone into heaven . we have an advocate with the father : iesus christ the righteous , saith saint iohn . all these authorities of the holy scripture with many other , doe testifie that christ as concerning his corporall presence is no more in the earth , but in heaven only . christ hath in him two natures , the nature of god , and the nature of man. as concerning his divine nature , hee is in heaven , in earth , and in every place . but as touching his humane nature , hee is in heaven onely , and there shall remaine untill the day of iudgement , as saint augustine saith , as concerning the presence of his majestie wee have christ alwayes , but as touching the presence of his flesh , it was truely sayd to his disciples . mee shall yee not alwayes have with you . for the church had him a few dayes after th● presence of his flesh , but now it holdeth him by faith , and seeth him not with the eyes . againe , he saith , god and man is one person , and both is one christ iesus , in every place , in that he is god , but in heaven in that he is man. also in another place , where and in what manner christ is in heaven , it is a vaine and superfluous thing to aske or demand , but wee must surely beleeve , that hee is onely in heaven . if hee be onely in heaven , as concerning his corporall presence , as both the scriptures and saint augustine affirme , how then is hee either in your round cake at masse , or else hanging up in your popish pixe over the altar with an halter ? but let us heare what the ancient doctour virgilius writeth concerning this matter . the sonne of god , saith he , as concerning his humanitie , is gone away from us , but as touching his divinity , hee saith unto us : behold i am with you alwayes unto the end of the world . againe , forasmuch as the word is every where , and his flesh is not every where , it appeareth that one and the same christ is of both natures , and that hee is in every place as concerning the nature of his godhead . againe , that hee is contayned in a place as touching the nature of his manhood . of these authorities doth it manifestly appeare , that christ , inasmuch as he is god , is in every place , but having respect to that hee is a man , he is only in one place , that is to say ▪ in heaven . if he bee only in heaven inasmuch as he is man , then consider yee , what is to be thought of the doctrine of the papists , which teach that christs naturall body is in every place wheresoever his godhead is . o antichrists ! if this be not to play the hereticke marcions part , and utterly to destroy the verity of christs humane nature , or of his naturall body , what is it ? but saint augustine saith very well in this behalfe , wee must take heed ( saith hee ) that we doe not so set forth , maintaine or affirme the godhead of the man ( christ ) that wee take away or destroy the truth of his body . for it doth not follow , that that which is in god , should be every where as god. christ , inasmuch as he is god , is every where , but being man , hee is onely in heaven . but yee will object , according to your old wont , the omnipotencie or almighty power of god and say , that forasmuch as he is omnipotent and almighty , he may both make the bread his body , and also bee in as many places concerning the corporall presence , as he list , that is to say , in infinite places at once . i answer , god is not called almighty because he can doe all things , but because he is able to doe whatsoever his godly pleasure is to doe . for there are certaine things which god cannot doe , as for example , hee cannot denie himselfe , hee cannot lye , hee cannot save such as die in infidelity , hee cannot make another of like power with himselfe , hee cannot save the reprobate , nor condemne the elect , which have their names written in the booke of life , &c. whatsoever is contrary to his word , that cannot god doe ; but it is contrary to the word of god for christs body to bee in more places at once , than in one , yea , to bee both in heaven sitting at the right hand of god the father , and heere also in earth at your popish masses in a thousand places at once , therefore is not god able to make his body to bee in so many places at once , as ye faine , forasmuch as the nature of god onely is infinite , and the nature of all creatures is contained in some certaine one place at once . but here againe yee will bring forth these promises of christ . wheresoever two or three be gathered together in my name , there am i in the middest of them . againe , i am with you alwayes unto the end of the world . these promises , and such like are to bee understood not of the corporall presence here on earth , but of his grace , as the doctors themselves doe declare . it is to bee noted , marked and considered saith cyril , that although christ hath taken away the presence of his body from hence , yet by the majesty of his god-head hee is alwayes present , as hee at his departure promised his disciples . behold saith he , i am with you alwayes unto the very end of the world . the like saying of saint augustine heard wee before . of all these things heretofore spoken it is evident , that the naturall body of christ is not here in earth , as yee masse-mongers would gladly make us beleeve , but in heaven onely , and there shall remaine untill the day of iudgement . christ in the mean season being here present with us by his spirit and grace . seeing then that the sacramentall bread is not the naturall body of christ , god and man , but a figure , sacrament , and holy signe of his body , with what forehead dare you either affirme that your little thinne round cake , after five words pronounced over it , and you breathing , blasting and blowing upon it , to be the true , naturall , reall , corporeall , and substantiall body of christ , god and man , as hee was borne of the virgine marie , and suffered for us on the altar of the crosse , or worship it your selves , or yet provoke others so to doe , according to pope honorius decree , and not after christs institution ? what is idolatrie , if this bee not idolatrie ? to worship a piece of bread for god , what heathen idolater ever so doted ? if good king ezekias lived in these our dayes , hee would rather play with the sacrament of christs body and bloud , as he did with the brasen serpent , than hee would suffer such abomiable idolatry to be committed at the ministration of it , to the great dishonour of god , the utter defacing of christs passion , and bloud , and death , and to the dreadfull damnation of innumerable souls . o england england teares , yea teares of bloud mayest thou well weepe , which in the prosperous time of that most godly king edward the sixt wert blessedly purged of all superstition , idolatry , and popish doctrine , and hadst restored unto thee the true gospel of thy salvation , and the right ministration of the lords sacraments , but now for thine unthankfulnesse toward the lord thy god , all these heavenly treasures are taken away from thee , and the stinking dung of the pope most miserable cast upon thee . lament thy sinnes o england , lament , lament , returne to the lord thy god , and most humbly beseech him once againe to looke upon thee with his mercifull countenance , to take away these popish dregs , to restore unto thee his lively word , and to blesse thee again with the true ministration of his holy sacraments , that thou maist serve the l o r d thy god in holinesse and righteousnesse all the dayes of thy life . this doctrine , that the sacrament of the altar , as you terme it , is the true , naturall , reall , carnall , corporal , and substantiall bodie of christ , is the dream of antichrist the bishop of rome , and was never received in the church till pope leo , pope nicholas , pope innocent , pope honorius , and pope vrban , through their tyranny brought it in and compelled the christians with fire and fagot ( as the manner of the tyrannicall papists is ) to receive their abomihable doctrine , and yet in all ages god stored up some to confesse the true doctrine of the sacrament against antichrist even unto the death . neither is this popish doctrine so ancient as the papists bragge . for it is not much more than five hundred yeares since their g●osse opinion of the sa●rament began first to be attempted . and although pope nicholas the second di● much in the matter , yet was it not thorowly received nor agreed upon , untill pope innocent the third came , which about the yeare of our lord 1215. kept a councell at rome , called latronense , i would say , lateranense concilium : where were gathered together a swarme of papists , about the number of thirteen hundred pild pates , of the which number eight hundred and odde were monkes , canons , and fryers , chickens of the popes owne brood . last of all came pope vrban the monke , in the yeare of our lord , 1264. and he made up all the market . for he ordained a feast called corpus christi , in the honour of the sacrament , so that ever after that time , the sacrament was no more taken for a signe , figure , and token of christs bodie , but for christ himselfe god and man , and therefore was it reverenced , worshipped , censed , and kneeled unto , as yee teach the people to doe at your unsacred sakerings , and so are yee their schoolmasters to learn them to commit idolatrie against their lord god , but let us goe foorth with our matter . after our saviour christ had delivered the sacramentall bread to his disciples for to eat , hee tooke the cuppe , and thanked , and gave it them , saying , drinke yee all of this . for this is my bloud ( which is of the new testament ) that is shed for many for the remission of sinnes . this doe , as oft as yee drinke it , in the remembrance of mee . here christ delivered to his disciples holy wine ( i call it holy , because it was dedicated and appointed to an holy use ) which hee made the sacrament of his bloud . and they all dranke of it . and here is to bee marked by the way , that our saviour christ afore seeing that there should arise false annointed , that would take away from the people the sacrament of his bloud , bade them all drinke of it . all , all without exception , even so many as beleeve on him , spirituall or temporall , as they call them . are not yee popish shavelings these false annointed ? have you not taken away the cup of the lords bloud from the lay people , and reserved it to your selves alone ? doe not ye minister the sacrament of christs bodie and bloud to the lay people under one kinde onely , cleane contrary to christs institution ? o god-robbers . o spoilers of christian mens soules . neither can ye abide , that the people should touch your pope-holy chalice , when they drinke the wine , but ye your selves holding the chalice in your own hands give them drinke , as though they were babes of three dayes old , and could not put the cuppe to their mouth . o tender and jealous nurses ! in the primative church and many hundred yeares after , as we may see in the monuments of learned men , the sacrament according to christs institution , was received of the people under both kindes , untill antichrist , the biship of rome , by his divellish decree , determined the contrary at the councell of constance , not much more than an hundred years past . pope gelasius made a godly decree , that those people , that would not receive the sacrament under both kindes , should receive none at all , but be put away from the lords table . the greekes and bohemes , with all that be not under the tyranny of the pope of rome , and of his wicked lawes receive the sacrament under both kinds at this day , according to christs institution . where the contrary is used , there reigneth the devill and the pope , and not christ and his holy word . but now let us behold your doings . after that yee have committed idolatrie with the sacramentall bread ( if it be worthy of that name ) ye fall in hand to consecrate ( i use still your owne termes ) the wine with these words : in like manner after supper was done , hee tooke this noble chalice ( that is a lye , for christ never handled that chalice ) into his holy and worshipful hands , and after hee had given thankes to the father , he blessed ( here fall ye to crossing againe ) and gave it to his disciples , saying : take yee , and drinke yee all of this ▪ for this is the cup of my bloud , a new and everlasting testament , a mystery of faith , w ch shall be shed for you , and for many , for the remission of sinnes . so oft as yee shall doe these things , yee shall doe them in the remembrance of me . how many words have ye put in here of your owne braine , ye shall easily perceive , if yee compare them with the words which our saviour christ spake . but for as much as they do not greatly disagree frō the truth of gods word , i will not strive with you in this behalfe , though i would wish you once to deale faithfully and truely in all your doings , but specially whē you have to doe with god , seeing it is written . put nothing to the words of god , lest hee reprove thee , and thou bee found a lyar . after the aforesaid words spoken in hocker mocker , yee breathe and blow , and shake your head over the chalice , and then yee kneele downe , lift up your hands , and honour it like most abhominable idolaters . after that yee stand up againe like pretty fellowes , and well appointed , and taking the chalice in your hands , yee hold it up with heave & howe above your heathenish heads , that the people also may worship it , and bee fellow idolaters with you , and fall into the like danger of everlasting damnation . this done , yee set the chalice downe againe upon the altar , and yee cover it with your corporasse cloath for catching of cold . then once againe kneele ye downe , and up againe like dive doppers , and kisse the altar , and spread your armes abroad , as though you would embrace some she saint . after al these things ( as i may let passe your crossings and blessings , your crouchings and noddings with many other apish toyes ) yee fall againe to your solemne prayers , and among all other yee stand nodding and praying in your memento for the soules departed , which was put to the masse by pope pelagius about the yeare of our lord 560. and here in your minde and thought ( for now yee play mum-budget , and silence glumme ) yee pray for philip and cheny , more than a good many , for the soules of your great grand sire , & of your old beldame hurre , for the soules of father princhard , and of mother puddingwright , for the soules of goodman rinsepitcher , and goodwife pi●tepot , for the soules of sir iohn husgoose , and sir simon sweetlips , and for the soules of all your benefactors . founders , patrones , friends and well-willers , which have given you either dirige groates , confessionall pence , trentals , year services , dinners , suppers , or any thing else , that may maintaine you our ladies knights . but i pray you , how can you with an assured conscience and true faith , pray for such as are departed out of this world ? if these your prayers bee of faith , then doe your faith hang on gods word . if you have the word of god for you so praying , bring it forth of good fellowship , and wee will heare you . have ye none ? alasse silly soules ! then put up your pipes , and lay yee downe to sleepe . trudge with your dirges , and pack up your masses of requiem . doe yee alleage pope pelagius , and old fathers or ancient customes ? we have nothing to doe with them , except they bring the word of god in their mouth . prayer is a matter of faith , and faith alwayes leaneth upon the word of god solely and fully . if ye have not the word of god for your prayer , then can ye not pray of faith . if yee pray not of faith , then are your prayers abhominable in the sight of god , so farre it is off , that they bee heard , as the apostle saith : whatsoever is not of faith , is sinne . saint iohn saith , this is the trust that wee have in him , that if wee aske any thing according to his will , he heareth us . but how doe you aske according to the will of god , when yee have not one title of the holy scripture to declare that yee ought to pray for the dead ? thinke ye to be heard of god ? even as baals priests were , when they cried o baal , heare us , o baal , heare us . if yee would leape upon your altars , yea , and cut your selves with knives till ye be all on a gore-blo●d , as their manner was , yet shall yee never be heard of god. for yee pray without faith , seeing ye have not the word of god for you . doe yee alleage charitie ? and say , it is a charitable deed to pray for them that are departed ? i answer , yee are very antichrists , that turne the rootes of trees upward . will yee have charity before faith ? is not faith the mother of all vertues ? is not charitie the daughter of faith ? how dare the daughter move you to doe that whereof the mother knoweth nothing at all ? it is not charity that moveth you to pray for the departed , but blinde affection , corrupt zeale , and cankered custome , and hope of gaine . after the departure from this life , all go straight wayes either unto eternall glory , or else unto everlasting pain , as the history of the rich glutton , and of the poore man lazarus evidently declareth . our saviour christ saith , hee that beleeveth on the sonne , hath everlasting life . but hee that beleeveth not on the sonne shall not see life , but the wrath of god abid●th on him . here also are rekoned but two kindes of persons , faithful and unfaithfull , the one sort after their departure goe immediately unto everlasting life , the other unto eternal dam●ation . and the preacher saith , when the tree falleth whether it be toward the south or north , in what place soever it ●all , there it heth . as we depart , so shall we have our place . if wee depart in faith , heaven is appointed for us , but if wee dye in infidelitie , unfaithfulnesse , or misbeleefe , hell is readie at hand . therefore your prayers for the dead are in every condition frustrate and vaine , superfluous and unprofitable , heaven needeth no prayer , hell refuseth all prayer . notable is this sentence of saint augustine ; know ye , saith saint augustine , that so soone as the soule is departed from the body , it is straightwaies either for the good merits placed in paradise , or else for the sinnes throwne headlong into the deepe dungeon of hell . againe , in another place hee saith ; brethren , let no man deceive himselfe ; for there are but two places , and there is no third place for any . he that hath not deserved to raigne with christ ( in this world ) shall without doubt ( in the world to come ) bee damned with the devill . and saint cyprian saith , when wee depart hence , there is no place of repentance . life is either lost or gotten . but i marvell much of this one thing concerning this matter , that ye pray god the father that hee will mercifully give to all such as rest in christ a place of refreshing , of light and peace . as though those that rest in christ could want any of them all . can any man that rests in christ bee tormented in paines , darkenesse , and disquietnes , trouble , or griefe ? to rest in christ after this life , is not to be payned in purgatory ( if there were such a place as the papists feigned , but to raigne with christ in glory , to possesse everlasting joy , and to have the fruition of gods glorious majestie with the heavenly angells and blessed spirits , as it is written , blessed are the dead which die in the lord. for the spirit saith , that from henceforth they rest from their labors . and david calleth the death of the saints pretious in the sight of the lord. doth not the wise man also say , that the soules of the righteous are in the hand of god , and that no griefe , paine , nor torment shall touch them . they are in peace , saith hee . if these things be true , as nothing is more true , what need ye then to stand nodding in your memento , praying for the dead ? ye might as well pray for dead swine . for yee have as good authority of the holy scriptures for the one , as for the other . but this praying for the dead hath made your kitchins warme , your pots to seeth , and your spits to turne merrily . it hath fed your idle bellies with the fattest of the flocke , and caused you to live in all joy , pleasure , and quietnesse , without any labour , paine , or travaile . therefore no marevell though such things bee placed in your masse . take away the praying for the dead , and yee purgatory-rakers may picke your meat upon newmarket heath . for your dirige groats your trentalls , your moneth mindes , your anniversaries , your bead-rowls , your soul masse-pence , and all such other pelf falls to the ground straightwayes . and then welcome again hard fare , greasy cap , threadbare gowne , broken shooe , torne hose , empty purse , and all that beggerly is . make much therefore of praying for the dead , and wish that your masse , which of late yee have to your great joy recovered againe , may long continue in her great prosperty , or els your cake is dough , and all your fat lye in the fire . what shall i speake of dancing of your little great god about the chalice with per ip , & cum ip , & in ip , sum , which followeth the praying for the dead ? that is so holy a thing , that it is called the second sakering , and may by no meanes bee left undone . your childe must needs bee dandled and playd withall a little while , least hee chance to sleepe too long . after that yee have layd your young god to rest againe , you say your pater noster like good devout men : that done , yee take up the patine of the chalice , and afterward yee crosse your selves withall both upon your brests , and upon your bald crownes , and lay it downe againe . i thinke yee doe this either to fray away spirits , or else to enarme your selves with the signe of the croose , that they may bee the more able to bring to passe your butchery , that is now at hand . for straightwayes yee strike up your sleves , yee uncover the chalice , yee lay downe the corporasse cloth , ye take up your little god , yee hold him up over the chalice , and ye cruelly teare , plucke , and breake him in three pieces , according to pope sergi●s commandement , about the yeare of our lord 700. when yee have so done , ye keepe two parts of your christs body , which yee your selves made , and have now destroyed again , in your hands holding them over the chalice , and the third part yee let downe into the wine , that it may bee the tenderer , when yee eat it . the my●ticall mysteries hereof i declared a little before . then doe ye say the agnus , which pope sergius also commanded that it should bee said at masse a little before the receiving of the host . and here againe yee play the abominable idolaters . for looking upon the bread , yee looke your selves and worship it , saying in latine , agnus dei qui tollis , &c. o lambe of god that takest away the sinnes of the world have mercie upon us . thrice doe yee call that bread which yee hold in your hands , the lamb of god which taketh away the sinnes of the world . o intollerable blasphemy ! was there ever idolater , that worshipped a piece of broken bread for god ? what marvell is it , though the iewes , the turkes , and all other infidels bee so loth to come to the christian religion , when they see so manifest idolatrie committed ? when they behold a piece of a thinne wafer cake honoured for god ? certainly , this abominable idolatry which yee masse-mongers maintaine , and commit at your masse , hath beene , and is the occasion , that innumerable thousands have beene , and are daily damned . yea , these your wicked doings , are the cause , why so many doe abhorre the christian religion , & defie the name of christ , as wee reade of a certaine emperour of turky , which when hee was demanded why hee and his people did so greatly abhorre the religion of christ , answered that hee coead by no mulnes approove or allow the religion , service , and honour of that god , whom men at their pleasure doe make , and straightwayes eat him when they have done . better were it for you , o ye masse-mongers , to have a mil-stone tied about your neckes , and to be cast into the sea , than thus with your abominable massing and god-making to drive so many from christ , and provoke so great multitudes unto idolatry , and finally unto everlasting damnation : and with what a conscience can yee say to the bread , which is a dumbe and insensible creature without all life or spirit . o lambe of god which takest away the sinnes of the world , have ●●ercie ●pon us . is that bread , which a little before was corn in the plough-mans barne , meale in the millers trough , flower in the bakers boulting tubbe , and afterwards tempered with a little water , and baked of the waferman betweene a paire of hot printing irons , come now suddainely through your charming unto such dignity , that it is the lambe of god that taketh away the sinnes of the world ? & that men must pray unto that to have mercie & forgivenes of sins ? o lord thou living god have mercie upon us , and destroy this abominable idoll of the masse . in the worshipping of baal , astaroth , moloch , bel-peor , melchom , dagon , chames , the queene of heaven , saturnus , iupiter , priapus , iuno , venus , and such other idolls , was never so great a blasphemy and dishonour to god , as is the setting up of this broken bread to bee worshipped for god. and the matter is so much the more to bee abhorred , because yee colour your abominable idolatrie with gods word . faigned holines , saith saint gregorie , is double iniquity . ah , is that polluted and defiled bread , the lambe of god that taketh away the sinnes of the world ? then was that your bread also borne of mary the virgine , and nourished with the milke of her breasts . then did that bread live upon the earth , speake , eate , drinke , sleepe , preach , wo●ke miracles , &c. then was that bread betrayed , accused , beaten , buffeted , spitted on , crowned with a crowne of thornes , clad wt●h a garment of purple , crucifyed , and nailed to the crosse. yea , then did that bread offer himselfe on the altar of the crosse a sacrifice to god the father for the sinnes of the world , dyed , and rose again for our iustification . hath your broken bread done all these things ? christ the lambe of god which taketh away the sinnes of the world hath done all these things alone , alone . bee ashamed once oye wicked papists , thus to blaspheme god , and to deceive the people , through your abominable massing . again , is grace , mercie , favor , and remission of sins to bee craved of these fragments of bread , which ye hold in your hands ? so is it that true , living , immortal , and everlasting god , which hath bin without beginning , which made heaven & earth , and all things contained in them . for none can forgive us our sins but god alone . hath your broken bread bin without beginning ? hath it made al things ? yea , it is a creature it selfe vile and devillish as yee use , or rather abuse it . be ashamed o ye shamelesse hypocrites , thus to deface the glory of god , and to leade the people in damnable blindenesse . shortly after the agnus , yee kisse the pax , whch was the ordinance of pope innocentius in the yeare of our lord 310. and while the boy or parish clerke carryeth the pax about , yee your selves alone eat up all , and drinke up all . ah , what riding fools and very dolts make yee the people ? yee send them a piece of wood , or of glasse , or of some metal to kisse , and in the meane season yee eat and drinke up all together ? is not this a pageant of hick-scorner ? is not this a toy to mocke an ape withall ? is this christs accipite and edite ? take yee and eat yee , speaking to many , and not to one alone . is this christs bibite ex eo omnes ? drinke of this all yee ? did christ eat the sacrament alone ? did he not rather give it to his disciples , and commanded all faithfull ministers so to doe ? why then doe ye ( o ye antichrists ) eat & drinke up all alone , contrary to christs institution and commandement ? and yet behold , how yee shunne not to lie even to gods face : yee say at your post●communion , these words , quod ore sumpsimus domine , &c. that which wee have taken with our mouth grant that we may receive it with a pure minde , and that it may be made unto us of a temporall gift an everlasting remedie . againe , h●c nos summo purget à crimine , &c. this communion might purge us from sinne , and make us partakers of the heavenly remedie . and in another place yee desire god , that so many as shall receive the body and bloud of christ , may bee filled with all heavenly blessing and grace . yee tell god , that you with the rest of the congregation have received even with your owne mouthes the sacrament of christs body and bloud , and ye lye most abominably . for yee your selves have eaten and drunken up altogether alone , and like churlish carles ye have given no man part with you . againe , ye call it a communion , which is a partaking of many together , but yee might right well call it an union . for no man eateth and drinketh of the bread and wine , but you alone . item , ye desire god , that so many as shall be communicants , may be filled with the heavenly blessings and grace , and no man do receive but you alone . what a mocking is this of god , and a deceiving of the people ? god have mercy on us , and once againe deliver us from this most lying , wicked , abominable and divellish idoll the masse , and restore unto us the holy and blessed communion . christs ordinance is not , that one standing at an altar should eat , devoure , and mouch up altogether alone , but that a multitude should receive the sacramentall bread and wine together . take yee , saith our saviour christ , eat ye , and drinke yee all of this . he saith not , take thou sir iohn , eate thou , and drinke thou alone . in the acts of the apostles , wee see , that a multitude of the christians came together to breake the bread , and not that one alone did eate all alone , turning his arse to the people , as yee massemongers doe . saint paul saith , the bread which ye breake , is it not the partaking of the body of christ ? hee saith not , the bread which i breake , but which we breake , speaking of many , and not of one . againe , we all be partakers of one bread , and of one cup. indeed wee bee , or wee ought to be . but wee be not , therefore yee masse-mongers doe us the more wrong . where the blessed apostle entreateth of the lords supper , he saith , my brethren when yee come together to eate , ( he meaneth the holy communion , or the lords supper ) tarry one for another . hee saith not , when yee come together to see the priest say masse , and to eate and drinke up altogether alone , standing at an altar and turning his backe towards you , as one full of little good manners . hee saith also . tarry one for another . but yee tarry for no man , but having a boy to helpe you to say masse , ye goe to your mingle mangle , and never call purre to you . for yee eate and drinke up altogether alone , being much worse than the swine-heards . wee reade in the ancient canons , that such as would not communicate , should bee excommunicate , and driven out of christs congregation , and not to be reputed or taken as members of christs bodie . whereof wee may easily and truely gather , that this private massing , which yee masse-mongers use at this present , is not of god , but of the devil , and was not practised of the holy ancient fathers in their churches , but of late yeares brought in by antichrist , and his shamelesse shavelings , which in their private masses doe nothing else than prophanate , defile and corrupt the lords supper , and make merchandize of it . while they take upon them to receive the sacrament for other , and to make it a sacrifice for the sinnes of such as hire them for their money , that they of the labour of other mens hands , and the sweate of other mens browes may live an idle & voluptuous life , as epicures and belly beasts , borne onely to consume the good fruits of the earth . but as yee masse-mongers cannot bee baptised , nor beleeve for other , no more can yee receive the sacrament for other . as every man is baptised for himselfe , so must hee eat and drin●e the mysterie of the lords bodie and bloud for himselfe . can my eating slake your hunger ? no more can your eating of the sacrament doe mee good . the righteous man , saith the prophet , shall live by his owne faith . the priests eating therefore of the sacramentall bread for other is abominable , and in all points contrary to christs holy institution ; which ordained his blessed supper not to be received of one alone for all the congregation , but that every one should receive it for himselfe , that by the worthy receiving thereof , his troubled conscience might be quieted , and his faith confirmed . we reade that when saint anthony , which lived about the yeare of our lord 350. was in the wildernesse , he saw a vision , which was this . he beheld a number of altars suddenly built up , and covered with white linnen cloths , with bread and wine set upon them , and a great sort of uncleane and filthy swine standing at them , and slovenly devouring all that ever was set upon the altars . saint anthony being wonderfully amaz●d at this strange sight , cried unto god and said : o lord god , what mean these foule ill favoured sights ? god said unto him , these filthy swine which thou seest standing at the altars are the leacherous priests , which after thy dayes shall arise , and driving away the holy cōmunion out of churches , which i instituted to be received of many , shall eat and drinke all the sacramental bread and wine alone , giving no part thereof to the residue of my people , whom i redeemed with my precious bloud , and for whose sake i ordained my holy supper to be received of them also . are not ye leacherous priests these filthie swine ? have yee not cast away the lords table , and set up idolatrous altars ? doe not yee at your masse eat and drinke up all alone , like hungrie hogges , and give no part to gods faithfull people ? ye may right well bee compared to filthy swine . for as these brutish beastes cannot abide any other to eat with them , but would ●aine eat up all alone themselves , even so play yee . at your idolatrous masses like a sort of beastly hogges yee eat and drinke up all alone , giving no man part with you , cleane contrary to christs institution . and yee may justly be cal'd lecherous priests . for ye abhorre godly and lawfull matrimonie , and ye defile your selves with all ki●d of stinking whoredome and abominable sodomitry . maids ye deflowre , mens wives ye defile , and widowes doe yee corrupt , besides much other abomination , which chast eares abhorre to heare . men meete to consecrate such a god , and fit champions to say such divellish masses . god give you grace once to leave this most detestable wickednesse . moreover , was not the sacrament of christs body and bloud ordained to move and stir all men to friendship , love and concord , and to put away all hatred , variāce and discord , and to testifie a brotherly and unfained love betweene them , that be the mēbers of christ. but what friendship or love can bee maintain'd at that ministration of the sacrament , where one eateth and drinketh all alone , as ye do at your masses ? if it bee a sacrament of charitie and love , then ought the members of christ charitably and lovingly to eat and drinke the lords supper together , as the apostle saith , wee are all partakers of one bread , and of one cuppe , and not one to devoure all alone . for charitie consisteth not in one alone , but in many . and the lords supper is called a communion and not an union . therefore yee masse-mongers grievously offend , which contrary both to the commandement of christ , and the order of charitie , at your masses eat and drinke up all alone , and by this meanes yee make the the lords supper a sacrament rather of hate and dissention , than of love and unitie . and heere commeth into my remembrance an history of a christian & of a iew. the christian perceiving the iew to bee an honest civill man , faithfull in his promise and upright in his dealing toward all men sorrowed greatly in his heart , that hee was not also of the christian beleefe . the christian thinking that the most ready way to bring the iew unto christ , was to leade him to church , that he might there heare and see how well god was served among them , desired the iew upon a certaine sabboth day to goe with him unto the temple of the christians , nothing doubting , but if hee would so doe , hee should bee allured to give over his iewish opinions , and to become a christian man. the iew consented and went with him to church where he quietly saw and beheld all things . he heard iolly ringing , pleasant singing , and merry organs playing . hee beheld a sort of gay gawdy mawmets , and a number of merry fellowes in the quire singing sometime high , sometime low , sometime in a meane , and sometime nothing at all . hee saw also a fellow with a shaven crowne going up and downe in the church , and casting water in the peoples teeth , and afterward having a iolly coat upon his backe he saw him goe about the church-yard , after an image , all the people following him . after all these things hee saw that shaveling cast off the gay-coat againe , and put on other game plaiers garments , & so to addres himselfe unto an altar covered with white linnen cloathes , wherupon was set , as hee thought , meate , and drinke , for he saw the cup there . after much singing and piping , he saw the sacrificer that stood at the altar , lift up a little thin round cake , & a cup of drinke above his head . here will bee good cheere thought the iew anon , for here are iolly signes & proffers . but when he saw the people fall downe & worship the bread and cup hee marvailed greatly at their madnes . masse ended , hee looked alwayes when the people should have beene called to eat and drink with hicke-scorner that heaved the bread and cup over his head , but no man had part with him . he devourd all alone like sim slap sauce : when they were departed out of the church going home ward , the christian willing to prove how the iew was affected toward the christian religiō , said unto him , sir , how like you our religion and serving of god ? to whom the iew answered : ye have in the temple many things that would make a sad man glad , and one that is sorrowfull , cheerefull . i meane your thundring of bells , your playing on the organs , your merry singing , the casting of water in the peoples teeth , and your running one after another about the church-yard , like the prior of pricklingham and his covent . all these things seeme to be matters of mirth used among you , as i thinke onely to make you merry . but the having of idols in your temples i do not allow . i see you also fall downe and worship a peece of bread and a silver cup , which i iudge high abomination and damnable idolatry . and another thing there is used in your temples , which i also do nothing like . what is that quoth the christian . i will tell you said the iew. yee talke , cracke and boast much of charity but i say right well that there is little used among you . for there was an altar spred with fine white cloths , and meat and drinke as i suppose , set upon it , i alwaies looked , when ye should have beene called to eate and drinke together according to the order of charity , but that shaveling that stood at the altar in the gay coat did both eat and drink all alone , giving you no part with him , which is a token of small charity & friendship among you . certs you shal redresse these great vices , and have more charity among you before i become one of your order . and so the iew refused to be made a christian . god have mercy on us . among many other notable faults , which the iew perceived in our temples , this was not the least , that one standing with his backe toward the people at an altar , did eat and drink al alone , giving no man part with him , which is a token of small charity and friendship as the iew said verily the private masse , wherin the sacrament of christs body and bloud is too much abused , hath beene and is the cause that many at this day doe abhorre the name of christ and utterly condemne the christian religion . god for his mercy drive this idolatrous masse out of this realme once againe , and restore unto us the true use of his holy supper , amen , amen . but let us see , what followeth in your popish masse , and make an end . when the boy or parish clarke commeth againe with the pax , yee hold forth your chalice like sir ralph rinspitcher for a little more drinke . and when yee have once drunken up that , yee hold forth your goddard yet once againe to have a little more swill . no marvell . for peradventure ye fell the night before into a great heate , while you kept company with your toying thais , and therfore no marvell , silly soules , though you drinke solemnly . but o good lord , what wiping of the mouth , and licking of the fingers is there then ? it would doe a woman good to see how cleanly sir iohn sweet-lips is . and yet not so contented , yee goe to the altars end , and there once againe , yee wash your hands , to shew how ●●minion trimme , fine neat , and white-fingered gentlemen , yee are in all your doings , but especially in matters pertaining to lady venus court. after this yee returne to the altar , and take another licke or two of the dropping of the chalice , because yee would bee loth to lose any thing , and taking up your cake in your hand , ye come againe to the altars end , where yee began your popish and idolatrous masse , to declare that as good never a whit , as never the better , and to shew that the matter for the which yee said masse , is as farre forward now , as though yee had said none at all . after a few collects mumbled over , yee turne you to the people , and say , dominus vobiscum , bidding them adieu , and with ite missa est , yee bidde them goe , and tell them masse is done . and all in latine , because the people understand nothing but english. then fall yee once againe to kneeling downe at the altar , and because yee are our ladies knights , yee salute her most humbly with some devout orison . that done , ye rise up againe , like tall fellowes , and saying the beginning of s. iohns gospell , ye blesse you secrosse you as though a thousand devills were about ye . after all these things , yee trusse up your trinkets , yee shut your booke , ye fold up your corporasse cloath , yee winde up your chalice ye put off your fooles coate , your vestment , your stole , your fannell , your girdle , your albe , and your amice , yee put out the candle , & solemnly making curtesie to your god , that hangeth over the altar , ye trudg out of the church , either home , or else to the alehouse , being now at libertie all the whole day after to doe what ye list with a safe conscience , to ●dise , to card , to hunt , to hawke ▪ to bowle , to bib , to make good cheere , to play , revell rout , to drinke them all out , to set cocke on the hoope , let the divell pay the maltman , to fish in venus pond ▪ to sacrifice to bacchus , and what not ? and here is your goodly godly massing , wherwith ye bewitch the ignorant , and make the simple people to doate . i passe over your monstrous and apish toyes , your inclinations , and prostrations , your complications and explications , your elevations and extensions , your incurvations and genuflexions , your inspirations and exosculations , your benedictions & humiliations , your pulsations & pausations , with your consignations , and all other abominations . what christian heart can abide either to say heare , or see , such a divellish and abominable kind of massing as ye use at this day ? yee doe nothing at all in your masse , that agreeeth with christs institution . the lords supper and your peevish , popish private masse doe agree together like god and the divell , christ and beliall , light and darkenesse , truth and falsehood , and as the common proverbe is , like harpe and harrow , or like the hare and the hound . sowre and sweete are not so contrary one to another , as your masse is contrary to christs holy communion , as yee have abundantly heard heretofore . for whereas christ preached at the institution of his holy supper , yee preach nothing at all at your masse . whereas christ ministred his blessed supper at a table , yee say your popish masse at an altar . whereas christ did sit while he have the sacrament of his body and bloud to his disciples , yee stand , and by no means will sit when yee receive it . whereas christ did use none other apparell but his ●suall garments , yee disguise your selves with such geare , as is more meet for a game● player , than for a sober minister . wheras christ at his supper both prayed & gave thanks to his heavenly father in that tongue , which those that were present did understand , ye at your masse speake all things in such a tongue as yee your selves , for the most part , understand not , and so are they that are present unedified . whereas christ in his holy supper gave the sacrament of his body and blood to all his disciples , yee in your abominable masses give it to none , but yee your selves eate and drinke up altogether alone . whereas christ at his mawndy gave to his discipler holy bread and holy wine , to bee figures , signes , and memorialls of his blessed body breaking and of his pretious blood shedding , yee at your masses take upon you to eate and drinke not spiritually , but corporally and naturally the corporall and naturall body and bloud of our saviour christ , as hee was borne of the virgin , and hung on the crosse . wheras christ ministred with true and perfect brea● , yee minister with starch , or with a thinne wa●er cake . whereas christ delivered the cuppe contayning wine onely in it , yee in your chalice put both wine and water mingled together . whereas christ gave the sacrament of his body and bloud to his disciples sitting at the table , yee give the sacrament to such as kneele before the altar . whereas christ gave his disciples the sacramentall bread and the cup into their handes , yee put the bread into the mouths of the communicants , and by no meanes will you suffer them to touch your popes holy chalice ▪ wheras christ delivered the sacrament of his body and bloud under both kinds to his disciples , and so commanded it to be observed in his holy congregation , yee contrary to christs institution & ordinance , minister it to the common people under one kind only ; whereas christ did institute his holy supper to bee eaten and drunke in the remembrance of his blessed passion and precious death , yee reserve the sacramentall bread , and hang it up in your pixes , & carry it about for a pageant at your pompous popish processions ; whereas christ ordayned his blessed supper to bee a sacrament of thanksgiving , you make your masse to be a sacrifice propitiatory , satisfactory , and expiatory for the sinnes both of the quicke and the dead . whereas christ at his supper gave the sacrament of his body and bloud freely to his disciples , you sell your masses , and make merchandise of the sacrament , as the costard-monger doth of his costards , and of his other fruits . to conclude , whereas christ appointed the sacrament of his body and bloud to put us in remembrance of his blessed body breaking , and precious bloudshedding , and to stirre us up unto mutuall love , and unto thankesgiving to his heavenly father for the benefits received by the death of his sonne christ , yee apply your masses to a thousand severall purposes , cleane contrary , as to the getting of faire weather , rain , health , long life , riches , victory in battell , overhand of enemies , &c. to driving away of devills , chasing away of agues , putting away of pestilences , curing of measled swine , healing of sicke horses , helping of chickens of the pip , making hot of a winchester goose , restoring of a good name , procuring of friends , preserving of evill chances , bringing of good lucke , pacifying of gods wrath , obtaining of remission of sinnes , delivering of soules out of purgatory , yea out of hell , and placing them in everlasting glorie . what thing is either in heaven earth , or hell , for the which the masse is not profitable , and serves for the purpose , if it please you to apply it ? it is a sawce for all meats , a salve for all sores , a remedy for all diseases , a maintenance of all prosperity , and a defence against all adversity . protens never turned himselfe into so many formes , shapes , and fashions , as your masse hath vertues . o blessed masse , o holy masse , o vertuous masse , yea , o most vile , stinking , and abominable idol . now judge ye , o ye masse-mongers , what is to bee thought of the peevish , popish , pratling , private masse , which the papists , and the most part of you that are massemongers doe so highly praise , commend , advance , extoll , magnifie , and set forth , not as god onely , but in a manner above god. for what thing is it that wee desire to have , for which wee doe not rather resort unto the masse , than unto god ? and is this any other thing than meere idolatrie , and stealing away of his glorie ? which thing whosoever doth , is he not gods enemie ? is hee not an adversarie to the true christian religion . doth hee not defile the precious bloud of our saviour christ under his foot ? doth hee not defile the holy mysteries of god , and blaspheme the name of the lord ? doth hee not give himselfe from god to the devill , and become the childe of wrath , a vessel of vengeance , a firebrand of hell , and heire of everlasting damnation ? god have mercie upon us . behold now the miserable state wherein yee stand , and so many as cleave to your abominable massing ! cease therfore , cease betimes , to bee haters of god , hlasphemers of his holy name , enemies of christs bloud , polluters of the christian religion , defilers of god● most holy sacraments , corrupters of his blessed mysteries , seducers of the people , destroyers of mens soules , pestilences of the christian common-weale , and ministers of satan . forsake your abominable kinde of massing , forsake it , forsake it , and defile your selves no more with idoll service , lest yee provoke the fierce wrath ▪ and hot vengeance of god to fall both upon you the masse-mongers , and upon all them also that are the masse-hunters , and finally , for your wickednesse upon the whole realme . for god cannot alwayes abide his holy sacraments thus to be abused and defiled . if if they escaped not unpunished , that did eat leavened bread while the feast of the lords passeover did endure ; if vziah went not away unplagued , but was strooke with suddaine death , because hee touched the arke of the lord ; if hee that came to the marriage , because hee had not the wedding garment was taken from the table , bound hand and foot , and cast into utter darkenesse , where weeping and ghasting of tee●h shall be 〈…〉 the devil entred into i●das after that hee had received the lords bread unworthily ; if the corinthians were grievously p●agued , yea , and that many unto the death , because they did abuse the lords supper , and unreverently behave themselves at the ministration of it : if those with many other escaped not unplagu'd for abusing the lords mysteries , thinke not ye , which daily defile the honourable sacramēt of christs body & bloud in your most wicked , damnable , devillish , idolatrous , heathenish vile , stinking , blasphemous , detestable , and abominable massing , shall escape free from punishment , neither yee your selves , nor the consenters to your idolatry . therefore if there bee any love in you toward god , any hearty good will toward christ our saviour , any fervent affections towards gods most holy word , any godly zeale toward the christian commonweale , any desire of goodnesse towards this our native countrey , any sparke of well-willing toward the salvation either of your owne soules , or of others : i exhort you all by the tender mercies of god and by the precious bloud of our saviour christ iesu , that yee without tariance give over your abominable massing , which without doubt is not the acceptable service of god ( as the blind sort of people judge ) but the very vile blasphemous bondage of satan , invented by the devill , brought in by antichrist , confirmed & established by such as have received the beasts marke , whose inheritance shall be in that lake that burneth with fire & brimstone . neither lot any thing move you that the idolatrous masse , w ch before was worthily banished out of the realme , is now againe restored by act of parliament , but rather heare what the apostles say , we must obey god more than men . in all matters of religion , the will of god is to be considered before the commandement or act of any mortall prince . pharaoh was a king , yet the godly midwives obeyed not his ungodly commandement in killing the male child●en of the israelites . nebu●hadonezer was a king , yet the three young men would not obey his wicked proclamation in worshipping his golden idoll . antiochus was a king , yet the faithfull iewes would not observe his abominable lawes in sacrificing to idols , and in eating unclean flesh . maacha was a queene , and made an abominable idoll of priapus , and offered sacrifice unto it , and exhorted others without doubt to doe so likewise , but so many as feared god abhorred her doings , and defyed her idolatry , insomuch that king asa her sonne put her downe , because shee had made images in groves , and brake down her idols , and stamped them , and burnt them to ashes at the brooke cedron . iesabel was a queene , and an abominable idolatresse , promoting and making much of baals priests , and feeding them even at her own table , but imprisoning and murdering the prophets of god , she worshipped baal , and caused many other so to doe . but those that loved god abhorred her idolatry , and by no meanes would follow her wicked steps , but chused rather to worship god according to his word . the prophet elias slew all her prophets that did service to baal , and queene iesabel her selfe came to a most miserable end . shee was throwne downe to the ground from an high window , inso ▪ that the wall was sprinckled with her bloud , and the horses trod her under their feete , and the dogs came and eat up her flesh , so that there was nothing left of her , but her skull , her feet , and the palmes of her hands . athalia was a queene , and a great idolatresse , shee worshipped baal , and enticed her sonne ahazia to doe so likewise . notwithstāding such as feared god , obeyed in this behalfe neither the king nor his mother , but walked after the commandements of god. both the mother and the sonne were slaine miserably . the bishops , the priests the lawyers , the scribes , the pharisees , the sadduces , and such others , were great rulers in iewrie , and they commanded the apostles , that they should no more preach in the name of iesu , but they obeyed them not , but stoutly answered , whether it bee right in the sight of god to hearken unto you , more than unto god , iudge yee . for we cannot but speake that which wee have seene and heard . rulers are so farre to be obeyed , as the limits of gods word doe suffer . i● their lawes and acts agree with the word of god , they are to be obeyed , if they be contrary to the commandement of god , it is to bee answered with the apostles . we must ●bey god more than men . furthermore , if ●ee be afraid of losing your livings ▪ an● by that meanes of falli●g into beggery , remember that he , for whose sake yee forsake your idolatrous massing , that ye may serve him with a pure conscience according to his word , will never forsake you , nor leave you succourlesse and unprovided for . sooner shall god deale with you , as he did with the children of israel i● the wildernes with eli as with the widow of of sarepta , with daniel , with the people whom christ fed in the desert , as wee reade in the historie of the gospell , and with such other , as unfainedly feared god , than ye shall want any good thing . hear what david saith , they which seeke after the lord shall want no manner of thing that is good . againe , i have beene young , and now i am old , and yet saw i the righteous never forsaken , nor their seed begging their bread on the earth . our saviour christ also saith , there is no man that hath forsaken house , or brethren , or sisters , or father or mother , or wife , or children , or lands for my sake and the gospels ▪ but he shall receive an hundred fold : now in this life , houses , and brethren , and sisters , and mothers and children , and lands with persecution , and in the world to come everlasting life . and god himselfe saith , i will not leave thee , nor forsake thee . having these loving promises of god , feare yee not the losse of your livings , nor the hatred of the wicked worldlings . if god provideth for you ( as undoubtedly hee doth ) what can ye want ? if god bee your friend , your buckler & shield , who can hurt you ? as saint paul saith , if god be on our side , who can be against us ? now have yee heard , how far the masse dissenteth from the lords supper . ye have heard , what manifest blasphemies and intollerable untruthes bee contained in the masse . ye have heard that the masse is the invention of the devill , the nurse-childe of antichrist , and the welbeloved darling of all them that have received the beasts marke . ye have heard that no christian man can either say masse or heare masse with a good conscience . to end , yee have heard , that the masse is the fountaine , well , head-spring and originall of all idolatry , superstition , wickednes , sin & abomination , and that it is not gods worship , but idoll service . considering therfore these things , if ye tender the glory of god , your owne salvation , and the peace , quietnesse and safegard of our country , flee idolatry , forsake your abominable massing , and serve the lord our god according to his holy word . so shal god blesse you with all good things , both in this world , and in the world to come . fare yee well . the grace of our lord iesus christ , and the love of god , and the fellowship of the holy ghost be with you all . amen . man , how long , o lord. christ , i come quickly . man , o come lord iesu. give the glory to god alone . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a06744-e260 the abomination of the popish masse . what christ did when hee ordained his holy supper . matth 26. matth. 14. luke 22. 1 cor. 11. iohn 13. christ preached before his supper . acts 2. 1 cor. 11. acts 20. note . ma●● 3. mat. 28. iohn 13. 14. 15. 16. 1 cor. 11. ministration of the sacraments without preaching , profiteth little . in ioan tract . 80. what things ought to be preached at the ministration of the lords supper . luke 1. the popish masse hath no preaching . no goodnes is learned at the popish masse . the masse is the nurse of all vice . esay . 58. marke 16. the bells are better preachers than the massers . what goodnesse followed the ministration of the holy communion no man better for hearing masse . the masse is to be abhorred of all good men . the masse-mongers are double dissemblers . the people are mocked at the popish masse . christ ministred his supper at a table . the primative church used no altars , but tables at the lords supper . why christ ministred at a table rather than at an altar . 1 cor. 10. christ alone is our altar . heb. 13. rom. 8. 1 t●m 2. 1 iohn 2. abomination . the communion of the bodie and bloud of christ ought to be ministred at a table . christ ministred without copt or vestment . a surplesse tollerable without the rest of massing apparel . fannell . fools coat , otherwise called a vestment . shaven crowne . never none evill of that marke for lady venus pastime . what the garments of the priests in the old law signified . spiced consciences . rom. 13. christ sate at his supper . gestures . why the iewes stood at the eating of the paschal lamb. psal. 39. heb. 13. 1 pet. 3. why christ with his disciples sate at his supper . apoc. 13. the doctrine of christ is perfect and sufficient for our salvation . matth 23. christ is no lesse present at baptisme than at the supper . an error of the papists . a comparison between the old idolatrous priests and ours . the god of the papists . dan. 14. what the papists doe at their masse . priests massing vestments . altars . hallowing of altars . altar clothes . corporasse . cups of wood . chalices of glasse . chalices of silver and gold . bread confi●eor . an errour of the papists concerning confession . an error of the papists concerning the intercession of saints● the masse is a monster of lies . the i●troite or office of the masse . the kyry . gloria in excelsis . the papists cannot agree . collects . the epistle . the grayle . the allelujah . the tract or sequence . the gospel . why the people stand up at the gospel . the creed . censing of the altars . the offertory . a blasphemous prayer at the offertory . idolatry . the death of christ is the alone sacrifice for sinne . sacrifice ought to bee offered to god alone . esay 42. psal. 114. a new sacrifice . washing of hands . matth. 27. crossing . kissing . turne and returne . the secrets . the preface kissing the canon of the mas● . the sanctu . the authors of the canon . crossing . the first memento . why the priest at masse turneth his backe to the people . idolatrie . the councell of nice . an errour of the papists . what christ did . comparison betweene christ and the massemongers . iohn 6. breaking of the host in three parts . what the breaking of the host signifyeth , and is . note . matth. 25. 〈◊〉 . 14. luke 22. i cor. 11. a point of little good-fellowship , handling of the sacramentall bread . of the hand and mouth . beware yee that ma●ntaine massemongers . note . touching of the chalice . idolatrie . ●●●iding at easter . a point of little good fellowship . antichrists . why the lords supper was instituted . consecration . iug●●ng . ignorance . blessing signi●ieth thankesgiving . enim . corrupters of christs testament . note well . antichrists . matth. 10. corrupters . ●dolatry . sakering or levation . the sakering is the most abominable part of the masse matth. 18. matth. 10. the objections of the papists concerning christs corporall presence in the sacrament . an abs●rditie . iohn 15. 10. mat. 11. 17 3 king. 13. iohn 19. libr 4. cont. marc. co●tra . adi●ant . 〈◊〉 mat. 26. titus 3. serm. de chrism . contr. adiman●um . christs naturall body cannot be but in one place at once . iohn 14. 16. mark. 16. luke 24. acts 1. act. 2. rom. 8. eph. 4. cel. 3. 1 thes. 14. 1 tim. 3. heb. 10. 1 pet. 3. 1 iohn 2. tract . 50. in iohan. hd. dard●n . de fide & syn. ● . 6 lib. 1. cont . e●tich . ad dardan . note well the omnipotencie or almighty power of god. why god is called almighty . the promises of christ concerning concerning his presence . mar. 18. matth. 28. in ioh. l. c. 16. idolatry . 2 king. 1● . the doctrine of the papists concerning the presence of christ in the sacrament , is new . the feast of corpus christi . matth. 26. the sacrament ought to be received of the people in both kinds . sacrilege . the councell of constance . gel●sius decree . the greeks and bohems . idolatry . a lye. crossing . prov. 30. idolatry . kissing . the second memento . praying for the soules departed . the holy scripture teacheth not prayer for the dead . prayer . rom. 14. 1 iohn 5. 1 king. 18. luke 16. iohn 3. e●cces 11. adfratres i● eremo . serm. 57. ser. d●temp di● . 17. co●tr . demes . what it is to rest with christ after this life . apoc. 14 psalm . 116. sapi●nt . 3. the second sakerin● , otherwise called gods hopping about the chalice . the pater noster . c. 1. the breaking of the host in three parts . agnus . idolatry . idolatry . an history of a certain emperour of turkie . the petty degree of the papists god no●● ▪ rom. 4. the pax. the pax. a lie , three for failing . christs ordinance is that the congregatiō should receive the sacrament together . act. 2. 20. 1 cor. 10. 1 cor. 11. the papists at their masse in receiving the sacrament tarry for the people , as the abbot tarrieth for his covent . the private masse is of the devill , and not of god. every man ought to receive the sacrament for himselfe . abac●k 2. rom. 1. the vision of saint anthony . note well . the lords supper is a sacrament o● love and concord . 1 cor. 10. an history of a christian and a iew. drinke and still drinke . rinsing of the chalice . washing of the hands . licking of the chalice . what the comming againe to the altars end signifyeth . an orison for our lady . saint iohns gospell . god give you good night at algate . how the priests spend the day after they have said masse . good stuffe , worke for the tinker . a comparison between the lords supper and the popish masse . the vertues of the masse the masse serveth for all purposes . note in how damnable a state the masse-monger is . exod. 12. ● king. 6. mat. 22. ioh. 13. 1 cor. 11 rev. 20. note well act. 5. exod. 1. dan. 3. 1 mac. 1. 2 cron. 15. 1 king 18. ● king 9. 2 king 11. 〈…〉 how farre civil mastistrates are to be obeyed . act. 5. poverty . exod. 16. 3 king. 17. dan 14. marke 14. psal. 34. psal. 37. mark 10. ios. 1. rom. 8. 2 cor , 13. psal. 13. apoc. 12. apoc. 22. the funeral of the mass, or, the mass dead and buried without hope of resurrection translated out of french. tombeau de la messe. english derodon, david, ca. 1600-1664. 1673 approx. 211 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 80 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2008-09 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a35740 wing d1121 estc r9376 12329637 ocm 12329637 59620 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a35740) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 59620) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1641-1700 ; 207:14) the funeral of the mass, or, the mass dead and buried without hope of resurrection translated out of french. tombeau de la messe. english derodon, david, ca. 1600-1664. s. a. [15], 143 p. printed by andrew clark and are to be sold by randal taylor ..., london : 1673. translation of: tombeau de la messe. written by david de rodon and translated by s.a. cf. halkett & laing (2nd ed.). errata on p. [15]. reproduction of original in bodleian library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng catholic church -controversial literature. mass -early works to 1800. 2006-09 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2006-10 apex covantage keyed and coded from proquest page images 2007-05 emma (leeson) huber sampled and proofread 2007-05 emma (leeson) huber text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion the funeral of the mass : or , the mass dead and buried , without hope of resurrection . translated out of french. london , printed by andrew clark , and are to be sold by randal taylor at the sign of the crown in little britain . 1673. to the right honourable the earl of shaftesbury , lord high chancellour of england , &c. my lord , i could not without injustice , have dedicated this book to any but your lordship , because , as there is no person to whom i am so much obliged , so there is no member of either house of parliament that hath so freely and generously owned the protestant interest . as for my obligations to your lordship , because they are too great to be exprest , it is my duty to take all occasions of expressing my thankfulness for them , and therefore i take this occasion to proclaim my thankfulness to the world. as for your lordships late owning the protestant interest in the house of peers , it was so eminent , and accompanied with such zeal and courage , that ( next under god , and the king ) your lordship may deservedly be stiled the chief asserter and promoter of it , and consequently the asserter and promoter of the interest of england . for the interest of the protestant religion , and the interest of this kingdom , are so interwoven , that the welfare or ruine of either , is the welfare or ruine of both . now being obliged by your lordship , both as an english protestant , and also more particularly in my private capacity , i beseech god to grant that your life may be long and prosperous , your memory and posterity honourable , as long as the sun and moon shall endure , and your soul and body eternally happy , when time shall be no more . to this prayer i shall only add , that i am unfeignedly , my lord , your lordships most affectionate honourer , and most humble servant , s. a. the preface . the author of this piece was one mounsieur de rodon , philosophy professor in the royal colledge at nismes , a city of languedoc in france , where it was written . but as soon as it was printed , it was supprest by the command of authority , prohibiting all persons to keep any of them , upon i know not what severe penalties , and such copies as could be found , were publickly burnt by the hang man , about 1660. whereupon the poor gentleman , for fear of being condemned to keep company with his books , was forced to fly to geneva , where he not long after died . these severities of our adversaries bring to my remembrance what a learned and ingenious frenchman once told me , viz. that this small tract hath more netled their party then any one piece that ever was extant in france since the reformation of religion there . whether that be a mistake , i know not , but this i dare affirm , that though many famous men of that kingdom have , in the memory of this age , written very smartly against the romish heresies , yet there is not one of them whose person and writings have had such hard measure . whence it appears that our author ( his very enemies being judges ) hath made good what he undertook , viz. he hath destroyed that great diana the mass , and hath also , by way of prevention , destroyed all the arguments made use of by the romish doctors for the restoring and re-establishing of her : which he hath so well performed , that to this very day , not one of them hath dared so much as to attempt to revive her , by answering his book ; so that here you may see her laid in her grave , without hope of resurrection ; and therefore the book may very fitly be termed , the funeral of the mass ; and consequently the funeral of romish heresies and idolatries , as the author well observes . for the truth is the mass and the romish religion are almost convertible terms , so that if the former be destroyed , the latter must vanish into its first nothing , and therefore our author having destroyed the mass , hath destroyed the thing called popery too . as for the monstrous absurdities and blasphemies which flow from this one romish doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass , they would fill whole volumes ; but i shall content my self to say that the mass consists of more gross and abominable superstitions , phanaticisms , and idolatries , then ever have been believed or practised by the most ignorant pagans . what the tenets of the romanists are , and what their practices have been in reference to protestant magistrates and people , woful and sad experience hath sufficiently taught the world. i shall only add , that they are as pernicious to our bodies , and estates as their heretical doctrines , and idolatrous services are to our souls . and consequently to introduce popery into this kingdome would be an act as unpolitick as anti-christian , as hath been demonstrated in that incomparable piece , entituled , the established religion in opposition to popery . but because ( i know not by what strange infatuation or enchantment , or rather by what wonderful judgment of god ) this monstrous , absurd , and destructive ( shall i call it ? ) religion prevails amongst us , i thought good to english and print this small treatise , as the best antidote against popery ( the holy scripture excepted ) that ever i read ; and for ought i know , it is not inferior to the best of this kind , that ever was yet extant : to which opinion the harsh usage it hath had from our adversaries , as aforesaid , doth certainly give no small testimony . but i know that the holy scripture it self cannot profit except god be pleased to give his blessing , much less can this book ; and therefore , i earnestly beseech him that he would make it prosperous and successful for the good of souls ; and if any shall receive benefit by it , i desire them to give him all the glory , and then i shall think my self infinitely recompensed for my pains in translating it . the contents of the chapters . chap. i. 1. concerning the exposition of these words , this is my body . page 1. chap. ii. 2. concerning the exposition of these words , he that eateth my flesh , and drinketh my bloud hath eternal life . my flesh is meat indeed , &c. p. 10. chap. iii. 3. against transubstantiation . p. 19. chap. iv. 4. against the real presence of christs body in the host or consecrated wafer . p. 32. chap. v. 5. against the adoration or worshiping of the host . p. 56. chap. vi. 6. against the taking away of the cup. p. 78. chap. vii . 7. against the mass . p. 91. chap. viii . 8. containing answers to the objections of the romish doctors . p. 112. amend the following errours of the press thus : pag. 2. line 5. for obscure read obscurely . p. 23. l. 7. for then read else : p. 46. l. 22. for accident read accidents . p. 49. l. ●2 . for being read seing . p. 51. l. 3. for that should read that it should . p. 57. l. 17. for creatures read creature . p. 60. l. 13. for tood read too p. 66. l. 17. for apostles read apostle . p. 83. l. 12. read pastors only , because . p. 105. l. 2. read council of trent ▪ p. 10● . l. 4. for mass read cross . p. 115. l. 17. for that by read that if by . p. 124. l. 18. for apostle read apostles . p. 130. l. 2● ▪ read priest . ) p. 133. l. 13. dele them . the funeral of the mass . chap. i. concerning the exposition of these words , this is my body . the romanists are wont to tell us , that these words of jesus , christ , this is my body , are so clear to prove the real presence of christs body in the host , and consequently to prove transubstantiation ( or the substantial conversion of the bread into christs body ) that they are amazed we cannot perceive so manifest a truth . against which i form this argument : he that speaks contrary to the usage of all the world , and takes words otherwise then all other men do , must without doubt , speak very obscure : but if jesus christ by these words , this is my body , had meant the real presence of his body in the host ( as the romish doctors assert ) and consequently had meant the substantial conversion of the bread into his body , he had spoken contrary to the common usage of all the world , and had taken the words otherwise then all other men do , which i thus prove . there was never any author either sacred , or prophane , that made use of such words as these , this is my body , to signifie the substantial conversion of one thing into another ; or to signifie the real presence of a thing immediately after the pronouncing of them , and not before . on the contrary , there was never any man that did not use them to signifie , that the thing was already that which it was said to be . for example ; when god the father , speaking of jesus christ , said , this is my beloved son it is certain that jesus christ was the son of god before god said it : and in common usage it is never said this is that , except the thing be so before it is said to be so . for example ; we do not say this is a table , before that , which we mean by the word this , be a table . therefore it is contrary to the common stile of all authors , as well sacred as prophane , and contrary to the common usage of all men , to make these words of jesus christ , this is my body , to signifie the substantial conversion of the bread into christs body , and the real presence of his body in the host immediately after the pronouncing of them by the priest , and not before . seeing then that jesus christ , when he said , this is my body , did not speak contrary to the common usage of all the world , and did not take the words otherwise then all other men do , it necessarily follows that these words of jesus christ , this is my body , do not signifie the substantial conversion of the bread into christs body , nor the real presence of christs body in the host immediately after the priest hath pronounced them , and not before . and this being so , the romish doctors must seek some other passages of scripture , than this , this is my body , to prove such a conversion , and such a presence ; and seeing they can find none , i conclude that such a conversion and such a presence , have no foundation in holy scripture . 2 that which i have said concerning common usage is founded on this reason , viz. because things must be before there can be any image , picture , or representation of them , and consequently images are after the things ▪ whereof they are images : but words are the images of conceptions , and conceptions the images of things : therefore things are such before we can really conceive them to be such , and we conceive them to be such , before we can say they are such . therefore that which jesus christ held , and gave to his disciples , expressed by the word this , was his body , before he conceived that it was his body , and he conceived that it was his body , before he said this is my body ; and consequently it is not by vertue of these words , this is my body , that that which jesus christ gave to his disciples , expressed by the word this , was his body ; but rather it is by blessing the bread , or thanksgiving that the bread was made the body of christ , because it was made the sacrament of it . whence it follows that these words , this is my body , must be expounded thus , this bread is my body ; and these words this bread is my body , must be expounded thus , this bread is the sacrament of my body ; which i prove thus . 3. a proposition must be expounded according to the nature of the thing in question ; for example , if a man , pointing at the kings person , should say , this is the king , the proposition must be expounded thus , this is the kings person , because the kings person is meant : but if a man coming into a painters shop , and pointing at the kings picture , should say , this is the king , the proposition must be expounded thus , this is the kings picture ; because here his picture is meant . even so if jesus christ laying his hand on his breast , had said this is my body , we must without doubt have understood the proposition concerning his real body , and not concerning the sign , or sacrament of it ; because his very body had been then meant , and not the sign or sacrament of it : but jesus christ , being about to institute the eucharist , and to that end , having taken bread , blessed it , and given it to his disciples with these words , take , eat , this is my body , it is evident that they must be understood of the sacrament of his body , and the proposition must be expounded thus , this is the sacrament of my body ▪ because here the sacrament of his body is meant . and seeing a sacrament is a visible sign of an invisible grace , as the council of trent saith , in its sixth session , it is evident that this proposition , this is my body , being expounded by this , this is the sacrament of my body , may be expounded thus , this is the sign of my body ; which i confirm thus . 4 in these two propositions , this is my body , this cup is the new testament in my bloud , the word [ is ] must be taken in the same sense , because they are alike , having been pronounced upon the same matter , viz. the one upon one part of the sacrament , and the other upon the other part of it ; and because of like things we must give a like judgment . but in this proposition , this cup is the new testament , the word [ is ] is not taken for a real and transubstantiated being ; but for a sacramental and significative being : because neither the cup , nor that which is in the cup , is changed into a testament ; neither is it really and properly a testament , but the sacrament of the new testament . therefore in this proposition likewise , this is my body , the word [ is ] is not taken for a real and transubstantiated being ; but for a sacramental and significative being : and consequently as this proposition , this cup is the new testament , must be expounded thus ; the wine that is in the cup is the sign and sacrament of the new testament : so this proposition , this is my body , must be expounded thus , this bread is the sign and sacrament of my body . whence it follows that in one single proposition of jesus christ in the institution of the sacrament of the eucharist , viz. this cup is the new testament , there are two figures , one in the word cup , being taken for that which is in the cup ; this is a figure called a metonymie , whereby the thing containing is taken for the thing contained . the other figure is , that the cup is called the new testament : this is also a figure called a metonymie , whereby the sign is called by the name of the thing signified . and therefore the romish doctors are mistaken when they tell us that all that jesus christ said when he instituted the eucharist , must be taken literally , and without a figure . but withal we must not imagine that jesus christ spake obscurely , because he spake figuratively ▪ these figures and manners of speech , being commonly and familiarly used by all the world. 5. but when we say that these words , this is my body , this is my bloud , must be expounded thus , this bread is the sign and sacrament of my body , this wine is the sign and sacrament of my bloud , we do not mean that the bread and wine are barely and simply signs of christs body and bloud ▪ but we believe that the bread and wine in the eucharist are signs that do exhibit the body and bloud of christ to believers : for when they do , by the mouth of the body receive the bread and wine of the eucharist , they do at the same time , by the mouth of the soul , viz. by faith , receive the body of christ broken , and his bloud shed for the remission of their sins , as will be proved in the next chapter . 6. add hereunto this one argument : when a man saith that a thing is such , if it be not such , during the whole time , which he imploys in saying it is such , he makes a false proposition . for example , when a man saith that a wall is white , if it be not white , during the whole time he imploys in saying it is white , he makes a false proposition . but ( according to the romish doctors ) when jesus christ said , this is my body , it was not his body during the whole time which he imployed in saying this is my body ; for , they say , it was his body afterward only : therefore , according to the romish doctors , jesus christ uttered a false proposition : which being blasphemous to affirm , we must lay down this for a foundation , that that which jesus christ gave his disciples when he said , this is my body , was his body , not only after he had said it , but also while he was saying it , and before he said it . and here we have this advantage of those of the romish church , that we believe the truth of these words of jesus christ , this is my body , much better then they do ; because they believe it at one time only , viz. after he had said it : but we believe it at three several times , viz. before he said it , when he was saying it , and after he had said it . but here some may object that we must not take the words of our lord in too rigorous a sense , and that in these words , this is my body , we must take the present tense for the next future , and then the sense will be this , this will immediately be my body . to which i answer , that the romish doctors will have us take these words , this is my body , in the rigour of the literal sense , and then the proposition is evidently false . i know that the present tense may be taken for the next future ; as when jesus christ said , i go to my father , and to your father ; i go to my god , and to your god : that is , i shall go speedily . but who can be so bold and ignorant as to affirm that this speech is without a figure , seeing all grammarians know that it is a figure called enallage of time ? therefore the romish doctors must confess , that by their own doctrine this proposition of jesus christ , this is my body , is either false or figurative ; and that seeing it is not false , it must be figurative , and that the figure must be a metonymie , whereby the sign takes the name of the thing signified ( as hath already been proved ) and not an enallage of time . chap. ii. concerning the exposition of these words , he that eateth my flesh , and drinketh my bloud bath eternal life . my flesh is meat indeed , &c. 1. in this chapter i shall prove that jesus christ speaks of a spiritual eating and drinking by faith , and not of a corporal eating and drinking by the mouth of the body . my first argument is this . when a man would satisfie his hunger , and quench his thirst , he eateth , and drinketh that thing , which he hungers and thirsts after ; because eating satisfieth hunger , and drinking quencheth thirst : but it is by faith , that is , by believing in jesus christ , that we satisfie the hunger , and quench the thirst which we have after christ ; for it is in the sixth of st. john , he that cometh to me shall never hunger , and he that believeth in me shall never thirst : therefore it is by faith or by believing , that we eat and drink jesus christ ; and consequently the eating of christ flesh , and drinking his bloud is spiritual , and not corporal . 2. my second argument is this : jesus christ saith , he that eateth my flesh , and drinketh my blood hath eternal life . and except ye eat the flesh of the son of man ▪ and drink his bloud , ye have no life in you , john 6. but it is the spiritual eating and drinking by faith that gives life eternal , and not the corporal eating and drinking by the mouth of the body ; because many reprobates ( according to the very doctrine of rome it self ) do corporally eat the flesh , and drink the bloud of christ , and yet shall not inherit eternal life . 3. the third argument is taken from s. augustine , and cardinal cajetan , who expound the words of jesus christ as we do . st. augustin in book 3. of christian doctrine , speaketh thus , to eat the flesh of christ is a figure , teaching us to partake of christs passion , and to imprint in our memories with delight and profit , that christ was crucified for us . card. cajetan in his commentary on st. john 6. saith , to eat the flesh of christ , and drink his bloud , is faith in christs death ; so that the sense is this , if you use not the death of the son of man as meat and drink , ye shall not have the life of the spirit in you . and having sufficiently proved his exposition , he adds : to eat and drink the sacrament is a thing common , as well to those that eat unworthily , as to those that eat worthily , but that which jesus christ here speaks of , is not common to both , for he saith , he that eateth my flesh , and drinketh my bloud , hath eternal life ; he saith not he that eateth worthily and drinketh worthily , but he that eateth and drinketh . whence it clearly appears , that according to the letter , he speaks not of eating , and drinking the sacrament of the eucharist , but of eating and drinking the death of jesus christ . 4. now that we may clearly understand this doctrine , we must consider , wherein the life which jesus christ gives us , doth consist ; for seeing the flesh of jesus christ is meat to us , because it gives us life ; it is evident that if we know what life what life that is which jesus christ gives us , we must know likewise how jesus christ is meat to us , and consequently how we eat him . but to know what that life is which jesus christ gives us , we must consider what that death is in which we were involved , which is expressed by st. paul , ephes . 2. in these words : when we were dead in sins and trespasses god hath quickned us together with christ : by grace ye are saved ; and consequently the death in which we were involved , consists in two things , first in the curse of the law , which imports the privation of felicity , and the suffering of temporal and eternal punishment for our sins : secondly it consists in an habitual corruption , whereby sin raigns in us ; and therefore it is said 1 tim. 5. the widow that lives in pleasure is dead while she liveth . also sins are called dead works , heb. 10. so that the life which jesus christ hath purchased for us , consists in two things . first , in deliverance from the curse of the law by the pardon of our sins , as st. paul tells us , colloss . 2. god hath quickned you together with christ , having forgiven you all trespasses , blotting out the obligation that was against us ; which obligation proceeded from the law , because it did oblige all the transgressors of it to a curse . secondly , it consists in regeneration , or sanctification , whereof jesus christ speaking in john 3. saith , except a man be born again he cannot enter into the kingdom of god : and s. paul heb. 12. without holiness no man shall see the lord. therefore seeing that the life which jesus christ hath purchased for us , consists in the pardon of our sins ▪ and in our regeneration , and sanctification , which ends in glorification ; and that jesus christ is called meat in reference to this life , we must consider the means , whereby jesus christ hath purchased these things for us ; and seeing it is certain , that his death is the means by which he hath purchased pardon of sins , and regeneration , we must conclude that jesus christ is the food and nourishment of our souls in regard of the merit of his death . but that jesus christ by his death hath purchased life for us , ( that is justification , which consists in the pardon of our sins , and regeneration , which consists in holiness of life ) appears by these passages of scripture viz. we are justified by the bloud of christ , and reconciled to god by his death , rom. 5. we have redemption by his bloud , even the remission of sins . ephes . 1. he hath reconciled us in the body of his flesh by his death , that he may present us holy , without spot , and blameless in his sight . coll. 1. we are sanctified by the offering of the body of jesus christ once for all . heb. 10. christ loved the church , and gave himself for it , that he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word , that he might present it unto himself a glorious church , &c. eph. 5. therefore seeing jesus christ hath purchased life for us by his death , and that his flesh and bloud are our meat and drink ( because they purchased life eternal for us on the cross , viz. the remission of our sins , and sanctification , ending in glorification ) it follows that the action whereby jesus christ is applied to us for righteousness and sanctification , is the same by which we eat the flesh of christ , and drink his bloud . but this action is nothing else but faith , as the scripture tells us : being justified by faith we have peace with god. rom. 5. god purifies our hearts by faith . act. 15. he that believeth hath eternal life . joh. 6. from what hath been said i form this argument . that action whereby we obtain remission of sins , and sanctification , ending in glorification , is the same , whereby we have that life , which jesus christ hath purchased for us by his death ; because that life principally consists in the remission of sins , and sanctification , as we have proved . but the spiritual eating , and drinking by faith , and not the corporal by the mouth , is that action , whereby we obtain remission of sins , and sanctification , as we have also proved . therefore the spiritual eating and drinking by faith is the action , whereby we have that life , which jesus christ hath purchased for us by his death , and not the corporal eating and drinking by the mouth . and consequently seeing in st. john 6. a certain eating and drinking is spoken of , whereby we have that life which jesus christ hath purchased for us by his death ; it is evident that a spiritual eating and drinking is there spoken of , and not a corporal . 5. from what hath been said it appears , that when jesus christ saith , my flesh is meat indeed , &c. the figure falls upon the word meat , which is taken not for corporal but spiritual meat . the reason whereof is , that corporal food is that which is appointed for the nourishment of the body , as spiritual food is that which is appointed for the nourishment of the soul ; so that although corporal food be taken by the mouth of the body , yet that only doth not make it to be corporal food , except it be taken for the nourishment of the body ; otherwise poison , medicine , a bullet , &c. which a man should swallow would be corporal food ; which is absurd to affirm . but the flesh of christ , which is pretended to be eaten in the eucharist by the mouth of the body , is not appointed for the nourishment of the body ; because that food which is appointed for the nourishment of the body is changed into the substance of the body : but the body of christ is not changed into the substance of our bodies : therefore the flesh of christ is not a corporal food , but his flesh broken , and his bloud shed on the cross is a spiritual food , which nourisheth the souls of those , who by a true and lively faith , do embrace this flesh broken , and this bloud shed ; that is , who do wholy rest and rely on the merit of his death and passion for obtaining mercy from god. and certainly , seeing that the life which jesus christ gives us by his death , is spiritual , that the nourishment is spiritual , that the eating his body and drinking his bloud , is spiritual ( as hath been proved ) it follows that his flesh must be spiritual meat , and his bloud spiritual drink . and this flesh of christ is incomparably better , and more truly meat indeed in regard of its effects , than corporal food can be ; because it doth better , and more perfectly nourish the souls of believers then corporal food doth their bodies ; this being corruptible food which gives temporal life only ; but that spiritual and incorruptible food which gives life eternal . 6. i conclude this chapter with this consideration . when a doctrine is proposed which is pretended to be divine , and that passages of holy scripture are alledged for the proof of it , if it opposeth , or seems to oppose sense and reason , and to include contradictions ; and that a more suitable and rational sense can be found out for those passages , so that all these inconveniences and contradictions may be avoided ; there is nothing more just than that we should embrace that probable and rational sense , and reject that doctrine which opposeth sense and reason and seems to imply contradictions : but the doctrine of the real presence of the manhood of jesus christ in the host , and the transubstantiation of the bread into his body , is repugnant to sense and ▪ reason , and seems to include divers contradictions ; ( viz. that a humane body is in a point without any local extension , that a body may be in divers places at one and the same time , that the bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of christ , which were before ; that accidents may be without a subject , &c. ) and the passages that are impertinently alledged to prove such a presence , and such a change , have a sense very commodious and rational , for the avoiding all these contradictions , as appears in this and the former chapter , where i have very rationally expounded those two passages which the romish doctors impertinently make use of for this subject . therefore they ought to embrace that commodious and rational sense which we have given them ; and to reject the doctrine of the real presence of the body of jesus christ in the host , and the doctrine of transubstantiation . chap. iii. against transubstantiation . 1. transubstantiation is the substantial conversion of the bread and wine into the body and bloud of christ , which i destroy by divers arguments ; the first whereof is this : in every substantial conversion , that thing into which another thing is converted , is always newly produced . for example , when seed is converted into an animal , that animal is newly produced ; when jesus christ turned the water into wine , the wine was newly produced , &c. but the body and bloud of christ cannot be newly produced in the sacrament of the eucharist : therefore the bread and wine are not substantially converted into the body and bloud of christ in the sacrament of the eucharist . the second proposition , viz. that the body and bloud of christ cannot be newly produced , i prove thus : that which is newly produced receives a new being ; because to produce a thing , and to give it a being is one and the same : but the body and bloud of christ cannot receive a new being , which i prove thus : a man cannot receive ●●●t which he hath , while he hath it , and therefore he cannot receive a being while he hath a being ; for as it is impossible to take away a being from that which hath no being ; so it is impossible to give a being to that which hath a being already : and as you cannot kill a dead man , so you cannot give life to one that is living ▪ but the body and bloud of christ have , and always will have a being : therefore they cannot receive one , and consequently cannot be reproduced in the eucharist . 2. my second argument is this . in every substantial conversion , that thing which is converted into another is destroyed . for example , when the water was turned into wine , the water was destroyed : but in the sacrament of the eucharist the bread and wine are not destroyed by the consecration ▪ which i prove thus : in the celebration of the eucharist there is breaking , giving , eating and drinking after the consecration , as appears by the very practice of our adversaries , who after consecration , break the host , and divide it into three parts , give nothing to the communicants but consecrated hosts ▪ and eat and drink nothing but what was consecrated : but the scripture saith , that in the celebration of the eucharist , bread is broken , that bread and wine are given , and that bread is eaten and wine drunk , as appears by these following passages . st. paul 1 ▪ cor. 10. saith , the bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of christ ? and 1 ▪ cor. 11. st. matth. 26. st. mark 14. and st. luke 22. it is said that jesus christ took bread , brake it and gave it ; and st. mark 14. and st. matth. 26. jesus christ after he had participated of the sacrament of the eucharist , saith , i will drink no more of this fruit of the vine : and 1 cor. 11. as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup. let a man examine himself , and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup. 3. secondly , when jesus christ said to his disciples , drink ye all of this , st. matth. 26. that is , drink ye all of this cup , either he commanded to drink of a cup of wine or of a cup of bloud : if he commanded them to drink of a cup of wine , then it follows that they drank nothing but wine , because it is certain that they obeyed jesus christ ; for it is said st. mark 14. that they all drank ●f it . or if he commanded them to drink of a cup of bloud , then it follows that the wine was already changed into his bloud , because it is not probable that jesus christ said to them drink ye all of this cup of bloud , and yet that it was not a cup of bloud , but a cup of wine . but when jesus christ said , drink ye all of this , he did not speak to them of a cup of bloud for the wine was not then converted into christs bloud , because ( according to our adversaries ) it was not changed until jesus christ had made an end of uttering these following words , for this is my bloud . but he uttered these words , drink ye all of this , before he uttered those , for this is my bloud ; because a man must utter a proposition before he can give the reason of it . 4. thirdly , when a thing is converted into another , we cannot see the effects and properties of the thing converted , but only of that into which it is converted . for example , when the seed is changed into an animal , we can see no more the effects and properties of the seed , but of the animal only ; and when jesus christ turned the water into wine , the effects , properties , and accidents of the water were no more seen ▪ but of the wine only , &c. but in the eucharist we cannot , after the consecration , perceive the effects , properties , accidents , or parts of the body and bloud of christ ; but we see there all the effects , properties , and accidents of bread and wine : therefore in the eucharist , the bread and wine are not converted into the body and bloud of christ . and the truth is , if that which appears to be bread , and hath all the effects , accidents , and properties of bread , be not bread , but christs body cloathed with the accidents of bread ; then it may likewise be said that they that appear to be men , and have all the effects , properties , and accidents of men are not men , but horses cloathed with the accidents of men . 5. the fourth argument is this . in every substantial conversion there must be a subject to pass from one substance to another ; for then it would be a creation , which is the sole action that doth not presuppose a subject . but in the sacrament of the eucharist , after the consecration , there is no subject ; because , according to our adversaries , there remains no subject ; for , as they assert , the accidents of bread and wine remain without any subject at all : therefore in the sacrament of the eucharist there is no substantial conversion . 6. the fifth argument is drawn from hence , that transubstantiation destroys the nature of accidents , thus . that doctrine which asserts that accidents are not accidents but substances , destroys the nature and essence of accidents , because it is impossible that an accident can be a substance . but the doctrine of transubstantiation asserts that accidents are not accidents , but that they are substances , which i prove thus . that doctrine which asserts that accidents are not inherent , but that they subsist of themselves , doth assert that accidents are not accidents , but that they are substances , because inherence is the essential difference of an accident , and subsistence the essential difference of a substance . but the doctrine of transubstantiation asserts that accidents are not inherent , but that they subsist , which i prove thus . that doctrine which asserts that accidents may be without a subject , viz. the accidents of bread and wine without any substance , and without any subject to sustain them ; for by transubstantiation the substance of the bread and wine is gone , and their accidents remain : therefore the doctrine of transubstantiation asserts that accidents are not inherent , but do subsist by themselves , and consequently asserts that accidents are not accidents , but substances , and so destroys the nature and essence of accidents . but here it may be said that actual inherence doth not constitute an accident , but aptitudinal only . against which i form this argument . whatsoever doth exist actually , either it exists in something else actually so , that it cannot be without it , which philosophers call actual inherence , as walking : or else it exists in and by it self actually , so that it may be alone by it self , which philosophers term actual existence ; the former of these constitutes an accident , and the latter constitutes a substance . but the accidents of the bread and wine , after consecration , do exist actually : therefore they must exist either in something else actually , or in themselves actually . but they do not exist in and by themselves actually , for then they would subsist by themselves , and be real substances , which is impossible : therefore they exist in something else actually , viz. in the substance of the bread and wine , and consequently the substance of the bread and wine remains after the consecration , and so there can be no transubstantiation . 7. the sixth argument is drawn from this , that transubstantiation destroys the nature of sacraments , because every sacrament is a visible sign of an invisible grace , as the council of trent saith in sess . 6. and every sign relates to the thing signified , so that we must speak of signs and sacraments , as of things relating to something else . but all relative things have , as it were , a double being , viz. an absolute being which is the natural being of the thing , and a relative being whereby it relates to something else . for example , in a man that hath begotten a child , we consider his absolute and natural being as he is a man as others are , and his relative being , whereby he is a father , and is distinguished from other men that have no children , and so are not fathers . so in the sacrament of baptism , the sign , viz. the water , hath an absolute and natural being , viz. it s cold and moist substance , whereby it is water as other waters are ; and a relative , sacramental , and significative being , whereby it is the sign and sacrament of christs bloud , and differs from other waters that are not imployed for this sacred use . even so in the sacrament of the eucharist , the bread and wine , which are the signs , have their natural and absolute being , viz. their substance whereby they are bread and wine , as other bread and wine , which we commonly use ; and their relative , sacramental , and significative being , whereby they are the sacrament and signs of the body and bloud of christ , and differ from all other bread and wine that is not thus imployed . to this i add , that it is impossible a relative being should be without an absolute , because a relative cannot be without its foundation . for example , it is impossible to be a father without being a man ; to be equal without quantity , &c. and this being granted , i form my argument thus , that which takes away the natural being from signs and sacraments , destroys their nature and essence ; because the relative and sacramental being cannot be without the absolute and natural , as hath been proved . but the doctrine of transubstantiation destroys the natural being of the bread and wine , which are signs and sacraments of christs body and bloud ; for by transubstantiation , the whole substance of the bread and wine is destroyed : therefore the doctrine of transubstantiation destroys the nature and essence of sacraments . 8. to this argument our adversaries answer , that in the eucharist the bread and wine are not signs , because by the consecration they are destroyed as to their substance . but some of them say that the signs are the accidents of the bread and wine ; others say that the body and bloud of christ contained under the accidents of the bread and wine , are the signs of the body and bloud of jesus christ crucified ; lastly , others say , that neither the accidents of the bread and wine only , nor the body and bloud of christ only , but the body and bloud of christ , together with the accidents of the bread and wine , are the signs of the body and bloud of jesus christ crucified : therefore seeing the doctrine of transubstantiation doth not destroy the natural being of christs body and bloud , nor the natural being of the accidents of the bread and wine , they maintain that the doctrine of transubstantiation doth not destroy the nature and essence of sacraments . 9. to this i reply , that neither the accidents of the bread and wine only , nor the body and bloud of christ only , nor the body and bloud of christ together with the accidents of the bread and wine , are the true signs of jesus christ crucified ; but the bread and wine only , which i prove thus : first , in sacraments there ought to be an analogy and similitude between the sign , and the thing signified , as our adversaries confess , and particularly card. bellarmin book 1. of the sacrament , chap. 9. in these words . the fourth thing required in a sacrament , is that the sign should have some similitude and analogy with the thing signified . and he quotes st. augustine in epist . 23. to boniface , speaking thus : if sacraments had not some similitude of the things whereof they are sacraments they could be no sacraments : but in the sacrament of the eucharist , neither the accidents of the bread and wine , nor the body and bloud of christ , whether jointly or severally , have that similitude and analogy to the thing signified which is required , but only the bread and wine in substance ; because that which is principally signified , and represented by the signs in the sacrament of the eucharist , is the nourishment of our souls in the hope of eternal life : for as baptism is the sacrament of our regeneration and spiritual birth ; so the eucharist is the sacrament of our spiritual nourishment , as card. bellarmin confesseth in book 3. of the eucharist , chap. 9. and in book 4. chap. 19 ▪ he saith that the sacrament of the eucharist was ordained to preserve spiritual life , which cannot be represented and signified , but by signs which can nourish our bodies ; for the analogy and similitude consists in this , that as the signs have vertue to nourish our bodies for the preservation of temporal life ; so the things signified have a vertue to nourish our souls in the hope of eternal life . but neither the accidents of the bread and wine , nor the body and bloud of christ , whether severally , or jointly with the accidents , can nourish our bodies , ( nourishment being essentially the conversion of aliment into the substance of a living body , ) and it is certain that neither the accidents of bread and wine , nor the body and bloud of christ , whether separately , or jointly with them , can be converted into our substance , but only the substance of bread and wine , and other aliments which we take : therefore neither the accidents of the bread and wine , nor the body and bloud of christ , whether separately , or jointly with them , are the true signs ; but the bread and wine only , which being the ordinary nourishment of our bodies , do represent to us the spiritual nourishment of our souls by the body and bloud of christ , received by faith. 10. secondly , the council of trent in session 13. commands that the sacrament of the eucharist shall be adored with latrie , which according to our adversaries , is the sovereign worship due to god only . but the accidents of the bread and wine ought not to be adored , because they are creatures , and that god only must be adored : therefore the accidents of the bread and wine are not the sacrament of the eucharist . thirdly , a sacrament is a visible sign of an invisible grace , as the council of trent defines it in sessions 6 , and 13. but in the eucharist the body and bloud of christ are not visible : therefore , in the eucharist the body and bloud of christ , are not the signs . lastly , i say , that in every sacrament the sign relates to the thing signified ; and relation is always between two different things ; because nothing relates to it self , and consequently nothing can be both the sign and thing signified . but the body and bloud of christ are the things signified : therefore the body and bloud of christ are not the signs . and it is to no purpose to say that jesus christ in the mass is the sign and figure of himself on the cross ; for jesus christ wheresoever he is , is one and the same yesterday , to day , and for ever . and therefore jesus christ not being different from himself , cannot be relative to himself , nor the sign of himself . other reasons which are usually alledged against transubstantiation will be more properly mentioned in the next chapter . chap. iv. against the real presence of christs body in the host , or consecrated wafer . 1. the romish doctors affirm , that immediately after the priest in the celebration of the mass , hath pronounced these words , this is my body , the body of christ is really present in the host , and that it is whole and entire in every part and point of the host ; which doctrine i destroy by these following arguments , the first whreof is this . 2. if a thing be created in a place , either it must be produced there , or it must come , or be brought thither from some other place ; for it is impossible to find out a third way of putting any thing in a place . and the romish doctors have hitherto been able to invent but one of these two ways of putting christs body in the host , the jacobins telling us that it is brought thither from some other place , and the jesuites that it is produced there . but the body of christ can neither come , nor be brought thither into the host ▪ nor can it be produced there : therefore the body of christ is not in the host . 3. first , the body of christ cannot come , or be brought into the host from any other place , because it can ▪ come from no place but heaven , being no where but in heaven . but christs body neither comes , nor is brought from heaven into the host ; which i prove thus : when a body comes , or is ▪ carried from one place to another , it must leave its first place . for example , if a man would go from paris to rome , he must leave paris : but the body of jesus christ never leaves heaven ; for the heavens must contain him until the time of the restitution of all things . acts 3. therefore christs body neither comes , nor is brought from heaven into the host . besides , it is impossible that christs body should come or be brought into the host without passing through the space that is between heaven and earth where the consecrated hosts are ; because a man cannot pass from one extream to another without passing through the space that is between them . but the space between heaven and earth is too vast to be passed through in a moment ( for these doctors will have it , that immediately after the pronouncing of these words , this is my body , the body of christ is brought into the host . ) moreover it must in a moment be in all the heavens , and in all the airs between the highest heaven , and this earth where the hosts are , ( because a man cannot pass through a place without being there ) and then it would have three sorts of existences at once , viz. one natural and glorious existence in heaven , one sacramental existence in the host , and one airy existence in the air. but seeing all these things are absurd , we must conclude that christs body neither comes , nor is brought into the host . 4. secondly , christs body cannot be reproduced in the consecrated host , because a thing that is produced already , cannot be produced again , without a preceding destruction ; for as a dead man cannot be killed , nor that be annihilated , which is annihilated already ; so neither can that be produced which is produced already , nor that receive a being which hath one already . this common conception of all men is founded upon this principle , that every action , whether it produceth or destroyeth a thing , must necessarily have two distinct terms , the one called in the schools , terminus à quo , that is , the term from which the thing comes ; and the other terminus ad quem , that is , the term to which it comes . but according to this principle , that cannot be annihilated which is so already , nor that receive a being which hath one already ; because the term from which it should come , and the term to which it should come , would be one and the same thing ; contrary to the maxime already laid down , viz. that the terms of action must necessarily be distinct , and that one of them must be the negation or privation of the other . 5. here perhaps it may be objected , that by transubstantiation the substance of christs body is not newly produced , but only a new presence of him in the place where the substance of the bread was . but to this i answer , that in all substantial conversions and actions , a new substance must be produced , as in accidental , a new accident must be produced . but transubstantiation ( according to the romish doctors ) is a substantial conversion : therefore by transubstantiation a new substance must be produced . and seeing that the new presence of christs body in the place where the substance of the bread was , is not a substance , but an accident of the catagorie which the philosophers call vbi , it is evident that by transubstantiation the presence of christs body only is not produced in the place where the substance of the bread was ; and seeing that the substance of christs body is not produced there ( as hath been proved in the preceding number ) we must conclude that there is no transubstantiation nor real presence of christs body in the host . this instance doth also destroy the adduction of christs body into the host , which hath been already refuted in number 3. 6. my second argument is this . in a true humane body such as christs body is , there is something above , and something under , right and left , before and behind ; for the head is above the neck , and the neck above the shoulders , the shoulders above the breast , the breast above the stomach , the stomach above the belly , the belly above the thighs , the thighs above the legs , &c. but all the world knows that in a point there is nothing above or under , right or left , before or behind : therefore christs body is not in a point , and consequently it is not in every point , or part of the host . to this i add , that the quantity ▪ and greatness of christs body is nothing else but its length , breadth , and thickness , which cannot be in a point . lastly , the quantity of christs body is nothing else but its extent , as we all know ; and a body is extended when it hath its parts one without another ; that is , they are not one within another , as all the jesuites expound it . but the doctrine of the presence of christs body in the host , puts all its parts one within another , because it puts them all in a point : therefore such a doctrine takes away its extent , and consequently its quantity . 7. my third argument is this . to move and not to move at the same time , to be eaten and not to be eaten at the same time , to be in a point and not in a point at the same time , to occupy a place and not to occupy it at the same time , are contradictory things . but if the body of christ were in divers consecrated hosts , it would move and not move at the same time . for example , when a priest carries a consecrated host to a sick person , the body of christ which is pretended to be in it , moves with the host ; for it leaves the altar , and goes with the priest toward the sick persons house , and at the same time the body of christ , which is pretended to be in the other hosts that remain on the altar , moves not ; and so the same body of christ at the same time moves and moves not , which is a contradiction . seeing then it is impossible that one and the same body at one and the same time should move and not move , it is likewise impossible that christs body should be in divers hosts at the same time . in like manner , if christs body were at the same time in heaven , and in the host it would be eaten and not eaten at the same time ; for it would be eaten in the host by the priest , and at the same time , it would not be eaten in heaven . also it would be in a point and not in a point at the same time ; for in the host it would be in a point , and in heaven it would not be in a point at the same time : therefore seeing it is impossible that one and the same body at one and the same time should be eaten and not eaten , should be in a point and not in a point ; it is also impossible that christs body should be both in heaven and in the host at the same time . 8 the fourth argument is this : two relatives are always different , as the father and son , the husband and the wife , &c. and relation is always between two things that really differ ; as the equality between two ells , the resemblance between two crows , &c. in a word , nothing can have relation to it self , but whatsoever hath relation must necessarily have it to something else , as appears by the definition of relation : but to be distant is a relative and not an absolute term ; for when we conceive an absolute term we conceive but one thing , as when we conceive a crow ; but when we conceive a relative term , we necessarily conceive two things . for example , we cannot conceive a crow to be like , without conceiving something else to which it is like . seeing then we cannot conceive a thing to be distant without conceiving something else from which it is distant , it is evident that to be distant is a relative term , and that distant things are relatives , and consequently are really different . whence i form this argument : relative things are really different , as hath been proved : but the body that is at rome is distant from that which is at paris , by reason of the space of about 300 leagues that is between those two cities ; and the body that is in the highest heavens is distant from that which is upon earth , by reason of the many thousands of leagues that are between heaven and earth : therefore the body that is at rome is different from that which is at paris ; and that which is in heaven , is different from that which is upon earth ; and consequently one and the same body cannot be at the same time at rome and at paris , in heaven and upon earth ; else one and the same body might be distant and different from it self , which is a contradiction : therefore seeing jesus christ is not distant , and different from himself , it follows that he cannot be at the same time in heaven and in the host , nor at the same time in the consecrated hosts at rome and at paris . 9. but perhaps it may be said that a body being at the same time in two distant places is not distant from it self , but that the places only are distant ; and therefore that christs body in heaven is not distant from it self in the host , but it is the places only , viz. heaven and earth ( where the host is ) that are distant . to this i answer that it is only the distance of places that makes the distance of things existing in those distant places . for example : the reason why peter that is at rome is distant from paul that is at paris , is not because they are two things really different , else they would be always distant , even when they are in one bed together , ( for they are always really different ) but all the reason of their distance is , because they are in two distant places . seeing then ( according to our adversaries ) that christs body is in two distant places at once , viz. in heaven and in the host , at rome and at paris in divers hosts , it follows that christs body is distant , and different from it self . and seeing it is impossible that it should be distant and different from it self , it is evident that it cannot be in two distant places at once ; and consequently not in heaven and in the host . 10. besides , suppose that peter could be at rome and at paris at once , and that peter that is at rome should have a mind to go to paris , and should go accordingly ; and that the same peter that is at paris should have a mind to go to rome , and should go accordingly , it is certain that peter would draw near to himself , and meet himself . but things that draw near to each other , must of necessity have been at a distance before ; and therefore if a body draws near to it self , it is certain that it was distant from it self before . and hereupon i would fain ask our adversaries , whether , when peter should meet himself , he would let himself pass , or not ? and if he should let himself pass , whether peter going to rome , would step aside and give way to himself going to paris , or else the contrary ? but if he should not step aside and give place to himself , i would ask whether he would hinder himself from passing , or not ? and if he should not hinder himself from passing ; whether he would pass thorow himself , and so make another janus with two faces , & c ? whatsoever answers they shall make to these questions must ( i am sure ) be very absurd and ridiculous . 11 the fifth argument is this : it is a perfect contradiction , that a body should be one and not one : but if christs body should be at the same time in heaven , and upon earth in the host , it would be one and not one ; for it would be one by our adversaries own confession , and it would not be one ; which i prove thus : that a thing may be one , it must neither be divided in it self , nor from it self , as appears by the definition of unity ; and it is certain that nothing is divided or separated from it self : but if christs body be at the same time in heaven and upon earth in the host , it will be divided , and separated from it self , that which is in heaven being divided and separated from that which is upon earth , because it is not in the space between both . 12. here again it may be objected , that a body in divers places is divided from it self locally , because the places in which it is , are divided ; but not entitatively , because it is still one and the same entity of body . to which i answer , 1. that entitative division ( which is nothing else but a plurality of beings , or a plurality of things really different ) is no true division , for then the three divine persons which are really different , would also be really divided ; and the body and soul of a living man which do really differ , would also be really divided . 2. i say , that if a body be divided and separated from bodies which it toucheth , it is also divided and separated from bodies which it doth not touch ; and if a body be divided and separated from bodies to which it is near , it is also divided and separated from bodies that are far distant from it ; but especially the division is true , when between two there be bodies of divers natures , to which there is no union . therefore , seeing that between christs body , which is really in heaven , and the same body which is pretendedly upon earth in the consecrated hosts , there be divers bodies of divers natures , to which it is not united ; it is evident by our adversaries own doctrine , that christs body is really divided and separated from it self . and seeing it is impossible it should be separated from it self , it is also impossible that it should be in heaven and in the host at the same time . 3. i say , that local division takes away entitative division , and things that are divided locally , are also divided entitatively ; that is , they are also really different ; else no reason can be given why two glasses of water taken from the same fountain , are really different , seeing these waters are like in all things , except in reference to place , and there can no reason be given why the ocean is not one single drop of water only , reproduced in all places occupied by the ocean , except it be that one drop of water cannot be reproduced in all those places ; but if it be possible , then reason obligeth us to believe that it is really so , because god and nature do nothing in vain ; and it is in vain to do that by many things , which may be done by one thing : and if it be really so , then it follows , that all the sea-battles that ever have been , were fought in one drop of water , and many thousands of men have been drowned in one drop of water , and all people since adam have drunk but one drop of water , which things are absurd and ridiculous . 13. the sixth argument is this : jesus christ as he is man , cannot be in divers places at once , if another man cannot be so too , because jesus christ , as he is man , was made like unto us in all things , sin only excepted , as the apostle to the hebrews observes . but another man cannot be in divers places at once ; for example , peter cannot be at the same time at paris and at rome , which i prove thus . it is impossible that peter should be a man and no man at the same time : but if peter could at the same time be at paris and at rome , he might at the same time be a man and no man , which i prove thus : he that may at the same time be both dead and alive , may at the same time be a man and no man ; because he that is alive is a real man , and he that is dead is no real man , but a carcass : but if peter could at the same time be at paris and at rome , he might be both alive and dead at the same time ; for he might be mortally wounded at paris and die there , and , at the same time not be hurt at rome , but alive and making merry there . besides , peter might be divisibly at paris , and indivisibly at rome ; ( as christs body , according to our adversaries , is divisibly in heaven , and indivisibly in the host : ) but if at paris ( where he should be divisibly ) his head should be cut off , he would die , and cease to be a man ; and at rome ( where he should be indivisibly and in a point ) his head should not be cut off , and so he should remain at the same time a living and real man , which is a contradiction . in a word , peter might be at paris in the midst of flames , and be burnt and reduced to ashes , and consequently should die , and be no man ; whereas at the same time he might be at rome in the river tiber , sound and brisk , and consequently be a true living man : whence it follows that he might be a man , and no man , which is a contradiction . 14. to this may be added other absurdities that would follow from this position , that one body may be in divers places at once , viz. that one candle lighted might give light to all the world , if it were reproduced in all places of the world : that a great army might be made of one man , reproduced in a hundred thousand adjoining places : that all the debts in the world might be paid with one crown , reproduced as many times as there be crowns due : that all the people in the world might quench their thirst with one pottle of wine , reproduced as many times as there be inhabitants in the world : that all the men in the world might drink in one and the same glass , reproduced as many times as there be men in the world : ( whereupon a man might be so curious as to ask , whether if this glass should be broken at paris , it would also be broken at rome , constantinople , and other places : ) that one man reproduced in an hundred thousand places , might at the same time marry an hundred thousand wives , and lie with them ; whereupon a man might desire to know whether these women might not conceive , and every one of them be delivered of a child at the end of nine months ; and consequently it may be said that one man did in one night beget a hundred thousand children , &c. 15. the seventh argument is this : if christs body were in the host , it would be seen there ; for being there in its glory ( as the romish doctors say it is ) it would be there more visibly then it was when he conversed amongst men here below ; because the glory of christs body doth principally consist in the brightness and splendor of an extraordinary light , like to that which it had upon mount tabor ; but who dares affirm that such a glorious body is not visible wheresoever it is ; and yet it is certain that christs body is not to be seen in the host , which is an evident sign that it is not there . but it may be said that christs body is under the accident of the bread , and that these accidents hide it from us . to this i answer , that ( according to our adversaries ) christs body is in the place where the substance of the bread was : but the substance of the bread was not under the accidents , and the accidents of the bread were not upon their substance , for then the substance of the bread and its accidents had been in two different places , above and under being two several differences of place , and that which is under is not above , &c. therefore christs body cannot be under the accidents of the bread , and consequently the accidents do not hide it from us . and seeing ( as our adversaries say ) christs body is in every part and point of the host , it must needs be in the superficies , and consequently cannot be hid or covered by the accidents of the bread. here again it may be said that christs body is glorious , luminous , and visible of it self , but god hinders us from seeing it . to this i answer , that if god hinders , it is only because he is pleased so to do ; and consequently if he were pleased not to hinder , he would not do it , but would permit it to be seen in the same posture as it is in the host . whereupon i would ask our adversaries in what posture it would be seen there , whether sitting , standing , lying , or in any other posture , or whether it would be in any posture at all ? if it be in no posture , it must be without any external form , because posture or situation absolutely depends upon external form , but how can a man be seen without an external form of a man , and without being in any posture of a man ? and how can christs body be without posture , and without external form ; seeing ( as our adversaries say ) it is whole and entire in the whole host , and occupies the whole space of a great host ? but if it be sitting , or standing , or in any other posture , and with the external form of a man , and if ( as they say ) it be whole , and entire in a point of the host , then it will follow that a man may be seen sitting , or standing in a point ; and seeing a man that is standing hath his head above and his feet below , it will follow that jesus christ will be seen in a point of the host with his head above and his feet below , though in a point there be nothing above or below . to this i add , that if it could be seen in the host it would appear as big as the host , because it would occupy the whole space of the host ; and it would appear round , because it would be bounded by the space that the host occupies , which is round . besides , if the host should be divided into two equal parts , it would appear less by one half , and in the form of a half circle , because it would be whole and entire in the half of the host , and occupy the space of it . it would also appear a hundred thousand times less , and in a hundred thousand several forms ; for , as they say , it is whole and entire in a hundred thousand parts of the host , and occupies the spaces of them . in a word , there was never such a monstrous thing seen in the world , as christs body would be , if it were really in the host in such a manner , as our adversaries affirm it to be . 16. the eighth argument is this : either the manhood of jesus christ , which is pretended to be in the host , can act there , or it cannot : if it cannot act , then it follows that it cannot see , hear , know , or love , or exercise any other function of the sensitive or rational soul : but if the manhood of christ in the host knows nothing , nor loves nothing , then it follows that it will not be happy , because happiness chiefly consists in the knowledge and love of god. also the manhood of christ in the host will be different from his manhood in heaven ; for it will know in heaven , and at the same time know nothing in the host ; it will love in heaven , and love nothing in the host ; it will see in heaven , and see nothing in the host . but if christs manhood can act in the host as it doth in heaven , then it will follow that it will open its eyes , and move its feet in a point ; because , according to our adversaries , it is whole and entire in every point of the host . and being , as they tell us , god can as easily put the whole world into a point , as he doth the whole manhood of christ into a point of the host , it will follow that all the parts of the world existing in a point , may do in it all those actions which they now do in a vast space , as the parts of christs manhood existing in a point of the host can do in it all those actions which they do in heaven ; and so in a less space then is occupied by a grain of corn the sun may move from east to west , the sea may have its flouds and ebbs , and the english may have a sea-fight with the spaniards . in a word , a sparrow may easily swallow all the world , seeing the world will not occupy so much space as a grain of corn doth ; and yet the world which it shall swallow , will be as great as it is at ▪ present ; even as christs body in the host , is as big and as tall as it was on the cross , as our adversaries affirm . 17. the ninth argument is this : as a body cannot be in a place , except it be produced there , or that it comes , or be brought thither from some other place ; so a body cannot cease to be in a place without being destroyed , or going to some other place ; and consequently if christs body ceaseth to be in the host after the consumption of the accidents , it must necessarily either perish , or go to some other place : but christs body cannot perish , for jesus christ dieth no more , rom. 6. and christs body goes to no other place ; for if it should go to any other place , it would go to heaven : but it cannot go to heaven , because it is there already , and a man cannot go to a place where he is already : therefore christs body doth not cease to be in the host . whence it follows , that either christs body still remains in the host , and that it is impossible that should be consumed , or else that it never was in the host : but every one knows by experience that the hosts are eaten and consumed , and that christs body cannot be there after the consumption of the accidents of the bread : therefore it never was in the host . 18. the tenth argument is drawn from hence , that the pretended presence of christs body in the host , destroys the nature of christs body , thus : the properties of a species are incommunicable to every other species . for example : the properties of a man are incommunicable to a beast ; for , seeing the properties flow from the essence , or are the very essence it self , it is evident that if the essence of a species be incommunicable to another species , then the properties of a species are also incommunicable to another : but the body and the spirit are the two species of substance : therefore the properties of the spirit cannot be communicated to the body , as the properties of the body cannot be communicated to the spirit . but there are two principal properties which distinguish bodies from spirits : the first is , that spirits are substances that are penetrable amongst themselves , that is , may be together in one and the same place , but bodies are impenetrable substances amongst themselves , that is , they cannot be together in one and the same place . the second is , that bodies are in a place circumscriptively , that is , all the body is in all the place , but all the body is not in every part of the place , but the parts of the body are in the parts of the place ; but spirits are in a place definitively , that is , all the spirit is in all the place , and all the spirit is in every part of the place ; because a spirit having no parts , must necessarily be all wheresoever it is . whence i form my argument thus : that doctrine which gives to a body the properties of a spirit , changes the body into a spirit , and consequently destroys the nature of a body , seeing properties cannot be communicated without the essence : but the doctrine of the pretended presence of christs body in the host , gives to a body the properties of a spirit , because it affirms that the quantity of christs body penetrates the quantity of the bread , and is in the same place with it ; that all the parts of christs body are penetrated amongst themselves , and are all in one and the same place ; and that christs body is all in all the host , and all in every part of the host : therefore the doctrine of the romish church touching the pretended presence of christs body in the host , destroys the nature of christs body . 19. the eleventh argument is drawn from hence : that jesus christ being sate at gods right hand is in a glorious estate : and yet the doctrine of the pretended presence of christs body in the host subjects him to divers ignominies , viz. that his body goes into peoples bellies , and amongst their excrement ; that it is subject to be eaten by his enemies , yea by mice and other beasts . hear what claude de xaintes , a famous romish doctor saith of it , repet . 5. chap. 2. of all these we exclude not one from the true and corporal receiving of the lords fl●sh in the sacrament , let him be turk , atheist , infidel , or hypocrite ; yea , though he should be the devil himself incarnate . it is also subject to be stoln , for about 25 years since a thief was executed at paris for stealing out of a church the chalice and this god in it ; and the priest went to the prison in his sacerdotal ornaments , and falling on his knees before the thiefs pocket , pulled his god out of it . and as it is a god that cannot keep himself from being stoln , so neither can he keep himself from being burnt , as it appeared when the palace-hal at paris was burnt . in short , the host , or god of the mass , hath been seen in the hands of one possessed by the devil , and consequently in the devils power ; yea , there are charms made by the romish priests to compel the devil to restore god to them . a horrible and prodigious thing to put god into the devils power , and into a capacity of being eaten by the devil incarnate , especially , seeing he is now glorious in heaven . 20 the twelfth argument is drawn from hence : that god doth no miracles without necessity : but what necessity is there that he should do so many miracles in this sacrament , viz. that accidents should be without a subject ? that the bread should be converted into christs body , which is already ? that christs body should be in a point , and in a hundred thousand places at once ? what necessity is there that it should be eaten by wicked men , by beasts , and by devils incarnate ? what necessity is there that it should be carried away by the devil , that it should be stoln , burnt , &c. can it be said that it is for the salvation of the soul of him that eats it ? but reprobates , as our adversaries confess , eat it too ; and the faithful under the old testament did not eat it , nor do the little children of believers under the new , and yet they are saved for all that . can it be said with bellarmin and perron , that the host being eaten , serves as an incorruptible seed for a glorious resurrection ? but the faithful of the old testament , and the little children of believers under the new , will rise again gloriously , though they never participated of the eucharist . and st. paul tells us rom. 8. that this seed of the resurrection of our bodies is not christs flesh , but his spirit , in these words , if the spirit of him that raised up jesus from the dead , dwell in you , he shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his spirit that dwelleth in you . 21. lastly , the holy scripture ▪ is clear in this matter ; for jesus christ is asceuded into heaven , acts 1. and the heavens must contain him until the time of the restitution of all things , acts 3. and he himself saith , i leave the world and go to the father , st. john 16. the poor ye have always with you , but me ye have not always , st. matth. 26. to which may be added what jesus christ saith , st. matth. 24. viz. in the last days false prophets will come ▪ that shall say , christ is here or there , and that he is in the secret chambers , ( or cabinets ) which cannot be but by the doctrine of the romish church , which puts christs body in divers places , and shuts it up in several cabinets on their altars ; and it is very remarkable that in the greek it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , in the cupboards , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being properly a cupboard to keep meat in . chap. v. against the adoration or worshiping of the host . 1. against the adoration of the host , i form three propositions ; the first is this , we are not obliged to adore or worship god every where , or in all places where he is , at least not with external adoration , but we are only obliged to worship him in all places where he appears in his glorious majesty . the first part of this proposition , viz. that we are not obliged to worship god in all places where he is , appears by the practice of all christians . for god being every where , and consequently in stones , trees , beasts , devils , and all other creatures , there is no man so extravagant as to fall on his knees before a tree , an ass , or a devil , that he may worship god in them , who is as really present in them , as he is in heaven . 2. the second part of this proposition , viz. that we are only obliged to worship god both with internal and external adoration in all places where he appears in his glorious majesty , is proved , first , by the commands which jesus christ gave his apostles when they asked him how they should pray ; for he answers them thus ; when ye pray , say , our father which art in heaven , st. matth. 6. st. luke 11. why doth he say , which art in heaven , and not which art on earth , or in the sea , or in the air , seeing god is equally in all these places ? but only because god appears in heaven in his glorious majesty and there crowns all the blessed spirits with his glory . secondly , when god appeared to moses in the burning bush , which was not consumed , he said to him , take thy shoes from off thy feet , for the place where thou standest is holy ground , exod. 3. why is this ground called holy , and moses commanded to approach it with reverence , submission , and adoration , seeing any other ground is equally gods creatures , and that he is equally present every where ? but only because god did manifest somewhat of his power and glory in that place , by causing the bush to burn without being consumed . thirdly , joshua and the israelites did prostrate themselves before the ark of the covenant , joshua 7. 6. because god appeared there in a peculiar and glorious manner , for , from the mercy-seat which covered it , he gave his oracles and made known his will , exod. 25. 22. numb . 7. fourthly , when the priest celebrates mass , a little before the consecration , he recommends the sursùm corda , that is , the lifting up of their hearts ; why the lifting them up , seeing god is equally both above and below ? but only because god appears above in heaven in his glorious majesty ; and consequently it is thither that we must direct our vows , our prayers , and our worship . 3. the second proposition is this : we are not obliged to adore jesus christ in the water of baptism , though he be really there in regard of all that is adorable in him . the first part of this proposition , viz. that we are not obliged to worship jesus christ in the water of baptism , is chiefly proved by the practice of all christians ; for no man ever fell on his knees before the water of baptism and adored jesus christ in it , at least not with external worship , which is only here intended ; and doubtless the reason is , because jesus christ discovers no beam of his glory there ; nor doth he appear in the water of baptism any more then in other waters ; so that as we are not obliged to worship god , save only where he appears in his glorious majesty , as hath been proved , so neither are we obliged to worship jesus christ , but only where he discovers some beam of his glory , which he doth not in the water of baptism . 4. the second part of this proposition , viz. that jesus christ is really present in the water of baptism in respect of all that is to be adored in him , is proved thus : all that is of it self adorable in jesus christ , is either his godhead , or his divine person , or his divine attributes . as for his godhead , seeing it is really every where it cannot be denied but that it is also in the water of baptism . as for his person , seeing it is divine , and eternal , and infinite , it is really every where , and consequently in the water of baptism : and as for his divine attributes , seeing they are not really different from the godhead , or the person of jesus christ , it necessarily follows , that seeing the godhead and person of jesus christ , are really in the water of baptism , his divine attributes must really be there likewise . 5. the third proposition is this : we are not obliged to adore jesus christ in the host , though he be really there in respect of all that is to be adored in him , viz. in respect of his godhead , his divine person , and his divine attributes ; yea , though he were there invisibly in respect of his manhood too . the principal reason of this hath been toucht upon already , viz. that as we are not obliged to worship god in all places where he is ( at least not with external worship ) but there only where he appears in his glorious majesty , viz. ordinarily in heaven , and extraordinarily elsewhere , as hath been proved in the first proposition . and as we are not obliged to worship jesus christ in the water of baptism with external adoration , though he be really there in respect of all that is adorable in him , because he doth not discover the least beam of his glory there , nor appears in the water of baptism more then in other waters , as hath been proved in the second proposition : even so we are not obliged to worship jesus christ in the host with external adoration , although he be there in respect of all that is to be adored in him , yea , though he were there in respect of his manhood ●ood ; because jesus christ doth not discover any beam of his glory there , nor doth he appear in the consecrated hosts any more then in those that are not consecrated , for no man can distinguish the one from the other . and as for his manhood which is pretended to be there invisibly , i say that there is no sensible mark of its presence , and consequently nothing which obligeth us to external worship , for the same reason as is already alledged ; for if the invisible presence of the godhead , divine person , and divine attributes of jesus christ which are of themselves adorable , do not oblige us to external worship in the water of baptism , why should the manhood of jesus christ , which is not of it self adorable , oblige us to external adoration though it were in the host , it being there only , as they say , invisibly ? in a word , they must shew us the disparity , and tell us the reason why we are not obliged to adore jesus christ with external worship in the water of baptism , though he be really there present in respect of all that which is adorable in him , viz. in respect of his godhead , his divine person , and his divine attributes , and yet are obliged to worship jesus christ in the host with an external worship , though nothing renders him more adorable there then in the water of baptism . 6. to this the jesuite s. rigant , one of the most learned of his order , answers , that although there be nothing in the consecrated host that renders him more adorable then in the water of baptism ; yet there is something in the host which obligeth us to external worship , which is not in the water of baptism ; because , saith he , the manhood of jesus christ is in the host , and is there in stead of a ray of glory ; and god will be adored in all places , where the manhood personally united to the godhead , is present : but in the water of baptism jesus christ discovers no beam of his glory , and his manhood which is equivalent to a ray of glory , is not there . 7. to this i reply , that the rays or beams of glory which oblige us to external adoration in a certain place , must be sensibly in that place . and therefore seeing the manhood of jesus christ which is pretended and supposed to be really present in the host , is neither visible nor sensible , it cannot be equivalent to a beam of glory . to which i add , that as the godhead and divine person of jesus christ which are equally present in the water of baptism , and in the host , do not oblige us to external worship , for this only reason , viz. because they do not discover any ray of their glory there : so neither doth the manhood of jesus christ , pretended and supposed to be really present in the host , oblige us to external adoration , for this only reason , viz. because it appears not there , nor discovers any ray of its glory . lastly , i affirm that by the very doctrine and practice of the romish church it self , we are not obliged to adore jesus christ in all places where his manhood is , because , as the romish doctors confess , we are not obliged to adore jesus christ in that host which the priest hath newly eaten , and whose accidents are not yet destroyed ; nor in that host which is lockt up in the cupboard that is on the altar ; nor in that host which a priest carries under his cloak to a sick person in the country . 8. to this the same jesuite answers , that although the glory of christs manhood appears not to our bodily eyes , yet it appears to the eyes of our soul , viz. to our faith ; for the greatest glory of christs manhood consists in its being personally united to the godhead , and in being sustained in a peculiar manner by the word . suppose then , says he , that jesus christ be in the host , we are sure that it is personally united to the godhead ; and consequently , the glory of christs manhood , which consists in this personal union , doth certainly appear to our faith , which is sufficient to oblige us to an external adoration of jesus christ in the host . 9. to this i reply , that there is a twofold glory of god , and of jesus christ , or of his manhood , viz. the one essential , internal , and hid from our senses ; the other accidental , external and apparent to our senses : the essential and internal glory of god which is hid from our senses , consists in the eminence of his perfections , which are to be infinite , almighty , most wise , &c. and the accidental and external glory of god , which appears to our senses , consists in some miraculous and extraordinary effect , which is sensible ; as when god caused a bush to burn without being consumed , when he pronounced his oracles from above the mercy-seat ; and when , being made man , and having manifested himself in the flesh , he commanded the winds and the waves , cast out devils , raised the dead , &c. but i affirm that we are not obliged to worship god with an external adoration in all places where he is , in his essential and internal glory only , although it appears to our faith , because god being every where with this essential , and internal glory , we should be obliged to worship him with an external adoration in trees , in beasts , yea and in devils too , which is absurd : but we are only obliged to worship god with external worship in all places where he makes his essential and internal glory appear by some accidental and external glory , viz. by some miraculous or extraordinary effect , which is sensible , and equivalent to a ray of his essential and internal glory , as appears by what is said in the first proposition . in like manner the personal union of the godhead and manhood , being an essential glory of jesus christ , and an internal glory of his manhood , wholly hid from our senses , doth not oblige us to the external adoration of jesus christ , although it certainly appears to our faith , except it be accompanied with an external and sensible glory ; for if the essential and internal glory of the godhead and divine person of jesus christ , which appear equally present to our faith in the water of baptism , do not oblige us to an external adoration of jesus christ , except it be accompanied with an accidental , external and sensible glory ; why should the internal glory of christs manhood , which is infinitely beneath the essential and internal glory of the godhead , and appears present to the faith of those of the romish church , oblige them to the external adoration of jesus christ , if it be separated from all external and sensible glory ? to this i add , that according to the doctrine and practice of the romish church , we are not obliged to adore jesus christ with external adoration in all places where the personal union of the manhood with the word , appears to the faith of those of that church ; for we are not obliged to adore jesus christ in that host which a priest hath newly swallowed ; nor in that host which is lockt up , nor in that host which a priest carries under his cloak to a sick person in the country ; although the essential glory of jesus christ , and the internal glory of his manhood ( which this jesuits makes to consist in the personal union of the manhood with the word ) appear certain to the faith of those of the romish church . 10. to this the jesuite answers , that as if we would obtain any grace from god , considered as he really exists in a stone , we should be obliged to prostration and external worship of the godhead really present in that stone : so , if we would obtain any grace from jesus christ really existing in the host , we are obliged to approach unto it with reverence , and external adoration ; and consequently we are obliged to worship jesus christ in the host with external adoration whensoever we would obtain any grace from him , as he exists in the host . 11. to this i reply , that as we are never obliged to beg grace of god , as he exists in a stone , except he discovers some beam of his glory there , ( for it is sufficient to beg grace of god , considered as he exists in heaven , where he appears in his glorious majesty , according to the command of jesus christ , when ye pray , say , our father which art in heaven , and according to the command of the apostles , lift up your hearts ) so we are never obliged to beg grace of god or jesus christ , considered as existing in the host , because he discovers no ray of his glory there ; but it is sufficient to beg grace of god or jesus christ , considered as existing in heaven , because he always appears there in his glorious majesty . therefore as we are never obliged to beg grace of god , considered as existing in a stone , so we are never obliged to adore him there : and as we are never obliged to beg grace of god or jesus christ , considered as existing in the host , so we are never obliged to adore him there with external adoration . 12. to this the jesuit answers , that god hath done many miracles by this sacrament , and in it , both by punishing prophane persons , and the despisers of it ; and also by making a little child appear upon the altar , or flesh in stead of the bread , or bloud in stead of the wine ; all which ought to be acknowledged as so many rays of the glory of christs manhood , and that they ever oblige us to the external adoration of jesus christ in the host . 13. to this i reply , that i do not at all doubt but that god hath many times punished prophane persons , and the contemners of this sacrament , both ordinarily and extraordinarily ; for st. paul 1 cor. 11. tells us that many of those that did receive this sacrament unworthily , were sick , and many slept , that is , were dead : and st. cyprian in the treatise of those that fall , observes gods judgment against wicked and prophane persons , and the contemners of this sacrament . but as for those apparitions of jesus christ in form of a child , and of flesh and bloud , &c. i look on them as fabulous stories invented by monks and other superstitious persons , above seven or eight hundred years after christ , when the doctrine of the real presence of christs manhood in the host , began to prevail ▪ and was powerfully opposed by gods people in those days . 14. secondly , i say , that although there had been such apparitions yet we must not infer from thence , either the presence of christs manhood , or external adoration ; because that is not christs flesh which seems to be so ; and these apparitions may be illusions of the devil . the jesuite vasquez in disput . 193. chap. 2. speaks thus . i answer , that which appears is not the flesh of christ , nor of any other that is really flesh ; but it is only an effigies , or appearance of flesh , as st. thomas saith : and whereas the simple are deceived , and do believe that christs flesh is there in a divisible and bloudy manner , it is no great matter , and this deceit must be corrected by the right instruction of the doctors . gabriel biell , a famous doctor of the romish church , lesson 51. upon the canon of the mass , saith , that such apparitions of flesh and bloud may be made by the illusions of the devil , to deceive the simple , god permitting it to be so ; and he gives an example of it , viz. that in a convent of minor friers at ysennes in thuringia , a certain person like unto an angel , appeared to a lay-frier that was preparing himself for the communion , and thrust into his mouth a piece of flesh , which as soon as he had swallowed , he was possessed , and grievously tormented by the devil . the jesuit suarez , tom. 3. disp . 55. sect. 3. speaks thus . experience tells us that by length of time this flesh and this bloud which appear in the eucharist , are changed and corrupted . but when this happens , saith that famous romish doctor alexander hales , sent. 4. quest . 11. it is a sign that the apparition which was made in that form , was not made by the power of god , but by the power of the devil , or by the craft of man. 15. thirdly , if it were as true as it is false , that jesus christ hath appeared sometimes in the sacrament of the eucharist in the form of a little child , or of flesh and of bloud ; yet i say , that as god , when he appeared to moses in the bush that burned without being consumed , was to be worshiped there , for this only reason , because he discovered a beam of his glory by causing the bush to burn without being consumed ; but it doth not follow that god must be worshiped in all other bushes , though he be as really in them as he was in that , for this only reason , because he doth not discover in them any ray of his glory : so , if jesus christ hath sometimes appeared visibly in the host ( which i do not grant ) i think then he should have been worshiped , because of such a visible appearance , which is equivalent to a ray of glory ; but it follows not that jesus christ must be adored in other hosts , where his manhood appear ; not , though it be really there , for this only reason , because no ray of his glory appears there . 16. to the three foregoing propositions i add this argument , which is very considerable : in lawful adoration it is requisite that he that adores , be well assured that what he adores is the true god , else he may justy be reproached , as jesus christ reproached the woman of samaria , ye worship ye know not what . but the romanists can never be assured ( according to their own maxims ) that the host which they worship is the true god , and they have always cause to suspect that they worship a morsel of bread in stead of the redeemer of the world ; because according to their own doctrine , the real presence of christs body in the host depends on lawful consecration ; and lawful consecration depends on the quality of the priest , and on the pronouncing of the words of consecration , and on his intention in pronouncing them ; for there is no consecration ( as they say ) when either he that celebrates mass is no priest , or doth not pronounce the words that are essentially requisite to consecration , viz. this is my body , &c. or doth not pronounce them with intention to consecrate ; and consequently in these cases the host remains meer bread . but it is impossible certainly to know these three things : for as for the quality of the priest , he must have been baptized ; and he that baptized him must have observed the essential form of baptism , and have had intention to baptize him : again , he must have received ordination from a true bishop ; and the bishop must have observed the essential form of ordination , and have had intention to make him a priest ; and to make this bishop a true bishop , he must have been baptized in due form , and with the requisite intention , and must have received ordination in due form , and with the requisite intention from other bishops ; and they again , for the making them true bishops , must also have received baptism and ordination in due form , and with the requisite intention , from other true bishops , and these from others , and so back to the apostles . but who can be assured that from the apostles to a bishop , or priest , now adays , there hath been no failing , either in the essential form of baptism or ordination , or in the requisite intention ? as for the pronouncing of the words requisite to consecration , none but the priest can know whether he hath pronounced them or not , because in the celebration of the mass , those words are pronounced so softly , that no person present can hear them . and as for the intention , it is evident that no man but himself can know it . besides , it is known that some priests are magicians , as lewis goffredi , and other wicked priests , who do neither consecrate in due form , nor with the requisite intention , especially such as believe nothing of what they profess ; yea , divers monks and priests that have been converted to our religion , have assured us that for a long time before their conversion they did abhor the idolatry that was practised in the adoration of the host . judge then if such persons as these had any intention to consecrate in the celebration of the mass . 17. the romish doctors have sought all the remedies imaginable to prevent this danger . pope adrian quest . 3. speaks thus : in the adoration of the eucharist , there is always a tacite condition , viz. if the consecration be duly made ; ( as bath been decided at the council of constance ) otherwise they could not be excused from idolatry , that worship the host when the priest pretends to celebrate , but celebrates not ; or pretends to celebrate , and is no priest , as it many times happens . observe these words , it many times happens , for they shew that there is great cause of doubting , and that much caution must be used . for , as if a woman , in her husbands absence , should say to a man that comes to her , and tells her he is her husband , ( and she hath probable grounds to suspect him ) if thou art my husband i will receive thee , and thereupon endeavours to clear it before she admits him to any privacy ; this condition frees her promise from blame ; but if she gives her self up to him , before she clears this doubt , saying , i will receive thee if thou art my husband , this condition doth not free her action from blame , but she will be reputed an adulteress . even so if a man to whom an host is proposed to be adored , and he hath reason to doubt whether it ought to be adored , should only say , if thou art christ i will adore thee , and should not adore it before he be well assured of it , this condition would render him blameless ; but if , notwithstanding his doubt , he adores it , this condition , if thou art christ , i adore thee , doth not exempt him from the crime of idolatry ; for to what purpose is the condition , whether it be tacite , or exprest , i adore thee if thou art christ , because he actually adores it , without knowing whether it be so or not . 18. to what hath been said , i add , that the primitive church never adored the host , nor believed that the body and bloud of christ were really and invisibly in the sacrament of the eucharist ; for if the christians of the primitive church had believed it , they had furnished the heathens with specious pretences to excuse the idolatry of their image-worship , and to retort upon the christians those very arguments which they had made use of against them . 19. first , the heathens did maintain that their idols were composed of two things , viz. of a visible image and an invisible deity dwelling in it . they bring their gods , saith st. chrysostom in theodoret in atrep , into their base images of wood and stone , and shut them up there as in a prison . your gods , saith arnobius , book 6. dwell in plaister and baked earth ; and , that they may make these materials more venerable , they suffer themselves to be shut up , and to remain hid and detained in an obscure prison . but might not the heathens have justly replied to the ancient christians , if they had believed what the romish doctors do now adays . and do not you believe the very same of your host , that it is composed of two things , viz. of the visible species of bread , and the invisible body of christ , which is hid under the species ? doth not your christ dwell in baked dough , and that he may make a piece of bread more venerable , doth he not suffer himself to be shut up , and doth he not remain hid , as in a prison ? 20. secondly , the heathens held that consecration was the means whereby the deity , which they adored , was made present in the image . so tertullian in his apolog. chap. 12. saith , i find nothing to object against images , but that the matter of them is such as our frying-pans and kettles are made of , which changeth its destiny by consecration . and minutius felix speaks thus of a pagan image , behold it is melted , forged , fashioned , and yet it is not god ; behold it is gilded , finished , erected , and yet it is not god ; behold it is adorned , consecrated , and worshiped , and then it is god. and arnobius in book 6. dedication or consecration makes them dwell in images , they refuse not to dwell in habitations of earth , or rather , being forced to go into them by the right of dedication , they are incorporated , and joined to the images . but might not the heathens have replied to the christians thus . we find it just so in your eucharist , viz. that the signs are of the same matter with our common bread and wine , but change their destiny by consecration ; behold it is kneaded , and moulded , and yet it is not god ; behold it is baked in the oven , and yet it is not god ; behold it is consecrated and adored , and then it is god ; for your christ doth not refuse to enter into these earthy matters , or rather , being forced to go into them by the right of consecration , he is incorporated and joined to the species of the bread and wine . 21. thirdly , the heathens had both great and little images , and did believe that the deity which they worshiped , was as well in the little as in the great ones . arnobius in book 6. jears them for this , saying , that , if their gods had their great and little images in which they dwelt , they must needs be straightned for want of room in the little ones , whereas in the great ones they might stretch themselves out at their full length . but might not the heathens have reproached the christians of those times in the same manner if they had believed that jesus christ had been wholly contained as well in a little host as in a great one , and as well in the least part of the host as in the greatest ? 22. lastly , the heathens were reproached for worshiping wood and stone , the work of mens hands ; things that cannot see , hear , smell , taste , breath , speak , or move ; things exposed to age , rust , corruption , dust , falling , breaking , burning , &c. to the injuries of worms , mice , and other beasts ; subject to the power of enemies , to be stoln , lockt up , &c. as you may read in arnobius , lactantius , minutius felix , and other ancient doctors of the church . but if those ancient christians had believed what the romanists now do , might not the heathens have replied thus ; and can you deny that the host which you worship is the work of a mans hands , that moulded it , and gave it such a form as pleased him , and then consecrated it with certain words to make your christ come into it whole and entire ? do not you adore your host , which neither sees , nor hears , nor smells , nor breaths , nor walks , nor speaks , nor moves ? is not your host subject to age , dust , felling , burning , to worms , to mice , and other beasts ? is it not subject to be taken away , stolen , lockt up , &c. but if it be said that the accidents of the host are only subject to these inconveniences , and not jesus christ that is under them , i answer that the heathens had said the same , viz. that their gods were not subject to these inconveniences , but the images only in which they were ; for in arnobius his 6. book , they speak thus : we believe not the copper , gold , and silver , whereof the images are made , to be gods and deities , that of themselves deserve adoration ; but in these materials we adore those that sacred dedication introduceth , and causeth to dwell in the images . chap. vi. against the taking away of the cup. 1. the taking away of the eucharistical cup was established as an article of faith by the romish church representative , assembled in council at constance , anno 1415. session 13. in a canon , the chief clauses whereof are these : seeing that in divers parts of the world there be some who rashly presume to say , that christian people ought to partake of the sacrament of the eucharist under both species of the bread and wine ; and do give the communion to lay-people , not only under the species of the bread , but also under the species of the wine ; this present holy general council of constance , lawfully assembled in the name of the holy ghost , being desirous to provide for the safety of the faithful against this errour , doth therefore declare , decree , and determine , that although jesus christ did administer this venerable sacrament to his disciples under both the species of bread and wine ; and although in the primitive church the faithful did receive this sacrament under both species , yet notwithstanding that ( for the avoiding of certain dangers and scandals ) this custom , which was introduced with reason , ought to be kept , viz. that priests that say mass shall communicate under both the species of the bread and wine , but that lay-persons shall communicate under the species of bread only : and they that shall say the contrary , ought to be expelled as hereticks , and grievously punished by the bishops , or their officials . this canon was confirmed by the succeeding romish councils , and particularly by the council of trent . 2. against so horrible a canon and so strange a law , it is very difficult to oppose any thing ; for , if you tell them that this law is contrary to the institution and command of jesus christ , they freely confess it ; seeing that although jesus christ did institute and administer the eucharist under both species , yet they will not have it so practised . if you tell them that this law is contrary to the command of st. paul , and practice of the primitive church , they ingeniously own it ; for they openly declare , that although the faithful in the primitive church did receive the sacrament of the eucharist under both species , yet they that practise it thus ought to be expelled and punished as hereticks . this is the true way of ending all controversies , and of keeping us from disputing with them . for example , if we alledge that st. paul 1 tim. 4. saith , that they who forbid to marry , and command to abstain from meats , do teach the doctrines of devils ; they need only answer , that although st. paul doth say so , yet we must not believe it , because the romish church hath determined otherwise . again , if we alledge , that the same apostle ephes . 2. saith , that we are saved by grace , through faith ; and that not of our selues , it is the gift of god ; not of works , least any man should boast ; they need only answer , that although this was written by the apostle , yet we must not believe it , because the romish church hath determined , that we are saved by works and faith as coming from our selves , and from the strength of our own free will , &c. and now i leave you to judge whom we ought to follow , whether these lying doctors , or jesus christ and his apostles . but that which i find utterly insupportable is this , viz. that they accuse of rashness , errour , and heresie , those that by obeying jesus christ and his apostles , and following the practice of the primitive church , do affirm that we ought to partake of the cup as well as of the bread. again , i find it an insufferable piece of impudence , that they boast so much of antiquity , and of the conformity of their creed to that of the primitive church , and yet can so openly renounce both in this chief and principal point of doctrine . 3. here the romish doctors now adays think to shelter themselves , by telling us it is true that jesus christ did institute the sacrament of the eucharist under both the species of the bread and wine ; and that the primitive church did so celebrate it , not by any express command of jesus christ and his apostles , but meerly by ecclesias●ical policy , which may be changed , as several occasions and circumstances require . and they add , that it is sufficient to observe that which is of the essence of the sacrament , viz. to receive the body and bloud of christ ; but that the church may change that which is accidental , viz. to receive them under both the species , or under one species only ; for they will have it , that the bloud of christ is under the species of the bread , by concommitance ▪ and that his body is under the species of the wine by concommitance ; because jesus christ being now glorious , his body and bloud cannot be separated . 4. to this i reply , first , that there is an express command of jesus christ to take the cup and drink , st. matth. 26. in these words , drink ye all of it . to this the romish doctors answer , that the word all is not extended to all men ; for then we should say that the eucharistical cup ought to be given to turks , jews , and all other infidels . and they add , that the word all doth not extend to all those that are of the body of the church of the elect , for then the eucharistical cup should be given to little children , whom god hath elected to eternal life : but say they , the word all is extended only to all those , to whom jesus christ gave the cup , viz. to the apostles , considered as they were pastors . 5. to this i reply , that although jesus christ gave this command to drink of the eucharistical cup to his apostles only , yet we must know in what quality they received this command . but it was not in the quality of apostles , for then none but apostles could partake of the cup ; and there being now no more apostles , it should be quite taken away , and so mass could be no more celebrated . and it was not in quality of pastors , or sacrificing priests ; for jesus christ was then the only sacrificer , as the romish doctors say , and the apostles did not then exercise the function of sacrificing priests . besides it belongs to pastors , and those that administer the sacraments , being publick persons to give , but to private persons to receive only : but the apostles in the celebration of the eucharist , did only receive of jesus christ their master and pastor : therefore they received the command to drink of the cup , as they were believers . whence it follows that all the faithful that partake of the sacrament of the eucharist , are obliged by the command of jesus christ to drink of the cup. so then the romish doctors are mistaken when they tell us that none but priests that sacrifice , have a right to drink of the cup , and that those priests that do not sacrifice , must communicate under the species of the bread only , for at that time the apostles did not sacrifice . to this may be added , that if the command of jesus christ , drink ye all of it , was spoken to pastors only , because they to whom christ spake were pastors ; then it follows that the command of jesus christ , take , eat , was spoken to pastors , because they to whom jesus christ spake were pastors ; and so the people will not be obliged by any command to communicate under the species of the bread , and consequently will be wholy deprived of the sacrament , which is very absurd and contrary to christian religion . 6. secondly , i say , that in 1 cor. 1. there is an express command to all the faithful to drink of the cup , in these words , let a man examine himself , and so let him eat of this bread , and drink of this cup. in which words the apostle speaks to all believers , who , no doubt , have cause to examine themselves . and this is apparent , because st. paul directs his epistle ( and consequently these words ) to all those of the church of corinth , as well lay-men as ecclesiastical ; for in chap. 1. vers . 2. he directs it to all that in every place call upon the name of jesus christ our lord. to this i add , that jesus christ doth not only say , as often as ye eat this bread , but also , as often as ye drink this cup ye do shew the lords death till he come ; so that we do as much commemorate christs death by partaking of the cup in the eucharist , as we do by partaking of the bread . and this is very proper , for seeing that not only the body of christ was broken , but also his bloud shed on the cross ; and that in every propitiation and expiation for sin , the effusion of bloud was very considerable ( because it represents death better then any thing else doth ) it is certain that they do not celebrate the memory of christs death as they ought , that do not partake of this part of the sacrament , whereby only we commemorate the effusion of christs bloud . 7. thirdly , i say , that in the dispute about the eucharist , our adversaries do alledge to us the words of jesus christ in chap. 6. of st. johns gospel , except ye drink the bloud of the son of man , ye have no life in you . why then do they deprive the people of life , by taking the cup from them and hindering them from drinking ? and it is not at all to the purpose here to alledge concommitance , and to tell us that by taking christs body under the species of the bread , we take his bloud also , because 't is inseparable from his body . for , to this i answer , first , that to take christs bloud in taking the host , is not to drink it : but jesus christ saith expresly , except a man drink his bloud he hath no life in him . secondly , i say , that although in some places by the body , should be meant the body and bloud too , yet it could not be in those places where a manifest distinction is made between the body and the bloud : but in the sacrament of the eucharist this distinction is very apparent ; for jesus christ gave first the sacrament and sign of his body , in these words , take ; eat , this is my body , which is broken for you ; and then separately the sacrament of his bloud , in these words , drink ye all of it , for this is my bloud , which is shed for you . and he not only speaks of them separately , but represents them as really separated in his death ▪ for he saith , my body broken for you , and my bloud shed for you . in which words there is no place for concomitance ; for the body broken by divers wounds doth not contain the bloud , and the bloud being shed , is not contained in the body . also our adversaries affirm , that the sacramental words do operate that which they signifie ; but by their own confession , they signifie the separation of christs body from his bloud , as card. perron acknowledgeth in his reply to the king of great britain , pag. 1108. in these words , the scope of the entireness of this sacrament , is to put us in mind that this body and this bloud which we receive , were divided by his death on the cross ; whence st. paul saith , as often as we eat this bread , and drink this cup , we shew the lords death till he come . thirdly , i say , that as he that eats bread dipt in wine , hath indeed wine in his mouth , but doth not drink it ; so he that should eat or swallow a consecrated host , would not drink christs bloud , though it were in it . 8. lastly , i say , that seeing the sacraments were instituted to assure us the more of the truth of gods promises , and that all our comfort depends on this perswasion , that all gods promises are most true ; it necessarily follows , that as much of the sacrament as is taken away , so much of the certainty of this perswasion is diminished . and 't is to no purpose to say that one part of the sacrament doth as much confirm gods promises as the whole sacrament doth ; for if it be so , then god hath unnecessarily instituted two sacraments ; for it had been enough to have instituted baptism only , seeing it is ordained to confirm gods promises . but , if for such a confirmation two sacraments are better then one , and if two pledges , and two seals for that purpose , are of more consequence then , one alone ; then in one sacrament also , two signs are of more weight then one alone , for the confirmation of gods promises . and seeing it is said st. luke 22. and 1 cor. 11. that the cup is the new testament , and the new covenant in the bloud of christ , because it is the sacrament of it , why then are people deprived of it ? 9. as for the imaginary dangers and scandals which the romish doctors find in peoples partaking of the cup , i say in general , that jesus christ ( in whom the treasures of wisdom are hid , and in whom the fulness of the godhead dwells bodily ) foresaw them as well as they ; and yet he instituted and administred the cup , and commanded all to drink of it . and st. paul who was extraordinarily inspired by the holy ghost , doth ( notwithstanding these pretended dangers and scandals ) command the corinthians , as well lay persons as ecclesiastical , to drink of the cup , as hath been already proved . 10. the first inconvenience which our adversaries find in peoples partaking of the cup , is that they fear they may dip their moustaches in the chalice , and so the bloud of christ may remain on some hair of the moustache ; also they fear that the species of the wine , and consequently christs bloud , may fall to the ground , and being fallen it cannot be gathered up again . to this i answer : first , that women , eunuchs , and such young men as have no beards , ought not to be excluded . secondly , it is better to be without moustaches then without the participation of the whole sacrament . thirdly , this inconvenience proceeds only from a false supposition , viz. that christs bloud is under the species of the wine ; but if in the sacrament of the eucharist there be nothing but bread and wine in substance , and any of it should fall to the ground accidentally , and not through any fault of ours , this inconvenience is not great enough to violate the institution and command of jesus christ and his apostles . 11. the second inconvenience is , that it is almost impossible to observe this law where there is a great number of people and but one priest . to this i answer , first , that in places where there is much people , as in cities , there are divers priests . secondly , if one priest be not enough , another must be called from some neighbouring place . thirdly , that which cannot be done in one day , must be done in two or three days , rather then the command of jesus christ should be violated , and the practice of the primitive church abandoned . 12. the third inconvenience is , that some have a natural antipathy , or aversion to wine , and consequently cannot drink of the cup. to this i answer , that because corporal actions do depend on certain natural powers , they are supposed to be commanded to those that have natural powers proper to exercise those actions , and to none else . for example , the hearing of gods word is not commanded to deaf persons , but to those that can hear it ; but drinking of wine is a corporal action , and therefore commanded to those only that can drink it . so that if the cup must be taken from all lay-people , because some of them have a natural antipathy to wine ; then the preaching of the gospel must be taken from christians , because some of them are deaf and cannot hear it . 13. the fourth inconvenience is , that there are some countries where no wine grows , as in lapland , norway , &c. to this i answer ; first , that although no wine grows in those countries , yet some may be brought thither . secondly , but if none can be brought without being spoiled , and its form changed , then it is better to substitute the ordinary drink of the country in stead of wine . thirdly , but if this common drink of the country may not be substituted in stead of wine , then they that cannot have wine , do abstain from it , because they are forced thereunto ; and it is neither impudence nor contempt , to abstain from a thing commanded by jesus christ , when it is not to be had : but to ordain that they that have wine in abundance shall abstain from the cup , is an insufferable boldness , and a most unchristian contempt of the sacrament . chap. vii . against the mass . 1. the mass , according to the romish doctors , is a sacrifice of the body and bloud of christ propitiatory for the sins of the living and dead ; and so it is defined by the council of trent , session 22. against such a mass we might alleadge all the arguments already made use of against transubstantiation , and the pretended presence of christs body in the host ; for our adversaries confess that those reasons which destroy transubstantiation , and the pretended presence of christs body in the host , do also destroy the mass . but in this chapter we shall only use such arguments as are directly against the mass , and do utterly destroy it . 2. the first argument is drawn from this , viz. that in the institution and first celebration of the eucharist , jesus christ did not sacrifice nor offer his body and bloud to his father , as appears by what is mentioned in the three evangelists and the apostle st. paul , in which there is not the least foot-step to be seen of a sacrifice , or oblation of christs body and bloud . this bellarmin confesseth in book 1. of the mass , chap. 27. in these words , the oblation which is made after consecration , belongs to the entireness of the sacrament , but is not of its essence ; which i prove , because neither our lord nor his apostles , did make this oblation at the first , as we have demonstrated out of gregory . the jesuite salmeron in tom. 13. of his commentaries on the epistles of st. paul , makes a catalogue of unwritten traditions , in which he puts the ecclesiastical hierarchie , the worshiping of images , the mass , the manner of sacrificing , and the tradition that jesus christ did offer a sacrifice in the bread and wine . card. baronius in his annals on the year 53. freely confesseth that the sacrifice of the eucharist is an unwritten tradition . a strange thing that the mass , which is the foundation of the romish church ( for the doctors require nothing of the people , but that they should go to mass ) cannot be found to have been instituted or commanded by jesus christ . and the truth is , if jesus christ in the celebration of the eucharist had offered unto god his father a sacrifice of his body and bloud , propitiatory for the sins of the living and dead , then there had been no need that he should have been sacrificed again on the cross , because , having already expiated our sins in the sacrifice of the eucharist , there was no need he should expiate them again on the cross . to this i add , that st. paul , ephes . 4. 11. mentions the offices which jesus christ left his church when he ascended into heaven , in these words , he gave some apostles , and some prophets , and some evangelists , and some pastors , and teachers , but makes no mention at all of the sacrificers of christs body and bloud , nor in 1 tim. nor in the epistle to titus , when he describes the duty of bishops , presbyters , and deacons , without making the least mention of this sacrificing of christs body and bloud . 3. the second argument is drawn from the definition of a sacrifice , as it is given us by our adversaries , card. bellarmin in book 1. of the mass , chap. 2. defines it thus : sacrifice is an external oblation made to god alone , whereby in acknowledgment of humane infirmity , and the divine majesty , the lawful minister consecrates by a mystical ceremony , and destroys something that is sensible and permanent . from these last words , viz. that the lawful minister destroys something that is sensible , i form two arguments which destroy the sacrifice of the mass . the first is this , in every sacrifice the thing sacrificed must fall under our senses ; for our adversaries say it is a sensible thing : but the body and bloud of christ , which are pretended to be sacrificed in the mass , under the accidents of the bread and wine , do not fall under our senses , as we find by experience : therefore the body and bloud of christ , which are pretended to be under the accidents of the bread and wine , are not the thing sacrificed . the second argument is this : in every true sacrifice the thing sacrificed must be utterly destroyed ; that is , it must be so changed , that it must cease to be what it was before , as bellarmin saith in express terms in the place above cited : but in the pretended sacrifice of the mass christs body and bloud are not destroyed , for jesus christ dieth no more , rom. 6. therefore in the pretended sacrifice of the mass , the body and bloud of christ are not the thing sacrificed . 4. to these two arguments bellarmin in book 1. of the mass , ch . 27. and other romish doctors answer , that christs body simply is not the thing sacrificed in the mass , but it is christs body , as it is under the species of the bread ; and that it is in reference to the species of the bread , that christs body is sensible and visible . secondly , they answer that in the sacrifice of the mass christs body is destroyed in respect of its sacramental being , but not in respect of its natural being ; for when it is eaten in the sacrament it ceaseth to be under the species of the bread . 5 to these answers i reply , first , that christ body is not visible by the species of the bread , because , as our adversaries say , that hides it from us , and hinders us from seeing it . and although a substance may be said to be visible , and cognizable by its accidents , yet it is never so by the accidents of another substance ; and consequently jesus christ may be said to be visible by his own accidents , but not by the accidents of the bread , which are just alike both in the consecrated and unconsecrated hosts ; and 't is a ridiculous shift to say that christs body is visible under the species of the bread , because that species is visible ; for as we cannot see wine that is in a hogshead , because we see the hogshead ; and we cannot see money that is in a purse closed , because we see the purse ; so neither can we see the body under the species of the bread , because we see the species ; for as our adversaries say , that species hinders us from seeing it . 6. secondly , i say , that by the sacramental being is understood , only an accidental being of jesus christ ( for example his presence in the sacrament ) or else besides that , is understood his substantial being too . if his substantial being be also understood ( seeing the substantial being of a thing is nothing else but its substance and nature ) then it will follow that if jesus christ be destroyed in the sacrament of the eucharist in respect of his substantial being , he must also be destroyed in respect of his natural being , which is contrary to what the apostle saith , rom. 6. that jesus christ dieth no more . if an accidental being of jesus christ be only understood ( for example , his presence in the sacrament ) then these absurdities will follow , viz. first , that the sacrifice of the mass will be the sacrifice of an accident only , and not of jesus christ , because the presence of jesus christ is not jesus christ himself , but an accident of him . secondly , it will follow that the sacrifice of the mass , and that of the cross will not be the same sacrifice in reference to the thing sacrificed , because jesus christ , and his presence are not the same thing ; jesus christ being a substance , and his presence an accident , which is contrary to the decision of the council of trent , which hath determined that the sacrifice of the mass , and that of the cross , are the same in reference to the thing sacrificed . thirdly , it will follow that the thing which is destroyed in the sacrament , is not the same with that , which was produced there , because there is only an accident destroyed , whereas a substance was produced by transubstantiation , which is a substantial conversion , as hath been sufficiently proved . fourthly , it will follow that the sacrifice of the mass will be offered in the priests stomach only , because this presence is not destroyed till the priest hath eaten the host ; and consequently , the sacrifice of the mass will be offered after the mass , for this presence is only destroyed by the destruction of the accidents ; and commonly these accidents are not destroyed till after mass is said . fifthly , it will follow that the justice of god will cease to be the same ; for whereas heretofore it could not be satisfied but by the death of christ , and by the destruction of his natural being ; now god is appeased , our sins expiated , and gods justice satisfied by the destruction of his sacramental being only ; for they will have it , that the sacrifice of the mass is propitiatory for the sins of the living and the dead . 7. the third argument is drawn from these words of the apostle , heb. 9. almost all things are by the law purged with bloud , and without shedding of bloud is no remission : it was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these , but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices ▪ then these . from which words i form this argument . there is no propitiation , or remission of sins without sheding of bloud , as the apostle saith : but in the mass there is no sheding of bloud ( for it is called an unbloudy sacrifice : ) therefore in the mass there is no propitiation or remission of sins ; and consequently no propitiatory sacrifice for sin . this argument may be thus confirmed : under the old testament there was no propitiation , or purification , without sheding of bloud , and the types of heavenly things were so purified , as the apostle saith , heb. 9. therefore under the new testament also there can be no propitiation or purification without sheding of bloud , and heavenly things , being represented by the legal types , must be purified by a more excellent sacrifice , viz. by the sheding of christs bloud . and although the apostle useth the word sacrifices in the plural number , yet we must understand the only sacrifice of christ on the cross ; because when one thing is opposed to many , it is often expressed in the plural number ; as when baptism , which is but one , is called baptisms , heb. 6. 2. but the only sacrifice of the cross of christ in the text above cited , heb. 9. 23. is opposed to the old sacrifices , which were types and figures of the sacrifice of the cross . 8. the fourth argument is drawn from the words of the apostle , heb. 10. 16. this is the covenant which i will make with them after those days saith the lord , i will put my laws into their hearts , and in their minds will i write them , and their sins and iniquities will i remember no more . now where remission of these is , there is no more offering for sin . whence i form this argument : where there is remission of sins there is no need of an oblation , or a propitiatory sacrifice for sin , as the apostle saith . but in the christian church , by vertue of the new testament , or new covenant , confirmed by the bloud of christ , there is remission of sins , heb. 10. 16 , 17. therefore in the christian church now adays , there is no need of an oblation , or propitiatory sacrifice , and consequently no need of the sacrifice of the mass . 9. the fifth argument is drawn from the words of the apostle , heb. 9. jesus christ offereth not himself often , as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with the bloud of others ; for then must he often have suffered from the foundation of the world , but now once in the end of the world , hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself . and as it is appointed to men once to die , but after this the judgment , so christ was once offered to bear the sins of many , and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation . this is confirmed by the words of the same apostle , heb. 10. the law having a shadow of good things to come , and not the very image of the things , can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year , continually make the comers thereunto perfect , for then would they not have ceased to be offered , because the worshipers once purged , should have had no more conscience of sins . but in those a remembrance is made again of sins every year ; for it is not possible that the bloud of bulls and of goats should take away sins , &c. and every high priest standeth dayly ministring and offering often times the same sacrifices which can never take away sins ; but this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins , for ever sate down on the right hand of god. for by one offering he hath for ever perfected them that are sanctified : which is conformable to what he had said a little before , that we are sanctified by the offering of the body of jesus christ once for all . from all which i form these arguments . 10. first the old sacrifices were reiterated , for the apostle saith that the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with the bloud of others : but the sacrifice of jesus christ must not be reiterated , for the same apostle saith that jesus christ offereth not himself often ; and that he hath once appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself : therefore the sacrifice of the mass is not the sacrifice of the cross reiterated , or the reiteration of the sacrifice of the cross , as our adversaries would have it . 11. secondly , the apostle adding , else he should often have suffered from the foundation of the world , makes it apparent that christ cannot be offered without suffering : for , as he that should say , this is not fire else it would be hot , doth necessarily presuppose that fire is hot ; and as he that should say he is no man else he would be rational , doth necessarily presuppose that man is rational : so when the apostle saith , that jesus christ offereth not himself often , otherwise he should often bave suffered , doth necessarily presuppose that jesus christ cannot offer himself without suffering ▪ but jesus christ doth not suffer every day in the mass : therefore he is not offered every day in the mass by the ministry of priests . 12 , thirdly , these words , from the foundation of the world , are of great weight , for 't is as much as if the apostle had said , if the only sacrifice of christ on the cross be not sufficient to take away sins which shall be committed hereafter , it follows that it was not sufficient to take away sins which have been committed heretofore from the creation of the world ; for it is very unsuitable that the sacrifice of christ on the cross should have more vertue before it was offered then since : but the sacrifice of christ on the cross , had the vertue to take away sins before it was , otherwise ( saith the apostle ) he should often have suffered from the foundation of the world : therefore it hath also vertue to take away sins committed since it was , and consequently there is no need that it should be reiterated in the mass . 13. fourthly , the apostles comparison is considerable , the sense whereof is this : as men suffer death but once , and after death appear no more till the day of the resurrection , and day of judgment ; so christ hath offered himself to his father once for all on the cross to take away sins , and will be no more on earth until he comes to judge the quick and the dead . this utterly destroys the mass , in which jesus christ is said to be offered and sacrificed continually by the ministry of priests . 14. fifthly , sacrifices that take away sins , and sanctifie those that come thereunto , ought not to be reiterated ; for the only reason which the apostle alledgeth , why the old sacrifices of the law were reiterated , is because they could not take away sins , nor sanctifie the comers thereunto as appears by the text above cited . but the sacrifice of jesus christ on the cross , takes away sins and sanctifies those that come thereunto : therefore the sacrifice of jesus christ on the cross , ought not to be reiterated , and consequently is not reiterated in the mass . 15. if jesus christ did offer himself a sacrifice on the cross that he might sanctifie us for ever , and purchase eternal redemption for us , then it is evident that the fruit and efficacy of this sacrifice endures for ever , and that we must have recourse to no other sacrifice but to that of the cross : but jesus christ did offer himself a sacrifice on the cross , that he might sanctifie us for ever , and purchase eternal redemption for us , as appears by the texts aforesaid : therefore the efficacy of the sacrifice of the cross endures for ever , and we must have recourse to no other sacrifice but to that of the cross . in a word , either we must confess that the sacrifice of the cross hath no vertue to take away sins , and to sanctifie us for ever , ( which is contrary to what the apostle saith ) or else if it hath this vertue and sufficiency , then jesus christ hath offered one only sacrifice once for all , and consequently is not offered dayly in the mass by the ministry of priests . 16. lastly , the apostle almost throughout the whole epistle to the hebren ▪ s , saith , that jesus christ was constituted and consecrated by his father , high priest for ever ; and particularly chap. 7. he saith , that many were made priests , because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death ; but jesus christ because he continueth forever , hath an unchangeable priesthood ; and that he is able to save them to the uttermost that come unto god by him , seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them ; and consequently he hath no need of vicars or companions in his priesthood . 17. in answer to these arguments the romish doctors are wont to say that the sacrifice of the mass is the same with that of the cross , in respect of the essence of the sacrifice , the same thing being offered in both , viz. the body and bloud of christ by the same priest , viz. by jesus christ . but it differs in respect of the manner of offering ; for on the cross jesus christ offered himself bloudily , that is , when he died he shed his bloud for mankind ; but in the mass he offers himself unbloudily , that is , without sheding his bloud , and without dying : on the cross jesus christ was destroyed in respect of his natural being , but in the mass he is destroyed in respect of his sacramental being . they add , that all the arguments drawn from the epistle to the hebrews , respect only that bloudy oblation which was once offered on the cross ; but besides this bloudy sacrifice there is another that is unbloudy , which is daily offered in the mass . lastly , they say , that the sacrifice of the cross is primitive and original , but this of the mass representative , commemorative , and applicative of that of the cross as the council hath it in its 22. session . 18. to these distinctions i reply , that the sacrifice of the mass doth not differ from that of the cross in respect of the manner only , ( which is but an accidental difference ) but it differs in respect of essence too . first , because the natural death of jesus christ is of the essence of the sacrifice of the cross : but the sacrifice of the mass doth not comprehend the natural death of jesus christ , for jesus christ dieth no more , rom. 6. therefore the sacrifice of the mass doth not comprehend that which is of the essence of the sacrifice of the cross , and consequently differs from it essentially , and not in respect of the manner only . secondly , because the representation of a thing differs essentially from the thing represented : for example , the kings picture differs essentially from the king. also the memorial of a thing differs essentially from the thing whereof it is a memorial : for example , the celebration of the passover , which was a memorial of the angels favourable passing over the houses of the israelites , differs essentially from that passing over . and lastly , the application of a thing differs essentially from it : for example , the application of a plaister differs essentially from the plaister . but according to the determination of the council of trent , in session 22. the sacrifice of the mass is representative , commemorative , and applicative of that of the cross : therefore the sacrifice of the mass differs essentially from that of the cross . thirdly , because the sacrifice of the cross is of an infinite value , and consequently ought not to be reiterated ; for its value being infinite , it is sufficient to take away all sins past , present , and to come , as bellarmin saith book i. of the mass , chap. 4. but the sacrifice of the mass is of a finite price and value , according to the same bellarmin and other romish doctors ; at which we may justly wonder , seeing , as our adversaries say , it differs not from the sacrifice of the cross , either in respect of the thing sacrificed , or in respect of the chief priest , and yet from these the sacrifice hath all its price and value . 19. secondly , i say that an unbloudy propitiatory sacrifice is a feigned , and an imaginary thing , and that the arguments drawn from the epistle to the hebrews , do wholy destroy it . first , because it is said , heb. 9. that without sheding of bloud there is no remission of sins : therefore in the unbloudy sacrifice of the mass , there can be no remission of sins , and consequently it cannot be a propitiatory sacrifice for sin . secondly , because jesus christ cannot be offered without suffering ; for the apostle saith , heb. 6. jesus christ offereth not himself often , otherwise he should often have suffered : but the sacrifice of jesus christ with suffering , is a bloudy sacrifice : therefore there is no unbloudy sacrifice . thirdly , because the bloudy sacrifice of the cross , being of an infinite value , hath purchased an eternal redemption , heb. 9. and hath taken away all sins , past , present , and to come . whence it follows that there is no other sacrifice either bloudy or unbloudy , that can purchase the pardon of our sins ▪ the sacrifice of the cross having sufficiently done it . fourthly , because the justice of god requires that sins shall be expiated by the punishment that is due to them ; and this is so true that the wrath of god could not be appeased but by the bloudy and ignominious death of the cross : therefore the justice of god must have changed its nature if sins can be expiated in the mass without pain , or suffering . 20. thirdly , to the distinction of primitive sacrifice , which was offered on the cross , and representative , commemorative , and applicative , which is daily offered in the mass , i reply , first , that what the council of trent saith in session 22. viz. that in the eucharist there is a sacrifice representative , commemorative , and applicative of that of the mass , may bear a good sense , viz. that there is in it a representation , commemoration , and application of the sacrifice of the cross , viz. a representation , because the bread broken , represents the body broken ; and the wine poured into the cup , represents the bloud of christ shed for the remission of sins : a commemoration , because all that is done in it , is done in remembrance of jesus christ and his death according to his own command in these words , do this in remembrance of me , and according to what st. paul saith , 1 cor. 11. as often as ye eat this bread , and drink this cup , ye do shew the lords death till he come : and an application , because the merit of the sacrifice of the cross is applied to us not only by the word , but also by the sacraments , as we shall shew hereafter . but our adversaries are not content with this , for they will have it that in the celebration of the eucharist , there is offered a true and proper sacrifice propitiatory for the sins of the living and the dead , which hath been already refuted at large . secondly , i say that the application of the sacrifice of the cross may be considered on gods part , or on mans part : on gods part , when he offers jesus christ to us , with all his benefits , both in his word and sacraments : on mans part , when by a true and lively faith , working by love , we embrace jesus christ with all his benefits offered to us both in his word and sacraments . and this is it that jesus christ teacheth us , st. john 3. in these words , as moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness , even so must the son of man be lifted up , ( viz. on the cross ) that whosoever believeth in him should not perish , but have eternal life : for god so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son , ( viz. to die ) that whosoever believeth in him should not perish , but have everlasting life : he doth not say , whosoever sacrificeth him in the mass , but whosoever believeth , &c. and st. paul shews it clearly in these words , god hath set forth jesus christ to be a propitiation through faith in his bloud ; he doth not say through the sacrifice of the mass but through faith . and we really and truly apply the sacrifice of christs cross when we have recourse to him , as a man applies a plaister when he hath recourse to it , and lays it on the wound : but the recourse or refuge of a penitent sinner to the sacrifice of the cross for obtaining mercy from god , is nothing else but faith. as for the distinction of the sacramental and natural being of jesus christ , it hath been already refuted in the 6. number . 21. i shall conclude this discourse with the testimony of thomas aquinas , the most famous of all the romish doctors , and called by our adversaries , the angelical doctor . this thomas in part. 3. quest . 83. artic. 1. having proposed this question , viz. whether christ be sacrificed in the sacrament of the eucharist , he concludes with these memorable words . the celebration of this sacrament is very fitly called a sacrificing of christ , as well because it is the representation of christs passion , as because by this sacrament we are made partakers of the fruit of the lords passion . and afterward he gives his answer , in these words : i answer , we must say that the celebration of this sacrament is called a sacrificing of christ , in two respects . first , because ( as augustine to simplicius saith ) we are wont to give to images the name of the things whereof they are images , as when we see pictures on a wall , or in a frame , we say this is cicero , that is salust , &c. but the celebration of this sacrament ( as hath been said above ) is a representative image of christs passion ; which passion is the true sacrificing of christ , and so the celebration of this sacrament is the sacrificing of christ. secondly , the celebration of this sacrament is called the sacrificing of christ in regard of the effect of christs passion because by this sacrament we are made partakers of the fruit of the lords passion . let the romanists keep to this decision of their angelical doctor , and we shall agree with them in this point ; for i am confident that there is not one of the reformed religion but will subscribe this true doctrine of thomas aquinas . chap. viii . containing answers to the objections of the romish doctors . 1. in the two first chapters we have answered the two principal objections of the romish doctors , drawn from these words , this is my body , &c. and from these , he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud , hath eternal life , &c. now we must answer the rest . objection . 1. 2. the first objection is this . when the establishing of articles of faith , the institution of sacraments , and the making testaments and covenants are in agitation , men speak plainly and properly , and not obscurely or figuravitely : but in the celebration of the eucharist jesus christ established an article of faith , instituted the sacrament of the eucharist , and spake of a testament and a covenant ; for it is said of the cup that it is the new testament and the new covenant in the bloud of christ ; yea , he spake then to his disciples , to whom he spake in plain and proper terms , and not in obscure terms , or in figures or parables , as he did to the people . answer . 3. to this objection i answer , first , that it is false that articles of faith are always expressed in proper terms in holy scripture , as when it is said in the creed that jesus christ sitteth on the right hand of god , it is evident that this is a figure and a metaphor , for god being a spirit , hath neither right hand nor left ; and all interpreters expound this sitting on gods right hand , metaphorically , viz. for that lordship both of heaven and earth , which he hath received from god his father , as earthly princes make their lieutenants , whom they appoint to govern in their name , to sit on the right side of them . again , when it is said , st. matth. 16. vpon this rock i will build my church , and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it , and i will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven , and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven , &c. it is manifest that these are figures and metaphors , as bellarmin confesseth in book 1. of the bishop of rome , chap. 10. and yet it is chiefly by this passage that they endeavour to prove the popes authority . 4. secondly , i answer , that the holy scripture commonly speaks of sacraments in figurative terms ; thus circumcision is called gods covenant , gen. 17. in these words , this is my covenant , every male shall be circumcised , that is , this is the sign of the covenant , as appears by the following verse , ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin , and it shall be a token of the covenant between me and you . so the paschal lamb is called the lords passover , exod. 12. because the bloud of this lamb sprinkled on the dore-posts , was given as a sign of the angels favourable passing over the houses of the israelites ; as appears by verse 13. of the same chapter . so baptism is called the washing of regeneration , because it is the sacrament of it . in a word , the eucharistical cup is called the new testament , because it is the sign , seal , and sacrament of it . 5. thirdly , i answer , that in holy scripture , testaments are not always expressed in proper terms without a figure ; for the testament of jacob , gen. 49. and that of moses , deut. 33. are nothing else but a chain of metaphors , and other figures . and civilians will have it , that in testaments we should not regard the proper signification of the words , but the intention of the testator . to this i add that jesus christ did not then make the new testament and the new covenant , but only instituted the seal and sacrament of them : for the covenant was made with all mankind in the person of adam after the fall , when god promised him that the seed of the woman should break the serpents head . this was afterward renewed with abraham , when god promised him that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed , viz. in christ , the blessed seed , who hath destroyed the kingdom of satan . after this it was confirmed by the bloud of christ shed on the cross : then it was published through all the world when the apostles had received the holy ghost . and lastly , baptism and the eucharist are the signs , seals , and sacraments of it . 6. fourthly , i answer , that by these words , to speak clearly or plainly , be understood , to speak intelligibly , so that the apostles might and ought to understand what he said to them , then it ▪ is certain that jesus christ did speak clearly ; for to speak sacramentally , and according to the stile used in all sacraments , was to speak clearly and not obscurely : but if by these words , to speak clearly , be understood to speak without a figure , then it is false that he always spake clearly to his disciples , witness the calling of his disciples to whom he said st. matth. 4. follow me , and i will make you fishers of men : and when he saith else where , ye are the salt of the earth , the light of the world &c. to this i add , the apostles did ask jesus christ the meaning of parables , and other things which they did not understand ; and therefore certainly they had much more reason to ask the meaning of so many strange things as follow from the mass , from transubstantiation , and from the pretended presence of christs body in the host , viz. how a humane body can be in a point , and in divers places at once ? how the head of jesus christ and his whole body could be in his mouth ? how accidents can be without a subject ? &c. 7. lastly , seeing jesus christ said , drink ye all of this cup , all priests , whether jesuites , monks , or other romish doctors , would of necessity be constrained , really , properly , and without a figure , to drink of the cup , whether melted or not , and really to swallow it , until they should confess that there are figures in the words of jesus christ in the celebration of the eucharist . objection 2. 8. the second objection is this : the sacrament of the eucharist is more excellent then that of the passover , because the sacrament of the passover is a type of the sacrament of the eucharist , and the thing typified is always more excellent then the type : but if the sacrament of the eucharist did not really contain the body and bloud of christ , but was only the sign of it , then it would follow that the sacrament of the eucharist would not be more excellent then that of the passover ; nay , the sacrament of the passover would be more excellent then that of the eucharist ; because a lamb and its bloud is more excellent then bread and wine ; and the death of a lamb , and the shedding of its bloud , doth much better represent the death of christ , and the shedding of his bloud on the cross , then bread broken , and wine poured into a cup can do . answer . 9. to this i answer , first , that the thing typified by the paschal lamb , is jesus christ , and not the sacrament of the eucharist ; as st. paul shews clearly , 1 cor. 5. when he calls jesus christ our passover , in these words , christ our passover was crucified for us . the truth is , a whole lamb without spot or blemish killed and burnt toward the evening , and its bloud shed , doth very well represent jesus christ perfect , without sin , put to death , and his bloud shed toward the end of the world , and in the fulness of time ; but such a lamb represents nothing of that which is seen in the eucharist . besides the types and sacraments of the old testament were instituted that the faithful of those times might come to the knowledge of the things typified and signified , for the salvation of their souls : but the faithful under the old testament never came to the knowledge of the eucharist by the paschal lamb ; and though they had come to the knowledge of it , yet they had had no benefit thereby . in a word , seeing the passover and the eucharist are types , images , and signs , of jesus christ , 't is very impertinent to say , that the passover is the type of the eucharist , because a type is not properly the type of another type , but only of the thing typified ; as the image of caesar is not the image of another image of caesar , but only of caesar himself . 10. secondly , i answer , that the excellence of one sacrament above another , must be drawn from its form and efficacie , and not from its matter , because it is form that chiefly gives being to things composed of matter and form . but the form of sacraments depends on the words of institution , because being signs of divine institution , their form can only depend upon the will of god , who chooseth certain things to signifie other things ; and this will of god cannot be known but by revelation , which is the word ; so that it is properly said that the word joined with the element makes the sacrament : therefore , although the sacrament of the passover be more excellent then the eucharist in respect of its matter , because the paschal lamb and its bloud , are more excellent then the bread and wine of the eucharist ; and that the lamb and its bloud have a greater analogie with jesus christ and his bloud shed on the cross , then the bread and wine of the eucharist have ; yet the sacrament of the eucharist is much more excellent then that of the passover in respect of its form , which depends on the words of institution , because that at the institution of the sacrament of the passover god spake not one word of the principal end for which he did institute it , viz. to be the type of jesus christ and his death . but at the institution of the sacrament of the eucharist christ declared in express terms , that he did institute the eating of the bread broken , and the drinking of the wine , poured into the cup , to be commemorative signs of himself , and his death . the sacrament of the eucharist is yet more excellent then that of the passover , in respect of its efficacy , which depends on two things , viz. on the form , which being more manifest in the eucharist , doth also operate with more efficacy , and also because it represents a thing past , viz. the death of christ . but the knowledge of things past is more clear and perfect then the knowledge of things to come ; and we are more toucht with the memory of things past , when some symbole brings them to our thoughts , then when we consider things to come , through clouds and shadows . to this i add that the bread and wine of the eucharist have a greater analogie with jesus christ then the paschal lamb had , in one respect , viz. in regard of the spiritual nourishment which we receive by christs death ; for as baptism is the sacrament of our spiritual birth , so the eucharist is the sacrament of our spiritual nourishment . but this nourishment is much better represented by bread and wine which are the ordinary nourishment of our bodies , then by a lamb. lastly , i answer , that it is far less inconvenient to give some prerogative to the pasover above the eucharist , ( ●●z . to give it a more excellent matter and analogie ) then to assert the corporal presence of christ in the host , by an unheard of transubstantiation , which destroys the nature of sacraments , gives our lord a monstrous body , includes notorious absurdities and contradictions , and gives the lye to sense , reason , and holy scripture ; as hath been proved . objection 3. 11 the third objection was proposed at nismes , anno 1657. by the jesuite s. rigaut , thus . god doth communicate , or can communicate to the creature in a finite degree that which he possesseth in an infinite degree . for example ; god hath an infinite power whereby he can do all things at once ; therefore he communicates , or can communicate to the creature a finite and limited power , whereby it may do divers things at once , as appears in a man , for he can see , hear talk , and walk at the same time . god hath also an infinite wisdom and knowledge , whereby he knows all things at once ; therefore he communicates , or can communicate to the creature a finite knowledge , whereby it may know divers things at once . and even so god hath a virtual infinite extent , which is called immensity , whereby he fills all things and all places at once : therefore god communicates or can communicate to the creature , viz. to a body a finite extent , whereby it may fill divers spaces , and occupy several places at once . whence it follows that christs body may be in divers places at the same time , viz. in heaven and in the host . answer . 12. to this i answer , that as god cannot be in two places ( for example , in heaven and upon earth ) without being in all those places that are between both , ( for then he would be distant , and separated from himself ) so christs body cannot be in two distant places , viz. at paris and at rome , in heaven and upon earth in the host , without being in all those places that are between both , for then it would be distant and separated from it self , which is impossible , as hath been sufficiently proved . therefore seeing christs body is not in all places between paris and rome , and between heaven and earth , it follows that it is not in heaven and upon earth in the host , nor at paris and rome in consecrated hosts . so that to make a creature , for example the body of christ , partaker of gods extent or immensity , it is sufficient that as god by his infinite extent occupies all places , so christs body should by its finite extent occupy some place . but if to make it partake in a finite degree of this divine attribute of immensity , it must be in divers places , yet it is sufficient that it be in divers places successively and not at once ; or if to make it partake of this attribute it must be in divers places at once , yet it is sufficient that it occupies them by its several parts ; for example , that the head be in one place , and the feet in another , &c. in a word , that it be without discontinuance or separation , as god is every where without discontinuance . thus the learned , master bruguier then answered and much better , but i cannot remember his full and compleat answer . objection 4. 13. the fourth objection is this . if divers bodies may miraculously be in one and the same place , then it also follows that one body may miraculously be in divers places , there being no more difficulty or impossibility in the one then in the other . but divers bodies may miraculously be in one and the same place ; for jesus christ came into the room where his disciples were , the dores being shut , which he could not have done , if his body had not penetrated the dores . besides , it is said that jesus christ was born of the virgin mary , and consequently mary was a virgin both before and after his birth , which could not have been if jesus christ had not penetrated her belly and come forth without fraction or overture . lastly , jesus christ penetrated the stone that was laid on his sepulchre when he rose again ; and it is said that he penetrated the heavens when he ascended . answer . 14 to this i answer , first , that it is not said that jesus christ came in , the dores being shut ; for these are the words , the same day when it was evening , and the dores having been shut for fear of the jews , jesus came , &c. which words do indeed shew the time when jesus came in unto his disciples , but not the manner of his entry by penetration , but if the words be translated , the dores being shut , and that they do import that the dores were not opened by any body , yet they do not exclude the opening of them in the twinckling of an eye by the divine power , sith we have examples of this in holy scripture ; for acts 5. we read that the apostle went out of prison , though the dores had been fast shut , but it is said that the angel of god opened them . and acts 12. the dore of the prison opened to s. peter of its own accord ; that is , without being opened by any body . and so it is said that jesus christ entered , the dores being shut , or having been shut ; which excludes the opening of them by any body , but not the opening of them by a divine power in so short a time that it was undiscernable . secondly i answer , that the virgin mary was a true virgin both before and after her delivery , if by being a virgin be meant not to have had the company of a man ; but it is certain that jesus christ came out of the virgins belly by opening her womb ; for it is said , st. luke 2. that joseph and mary carried jesus christ to jerusalem to present him to the lord ; as it is written in the law , every male that openeth the womb shall be holy unto the lord. thirdly i answer , that jesus christ did not penetrate the stone that was laid on his sepulchre ; for it is said , st. matth. 28. that the angel of god rolled it back from the dore of the sepulchre . fourthly i answer , that when it is said , heb. 4. that jesus christ penetrated the heavens , we must understand it improperly , in the same manner as it is commonly said that an arrow penetrates the air ; that is , the air gives way to the arrow that passeth through the air ; and so jesus christ penetrated the heavens , because the heavens gave way to his body , and not that the heavens and his body were in one and the same place . 15. all the romish doctors agree with us , that modal accidents ( which are nothing else but the manners of the being of substances , as action , passion , relation , figure , &c. ) cannot be without a subject , no not by the power of god himself . but all the objections by which they endeavour to prove that the accidents of the bread and wine may exist without a subject , ( that is , without their substance ) do prove the same thing of modal accidents too . so that i shall not stay now to repeat those objections with their answers , which are set down at large in my dispute about the eucharist . objection 5. 16. the fifth objection is drawn from mal. 1. in these words , from the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the gentiles ; and in every place shall they offer incense to my name , and a new and pure offering : where by this new and pure offering nothing can be understood but the sacrifice of the mass ; because by this offering we cannot understand prayers , alms , contrition of heart , and other good works , which are sometimes in scripture called oblations and sacrifices , for the prophet malachi promiseth a new offering . but prayers , alms , and other good works were common amongst the jews ; and besides , they of the reformed church do believe that all the actions of the faithful are poluted , and the prophet speaks of a pure and clean offering . again , by this offering which malachi speaks of , cannot be understood lambs , bulls , and such like animals , which were wont to be sacrificed in solomons temple ; because the prophet promiseth that it shall be offered in every place , even amongst the heathen . lastly , by this offering cannot be understood the bloudy sacrifice which jesus christ offered on the cross , because that bloudy sacrifice was offered but once upon mount calvary in judea , and the prophet speaks of an oblation that shall be offered in every place : therefore by this offering must be understood the sacrifice of the body and bloud of christ , under the species of the bread and wine , which is nothing else but the mass . answer . 17. to this i answer , first , that by the offering whereof malachy speaks , must be understood that spiritual worship and service which believers should perform unto god under the new testament , which is comprised in that sacrifice which they offer to god , both of their persons and religious actions ; and this is the reason why st. paul , rom. 12. speaks thus . i beseech you therefore , brethren ▪ by the mercies of god that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice , holy , acceptable unto god , which is your reasonable service . and chap. 15. speaking of the grace that was given him of god , he saith , it is given him that he should be the minister of jesus christ to the gentiles , ministring the gospel of god , that the offering up of the gentiles might be acceptable , being sanctified by the holy ghost . whence it appears that by this oblation whereof malachy speaks , we must not understand the offering of christs body and bloud under the accidents of bread and wine , but the offering up of the persons and religious actions of those that should be brought unto god by the preaching of the gospel , and particularly the gentiles . 18. secondly i answer , that in the whole passage of malachy above cited , the words new offering are not to be found , but only clean offering . and though a new offering had been there spoken of , yet i say that things may be said to be new , when being spoiled and corrupted , they are restored and made sound again . but the service of god which had been corrupted under the law , was re-established by jesus christ and his apostles under the gospel , so that all things were made new ; a new time , viz. the time of the preaching of the gospel ; a new people , viz. the christian people ; a new place , viz. all parts of the world , and not at jerusalem only ; a new prayer , viz. the lords prayer ; new sacraments , viz. baptism and the lords supper ; and new preaching , viz. the preaching of salvation by jesus christ . 19. thirdly i answer that the oblation which is offered unto god under the gospel , is pure and clean ; the service which is performed to him , according to his word , is pure ; the preaching of the gospel is pure . in a word , the christian religion is pure , though there be many failings in those that profess it . and although the faithful that present their bodies a living sacrifice , holy , acceptable to god , be compassed about with many infirmities , and that their religious actions be accompanied with divers failings , yet their persons and works may be said to be pure and clean in jesus christ , in whose name they are presented to god ; so that although they cannot of themselves please or satisfie god ; yet as they are members of christ , they are reputed holy before god : for it is these st. peter speaks of in epist . 1. chap. 2. who as living stones , are built up a spiritual house , a holy priesthood , to offer up spiritual sacrifices , acceptable to god by jesus christ . and so our sacrifices are a pure and clean offering , but it is through jesus christ , who covers them with his purity and holiness , so that the defects of them are not imputed to us . to this i add , that besides the perfect purity which we have by the imputation of christs righteousness , we have also a purity begun by the holy ghost ; of which st. paul speaks rom. 15. in these words , that the offering of the gentiles might be acceptable , being sanctified by the holy ghost : for that which god hath decreed , je●us christ hath purchased , and the holy ghost hath begun , is reputed by god perfect and compleat . and st. paul shews clearly the truth of what hath been said , 1 tim. 2. 8. in these words , i will that men pray every where , listing up holy hands , without wrath and doubting . and ephes . 5. jesus christ loved the church , and gave himself for it , that he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word , that he might present it to himself , a glorious church , not having spot or wrinkle , or any such thing , but that it should be holy and without blemish . objection 6. 20. the sixth objection is drawn from gen. 14. in these words : and melchisedec king of salem , bringing forth bread and wine ( for he was a priest blessed him . and from psal . 110. and from heb. 7. where it is said , thou art a priest for ever , after the order of melchisedec . from which words our adversaries argue thus . first , they say that jesus christ is a priest , not after the order of aaron , but after the order of melchisedec ; the difference between aaron and melchisedec consisting in this , viz. that aaron and the other levitical priests offered bloudy sacrifices , killing and shedding the bloud of beasts , which they sacrificed to god , as a sign and figure of the bloudy sacrifice of jesus christ on the cross . but melchisedec offered an unbloudy sacrifice , for when he went to meet abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings , he offered to god bread and wine . and seeing this bread and wine offered to god by melchisedec were signs and types of christs body and bloud , jesus christ was obliged to offer an unbloudy sacrifice , viz. his body and bloud under the species of bread and wine , which he did at the institution and celebration of the sacrament of the eucharist , that so the reality of the thing typified might answer those shadows and types . secondly , that although melchisedec had brought all this bread and wine for the refreshment of abraham and his army that returned from the slaughter of the kings , yet he first offered it to god , and then gave it to them , that so they might partake of the sacrifice of bread and wine . and the reason of this is , because the scripture saith that abraham returned from the battel with great spoils ; amongst which there was meat and drink enough for the refreshment of himself and his people : also it saith expresly that abrahams people had taken such refreshment as was necessary before melchisedec met them ; and consequently they had no need of the bread and wine which he brought , except it had been to partake of the sacrifice of the bread and wine which he offered . thirdly , they say this is strongly proved by the following words , for he was priest of the most high god , which shew the reason why melchisedec brought bread and wine , viz. to make an oblation or offering of it to god ; for if he had brought this bread and wine for the refreshment of abraham and his people , the scripture would have said that he had brought this bread and wine , because that abraham and his army being faint and tired , had need of meat and drink ; but it speaks nothing of this : on the contrary it saith that he brought bread and wine , for he was priest . fourthly , they say that jesus christ is a priest for ever , after the order of melchisedec ; and seeing there can be no priest without a sacrifice , there can be no eternal priest without an eternal or perpetual sacrifice . but the sacrifice of the cross was offered but once , and cannot be reiterated , for jesus christ dieth no more , rom. 6. therefore there must be another perpetual sacrifice in the church , which jesus christ offereth by the hands of priests , which can be nothing else but the sacrifice of the mass , viz. the sacrifice of christs body and bloud under the species of the bread and wine , typified by the sacrifice of the bread and wine of melchisedec . answer . 21. to this i answer , first , that the hebrew word doth not signifie bringing but brought , drew out , caused to be brought , &c. but our adversaries falsifie the text thus , to make way for another falsification , viz. to put these words in a parenthesis ( for he was priest ) in stead of putting them without a parenthesis , and he was priest ; so that we may say that in these few words they have made three falsifications ; first , when they translate it proferens , that is bringing , in stead of translating it protulit , that is brought , or drew out : secondly , when they translate it erat enim sacerdos , that is , for he was priest , in stead of translating it , and he was priest : thirdly , when they translate it benedixit ei , that is , blessed him , instead of translating it & benedixit ei , that is , and he blessed him . and so of three different propositions , viz. melchisedech also brought bread and wine , and he was priest , and he blessed him ; they have made but one , with a parenthesis , thus : melchisedec bringing bread and wine ( for he was priest ) blessed him . 22. secondly , i answer that the hebrew word used by moses , signifies commonly brought , drew out , caused to be brought , caused to be drawn out , caused to come , &c. but we must not stray from the proper signification of words but upon very great necessity , which appears not in this text. and although this hebrew word should signifie brought to offer , and that it should be taken for offered , yet our adversaries would gain nothing by it ; for it is not said in the text that he brought bread and wine to offer unto god ; but we must rather expound it thus , viz. that he brought bread and wine to offer and present it to abraham : and indeed the following words , viz. and blessed him , do clearly shew it , for the pronoun relative him , relates to abraham , according to the exposition of the apostle , heb. 7. where he saith expresly that melchisedec met abraham and blessed him . and a little after he saith , that melchisedec blessed him that had the promises ; and that the less is blessed of the greater . but if these words , he brought bread and wine , must be expounded thus , he offered bread and wine to god , then it must necessarily follow that melchisedec blessed god and not abraham ; for in these words , viz. he offered bread and wine to god , and blessed him , the pronoun him can relate to none but god. 23. thirdly , i answer , that melchisedec brought bread and wine to abraham to refresh him and his people , and not to offer unto god. bellarmin in book 1. of the mass , chap. 6. confesseth that melchisedec brought bread and wine to abraham to refresh him and his people , who returned faint and tired from the slaughter of the kings , which is true ; but he adds that jesus christ had offered it to god before , which is false , and cannot be proved . jerome in his epistle to euagrius , writes that the jews understood it that melchisedec meeting abraham after his victory , brought bread and wine to refresh him and his people . josephus writing this history , saith , that melchisedec presented bread and wine to abraham to refresh him and his army . damascene , book 4. of the orthodox faith , saith that melchisedec treated abraham with bread and wine . 24. fourthly , the reasons of our adversaries , mentioned in the objections to prove that melchisedec brought bread and wine to abraham that he might partake of the sacrifice which he had offered , are not considerable ; viz. because abraham returned from the battle with great spoils ; and so there was meat and drink enough for him and his people ; and that they had taken their repast before melchisedec met them , &c. these reasons , i say , are inconsiderable , because although abraham had great spoils , yet he restored all to the king of sodom ; and though his people had eaten and drank of such as they found amongst the spoils , yet it is not said that abraham did eat and drink ; and though both he and his people had eaten and drank , yet it is not said how long it was since , and that they had no need of more provision ; and though they had no need of more , yet melchisedec not knowing that they had eaten and drank , did , that which prudent men are wont to do , viz. provide all that may be needful in case of necessity . 25. fifthly , i answer , that the principal reason which our adversaires bring to prove that melchisedec offered unto god bread and wine , viz. because it is in the hebrew text , for he was priest , is a manifest falsification ; for it is in the hebrew text , and he was priest . also the old latine interpreter , and the greek septuagint translate it as we do , viz. and he was priest : and it is very probable that this passage hath been corrupted in jeroms latine translation , because in his hebrew questions , and in his epistle to evagrius , he translates it , and he was priest . st. cyprian in his epistle to caecilius , and st. august . book 4. of christian doctrine , chap. 21. and elsewhere , translate it , and he was priest . so that although the hebrew particle used by moses , do sometimes signifie , for , yet seeing that both its proper and common signification is and ; and that for one place where it signifies for , there are a thousand at least where it signifies and ; and that there is nothing that obligeth us to translate it for ; it is evident that the argument of our adversaries is of no force at all . therefore it is more pertinent to refer these words , and he was priest , to what follows , viz. and blessed him , then to what goes before , viz. brought bread and wine . for as melchisedec , being a liberal king , brought bread and wine to abraham , to refresh him and his people ; so , as he was a priest much more excellent then abraham , he blessed him . and though it should be translated , for he was priest , yet it would not follow that melchisedec did sacrifice bread and wine unto god ; for it might be said that moses would shew the reason of the good will of melchisedec toward abraham ; viz. it was very fit that he that was priest of the most high god , should testifie his kindness to so eminent a servant of god as was abraham , by presenting bread and wine to him , whereof he thought there was need . 26. sixthly , i answer , that from what is said , psal . 110. and heb. 7. viz. that jesus christ is a priest for ever , it will not follow that he must offer himself every day in the mass , under the species of bread and wine , by the ministry of priests ; for the apostle writing to the hebrews , placeth the perpetuity of the priesthood partly in this , viz. that there is no need he should be offered any more , seeing by one oblation he hath consecrated for ever those that are sanctified ; and partly in this , viz. that being exalted far above the heavens , he intercedes continually for us ; for the priesthood consists in certain functions , and in the virtue and efficacy of them . and seeing there are two parts of christs priesthood , whereof one relates to the oblation of himself , which he offered on the cross ; and the other to his intercession ; it is certain that the virtue and efficacy of the oblation is eternal , and that the intercession will continue unto the end of the world. 27. seaventhly , i answer , that in all the holy scripture where the priesthood of melchisedec is spoken of , three things only are mentioned of him , viz. that he was a priest , that he was a priest for ever , and that he was so with an oath , according to the application that is made of it to jesus christ in psal . 110. and heb. 7. in these words , the lord hath sworn and will not repent , thou art a priest for ever , after the order of melchisedec , but there is nothing at all spoken of the sacrifice of melchisedec , nor is it said wherein it did consist : for as it was fit that all the offices which we find , were born by the greatest kings , priests , and prophets under the old testament , should be collected in the person of the messiah ; which was done by proposing them as types and figures of jesus christ ; and that the most illustrious type was melchisedec ; so it was more expedient not to speak of the nature of the sacrifice of melchisedec , because it was not expedient then to speak of the nature of the sacrifice of the messiah . and therefore although we know not the nature and quality of the sacrifice of melchisedec , yet we know that he was a priest : even as we know that melchisedec was a king , though we know not in what manner he executed his kingly office. 28. lastly , i answer , that it is false that the difference between the priesthood of melchisedec and that of aaron did consist in this , viz. that aaron offered the bloudy sacrifices of beasts , and melchisedec offered an unbloudy sacrifice of bread and wine . it is also false that the likeness of the priesthood of melchisedec to that of jesus christ doth consist in this , viz. that as melchisedec did sacrifice bread and wine , so christ did sacrifice his body and bloud under the species of bread and wine : these are humane inventions , and are founded neither on scripture nor reason , for on the contrary , the apostle writing to the hebrews , placeth the difference between the priesthood of melchisedec , and that of aaron , and its likeness to that of christ in quite another thing . first , he is called melchisedec , which being interpreted ( as the apostle saith heb. 7. ) is king of righteousness ; and then king of salem , that is , king of peace ; and herein he very well represents our lord jesus christ , who is truly king of righteousness , not only because he is righteous , and was always without sin ; but also because by his satisfaction he hath purchased righteousness for us , being made unto us of god , righteousness . he is also truly king of peace , in that he hath reconciled men unto god , made their peace with the angels and hath particularly recommended peace to them . as for aaron , and other high priests , they were no kings , much less are the priests of the romish church so , and consequently cannot be after the order of melchisedec , and they that have written the lives of the popes have sufficiently declared what righteousness and peace they have procured for the true and faithful servants of jesus christ , as i shall shew at large elsewhere . secondly , the apostle heb. 7. represents melchisedec to us as a man come from heaven , without father , without mother , without descent , having neither beginning of days , nor end of life : not that he was really such a one , but because moses hath wholy concealed from us his father , mother , descent , birth , and death , that he might be the type of christ , who was without father , as he is man ; without mother , as god ; without descent , both as god and as man ; having neither beginning of days as god , nor end of life , as god or as man. but the fathers , descent , birth , and death of aaron , and other high priests , are exactly described by moses . and there were never any popes , bishops , or priests , whose parents , birth , and death , were not known , and consequently they cannot be after the order of melchisedec . thirdly , the apostle adds , that melchisedec being made like unto the son of god , abideth a priest for ever ; because moses makes no mention of his death , nor of any one that succeeded him in his priestly office ; that so he might be the type of jesus christ , who never left his priestly office , but will exercise it until the end of the world , always inter●●ding for those that are his , by presenting his sacrifice to god the father continually . as for aaron and other priests , they are dead , and have had successors . and the popes , bishops , and priests , die daily , and have successors ; and consequently are not after the order of melchisedec . fourthly , the apostle saith likewise , that melchisedec took tithes of abraham , and adds that melchisedec blessed him that had the promises , viz. abraham , and that the less is blessed of the greater . whence it appears that melchisedec having taken tithes of abraham , and blessed him , and levi , and all the priests in his person , was more excellent then abraham , levi , and all the priests . in which respect he was a type of jesus christ , who was infinitely more excellent then abraham and all his successors , because he in whom all the promises were fulfilled , must needs be incomparably more excellent then he that received them only . but i do not believe that the priests of the romish church are so bold as to prefer themselves before abraham , the father of the faithful , in whose seed all the nations of the earth are blessed ; and consequently are not after the order of melchisedec . fifthly ; the apostle never spake of the sacrifice of melchisedec , so far was he from comparing it with the sacrifice of jesus christ , as being like it , or with that of aaron , as being unlike it ; so that all that our adversaries say of it , is nothing else but meer humane invention . 29. i conclude my answer with this argument , jesus christ hath offered no sacrifice but after the order whereof he was established a priest . but he was established a priest after the order of melchisedec only , as the apostle observes . therefore he hath offered no sacrifice but after the order of melchisedec : but ( according to the romish doctors ) there is no other sacrifice after the order of melchisedec , but that of the mass : therefore ( according to the romish doctors ) jesus christ hath offered no other sacrifice , but that of the mass . and seeing ( according to them ) the sacrifice of the mass is an unbloudy sacrifice , it follows that jesus christ hath offered no other sacrifice , but an unbloudy sacrifice ; and consequently he hath not offered a bloudy sacrifice on the cross , which is blasphemy . the end . a discharge of five imputations of mis-allegations, falsly charged upon the (now) bishop of duresme, by an english baron shewing, that no solid or reall answer is to be expected, from the romish party, to his late booke (against their masse) so greatly maligned by them. morton, thomas, 1564-1659. 1633 approx. 234 kb of xml-encoded text transcribed from 158 1-bit group-iv tiff page images. text creation partnership, ann arbor, mi ; oxford (uk) : 2005-10 (eebo-tcp phase 1). a07804 stc 18182 estc s112911 99848152 99848152 13230 this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the early english books online text creation partnership. this phase i text is available for reuse, according to the terms of creative commons 0 1.0 universal . the text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. early english books online. (eebo-tcp ; phase 1, no. a07804) transcribed from: (early english books online ; image set 13230) images scanned from microfilm: (early english books, 1475-1640 ; 1355:4) a discharge of five imputations of mis-allegations, falsly charged upon the (now) bishop of duresme, by an english baron shewing, that no solid or reall answer is to be expected, from the romish party, to his late booke (against their masse) so greatly maligned by them. morton, thomas, 1564-1659. [32], 227, [1], 225-278, [2] p. printed by m[iles] f[lesher] for r. milbourne at the signe of the greyhound in pauls churchyard, london : 1633. dedication signed: tho: duresme, i.e. thomas morton. a reply to imputations attributed to thomas arundell, 1st baron arundell of wardour, to whom the dedication is directed. printer's name from stc. the last leaf is blank. reproduction of the original in the university of illinois (urbana-champaign campus). library. created by converting tcp files to tei p5 using tcp2tei.xsl, tei @ oxford. re-processed by university of nebraska-lincoln and northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. eebo-tcp is a partnership between the universities of michigan and oxford and the publisher proquest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by proquest via their early english books online (eebo) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). the general aim of eebo-tcp is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic english-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in eebo. eebo-tcp aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the text encoding initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). the eebo-tcp project was divided into two phases. the 25,363 texts created during phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 january 2015. anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. users should be aware of the process of creating the tcp texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. text selection was based on the new cambridge bibliography of english literature (ncbel). if an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in ncbel, then their works are eligible for inclusion. selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. in general, first editions of a works in english were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably latin and welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in oxford and michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet qa standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. after proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of tcp data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a tcp editor. the texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the tei in libraries guidelines. copies of the texts have been issued variously as sgml (tcp schema; ascii text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable xml (tcp schema; characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless xml (tei p5, characters represented either as utf-8 unicode or tei g elements). keying and markup guidelines are available at the text creation partnership web site . eng arundell of wardour, thomas arundell, -baron, ca. 1560-1639. mass -controversial literature -early works to 1800. 2005-01 tcp assigned for keying and markup 2005-01 aptara keyed and coded from proquest page images 2005-02 jonathan blaney sampled and proofread 2005-02 jonathan blaney text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-04 pfs batch review (qc) and xml conversion a discharge of five imputations of mis-allegations , falsly charged upon the ( now ) bishop of dvresme , by an english baron . shewing , that no solid or reall answer is to be expected , from the romish party , to his late booke ( against their masse ) so greatly maligned by them . london , printed by m. f. for r. milbourne at the signe of the greyhound in pauls churchyard . 1633. to the right honovrable , the lord ar : baron . right honourable , ( whom , for honour sake , in an epistle reprehensive , i have not named in full syllables ) i had no sooner heard that your lordship had excepted against my booke , concerning the masse , but i laboured both by my importunity of letters unto you , and sollicitation of an honourable friend , to be acquainted therewith , having first understood , that you had objected thē to some protestants , by way of traducement ; and then imparted them to a female tongue , which you knew to be as shrill and loud as bow-bell , to convey it into the eares of others round about , in the vilest termes of falsificator and impostor . a pestilent ayre , which presently after was heard blustering at the court : whereunto i addressed my answer , satisfactorie , as i thought . and about five weekes after i received a replie from your lordship closely sealed up , with divers seales , for secrefie sake : but , behold a miracle ! the same replie flyeth out amain , the seales ( as it were the doores ) being shut , which dispersed abrod by the wings of report , preoccupateth the eares and mindes of the most of your profession , within the county of hampshire , to my great ignominie and reproach . all which your obliquity of dealing i received from the intelligence of persons without all exception : whereby i learne that your ayme was not your owne satisfaction ( then pretended ) but my defamation . so that your lordship may not now bee offended , to see your owne private letters present themselves againe unto you in publique print , and attended with this my discharge and answere unto them . for you were not to thinke , that when as you had placed the candle upon the top of the table , i should hide it under a bushell : but seeing that you would not pinion your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , flying words and voices , i have also given this my answere liberty , to meet with them upon the same stage . your lordships exceptions are partly against my allegations , and partly against my style of writing ; and you will bee knowne to bee the sole author of both : but your lordship will con me thankes , if for your credit-sake i attribute the objections against my allegations rather to some romish suggester than to your selfe ; when you shall perceive the manifold falsities of the objections , from point to point . nor will your knowne wisedome permit mee to beleeve , that you would offer to challenge a bishop , in matters of his owne profession ( unto whom you are pleased to ascribe more than ordinary attributes of learning ) and to impute such errors unto him with that confidence , as to wish that another bishop of the same profession might bee umpier betweene us ; except you had first consulted with some romish priest ; especially seeing that in your replie you judge your owne romish writers not to be warrantable enough , which come forth without the licence and approbation of their superiors . howsoever , as well for your satisfaction , as for mine owne iustification , i have returned unto your lordship such a reasonable and conscionable an answere , which i dare permit to the umpirage of any romish doctor , or bishop , were it your bishop of bishops the pope himselfe . yet shall not either popeship , doctorship , or so much almost as any schollership be necessarie in this case , wherein , as when any felon is brought before a iudge , or a iustice , that was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , deprehended in the manner , they need not be troubled with any further examination , then the view of the stolne stuffe , which was taken upon him . in like manner ( were the author either your selfe , or any other ) your falshood in objecting of falsities will be so apparant , that the reader shall not need to busie his braines with any further disquisition than the view and perusall of the words excepted against . in a word ; these and all other like accusations , used by m. parsons , or any other , have beene shewen hitherto to have beene as causelesse , as if it had befallen spiritually to my adversaries , as it hapned corporally to the enemies of lot , when they sought to assaile him , but could not find the doore . the other point of your exceptions , touching the bitternesse of the style , being a subject of humane affection , rather than of theologicall judgment , i shall not gainsay , although you shall challenge it to your selfe ; who hearing me , upon good proofes , condemning the romish masse of superstition , sacriledge , and idolatrie ; passe by this in silence , & only quarrel the denominations , in calling your masse superstitious , sacrilegious , and idolatrous . now forsooth , ô the bitternes of the style ! but ô violent cavillation , may i say . much like as if i had frendly admonished your lo : for your safety sake , to avoid such a by-way , because it is haūted with theeves ; or to forbeare to tast of such a cup , which is infected with poyson ; or to refraine the next house , wherein is the pestilence ; all this should bee received without regret : notwithstanding you should take offēce , that i should call the way theevish , the cup poysōable and the house pestilent . all the rest of your instances of bitternes labour of one and the same fault , which is impatience , not to suffer errors and vices to be arrayed with their sutable attributes of erroneousnesse and vitiousnesse ; as if you would deny the child his proper name . but hony and any sweet thing seemeth bitter to one in an ague , yet the cause is the distemper of the party . others spit out , as loathsome , that , which is bitter in their mouthes , although it would bee never so cordiall at their hearts ; and this disease is somewhat a-kin to a phrenzie . and that your lordship should blame me for confuting errors , and condemning faults in such bitter names , without which they could not bee so much as named , much lesse confuted , or condemned ; is a fault in it self , which i will not name , for feare you should accuse mee of bitternesse . he that would indeed busie his pen in blotting out the bitter styles of outragious raylers , may spend his life time in expunging whole bookes of your owne romish writers ; but especially in gretzer the iesuite his defence of bellarmine , and stapleton his counter-blast , both which have been studied by some , only to furnish themselves with store of salt , vinegar , and gall , for personall invectives . as for my selfe , none ever more abhorred that caninam eloquentiam , that is , doggish eloquence ; never did any ( be it spoken without arrogance ) insult lesse upon so great advantages ; witnesse the same booke almost throughout ; nor shall any unpartiall reader find in any of the places , which your lordship hath noted of bitternesse , any one terme , which may not bee held medicinable , and which the matter it selfe did not compell me unto , who have had this testimonie from a royall mouth , that i used not to flite : else should i not in my younger yeares have plaid the asse , as it became mee , when i sustained whole loads of reproachfull and ignominious termes of grashopper , leud lad , and very asse , cast upon me by the old man m. parsons , without any retaliation on my part , but rather glorying that i might bee thought worthy the name of asse , in that cause , wherein i did carry my saviour christ , by supporting and defending his truth . so little cause had your lordship , in any reason , to threaten me , with any unruly pen. but let come that pen , when it will , and though it bee drenched in bitterest waters of mara , i am ready for it , and sure i am , that i shall be avenged of the pen-man . but how ? didicit quis maledicere ? & ego contemnere , as it is in tacitus ; yet only contemning it , is but heathenish ; i shall encounter a rough and reviling speech with a soft answere , imitating physitians , whose aphorisme it is , calida curantur frigidis . yet may this be but only naturall , i will be a christian , and practise the lesson of our lord , & master , who teacheth us to revenge others cursings of us with our blessings of them : even as i now doe with your lordship , notwithstanding the malignancie , which i have found , i desire of god to blesse this my answere unto you , that as it must bee for conviction , so it may bee for your conversion , that you with us may at length learne to serve god in spirit and truth , by iesus christ. amen . your lo : in all christian affection , tho : duresme . a second advertisement to all priests and jesuites of the english seminaries , wishing to them grace , and peace in christ jesus . this epistle ( i confesse ) is somewhat large , yet so , that as it is much necessary , both for you to read , and for mee to write , that you may know the reasons , whereby i seeke to perswade others , that they are not to expect from you any reall and conscionable answer to that booke of the masse , by occasion whereof some of you have used so vile , vehement , and malignant detractions and calumniations against mee . for , first , as that painter in pliny , who as soone as hee had finished his picture , in his opinion perfect , and to life , betooke himselfe behinde the table , to harken what fault any spectator should finde with it . i likewise after the publishing of that booke , convincent as i thought , stood attentive to understand what exception any reader would take : and behold ▪ as there a shoomaker intruding himselfe among other spectators , and noting the fashion of the girdle in that picture to be amisse , was answered by that artist , ne sutor supra crepidam : even so hath one adventured to impute mis-allegations to that booke , in such manner , as deserving to be dismissed by the author in this sort , ne sciolus supra captum : the exceptions being such , that it may well be said of them ; the very repeating them is a refuting them , as some also have acknowledged . yet hath this beene of late , your onely manner of answering , although it be indeed but a meere tergiversation , that is , a shamefull flying all the forces of confutation of your romish masse ; as men in battell , seeking to evade , when they are in despaire to invade . the experience which i have had hereof , heretofore , may be to mee a ground of prophesie for the time hereafter , to wit , that no reall answer shall be had from any of you . and reall i call it , when res cum re , ratio cum ratione concertat , as tully speaketh ; but not that which is exercised onely in cavillation , about words and syllables . for were the exceptions now taken by your objector never so true , yet notwithstanding , what then would become of his cause ? but are they false ? what then shall wee thinke of his conscience ? let these two be put to the tryall . first , do you not know , that when two witnesses of ten are disabled , yet the other eight , remaining in the eye of justice untouched , and untainted , must carry the cause ? suppose therefore that those few exceptions , against my allegations , were true , yet how should five , or , if it were fifty erroneous citations prevaile against two thousand ( for i conceive they are no fewer ) other testimonies therein faithfully alleaged in the same booke ? whereby your ten romish transgressions against one command of christ [ do this , ] are abandoned ; your many romish depravations of the sense of the holy ghost , in those words of christ , [ this is my body ] are infringed ; the romish novelty of your doctrine of transubstantiation is discovered ; your sixe romish contradictions , against the truth of the bodily nature of christ , are confuted ; the romish capernaiticall eating of christs flesh is exploded ; and the romish sacrilegious sacrifice , together with her idolatrous worship in her masse , is irrefutably condemned . as for false imputations of falshood , as they must needs be damnable to the author , who accusing another in his owne guilt , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , condemneth himselfe , as the apostle teacheth : so , to the party unjustly taxed , it cannot be but matter of advantage and estimation ; for brazen plates , fixed on grave-stones , ( you know ) the more they are trod upon by mens dirty feet , the greater is their luster , and brightnesse , as soone as the dust is but blowne away . semblably the more the accusations be , which are unjustly charged upon any adversary , the more shall his reputation flourish , as soone as the fraud & falshood of the accuser shall be detected ; except it be among men that so stupifie their conscience , that they will not see even that which they see . such a one , of your owne order , some few moneths past , having onely so much modesty , as to conceale his own name , dehorted a knight by letters , from reading the observations , which i had concerning the masse , by putting him in minde of m. parsons booke of sober reckoning , objecting mis-allegations unto mee : but suppressing all mention and memory of my encounter , in answer unto him , by whom he was proved to be indeed but a drunken reckoner , yet not with wine , but with a farre worse spirit of lying , as your owne fellow priests will tell you , in the sequel of this discourse . another reason may be , the remembrance of those bookes of apologies , appeale , encounter , causa regia , which ( notwithstanding many promises , or rather threatnings of answering ) have laine still upon your hands ; beside the former booke of the romish grand imposture , which woundeth the very head of romish religion , concerning the church , even as this other doth strike at the fat belly thereof , your romish masse . so that this later booke may seeme to be secure , till that be first assaulted , seing that , by instinct of nature , every sensible creature is prone , above all parts of the body to defend the head . but principally am i confident , i shall have no other answer to this booke , except onely either a nihil dicit , or a nihil ad rem , not because it is my booke ( for i alas , i am but the collector , and composer ) but because it is yours , fighting against your romish masse , with your owne principles , conclusions , and confessions ; as also confronting you with your owne contradictions , absurdities , falsifications , and perjuries , ( bis perit , qui armis suis perit ) beside the evidences of scriptures and fathers , which are impreinable . all these are so many barracadoes , to hinder all approach , against the materialls of that booke . i may not conceale from you a riddle . it was but some few weekes since your foresaid lord intimated unto mee , that my booke of the masse is to be answered , and that he thought he could take that opponent off , for some time . my answer then was , that the dayes of my life could not be long , but whatsoever length of dayes god should give mee , i could not bestow it better than in defence of his truth , and therefore desired his l p to let the party whosoever take his course . howbeit the dog-trick , which once m. parsons plaid with mee , would not suffer me to give saith to that insinuation , who avouched in print , that my bookes of apologie were then in answerin● by a doctor , at gratz in austria , assigning also the time when it was to be published ; when as he , honest man , beleeved it not himselfe , but spake it onely by his equivocating spirit of mentall reservation ( being a great master in that blacke art himselfe ) and thereby hath taught me how to expound the words of this lord delivered unto mee . the booke ( saith hee ) will be answered ( reserving in his minde ) when yesterday shall be to morrow : & , a iesuite hath it in hand ( sub-understanding to burn it ; ) and that hee will goe thorough it ( bearing in his thought ) with an aule , or a needle : and , it will be a booke of some bignesse ( meaning ) mathematicall , and invisible . so that this your will-be is but that old lesson , learnt at rome , from the crow , which sitting on the top of tarpeys hill , cryed still 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , expounded by that poet , est quia non potuit dicere , dixit erit . i returne to your selves , lest that you may thinke this discourse to be tedious , know then that the lord , the opponent , will tell you a merry tale by the way ; nor may you thinke this rejoynder unnecessary , seeing that the lords reply hath already inveigled lords and ladies so farre , as to thinke his exceptions answerlesse . but be you ( beloved ) lovers of truth , from what organ soever it come , in whatsoever apparell it shall appeare . for , god is truth . thus writeth hee , who promiseth unto you certaine additionalls to the now impugned booke of the masse , of such requisite explanations , confutations , and corroborations , as will dispossesse , i hope , even the spirit of prejudice it selfe , out of every intelligent and conscionable reader , among you , as will shortly be published , if god permit . our lord jesus preserve us all to the glory of his saving grace . still your debter , t. d. the svmmary contents of this discharge , concerning the five allegations excepted against . the first false exception is made by a fraudulent omission of the particle [ &c. ] which particle evidently justifieth the allegation . num. 3. the second exception is objected with a triple falsity . i. it is objected that suarez is produced alone , to hold a senslesse body of christ : whereas suarez in the same place is alleaged to affirme the same , with many others . n. 49. ii. falsity is , in denying that suarez is rightly alleaged to say so , in respect of the naturall power of christ : albeit the very same words , according to his naturall power , be expresly alleaged . n. 50. iii. falsity , by imposing that contradiction on the b p : whereof he was but only the relater , and the church of rome it selfe the proper author . n. 52. the third false exception is objected with a double falsity . i. in making it an exception against mis-allegation , wherein there is no exception at all . ii. by confounding a cause ordinary , and extraordinary , together . n. 53. the fourth false exception is in objecting words , as alleaged out of bellar : which appeare by a divers and different character not to have beene cited out of bellarm. n. 54. the fift and last false imputation of mis-allegation , objected by two tricks of falsity , against the evident words of that allegation . num. 57. confuted from bellarmine . n. 58. the five former false exceptions retorted , for the justifying of the late treatise against the masse . n. 59. the contents of the reply , made in defence of the lords first exception , concerning his fraud of concealing the particle [ &c. ] seaven evasions made for the avoiding of that his owne ougly blot of falshood ; not without as many falsities , from num. 3. to 13. the contents , concerning eight tropes and figures in the words of christ his institution . in the first part of christ his speech , the word [ this ] is necessarily figurative . n. 17. and 43. ii. the word , breake , spoken of christ body , is necessarily figurative . num. 34. and the word , eate , num. 32. 34. and the word , given . num. 20. 21. and 22. in the second part of christs speech , the word , this , is necessarily figurative . num. 11. 13. and 28. ii. the word , cup . num. 10. 11. and 26. and the word , shed . num. 20. 22. 25 , and 26. and the word , testament , num. 10. 12. 13. and 26. and the word , drinke , spoken of christs blood in the romish sense . num. 35. the contents touching other points , in confutation of the reply . how the words [ this is my body ] are words of consecration . num. 11. and 24. that they are not romishly operative . n. 14. the replyers absurd reconciliation of the contradictions of romish doctors , by answering , that they differ onely in modo loquendi . num. 36. 37. his merry tale , num. 38. and miserable intanglement , in the application thereof . num. 39. the theoreme , symbolica theologia non est argumentativa , how to be understood . n. 43. s. augustine chosen vmpier , by consent , to decide the question concerning the sense of christs speech , whether it be figurative , or literall . num. 44. 45. that the exceptions , taken against the lo : bishop , doe much confirme the maine cause thorow out his booke of the masse . num. 59. the contents of an answer to a romish priest his late false imputation of mis-allegations ; by objecting the booke of m. parsons sober reckoning . m. parsons his art of passing by materiall points , which made against the romish positions , and practises . num. 60. hee was an elegant pen-man . num. 61. iudged by romish priests , because of his false dealing , unworthy to accuse another of falshood . num. 62. his ten apparently false imputations of mis-allegations . n. 63. his griefe before his death . n. 64. the popes proviso , in behalfe of romish clergy , making it almost impossible that any one shall be convicted of crimes . n. 65. the contents of the lay lords exceptions to the bitternesse of style ; expressed in five instances . in the first hee unwittingly condemneth the romish church of sacriledge and idolatry . num. 67. in the second hee is more offended with the appellations of vices , then with their vitiousnesse . num. 68. in the third hee wresteth metaphoricall termes to be literall , that hee might wring out of them some juice if bitternesse . num. 69. in the fourth , duly examined , he rathor justifies his adversary . num. 70. in the fift hee most odiously traduceth the lo : bishop , as if hee had accused all romish professors to be guilty of treason . num. 74. the lo : bishops expresse asseveration to the contrary . num. 74. 75 , unto num. 81. contents of other points annexed . examples of mansuetude objected , and answered . num. 71. 72. a distinction of bitternesse , medecinall , and vindicative . num. 73. the lo : barons accommodation to friendlinesse . num. 82. but yet his threatning the mischiefe of an vnruly pen. num. 83. the conclusion of all . nnm. 84. finis . faults escaped in some copies . pag. 16. lin . 5. read , lords suggest . p. 87. in marg . for num. 20. read , 26. p. 179. marg . * lin . 2. read , gavantius . besides there are some numbers omitted in the margent , opposite to the suggesters words : as , p. 118. adde num. 38. p. 161. adde , n. 49. p. 175. adde , n. 55. p. 205. adde , num. 61. p. 209. adde , n. 63. a discharge of the five imputations of mis-allegations charged upon the lo : bp. p. by an english baron . as also of his exceptions against the style . the l. baron his entrance . right honorable . i doe affirme , that i am not satisfied neyther in the bitternesse of your style , nor in the certainty of your allegations . the lord b ps . answer . and i denie ( right honourable ) that you have taken any just exception to either of both. but before i can procede , i shall crave a double courtesie of your lordship , one is , that since our greatest contention will be about figurative speeches of christ , concerning his words of institution of the sacrament of his body and blood ; i may have the liberty to use and practise a figure called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by only altering your method : satisfying , in the first place , your exceptions against the allegations ; and , afterwards , to give you an accompt , for the acerbity of the style . because every reader ( i suppose ) will rather affect materiall discussions , than verball skirmages ; and more especially , for that it will much more concerne me , to defend my integrity , in cyting my authors , than to secure my discretion , touching any aberration in style : for as much as every act of discretion dependeth upon seaven severall circumstances , wherein the breach of any one is accompted a full forfeiting of that which we call prudence , and discretion . in the second place , i intreat leave ( in the first part of this discharge ) to leave your lo pp : , that i may combate with your suggestor , because i shall be constrained , sometime , to make him know himselfe . thus much being obtained , let us two goe about our busines , he to his objections , and i to my retorsions . the first part of this discourse , which concerneth the allegations . the lords suggester . i say , i am not satisfied with the certainty of your allegations . the lord b ps . answer . and i can say , it had beene more for your credit , that you had been satisfied with the truth of those allegatiōs , than to prove your selfe , by your false criminatiōs ( as you must needs ) so luckless a man , that you can have no greater adversary than your selfe . the first principall exception against the allegations by the lords suggester ( in his letters ) as followeth . in your dedicatorie epistle you say that though your adversaries will not allow any trope to bee in those words of christ , hoc est corpus meum , yet ( whether they will or no ) they are forced to acknowledge in them sixe tropes ; which sixe tropes , though in the same place you quote them not , yet ( pag. 87. & 88. ) you alleadge them to bee ( bread ) ( eate ) ( given ) ( shed ) ( cup ) ( testament : ) which being all different words from those foure words of christ , ( hoc est corpus meum ) or ( this is my body ) i am not satisfied , that any of those authors , cyted by your lordship , have acknowledged any trope in those foure words ( this is my body . ) the lord b ps . answer , discovering the inexcusable falsehood of this first objection . if i had said simply , as is here affirmed , that your romish doctors confessed sixe tropes in those onely foure words of christ , [ hoc est corpus meum : this is my body ] i should have beene lesse satisfied , than either you ( my lord ) or yet any romish adversarie , and assuredly i should have plainely be-assed my selfe for so grosse a mistake ▪ but so far was i from that error , that contrarily my words ( as they are to bee seene in the dedicatorie epistle ) were , that our romish adversaries confessed sixe tropes in the words of christ , hoc est corpus meum , &c. that is , this is my body , &c. or , and so forth ; or , as if it had beene said , in the words following . now your suggestor , that hee might make me so absurdly false , as to have put the sixe confessed tropes in the compasse of these foure words , hath played me a fine tricke of legerdemaine , by concealing the particle &c. whereby the words following are necessarily implyed , and putting it up in his pocket . and for your lordship , after your often reading of that &c. so distinctly set downe , to connive at him in such a vile piece of conning ( i had almost said coozenage ) truly it was not honourably done . as for example , your lordship is catechising your sonne , saying , my sonne , remember you get by heart the twelve articles of your creed , i beleeve in god the father almighty , &c. by and by your suggester pulleth you by the sleeve , saying , o my lord , you told your sonne of twelve articles of the apostles creed ; and now you affirme that all the twelve articles are comprehended in these seaven words ; i beleeve in god the father almighty . so hee , leaving out the &c. what would your lordship say to such a stupid cavillation ? would you indure it ? yet is this just parallel to his first exception against mee . it is a vulgar opiniō to think that when one , being towards a journey , doth stumble upon the threshold in going out , it doth aboad but some ill luck : even so , what can this his first imputatiō of falsehood , being so false , else prognosticate , but that he will be foūd as faithlesse in all the rest ? neverthelesse , before i demostrate as much i shall desire no beleefe . but what now ? albeit this his falshood be thus transparent , that every abcdarian boy can see thorough it , by expounding the word , &c. yet notwithstanding , as if boldnesse and blindnesse had made a match or mariage together , hee , under your lordships owne hand , made a reply , seeking thereby to cover his former falshood with ( as it were net-worke ) the multiplication of many other open vntruths . the lords suggestor his reply , for covert of his former falsehood . whereas i had objected , that in your dedicatory epistle you shew that our writers , denying any trope to be in those foure words of christ , ( hoc est corpus meum ) are notwithstanding enforced to confesse sixe tropes in the same words ; which you say is vertigo mera : your answer is , that you expresly said , in the words of christ , hoc est corpus meum , &c. which ( &c. ) might have beene a wall of brasse to keepe mee from farther wandering , for that that particle ( &c. ) did not onely imply the words of consecration ( hic calix est testamentum in sanguine meo ) wherein the jesuites have confessed two tropes in one word ( testamentum ) but also it mett with bellarmines reasons , in defending the want of tropes in the words of institution ( because , saith hee , they are words of precept , words of doctrine , words of testament : ) who was therefore confuted in the words of christ ( bread ) ( breake ) ( given ) ( shed ) all tropicall , as is also confessed . the lord b ps answer , shewing the suggester his wilfulnesse in falsifying , in his first exception ; even from his owne confession . it is true that i answered so , & that truely , proving thereby the exception to have beene as wilfully false as if hee had professedly falsified : which furthermore appeareth thus ; hee saw , knew , and in his words in this place afterwards acknowledgeth , that i declared the sixe tropes then specified to consist in these words , brake , given , shed , drinke , cup , testament ; all which follow after the particle , &c. and therefore could hee not possibly conceive , that i meant they were comprehended in the foure words [ this is my body ] which goe before the same &c. no more than a man can imagine his own occiput , or nodle , being the hinder part of his head , can be said to be his nose , which standeth directly on his face . which yet is herein the more evident , because the word , &c. is , in its proper sense , as much as , in the words following ▪ even as properly , as if it had beene expresly delivered thus : there are sixe tropes in the words of christ his institution [ this is my body ] and in the words following , given for you , and the like . therfore i say truly , that that particle &c. might have beene unto my opponent as a wall of brasse , to keepe him from wandering , except he himselfe had a front of steele , as it seemeth hee had , when hee durst make any reply , in defence , of this his shamelesse falsity . but let us heare what hee can say . the lords suggestor his first evasion . to this i reply , that no catholike ever held , that there was no trope in christs words ( hoc est corpus meum ) with the addition of ( &c. ) the lo : b ps answer . call you this a reply ? as much as to say , no catholique ever held that there was no trope in that parable , the sower went out to sow his seed , with an &c. therefore , in this sentence of christ , there was no other trope implied in the word &c. as namely , way-side , stony , and thorny ground , & the like . if your suggester have no better skill to avoid his first foule blot of falshood , his game is desperate . let mee pose him ; either hee , in his first exception against that sentence , knew that &c. to imply other words following , or else hee held that it did not referre the reader to the other words following in the speech of christ. if hee held that the &c. did imply the words following , why then did hee conceale it ? if hee thought it did not , why did hee not confute it ? the first of these bewrayeth his fraud , the other his folly . and this his wilfull defence of his witlesse errour argueth his obstinacie . the lord suggester his second evasion . secondly , i say , that it is improper to adde an [ &c. ] to any sentence that carrieth a full sense it selfe , and is brought to a period . as for example : thou shalt not covet thy neighbours wife , nor his oxe , nor his asse , nor any thing that is his , &c. iohn was cloathed with camels haire , and he did eate locusts & wild honey , &c. teach all nations , baptizing them in the name of the father , and of the sonne , and of the holy ghost , &c. there be three that beare witnesse in earth , the spirit , the water , and the blood &c. these & very many more like places are in the scripture , where the particle [ &c ] being added , it would not onely be improper , but also would alter the sense of the holy ghost . the lord b ps . answer . nay , but if your l p : had not consulted rather with this suggester ( peradventure your ghostly father ) than with the holy ghost , you might have discerned two notable vntruths in this second evasion , the holy ghost it selfe in scripture being iudge . because , first , in the gospell , penned by the holy ghost , there is a prescript forme set downe of the lords prayer , whereof your l p : chancing to speake , saying , there be divers petitions therein , as for example , hallowed be thy name , [ &c ] your suggester , at the first hearing hereof , admonisheth you , saying , my lord , your l p : hath lost most of the petitions in your pater noster , because you have added an [ &c. ] to a full period of a speech , which carrieth a full sense in it selfe : and thereby have you altered the sense of the holy ghost . would your l p : admit of such a critick , and not reject him as a senslesse depraver of the sense of the holy ghost ? his second errour is , to think that the period of christs speech [ this is my bodie ] must necessarily be fixed at the word bodie : when as notwithstanding the relation , used by the euangelist s. luke , the scribe of the holy ghost , is otherwise ; luc. 22. 19. this is my body giuen for you . doe this in remembrance of mee . you see where the period is sett , and that the word , given , is inclosed within the list : which word , given , is afterward confessed to be tropicall ; and therefore overthroweth your conceit of a literall sense quite , as if no figuratiue word could be impailed within the periodicall sentence of christ. the lords suggester his third evasion . thirdly , those words of christ , which bellarmine , and other writers maintaine to be void of tropes , are set downe by bellarmine to be onely [ hoc est corpus meum . ] the lo : b ps answer . this is as truly false , as were the former , for bellarmine denies that there are tropes , not onely in these words [ this is my body . ] but also in these other , [ given ] and [ shed ] as your suggester knew to have beene cited by mee . booke 6. pag. 4. which maketh this his errour to be a wilfull falsity . the lords suggester his confirmation of the former evasion . and your selfe charge them with a vertigo mera , for that they banishing all tropes ab eisdem , do notwithstanding acknowledge sixe tropes : which you could not do with any colour , if they did not acknowledge those sixe tropes to be in eisdem : for no man can deny , that christ used divers tropes in other his speeches , though he used none in these . but no catholike writer doth acknowledge sixe tropes in eisdem . and now when i expected the proofe ▪ thereof , i am turned over to seeke it in the hidden construction of [ &c. ] the lo : b ps answer . and justly are you turned over to that [ &c. ] yet not as to a construction , which any can call hidden , that shall not suffer himselfe to be blind-folded by your suggester , who here againe doubleth his falshood , saying , that i alleaged those sixe tropes , confessed by romish authors to be in eisdē , that is , in the same foure words of christ [ this is my body ] simply ; whereas hee knoweth , and even now hath acknowledged , that it was in eisdem , that is , in the same words of christ , [ this is my body , &c. ] therefore not simply , but with an &c. whereby his wilfulnesse of falsifying is further detected . the lords suggester his fourth evasion . fourthly , although you alleage that christs words are [ hoc est corpus meum ] &c. yet seemeth it strange to mee , that all the sixe tropes , which you would prove , and which you say catholiques confesse , are smothered up in an [ &c. ] no one trope being by any catholike writer confessed , or by your selfe proved to be in christs words , [ hoc est corpus meum . ] the lo : b ps answer . here are but two vntruths in this one evasion , but i must needs say they are lowd and lewd ones ; first , to tell mee that i have not proved any one romish writer to have confessed any one trope in these words of christ , [ this is my body . ] the second is , that i my selfe have not confessed any trope in them . what not my selfe , s r suggester ? blush you not , who have read the booke 2. pag. 72. where , in the first section , there is a proofe specified in this speech of christ [ this is my body ] in two words , the pronoune [ this , ] and the verbe [ is. ] and divers pages following are spent wholly in proofe of both . his other assertion is , that no catholike ( meaning , romish writer ) hath beene alleaged to confesse any trope or figure in these words of christ , [ this is my body . ] so he , although knowing right well , that i produced ( booke 2. pag. 88. ) your romish glosse , authorized by pope greg. 13. ( which therefore ought to be of equall estimation with many romish doctors put together ) which glosse saith : this sacrament is called the body and blood of christ improperly , so that the sense is , this signifieth christs body . which is the proper and expresse language of us protestants . besides , in the booke 2. pag. 78. the title of a section is this : that the pronoune , [ this ] in these words [ this is my body , ] is tropicall ; which i proved out of your romish doctors , by an induction of the divers senses of the word , this : which , whether it demonstrated bread , or body of christ , or individuum vagum , yet every way is the sense improper and figurative . in the first , by the confessions of doctors on all sides . in the second , by the confession of divers romanists , which called that sense absurd . in the third , by other romish authors , who condemne this , as being full of absurdities . and all were discussed at large in my booke 2. cap. 1. & 2. in five full leaves ; yet your suggester shameth not to deny all this . it may be your lordship is , by this time , ashamed of your proctor . the lords suggester his fift evasion . bvt in your letter you say , that that particle ( &c. ) doth imply the other words of consecration , [ hic calix est testamentum in sanguine meo : ] in which you say our iesuites confesse two tropes . to this my fift replication is , that it seemeth strange to mee , that in your letter you affirme that these words of christ [ hic calix est testamentum in sanguine meo ] are the other words of consecration ; which doth inferre that christs words [ hoc est corpus meum ] are also words of consecration of the sacrament , under the species of bread. which point in your booke page 7. & 8. you deny , charging the romane masse to have changed christs manner of consecration , by attributing consecration to christs words ( this is my body : this is my blood , ) where you indeavour to prove both by reasons and witnesses , produced out of a booke of the arch-bishop of caesarea , that the consecration , used by our saviour , was performed by his blessing by prayer , which preceded the pronunciation of these words , [ hoc est corpus meum . ] and page 11. you say directly , that these words of christ are not the words of blessing and consecration : and the like sayings you have in other places of your booke . the lo : b ps . answer . it seemeth strange to this my adversary , that i have contradicted my selfe . is not this kindly spoken , and to my credit ? but to the matter . i thinke it not strange in him , who hath beene deprehended in so many falsities already , that he should not deale ingenuously in this . for in my booke , writing professedly upon the words of consecration , i proved exactly out , of the confession of the arch-bishop of caesarea , that those words [ this is my body ] are not properly the words of consecration : but in my letters to your lordship , speaking but obitèr of them , i called them words of consecration , by that liberty of schooles , dato & non concesso ; than which what kinde of speech can be more familiar among men ? one is to pay unto your lordship twenty pounds , and in tendering the payment unto you , saith , there is here ( my lord ) sixteen pounds in silver , & foure pounds in good gold : upon tryall , the gold is found to be counterfait , yet the man is instant , saying againe and againe , the gold is good : and your lordship perceiving his pertinacie , saith unto him , friend , as for your good gold , take it to your selfe , and pay me my money in silver . now commeth your suggester upon you , saying , this is strange my lord ; you said once that the gold was counterfait , and therefore refused it , and now you will call it good gold . just so dealeth your suggester with me , who called these words [ this is my body ] words of consecration , only in imitation of the romish phrase , and not in approbation thereof . but of this more hereafter . yet now what is all this to the point in question ? ( which is ) why your suggester did so fraudulently conceale the particle [ &c ] when he made his first exception against me ? just as if a man , being questioned for having found about him some hidden , and concealed , stolne stuffe , should by way of digression turne his talk to another matter , telling that it seemeth strange unto him that this his examiner ( the justice of peace ) had bound over to the assizes three of the most honest men in the parish . whether this evasion could satisfie for this mans false concealement of his theft , your lordship may judge . the lords suggester his sixt evasion . also i say , that if ( &c ) point to these other words of consecration , [ hic calix est testamentum in sanguine meo : ] and that catholikes confesse some of the sixe tropes to bee in these words : my answere is , that these words , and those other words of christ [ hoc est corpus meum ] are not the selfe-same words , though they both belong to the sacrament ; yet they doe not belong both to one and the same species : so as if any catholike have confessed a trope in [ hic calix est testamentum in sanguine meo : ] yet having not confessed any one trope in [ hoc est corpus meum ] they are unjustly charged with a vertigo , for having confessed sixe tropes in eisdem . the lo : b ps . answer . but seeing that contrarily i have proved from the confession of romish doctors ( as you have heard already ) a trope in eisdem , viz. the same words of christ [ this is my body , ] although other of them deny to admit any trope therein , therefore have not i unjustly imputed a vertigo , or spirit of giddinesse unto them . but your suggester ( as one transported with a worse spirit of falsity ) denyeth that i had proved a confessed trope in eisdem , namely , in the very words in question [ this is my body : ] even as he doth , in saying , if any have confessed any trope to be in the words [ hic calix est testamentum &c. ] if any ( saith he ) as if this could be doubted by any , which afterwards the suggester himself confesseth to be true . what disease will you call this ? but he addeth a reason , why i , saying that there were confessed tropes in christs words [ this is my body ] &c. the particle [ &c. ] could not imply the same ; which you call your consecrating words , [ this is my body : ] because ( good my lo : marke his reason ) although they belong both to the same sacrament , yet they belong not to the same species . so he. would this man ( thinke you ) have dealt so with the rankest begger that walketh in the streets ? a poore man being asked , how many colours ▪ he hath in his patched cloake ? sixe , master , saith hee , black &c. meaning other five colours , blue , white , russett , red , greene . soft man , saith your suggester , that [ &c. ] ( or , so forth ) could not imply those other colours , after spoken of , because they differ in specie , that is , are colours of divers sorts . witlesse ! the lords suggester his last evasion . the seaventh reason , why catholikes deny any trope to bee in [ hoc est corpus meum ] or in [ hic est sanguis meus ] and yet may perhaps cōfesse that in strict construction there may bee some trope in [ hic calix est novum testamentum in sanguine meo ; ] — the lo : b ps . answer . there are three patches in this last peece of this the suggesters reply , which i will deliver distinctly . the first is in saying , that romish writers may perhaps cōfesse that in strict construction there may be some trope in [ hic calix est novum testamentum in sanguine meo : this cup is the new testament in my blood ; ] although he knew that in my treatise ( book 2. pag. 87. ) i proved that these two words , cup , and testament , are to be improperly and tropically understood , by the confession ( first ) of your learned bishop iansenius : these words , cup , and , testament ( saith he ) cannot be properly taken in that speech of christ [ this cup is the new testament in my blood ; ] whether the cup be taken for the vessell used for drinking , which was a temporall thing , and therefore could not be the testament of christ , which is aeternall : or else whether it be taken for the matter in the cup , for it being the cup of the new testament , could not be the blood it selfe ; so he . next was the confession of the ies : salmeron ( in the same page ) the cup being taken for the thing contained in the cup : and , testament , for the legacie given by testament . to whom was added the ies : barradius , confessing that , in the word , testament , there is a figure . all these were then , in your suggesters knowledge , most certaine ; and yet he now , playing the lame giles , commeth here halting in , saying , perhaps some of our chatholikes confessed , in a strict construction , some trope . there may bee some trope in these words . againe , you may marke how gingerly he treadeth his maze ; he admitteth that they confesse some trope , he saith not some tropes , although three tropes were confessed therein ; and that not onely in a strict construction , as hee would have it , but upon a necessary explanation . will your lordship bee pleased to put him in minde of his so many and manifest collusions . the lords suggester , touching the romish words of consecration . — though both these places be in the scripture , & are both belonging to the sacrament , is , for that the first of them ( meaning , hoc est corpus meum ) are all of them words of consecration , and practicall , effecting what they say ; and that none of them can be wanting , all being necessary to the making of the sacrament : but in the latter words , neither calix , nor testamentum are the necessary words of consecration , or the forme of the sacrament , seeing the sacrament may bee without them . the lo : b ps . answer . his first assertion is , that the words , [ this is my body , and , this is my blood ] are words of consecration , and practicall , effecting that which they say : and so , indeed , your romish church teacheth , meaning thereby an operative power of transsubstantiating bread into the body of christ. but now must i intreate your l pp : to looke to the tenor of christs speech , according to all the 3 euangelists , and st. paul himselfe , in relating the other words of christ his institution ; and you shall finde that the thing , whereof they say [ this is my blood ] is spoken expressely of the cup , or chalice , [ this cup is my blood . ] so then you are to chuse , whether you will think that by these your consecrative words , effecting that which they say , the cup it selfe be converted into the blood of christ : or rather to acknowledge , in these your consecrative words , a figurative sense . secondly , he affirmeth that in the other words [ this cup is the new testament in my blood ] neither the word , cup , nor the word , testament , are the words of consecration , or belonging to the forme of this sacrament . then ( say i ) must hee confesse , that the romish new forme of consecration is not necessary , wherein the word , calix , cup , is expresly set downe , thus : hic est calix sanguinis mei : this is the cup of my blood . where , by the way , your romish church is to be challenged for an innovation , in that which shee holdeth to be a fundamentall point in her masse , which is her forme of consecration , differing from all other formes , and tenors either in scripture , or in any ancient tradition of primitive antiquitie . tell us againe , if the consecrating words [ this is ] are indeed practicall , effecting that which they say , [ this is the cup , or chalice ] then your priest saying , this is a cup , at every romish masse , doth thereby make a materiall cup , or chalice . ponder these things ( my lo : ) and see whether you can disgest your romish doctrine ; if you can , then , o dura ilia ! must i say . thus hath your lo : heard the divers evasions , used by your suggester , each whereof ignorance begot , and folly brought out ; to wit , a child altogether after the image and likenesse of both its parents , as can be ▪ of the sixe tropes , in christs words of institution , objected by the lo : bishop , in confutation of the romish doctrine . the lords suggester his preface to his owne reply hereunto , by his first evasion . bvt now to come to these sixe words , which you say are ( and would make us to confesse to be tropicall ) it is first to be understood as graunted , ( for that it cannot be denyed ) that they must be christs words ( who onely had power to institute a sacrament . next , that they must be such onely words of christ , as were spoken by him to the end to institute , or consecrate this sacrament : for otherwise no man denyeth but that christ spake many things in parables , and figures . the question is not whether s t paul , saying that they that eate it unworthily do eate their damnation , spake figuratively ; or whether christ , saying it is the spirit that quickeneth , the flesh profiteth nothing , spake figuratively . the lo : b ps answer . your l p : perceiveth right well , what is exacted of mee : be as willing ( i pray you ) to heare what i answer ; ( namely ) first , if i have not proved a figurative sense in both these speeches of christ , viz. [ this is my body : and , this is my blood : ] next , if i furthermore have not shewne the sixe tropes , now in question , to be found by the confession of romish doctors in the other words of christs institution , then let mee be held utterly unable , and unworthy to give your l p : any satisfaction . proceed wee to the tryall . the lords suggester his second evasion . for if wee shall prove that those words of christ , whereby hee instituted and consecrated this sacrament , were not tropicall , but reall , and to be understood literally , then your accusation of our men , confessing tropes in christs other words , though you could make it good , yet were it to no purpose . the lo : b ps answer . your suggester knew , doubtlesse , it was to good purpose , to prove that there were divers tropes in other words of christs institution , besides these two , which you call consecratory , which are [ this is my body , and , this is my blood , ] even because they directly repulse the answer of your great achilles card : bellarmine ; who , for defending these now-mentioned speeches of christ , [ this is my body , and , this is my blood ] from being tropicall , maintained that all speeches testamentary , doctrinall , and of command , and precept , ought to be proper and literall . whereby hee could not meane onely the words , which you call consecratory , [ this is my body : this is my blood ] because these are not words of command at all , such as are , eate yee , drinke yee , and notwithstanding are tropicall : and the other words , given , shed , are both as doctrinall as are your said consecratory speeches of christ , and neverthelesse confessed by your doctors to be tropicall . yea and those same words , cup , testament , albeit they be both as testamentary , as are your supposed consecratory sayings of christ , are yet also judged by them to be tropicall . all these were proved , booke . 2. pag. 96. whereby your cardinals defence is utterly overthrowne , as you know ; yet dares your suggester face it out , saying , that this is to no purpose . the shackles , which the lords suggester draweth upon his owne heeles , by his voluntary promise . bvt if these words of christ , alleaged by your selfe , booke 2. pag. 71. viz. [ this is my body : this is my blood ] are confessed by our men to be necessarily figurative , then will i not onely confesse that you have rightly condemned our writers of a vertigo , but also confesse that i am satisfied in this point , and acknowledge my former errour . the lo : b ps answer . if this could be a satisfaction to your suggester , then might he have beene twice satisfied already , out of the booke 2. pag. 72. where the title of the sect : is set downe in these words ; that a figurative sense is in these words of christ , [ this is my body : ] from the principles of romish schooles . which was also performed , by proving a figure in the pronoune , this , in the same speech of christ [ this is my body : ] which word , this , ( by confession on both sides ) must relate either to christs body , or to a common substance , called individuum vagum , or else to the word bread. but , by the confession of your owne doctors , the pronoune , this , could not properly demonstrate christs body , because ( by your romish doctrine ) christs body , at the pronunciation of the word , this , was not yet present in the sacrament . neither could it properly betoken your individuum vagum , or confused substance , because ( by the confession of others ) that sense is full of absurdities . lastly , if it should betoken bread , as to say , this bread is my body , then ( say they , with unanimous voices ) it is impossible not to be tropicall ; even as well as when it is said , this egge is a stone , or , this man is an asse . which point may be more emphatically confirmed by the other words , which you call consecratory , [ this is my blood : ] where the pronoune , this , relateth to the cup , wheresoever that speech of christ is recorded in scripture , matt. 26. 27. and mar. 14. thus [ he tooke the cup and gave it ( the cup ) to them , saying , drinke ye all of this , ( viz. cup ) for this ( namely still , cup ) is my blood . and luke cap. 22. and s. paul. 1. cor. 11. rehearse christs words thus : [ this cup is the new testament in my blood . ] so that the word , this , pointeth out alwaies the cup. but the cup cannot properly be called christs blood , nor possibly be changed into his blood , as all the world of divines have alwaies confessed . our second proofe was founded upon your churches confession , in her publique and priviledged glosse , expresly saying , that these words [ this is my body ] are improperly taken , meaning , this signifieth my body , as was set down booke 2. pag. 88. now that your suggester should here desire of mee to be satisfied , by letters , in that which formerly he received in print ; it argueth either a cheating concealment of that proofe , or else a doggish appetite , which will never be satisfied . the lo : bishops conclusion , upon the premises . all that your suggester hitherto hath done , is ( as your l p : may perceive ) for saving his first desperate blot of untruth , in concealing that particle [ &c ] that so hee might more eagerly charge me with falshood ; and after ( in defence of his deceitfulnesse ) huddle and multiply seaven more untruthes , which have beene particularly discovered in these his former seaven evasions , now already specified : wherein , as a man ready to sinke into the water , he catcheth at each thing about him , be it reed , rush , or very shadow , to save himselfe from drowning , but all in vaine . even so hath he , being unable to make any solid defence , snatched onely at mere fancies , void of all semblance of truth . perswade him ( i pray you ) that leaving all further prefacing , he would come to the tropes , now in question . particularly now of the sixe tropes , confessed to be in the words of christs institution of the sacrament of his blessed body and blood. the lords suggester . the sixe words , which our men ( as you affirme ) confesse to be tropicall , are [ given , shed , cup , testament , bread , eate . ] the lo : b ps answer . although these sixe were most precisely mentioned , yet were the other tropes , concerning those other words [ this is my body , ] and , [ this is my blood ] as exactly discussed , and proved to be likewise tropicall . the lords suggester his maligne suspicion . bvt if you hold that christ made no new testament , which you give some occasion to suspect , by the great esteeme and approbation you make in very many places in your booke of calvin , and beza , and their writings ( for which i am very sory ) then must i confesse that i am not satisfied therein . for calvin , and beza , and all other calvinists , that i have read , doe maintaine that there is but one testament ; and by consequent no new testament . the lo : b ps answer . it had beene better you had first suspected your own judgment ( friend suggester ) then either to grieve at my approbation of the writings of calvin and beza , or yet to taxe them of errour in this case . for the first , i would know among which kinde of men you wil be reckoned , i mean of those , who are likewise sorry ; whether among thē , who never read calvin , or beza ; or them who have read , & did not understand thē ; or else of them ( who are the worst sort of malignants ) who knowing their orthodoxe meanings , do not withstanding traduce them , as you have done . else shew , if you can , where they have denyed that there are two testaments , distinctly differing from each other , in their immediate subject : the immediate subject of the old testament being blessings , earthly & temporal , as the land of canaan , and the outward temple of jerusalem ; albeit remotely these were types of the immediate subject of the new testament , namely , of blessings spirituall and eternall , as the heavenly canaan , and ierusalem which is above ( saith the apostle ) the mother of us all . which spirituall and eternal , notwithstanding , are typically the subject of the old testament , figuratively comprehended therein . this doctrine is so far from all suspition of error , that it confuteth the iewish , and other hereticall opinions to the contrary . when will this man leave his quarrellous ambages , and returne to the matters in question ? of the first two of these tropicall words of christ his institution , [ given , and shed . ] the lords suggester his first evasion . now as concerning these words [ given and shed ] you alleage page 87. valent. for one , and salmeron for the other , as if they had said they were meerely tropicall : valent. saying of [ body given for you ] that is , which shall be offered for you on the crosse. and salmeron of this word , [ shed , ] saying , that it was so said , because it was very shortly after to be shed on the crosse. confirming that his exposition , for that it is not denyed , but that it is the manner of scripture to speake of a thing , as now done , which is after to be done . to this i reply , first that your quotation is but of one author only ▪ for either of these proofes , which doth not satisfie your assertion in your epistle , where you say thus ▪ in christs sacramentall words , or words of institution , adversarii nostri tropos sex , velint nolint , coguntur agnoscere , as if all , or the greater part of catholikes held it . the lord b ps . answer . this man ( the suggester , i meane ) hath so enured himselfe to falsifying , that he can hardly speake a truth . the first reply is to perswade a lord , that i had but two romish doctors , to witnesse , that when christ said [ this is my body , given for you ] he meant , given shortly after his death on the crosse , by a figure called enallage . and when he said , [ this is my blood , shed for you ] he had the same meaning , of being to bee shed at his passion : and that i had not the greater part of their doctors to verifie my words , when i said , adversarii nostri confitentur , our adversaries confesse . which is an unjust reckoning , because although ( book 2. pag. 87 ) i used the testimonies but of two ; yet booke 6. pag. 6. i produced a witnesse without all exception , even your learned bishop iansenius , testifiing that in these words of christ [ this is my blood , shed for you ] by the word , shed , is commonly understood ( saith he ) the future time , when it was to be shed upon the crosse. where the common understanding ( you know ) is equivalent with greater part . his second aberration is , that whereas one iesuite attributed one trope , or figure , to the word [ given , ] another iesuite noted the same figure in the word [ shed ; ] there being an equall propriety of speech in either . your suggester holdeth it an incongruity of speech , in me , to say , adversarii nostri , our adversaries hold tropes ; how then will hee give your lordship leave to affirme , saying of those two men ( who should have your lordship in suit of law ) my adversaries have suits against me ; but judge this terme of speech to be but a soloecisme ? the lords suggester his second evasion . secondly i say , that admitting these sayings of valent. and salmeron for sufficient , to prove that they may be , or are extended to the future time of the crosse , yet neither of them denyeth these words to be spoken in the present time of the sacrament : which unlesse they deny , they are here alleaged to small purpose . the lord b ps . answer . then belike your suggester doth conceive , that your jesuites to say , that a verb [ given ] being properly of the future time . i. shall be given , could likewise as properly signifie the present time , is given . but sooner shall he himselfe be able at once to looke up to heaven with one eye , and downe with the other , than finde this his conceit fancyed by any author that ever knew his grammar ; and yet will this sophister adventure to make it good . the lords suggester , alleaging the vulgar latine translation . and that this is no new invention of ours , our latine text doth plainely shew , where wee use both the present , and the future tense . the lo : b ps answer . yes ; an invention ( i dare say ) new , and never heard of , before now that this suggester hath vented it out , in an imaginary flash , against common sense . the latine translation useth , indeed , both tenses , given , in the present tense , and shed , in the future : but doth use neither of them both in two different senses properly ; to tell us that , given , being properly of the present tense , hath the proper sense also of the future . the like may bee said of the word , shed . how is not this fellow afraid to make your latine translation to be more absurd than indeed it can be , especially he himselfe ( if he be a priest ) being sworne to the authority thereof ? if rules faile , hee will trie what hee can worke by an example ; a very rare one i must needs say , and without any other example . the lords suggester his notable example . as if i had said , i doe give an hundred pound pension , and i will give it , the future promise doth not diminish the present gift ; much lesse in this , where the future promise is but a collection , but the present gift is certaine . the lo : b ps . answer . this suggester is somewhat confused , i may not suffer him to doe his acts in tenebris . but yet because here is an example of giving so large and honourable a pension of an hundred pounds , i will by your good licence ( my lord ) apply my selfe in some part to your lordship ▪ be it then that you say you do give , or that you will give an hundred pound pension to a man , i say , it is bountifully said , and like an honourable lord : but our question is not meerely of the different tenses , but of the different senses of [ i give , ] and [ i will give , ] in their proper and severall significations , being spoken of the same thing . hearken therefore , if you please : when you say [ i give ] thee this hundred pounds , and in so saying give it him , then the sense of the future tense , [ i will give it ] is false and superfluous ; because it cannot properly be said to bee given hereafter , which is already given . and if you say , [ i give it him ] in a future signification , meaning that you [ will give it hereafter , ] then was your other words , [ i give it him ] unproper and figurative ( the present tense being put for the future : ) or else you must confesse it was false , and you did but equivocate with him , by promising to give that which you meant not , for you gave him but words . but will you say that in both these speeches [ i give ] and [ i will give ] you speake properly ? take heed ( my lord ) for so , after that you have given an hundred pounds in present , saying , i give ; you are further tyed by your other saying [ i will give , ] to give him another hundred more , to make good your promise . is not your l pp : beholding to your suggester for this piece of service , which he hath done for you , by the rarity of his wit , quasi , without it ? the lords suggester his third evasion , by a plaine paradoxe . thirdly , i say that those words are neither christs sacramentall words , nor his words of institution , ( whereby hee instituted the sacrament ) as you call them pag. 88. nor his words of consecration , which your selfe in your letter doe rightly terme true consecratory words . the lo : b ps . answer . how i called those words [ this is my body , ] words of consecration , without any contradiction to my selfe , or advantage to your romish cause , i have made manifest already . for this present , i am to discover his paradoxe in this , that he denyeth the words , given , and shed , to be sacramentall words . this i call a new invention , indeed , and an egregious paradoxe , because you shall never be able to produce any writer , among your romish professors , who hath not acknowledged these words , blessing , breaking , given , ( spoken on christs part ) to signifie sacramentall acts. or yet these words , take yee , eate yee , drinke yee , to be sacramentall precepts , on the receivers part . or these words , [ body given , and blood shed , ] to be sacramentall narrations , betokening the thing mystically offered ; as well as these words , doe this in remembrance of mee , to be sacramentall explications of the use and end of this sacrament ; and all these sacramentalls to belong to christ his institution . i beleeve your suggester his dispaire , to shew the contrary , in any romish writer , will never permit him to make tryall hereof . the lords suggester his fourth evasion . fourthly i say , that your selfe both pag. 87. but especially pag. 7. in the 6. booke affirme that these words [ given , and shed ] are to be understood in the future tense , as relating to the crosse , but not to the sacrament : and so though some of our men doe imagine tropes in them , yet being denyed to appertaine to the sacrament , they cannot be in the number of eisdem , and so make nothing to the matter in hand ; neither can a vertigo bee imputed to our men , that they acknowledge a trope in them . the lo : b ps answer . some of your romish doctors undertooke to prove , that the words , given , and shed , are properly taken for the present time ; as your card : bellarmine , with some others have done , as was shewne booke 6. pag. 4. and 5. and are contradicted by others , who have testified that the opinion of your doctors is , to interpret them to signifie the offering up of his body , and shedding his blood afterwards on the crosse , as your l p : was taught even now . therefore the vertigo was not unjustly imputed to our romish adversaries , one side denying , and another affirming two tropes to be in these two words of christs institution , given , and shed . and if your suggester saw not thus much , you may justly suspect that his head was troubled with the same disease . of the tropes in the the next two words , cup , and testament . the lord suggester his notably false , yet most peremptory assertion , and evasion . as for the words , cup , and testament , i answer , as i did to the former ; first , that the authors , by you cited , are too few for you to ground your accusation against adversarij nostri , who are many hundred thousands , upon the opinion of so fewe . the lo. b ps answer . the authors , whom i produce to prove that , cup , by a figure , was taken for the matter contained in the cup ; and the word , testament , by another trope , taken for the legacie given by testament , were three , viz. your bishop iansenius , salmeron , and barradius ; the two last being both iesuites . and if three persons be not so farre plurall , as to be called adversarij in the plurall number , i know neither greeke , latine , nor english grammar . but these ( saith the suggester ) are but few , and there are many hundred thousands of the contrary opinion . this is that which i have called an assertion no lesse false then peremptory , as will now appeare . the l. bishops second answer , concerning the suggesters prodigious peremptorinesse . what ? an hundred thousand authors granting in these words of christ [ this is my blood shed for you ] that the word , shed ( spoken of christ at his last supper ) hath the sense of the present time ? never was there any bayard more bold in his leape , than this suggester hath beene lavish in this his asseveration ; seeing that it may be rather affirmed , that your romish doctors , were they a thousand thousand , discussing this point , would sweare that the word , shed , properly taken , could not be understood of the time of christ his instituting this sacrament . the reason may be this , dici de , sequitur in esse in , that is to say , never can any thing be affirmed properly of that , which properly is not . but the blood of christ was not properly shed at the time of his supper : therefore is it impossible to affirme truly , that this is properly said to have beene shed . harken in the first place to your great oracle bellarm : delivering his judgement in this point ( whose sentence i alleged , book 6. p. 8. ) the blood of christ ( saith hee , speaking of the time of the sacrament ) doth not passe out of his body . whereas christ ▪ ( saith your alfonsus ) once shed his blood upon the crosse , hee is never to shed it any more : whereby it is proved also , his true blood never to be any where without his body . our third witnesse was your ies. coster , thus : christ ( saith hee ) suffered a true effusion , or shedding of blood upon the crosse , his blood being separated from his body : but here ( namely in the sacrament ) is onely a representation of his blood. so hee . to reduce these confessions into forme of arguing . wheresoever there is a true effusion , or shedding of blood , there is a separation of blood from the body . but christ , neither at the time of instituting this sacrament , nor yet after his resurrection , had any true separation of blood from his body . ergo , hee had not either then , or after , any true and proper shedding of blood . and consequently cannot his blood be said properly to be shed in this sacrament . where now will your suggester finde out one of ten thousand men , who will deny this consequence ? if he himselfe can but imagine thus much , i , for my part , shall never envy him the property of a vertiginous man. the lords suggester his second evasion . secondly , i say that neither ( calix ) nor ( testamentum ) though they may in some sense be called sacramentall words : yet can they not be called the sacramentall words : for that the sacrament may be without them , and so are not in the number of eisdem . the lo : b ps answer . the suggester will be still idem in eisdem , that is , absurdly superfluous , as i have proved evidently already . that which wee are taught of him here , is , that these words cup , and testament , although they be sacramentalls , yet are they not to be called the sacramentals . o most excellent subtilty ! whereby this mans hands and legges , in like manner , although they be called corporall parts of his body , yet may not one say , that they are the corporall parts of his body . the latine translation useth indeed both tenses , [ datur ] given , in the present tense , and [ effundetur ] shed , in the future ; but it doth use neither of them both singly , in two different senses ; as to tell us , that given , being of the present tense , hath the sense also of the future : or that shed , being rendred in the future tense , hath likewise the sense of the present time . for to conceive two literall senses of one and the same words , as to say [ is shall be ] is as absurd in grammar , as to affirme out of the sea-card of one and the same winde , that it stands north-south . if rules faile , he will trie what hee can worke by examples . the lords suggester his objecting of the plaine speeches of the euangelists . besides , it is a maxime in divinity , that the obscure texts of scripture are to be expounded by those texts that are plaine and easie to be understood . but the words of s t matthew , and s t mark [ this is my blood ] is much more plaine than [ this chalice is the testament in my blood. ] and therefore ought to be , and are preferred by all antiquity before the other words of s t paul. and now to lay aside those plaine words of s. matthew and s. marke , and to entertaine those other words of s. paul , onely because they are more subject to cavills , and to figurative expositions , is nodum in scirpo quaerere . the lord b ps . answer . the maxime is most true , but this application , as if s. matthew , or s. marke would relieve him , to prove a literall sense in these words [ this is my blood ] is as untrue : because ( as hath beene said ) s. matthew , and s. marke both are as plaine for an unproper sense , as either s. luke , or . s. paul could be . for the speech of christ , in s. matthew , and s. marke , standeth thus ▪ hee tooke the cup , and when he had given thankes he gave it , ( viz. the cup ) unto them , saying , drinke you all of this , ( namely , cup , ) for this ( sc. cup ) is my blood . inasmuch therefore as this cup was that which christ called his blood , which cup ( as you have heard , booke 2. pag. 79. from the confessed maxime of maximes ) can no more properly be called christs blood , than ( according to your owne example ) a man can properly be termed an horse : therefore must the pronoune , this , signifie the matter in the cup , as the sacrament of christs blood ; and therefore sacramentally called his blood. wherefore can hee not justly say , that i have sought a knot in a rush , but rather this mans objection is not worth a rush. the lords suggester his foule intanglement . thirdly i say , that the custome of speech , where , by the word ( cup ) the liquor contained in the cup is of every man understood ; and by the word ( testament ) is meant that act or deed , whereby the covenant , or testament is given or confirmed , is so commonly and so usually understood of all men , that he would be thought to be rather the figure of a man , then a man that should now deny them to be allowed for direct speeches . in matter of philosophy , consuetudo est altera natura ; in the law , consuetudo facit jus ; and consuetudo legi quandoque praejudicat : shall wee say that hee writeth not good french , who writeth est for et , and en for an ? or that hee writeth not good english who , for liege people , writeth liege people ? the lo : b ps answer . it is a jolly matter to see a man turne to his wits againe . the suggester saith ( as well as can be wished ) that it is now plaine , that the word , cup , is put for the liquor in the cup : whereby is confessed that it is plainly a figurative speech ; as when one saith to his friend , sir , take you my purse to keepe , meaning , the money in his purse . such speeches may wee allow to be current , but yet not to be direct speeches , as the suggester would have it . but will it please your l p : to aske of your suggester , upon this confession , what is become of that your suggester , who talked even now of an * hundred thousand , who denyed any trope in the words , cup , or testament , against the opinion of some few ; and was encountred with a greater number than hee brought , and is now confounded by his owne contradiction ? where is the vertigo now , my lord ? his quaint crotchet of peeple and people , though peradventure it be applauded by you , or some ignorant people , yet cannot be but hissed at by any of sound judgement ; because in our question , concerning the word , cup , ( the word , cup , being put for the liquor in the cup ) it doth necessarily vary the sense : because the cup is no more the liquor in the cup , than the liquor in the cup can be properly called the cup. but whether the word be written peeple , or people , it altereth not the sense of the word , and is therefore senselesly applyed to our question concerning the cup. and now i will requite him with as delicate a conceit out of your romish schooles . it is disputed , concerning the conversion of the bread into the body of christ , thus . * it is like as when it is said of the grammarians ( meaning some of your doctors ) that the letter , a , is changed into the letter , e ▪ as when ago in the present tense is made egi in the preter-tense . this must needs be a dainty to your suggester , my lord ; much good may it doe him . of the trope , in the word , bread . the lords suggester . as concerning the word , bread , i answere briefly , that neither did christ use that word in the institution of the sacrament , neither doe you alleage any author of ours , for to prove it to be figurative . that place in the sixt of s t. john , by you cited , your selves acknowledge not to belong to this sacrament : and the other place , by you cited , out of the 10. ch. of 1. cor. 10 your selfe acknowledge to be spoken of the mysticall body of christ , which is his church . neither are those words christs , but s t. pauls , who could not institute a sacrament ; so as this word , bread , is not to bee brought within the compasse of your , ( &c. ) the lo : b ps . answer . who can deny , when it is said by the three euangelists , as well as by s. paul , that iesus tooke bread , and blessed it , but that which he blessed was made a sacrament ; and that which he blessed , the text saith , was bread ? in the next place he would perswade your lordship that i proved not the speech of christ , in calling bread his bodie , to be figurative , out of your romish doctors ; notwithstanding that ( booke 2. page 75. unto 82. ) divers leaves were spent in the proofe only of this . his third untruth is , by intimating that i proved not this out of s. paul to the corinthians , but only spake of bread , mentioned 1. cor. 10. which speech of bread , there signifieth only the mysticall body of christ , which is his church ; albeit ▪ i directly insisted upon that of 1. cor. 11. where bread is so called after consecration , not only bread , but also bread broken , to signifie christs naturall body crucified upon the cross. ( see book 3. pag. 133. ) and yet behold another lavish untruth of this unconscionable suggester . neither doe you ( saith he , speaking of protestants ) acknowledge the word , bread , to belong unto the sacrament . why man ? all protestants teach and professe bread and wine consecrated to bee the sacrament it selfe , & call them both , the sacrament of the body and blood of our lord. how then possibly should they not acknowledge them both to belong unto the sacrament ? as circumcision of the flesh was called the covenant . in the forme of baptisme , [ i baptize thee in the name of the father , sonne , and holy ghost ] the word , water , is not mentioned ; will the obstinacie of this man say , that therefore water belongeth not unto the sacramēt of baptisme ? or that it is not indeed the sacrament ? against that generall definition of a sacrament set downe by s. augustine , and retained in your schooles , a sacrament is a visible signe of an invisible grace . so is water , in baptisme , a visible signe of the purgation of the soule , by grace of the remission of sinne ; and so are bread and wine visible signes of christs body crucified , and blood shed for the remission of sinne ; and our sacramentall corporall eating is also a signe of our christian and spiritual refection thereby . fie , fie , my lord , that you should lend your eares to such a miserable seducer ▪ of the trope in the word , eate , used in the institution of christ. the lords suggester his first evasion . as for the word , eate , first i say , that though christ said [ accipite , & manducate ] yet were not those any part of the sacrament , or consecratorie words , nor those words of christ , whereby he instituted this sacrament . the lo : b ps . answer . though it bee not within the compasse of those words of your consecration of this sacrament [ this is my body ] yet are they properly belonging to the sacramentall use , and therefore might as necessarily require a proper sense and meaning as any other words of christ his institution , that belong either to the sacrament , or matter of the sacrament , if ( as your doctors have taught ) christ his sacramentall speeches be void of figures . and that , in every celebration of this sacrament , eating is necessary , your suggester himselfe ( if he bee a romish priest ) must as necessarily confesse ; for you have heard your doctors granting a necessary duty in the priest , wheresoever hee celebrateth this sacrament , to eate it with his owne mouth . see book 2. pag. 48 and 54. the lords suggester his objection . which sacramentall and consecratorie words , thirteen of the antient fathers , cyted by allen , bellarmine , brereley , &c. and bishop jewell in his reply , and the communion booke , in the catechisme for examination of children before confirmation , and d r. fr. white , now bishop of elie , in his reply , and calvin and beza in divers places of their workes ; and your selfe in your last letter confesse to bee [ hoc estcorpus meum . ] the lo : b ps . answer . how these words may bee called words of consecration , but improperly , i have already signified ; and shall ( god willing ) manifest fully in the second edition , by differencing the consecration of ordination , and accommodation , from the consecration of benediction . for , indeed , if those words [ this is my body ] should bee held to bee the words of benediction , which is properly called consecration , then should you exclude christ his owne benediction , which is expressely set downe before these your words of consecration , as it is in the euangelists ; iesus tooke bread , and blessed it , and after hee had given thankes , he gave it to them , saying , take , eate , this is my body . and so shall wee bee found to agree amongst our selves , whereas ( by the confession of your own learned arch-bishop caesariensis ) your romish doctors are involved in irreconciliable contradictions , as you haue seene them alleaged by mee , booke 1. pag. 8. the lords suggester his conclusion , in this his first evasion . so as the word , eate , being none of those sacramentall words of christ , cannot be brought in the compasse of your ( &c. ) the lo : b ps . answer . this is right the cuckowessong , so often repeated . the word , eate , is not mentioned in those foure words of christ [ this is my body , ] therefore it cannot be brought within the compasse of , &c. as though ( &c. ) were there set as an hedge to exclude mee from shewing any tropes in the words of christs institution , beside only those precedent words [ this is my body : ] and not rather , according to the proper nature of every &c. ( which hath been used by all writers in the world ) as a gap , to make passage to the other following words of christs institution ; i say , of his institution , and not only of consecration , as your suggester pertinaciously replyeth , contrary to my expresse words , booke 2. pag. 80. in the very title of the sect. 14. thus : many figurative speeches , used by christ , even in his words of the institution of the sacrament , by your owne confessions . which so plaine an expression of mine owne meaning might teach your suggester to eate his former words , and assertiō , concerning not only the word , eate , but the other tropicall words of christ , already mentioned . and doe you not see , my lord , how my former ( &c. ) still sticketh in your suggesters throat ? it will not downe . the lords suggester his second evasion . christ , indeed by the word , eate , intendeth to shew the use of the sacrament , which though it were not used as christ appointed , yet were it a sacrament , as your selfe pag. 8. confesse , where you say that christ made it a sacrament by his blessing , by prayer , which preceded these words [ this is my body : ] and by consequent , before the apostles did eate . also pag. 36. where you acknowledge the reservation of the sacrament to bee ancient , so it bee for a sacramentall eating thereof : whence it will follow , that it is a sacrament before , and without the eating of it : and that christs words , [ take and eate ] were not his sacramentall , or consecratorie words , or the words whereby hee did institute the bread to be a sacrament , seeing it is a sacrament , though it bee not eaten . the lo : b ps answer . say you so ? is it a sacrament , although it be not eaten ? you have no other sacrament in the celebration of the eucharist , but that which you call a sacrifice , and this sacrifice ( saith your * bellarmine , and other moderne divines ) cannot be , except that the priest eate it , as i have also shewed you in the sixt booke of the treatise of the masse . and the necessitie hereof they ground not upon those words , [ this is my body , ] but upon the words of command following , [ doe this . ] aske your suggester how hee can reconcile himselfe to those your doctors . of the words , breake , eate , and drinke , out of maldonate and brerely . the lords suggester , his exceptions . bvt you alleage maldonate to say , that the eating of the body is a figurative speech . the lord b ps . answer . if i knew that i had injured either of these authors , it would grieve mee at the very heart . first then to maldonates eating , and after to m. brerely his drinking . i produced ( booke 2. pag. 86. ) not only your ies. maldonate , but your other ies. suarez also , affirming that those words , break , and eate , cannot properly be affirmed of the body of christ without a figure . and that those sayings , christs body is broken , and , christs body is eaten , taken in the literall sense ( they say ) are false . besides , your ies. salmeron ( cited booke 5. pag. 228. ) proveth the same irrefutably . this reall eating ( saith he ) requireth a reall tearing with the teeth that thing which is eaten . but the body of christ ( saith he ) is not torne with the teeth . can your lordship thinke your suggester to have beene a rationall man , to charge me with not doing maldonate right , now that you see the direct & expresse confession of maldonate himselfe ? or can you account him a conscionable man , who knowing that both suarez and salmeron confessed and proved the words brake , and , eate , to be spoken figuratively , to conceale my evidence ? this practise ( my lord ) why do you not detest ? i passe to m r brereley . of the word , [ drinke . ] the lords suggester . and m. brerely , that the blood is not properly drunke out of the chalice , seeing the blood hath the same manner of existing , as under the forme of bread , to wit , not divided or separated from the body . but you had done brerely more right , if you had repeated his words as they are ; seeing the blood in the chalice : for brereley intēdeth not to say , that the blood is figurative , but that the beeing of the blood in the chalice , whereby it seemeth to be divided , from the body , is not properly said to be drunke out of the chalice , if wee attend to the strict propriety of speech . the like is to be said of maldonates words , concerning the eating of the body , which appeareth in the same sentence , viz. quia ipsi modi , qui significantur his verbis , non conveniunt corpori christi . the lo : b ps answer . m r , brerely his words ( by mee cited , booke 2. pag. 87. ) were these : if we attend unto the propriety of speech , neither is the blood of christ properly drunke out of the chalice . what can wee call wrong in this citation ? forsooth , m r brereley's words are not , drunke out of the chalice , but , blood in the chalice is drunke . would not a man thinke that your suggester was in , or else newly come out of the wine-cellar , when hee made this exception ? where i , because the liquor is not properly drunke , before it be out of the cup , lest m r. brereley my adversary might seeme to speake lesse properly , altered his phrase . o that my adversaries were such as would so kindly handle my writings , by so altering them , that they be better than they seeme to be , and not every-where almost deprave my words and meanings ! but be it drunke in , or drunke out of the cup , m r. brereley plainly acknowledgeth an impropriety in the phrase of drinking christs blood , which is the very point in question , and which i contended for from this his testimony . nor this onely , but ( booke 1. pag. 641. ) i shewed the generall doctrine of the church of rome , in the point of concomitancie , to be this , viz. that blood is still in the veines of christs body , as it was before the consecration of this sacrament . so that christ is received as whole man in his perfect body ; whereupon i inferred , that , because a man could not properly drink the blood of a man , whose blood is still in the veines thereof : therefore can hee not be said properly to drinke it , because it is received under the forme of a solid body , and not under the forme of blood , or any liquid thing . as yet therefore maldonate , and brereley remaine our faithfull advocates . and if your suggester shall prove the contrary , i shall thinke that hee was a sober man , when he made this his reply . the lords suggester . so as neither maldonate , nor brereley , doth differ from other catholike writers in the true sense and meaning of christs words , or that they thinke [ hoc est corpus meum : hic est sanguis meus ] are tropicall . the lo : b ps answer . if they differ not from other catholike writers in the meaning of christs words , now spoken of , which are eate , and drinke , then will it necessarily follow , that other catholike writers differ not from them ; and so wee shall all be good friends , professing unanimously that these two words [ eate , and drinke ] belonging to christs institution , are tropicall ; the very point which i undertooke to prove . it is not so ? the lords suggester . onely they differ in modo loquendi , which kinde of difference i presume shall not be urged as essentiall in a matter of this consequence , they agreeing in substance with all other catholique writers , as their whole bookes do plainly shew . the lo. b ps answer . it is your presumption indeed , and that a very childish one too . for better manifestation hereof , i shall presume that your suggester cannot be so absurd as , by the word substance , to meane any physicall and bodily substance , but onely the subject matter which is in controversie . and the matter in controversie is concerning the foresaid words of christs institution , eate , and drinke , whether they be properly , or literally taken , or improperly , and figuratively . some of your doctors hold them to be properly spoken , others deny this , and say , this is a false sense ( as you have heard . ) now your suggester will needs play the moderator , saying , that they agree in substance , namely , in the matter in question , though they differ in their maner of speaking ; although the maner of speaking is here become the very matter in question . iust as if when the lords in the star-chamber do variously censure a defendant , some judging him guilty , and some quitting him , and holding him innocent ; your suggester should reconcile this difference , saying , that though the one part held him guilty , and the other unguilty , yet do they not differ in substance , but onely in the maner of speaking . when the two adulterous elders were examined , concerning susanna , what tree it was in the garden , under which the act was done , one said , under a mastick , the other , under an holme tree : they differed onely in modo loquendi , and yet were they both thereby proved false witnesses . albeit otherwise agreeing in one intention , to accuse susanna of whoredome ; even as wee have noted your doctors by the division of their tongues , to have beene false teachers . the lords suggester . and because i finde , that in this your booke , you do endeavour in all points of difference to prove your tenet by the confession of the catholike party , whose sayings you alleage : which do not , as i conceive , differ in substance , but only in modo loquendi . the lo : b ps answer . you repeat your reply , i must have like liberty to repeat the effect of my answer . when the question is of proper and improper signification of words , the maner of speech is the substance of the matter in question . it is a knowne story of the trades-man in london dwelling at the signe of the kings crowne , who said unto his sonne , behave thy selfe well , son , and i will make thee heire of the crowne : his words were afterwards brought within compasse of treason , albeit others thought the word , crowne , to have beene taken by the speaker in a figurative sense , yet did hee forfeit both his owne crowne and life , even for the literall signification of the word , crowne , and was hanged onely upon a difference de modo loquendi , that is , the maner of speech . accordingly now , when the whole structure of the romish masse , concerning either corporall presence , transubstantiation , or adoration of the host , do all depend wholy upon the manner of christs speech [ this is my body ] in the literall and proper sense ; and that our confutation of all these superstitious , sacrilegious , and idolatrous doctrines , is grounded upon the improper and figurative meaning of the same words : if all this difference in the manner of speech be no substantiall matter of difference , let your suggester but answer , why your roman church burnt so many protestants , only for differing from her in the manner of speech , viz. interpreting christs speech [ this is my body ] figuratively contrary , to the literall exposition thereof ? if hee shall say , that shee did it unjustly , then was she a bloody iezabel : & if hee answer , that notwithstanding it were a difference , in maner of speech , yet was this sufficient matter to condemne them to the fier ; then is hee to be sent to schoole againe among petites , to learne what it is to differ in modo loquendi . the lords suggester his offer to tell a tale. i will , under your favour , endeavour , by an example in the same kinde , to shew how weake these kinde of proofes are . the lo : b ps answer . with very good leave ( friend suggester ) but see it be not such , as shall bewray your owne folly , and expose you to the scorne of any intelligent reader , you had best . the lords suggester his merry tale. in k. edward 2 d his time ( as i remember ) at what time the vniversity of oxford was much addicted to the learning of those , who by some were called nominals , for that they were strict in examining the nature and signification of every word , merton colledge , being seated upon the walls of the towne , and so wanting roome to make good and commodious walkes , the master and fellowes of the house being desirous to walke in the medowes that lay close to the walls , thought good to send three of their company to the king , then lying at woodstocke ; who being admitted to his presence , one of them signified to his majesty that they were sent by the colledge to demand licentiam faciendi ostium : the second presently interrupting him , said , that hee was mistaken , for that a licence to make a doore was not a satisfaction to them , for so they might have a licence , and yet the doore never made , and therefore his desire was to have , ostium fieri : whereunto the third replyed , that they were both mistaken , for so it might be still in fieri ; but that his petition was to have ostium factum : whereunto the first replyed againe , that they were not so unmannerly as to desire ostium factum , for that were to demand that the king should make them a doore , but desired that they might have leave posse ostium facere . but the second againe opposing him , and the third opposing the second , and the king growing weary , hee answered them , that though hee understood their request , yet would he not give them satisfaction , till they would agree in modo loquendi . the lo : b ps answer . if that i had not heard your suggester make so often mention of ostium , a doore , i should have thought it had beene a tale of a tubbe , it is so fond : but let us take it as it is , and make the best of it we can . onely it might have becom'd him , to have had a better conceit of the worth of that colledge in oxon , so famous for antiquity and learning , then to imagine that it should be so utterly forlorne of true oratorie and grammar , as that three choisest schollers therin should not be able to express this message in latin intelligently , especially to so great a king , but that they should deserve to be sent home , like the men of the towne of gotham , as wise as they came . by the way , you may tell your suggester that he is no reall man , who did not know what nominals meant , when hee saith , they were strict in examining the signification of words : for they were therefore called nominals , because they held vniversals to be , not res , but nomina . the lords suggester his application , upon his tale. now as it cannot be objected to any of these , that they differed from the rest in the substance of their demand ; so neither can it bee said of these catholike writers , that they differ one from the other in the substance , as their bookes doe sufficiently witnesse , though they differ in the manner of utterance . the lo : b ps . answer . his promise was to bring in an example of the same kinde ; and he is partly as good as his word , for it is indeed equally ridiculous ; for it cannot be of the same kinde , except the application stand right , as thus : as those schollers in their tales , even so the romish writers ( as namely bellarmine , allen , and others , who have written expositions upon the manner of christ his institution ) have been so defective in uttering of their meaning , concerning the same speech of christ , that they have merited ( like to the former gotthamists ) to be dismissed with laughter for speaking so foolishly . or else that he thinke it to be a more sutable application , if it stand thus ; as the foresaid schollers , in explicating their meaning concerning the making of a doore , have contradicted one another , some delivered it in the sense of the time to come , de ostio faciendo , and some other explaining it of the time past , de ostio facto , ( as the example sheweth : ) even so your romish doctors , in interpreting christs words , have beene repugnant one to another , by interpreting christs sayings in divers senses , some properly , and some of them figuratively . all which is so farre from weakning my proofes , that nothing could fortifie them more , to shew that your doctors are found professedly to differ in modo loquendi . as for example , in the words [ given , and shed ; ] some expounding them ( as you have heard ) properly in the present tense , and some improperly in the future . this may serve to manifest the pervicacie of your suggester , who notwithstanding holdeth on his pace . the lords suggester . neither is it possible they should differ in substance in their printed bookes ▪ for that no booke among them is allowed to bee printed without the examination of the superiours , men well knowne and approved for their faith and learning . the lo : b ps . answer . vvhat is this i heare ? one suggesting , upon any pretence , that to be impossible , which he knoweth hath beene proved throughout the whole treatise of the masse , to be infallibly true ? as namely , that there is scarce any one objection made by protestants against your romish doctors , which is not by others of the same profession as fully confirmed . whereupon wee may inferre , for a further confirmation of the point now in question , that if those faithfull and learned superiors have authorized the writings of those doctors , by whose testimonies our protestant reasons are so plainely avouched , both in our objections against your romish doctrine , and in our confutation of yours ; then must you necessarily grant us one further advantage , which is , that the same learned and faithfull superiors have so farie justified our protestant profession . but what talke you of these your superiors , as if they could not contradict one another , when as the superiors of all these superiors , and oracles of your church , your romish popes are found not onely in other doctrines , but even in the questions concerning the romish masse , manifestly contradictory one to another ? as this our treatise of the masse hath plainely discovered . see in the index of fathers at the word pope . the lords suggester . and if ( this notwithstanding ) any error were afterward found in any booke , the inquisition presently condemneth both the booke and the author , if he doe not submit to the correcting of his booke . and this to bee true is well knowne by your lordship , who in one part of your booke calls it booke-butcherie . the lord b ps . answer . you say very true , this practise of your inquisitors , in expunging out of the bookes of romish doctors all their ingenuous confessions , whereby our protestant doctrine and defence hath been avouched and justified , i have called a book-butcherie . if your lordship should know any great personage questioned about any criminall delicts , some whereof were also capitall transgressions , to have violently cut out the tongues of all such , whom hee did suspect could bring any matter of accusation against him , would your lordship thinke much to heare this cruelty called a butcherie , and not rather judge such a fact to be a most infallible argument of a guilty conscience in that partie ? even so the indices expurgatorii , wherewith the testimonies of your owne authors , witnessing for our profession in their bookes , be so many indices , yea iudices , to convince and condemne your now-romish church to bee an unjust and shamelesse patronesse of a false cause . what the mischiefe of this practise must bee , mine owne experience can best tell . i alleaged out of polydor virgill a sentence expressely printed in his first edition , out of polydor's owne originall and autographe : which sentence by your indices expurgatorii was commanded to be there blotted out , and afterwards to be left out in the next editions of polydore , and so it was . m. parsons finding the sentence wanting in the latter editions of polydore , rayleth downe right upon me , and noteth mee for a notable falsificator , never taking knowledge of the truth of the allegation , as it was set down and is now to be read , in the first proper and true editions of polydore . can there then be a more satanicall art of delusion , than this is of your indices expurgatorii , whereby you may have a faculty to play the theeves , by stealing out of the bookes of your owne romish doctors , all such their ingenuous confessions , marked for defence of the doctrine of protestants , and then take the liberty to call us lyars , for avouching their testimonies , albeit never so truely ? the lords suggester his last , and most generall evasion . lastly , if these allegations of tropicall or figurative speeches were true , yet doe i not see what argument you can draw from hence ; or how you can hence prove any thing against our tenet . the lo : b ps . answer . if your suggester cannot see what argument can bee drawne from these allegations , brought to prove a figurative sense in the words of christ his institution , and consequently in the words which you call consecratorie , it is because his sight is dimme , & he had not a fit paire of spectacles to helpe him ; whereby he might perceive , that upon the no-proper sense of the words , [ this is my body ] it must follow that there is no transsubstātiation in your romish masse , no corporall presence , no reall sacrifice , no proper eating , no lawfull divine adoration thereof . all which are substantiall points , although depending de modo loquendi . finally , i would gladly see some colour of reason , why the foresaid allegations should not be of force . the lords suggester , his confirmation . seeing your selves plainely confesse , and it is most true , that figurative speeches afford no certaine proofe in matters of faith : m. downeham in his booke of antichrist pag. 169. saying , it is a rule in divinity , that theologia symbolicanon est argumētativa : and the same is affirmed by willet in his synopsis pag. 27. and by others , whose sayings here , for brevitie sake , i omit , presuming that it will not be denyed . the lo : b ps answer . if i should deny this , i should contradict my selfe , who in my latine apologie , ( part . 2. lib. 5. cap. 4. ) have defended this position , by the confession of your owne writers , to bee the confutation of the extravagant glosses of your popes , and popish doctors . among which wee may reckon that of pope innocent the 3. who , to prove that his papall authority was above the imperiall , alleaged that scripture gen. 1. god made two great lights , the sunne to governe the day , and the moone to governe the night . and now our suggester will have you , in effect , to know , that this is but a lunatique argument , because it is symbolicall , no way able to prove that the imperiall , as the moone , had borrowed its authority from the papall , as from the sunne . your pope boniface the viii . argued thus ; luc. 22. peter said to christ , behold here are two swords : and christ answered , it is enough . hee said not ( saith your pope ) it is too much , and therefore both the temporall and spirituall sword are in the pope , as he is vicar of christ. so he , which consequence your suggester now teacheth to be no better than a wooden dagger , or rather a fooles bable , because this kinde of symbolicall reasoning is of no force . and indeed this papall crotchet hath beene ( in my latine apologie part . 2. lib. 5. cap. 28. ) confuted by your two jesuites , maldonate , and suarez , as being a violent distorturing of holy scripture . the same may be said of your two eminent cardinals baronius and bellarmine ; from that text act. 10. where , in a vision , it was said to peter , kill and eate : which being spoken of the killing and eating of beasts , the first word , kill , your baronius urgeth against the state of venice , to shew that the pope being s. peters successor , had power to compell them by violence . the other word , eate , bellarm. wresteth to prove the pope to be the head of the church , but why ? for , to eate ( saith hee ) is the property of the head. these and a thousand such symbolicall ( i had almost said , diabolicall ) profanations of scripture might be produced out of your romish writers , upon all points of controversie , which justly do fall ( quasi in spongiam ) upon this thesis , viz. symbolicall arguments make no necessary conclusions . but what maketh this against us , concerning the matter in question , which is the figurative words of christ , this is my body ? the position maketh onely against them , who extract either a literall sense out of a parabolicall & figurative speech , as origen did , when having read that scripture , there be some that castrate themselves for the kingdome of god ( which was but a parabolicall speech ) he did really , and therefore foolishly castrate himself . or else , when men turne the words of scripture , properly and literally spoken , into a figurative meaning , as your popes dealt with sunne and moone , and with peters swords . but by that thesis was it never forbid , whensoever in scripture the name of the thing signified is attributed to the symbol or signe , that then the symbolicall and sacramentall speech should be judged tropicall . but this kinde of exposition was alwayes approved of christ , and by his church . so here , christ taking bread , and breaking bread , which was the symbol and signe of christs body , and saying of the same bread this is my body ] it is not possible that the sense should be literall , but altogether figurative , as hath beene most evidently & copiously proved unto you by direct confessions ( in my treatise of the masse , booke 2. p. 84. ) of your owne divines , & by examples in scripture , ( lb. p. 85. ) to wit , the sign of the passing over called the passover ; baptisme , the sign of regeneratiō , called regeneration ; the rock , but a signe of christ , called christ : in each one of these the symbols being a signe and figure , the speech must infallibly be figurative . and therefore bread , being a figure of christs body , is called christs body figuratively . but your romish literall exposition , from this symbolicall , hath beene proved to be as false as the other is true , by the confessions of your doctors , alleaged , booke 2. pag. 79. what hath your suggester now gained ( my lord ) by his objection of a symbolicall argument , excepting onely that hee hath shewed himselfe to be an ignorant and superfluous litigator ? the lords suggester his relying upon the authority of s. augustine , in this question . the rather for that s. augustine , epist. 68. saith , non nisi impudentissimè nititur quis aliquid in allegoria positum prose interpretari , nisi habeat manifesta testimonia , quorum lumine illustrentur obscura . the lo : b ps answer , by consenting to the authority of s. augustine . this being your last allegation , and reserved , for the last confirmation of your defence , to the last sentence of your reply , doth tell mee , in effect , that you have chosen s. augustine to decide this whole cause , as one , who albeit he were alone in your choice , yet may be to us , for determining the point in question , as it were , all in all . that therefore you may perceive you have to deale with a tractable adversary , be it knowne unto you , that i shall desire none other , rather than this umpier , whom you your selves have chosen , and the testimony which you have now objected : onely exacting that wee may stand to the arbitrement of so honourable a moderator . it is the fashion that in such a case parties be mutually bound in some summes of money , to stand to the award of him , who is chosen to compound the difference . wee shall need no other forfaiture on either part , then the losse of the cause , which you may seeme to yeeld unto , by your single choice of this so singular a father , and i for my part shall accord to the same condition . s. augustine his vmpirage and full determination of this whole question , concerning the exposition of christ his speech ; whether it be figurative or not ; first from the rules of interpreting . the words in question are these words of christ his institution [ this is my body : ] the question it selfe is concerning the sense of the same words which you call consecratory , and operative ; whether it be ( as you say ) proper and literall , or ( as wee have affirmed ) the meaning be improper , figurative , and tropicall . s. augustine his judgement may be gathered from s. augustines owne rules of interpreting sacramentall speeches ; as also from his other assertions , concerning the property of a body . i shall deale clearly in both . the first generall rule of s. augustine , is recorded by your ies. salmeron . ( in 1. cor. 15. disp. 24. § ad 1. august . ( saith hee ) hath delivered this rule , when as words , being taken properly , and according to a literall exposition , yeeld a sense impossible and absurd , then must wee have recourse to a tropicall and figurative interpretation . this maior is ( as you heare ) s. augustine his owne . but in this speech of christ [ this is my body ] bread ( by s ▪ aug. ) is called the body of christ ; which ( as your bellarm ▪ saith ) being properly taken , is impossible : and as absurd ( say others ) as to say a man is a horse . ( both which are alleaged in the treatise of the masse , booke . 2. pag. 79. ) therefore for the right expounding of these words of christ [ this is my body ] wee are necessarily to have recourse to a figurative interpretation . you can require nothing in your answer to this syllogisticall argument , but that it may appeare unto you , that s. august . held that to be materiall bread , which he gave to be eaten , when he said [ take , eate , this is my body . ] and this was proved unto you ( book 5. pag. 21● ) where s. augustine affirmed of iudas , that he received the bread of the lord. that is , will you say , the body of christ , which he calleth bread , either because it hath the forme of bread , or else because it had beene bread , or because it is spirituall bread of the soule . nay ( will augustine say ) none of all these , for i said , that though iudas received the bread of the lord , yet he received not that which the other disciples received , namely , the bread the lord : whereby i distinguished , the bread the lord , which was christs body , received by the faithfull , from the sacramentall bread of the lord , received by iudas . our second argument is taken from s. august . his other second generall rule , concerning eating . for christ , as he said take my body , so he said also , eate , this is my body : to teach , that such as is the being of a thing ( be it proper , or figurative ) such is the eating thereof . but of eating christs body there was alleaged unto you ( booke 2. pag. 100. ) the generall rule of s. august . to wit ; wheresoever the word , or precept of christs speech doth command any flagitious thing , it is figurative ▪ ( as for example ) where it is said , except you eate the flesh of the sonne of man. so hee . and that we may understand he excluded all corporall eating of christs body , whether visible , or invisible , he explaineth his meaning to have beene spirituall only , by the mouth of the soule , telling us in his next words , wee eate , in beliefe of christs passion , by a secret and profitable remembrance that christs flesh was crucified for us . so hee . s. aug. his third rule was produced ( booke 2. pag. 95. ) which strikes at the heart of the question , viz. that sacraments be signes , which have the appellations of the things , which they represent : therefore do they carry the names of the things themselves . so hee . and this is verified by the example , which you have already heard , to wit , the signe of the passover , called the passover : circumcision , the signe of the covenant , called the covenant : the rock , the signe of christ in his passion , called christ : and baptisme the signe of christs buriall , called his buriall . but where ( will you say ) shall wee finde in augustine the subject of the question , which is , that the signe of christs body is called his body ? which would put the point out of all question . i answer , even in the place above cited , out of s. augustines owne words , saying that as baptisme is called christs buriall , so is the sacrament of the body of christ called his body . which is likewise said by s. aug. out of another part of his workes , and hath beene cited , booke . 6. pag. 36. which satisfieth your objected testimony out of s. aug. not to interpret the places of scripture allegorically , except there be some other manifest testimonies of scripture , whereby other more obscure places may be illustrated . here i might adde , that if the body of christ be properly so called , and accordingly extant in this sacrament , then being ( as your church teacheth ) properly offered , it should be a proper sacrifice . but s. aug. ( cited , booke 6. p. 36. ) hath taught you that the body of christ is so said to be sacrificed here , by a similitude , as easter day is called the day of christs resurrection . arguments out of other positions of s. augustine . the romish doctrine , which admitteth not of any figure in christs words [ this is my body ] doth thereby conclude , that after the words of consecration the substance of bread vanisheth , and that there is nothing materially remaining but the body of christ : and that the same body is extant in every consecrated host , howsoever the hosts be severed one from another , and yet that it is not circumscribed in any space , but is wholly in the whole , and in every part of the host. all these are the consequences of your literall expositions of these words of christ , wherein you have had s. augustine an utter adversary from point to point ; saying of the first , our eyes see bread in this sacrament ( speaking of bread after consecration , as hath beene cited , booke 3. pag. 119 ) and of the second , in concluding against heretickes an impossibility that christs body could be in two places at one instant , as namely , in the sunne and moone , ( as was alleaged booke 4. pag. 171. ) and this hee confirmed , by teaching that it is a property of the deity ( whereby the holy ghost is proved to be god ) to be in diverse places at once , as i related unto you booke 4. pag. 187. lastly , hee is adversary to the third point also , determining that every body , whatsoever , filleth the place wherein it is , and cannot be whole in any part thereof , which you might have red booke 4. pag. 192. by all which s. austines rules you may see s. austines position , now objected by your suggester , to be fully observed . for wee have in scripture most manifest places , which prove these words [ this is my body ] to be figuratively understood , because in scripture whensoever the signe ( as the bread ) being called christs body , hath the appellation of the thing signified ( whereof i gave you many examples throughout the booke 2. ) the speech is alwayes tropicall . farewell now to your lordships learned suggester . i expect now to heare your lordship speake in your owne language , for a conclusion . the lord baron himselfe . my lord. i finde by your letter , that you will take it in a degree of kindnesse to be advertised ( though by an adversarie ) by private letters , with any thing that he may thinke erroneous , to the end that you may either satisfie him in the truth of the writing , or otherwise correct it in the second edition . the lo : b ps . answer . it is true ( my lord ) and hee that knoweth me , knoweth this my disposition . for doth an adversary , although even with an adverse minde , acquaint me truely with my error ? i then say to him , sic inimicè places : or doth a friend conceale from mee mine error , as doubting to offend me ? i say , sic & amicè noces ; for i desire to goe as upright in my writing , as i would in my walking . and that your lordship may know i meane sincerely to reforme my aberrations , whatsoever shall come to my knowledge , i shall tell you of one error your lordship hath passed by , which i purpose ( god willing ) to correct . for although i accounted expressely but sixe tropes in the words of christ his institution , yet i now perceive , by the discussing of this your suggesters reply , that i had demonstrated , by infallible proofe , eight tropes in them . therefore i must enlarge my former reckoning , and instead of vi. write viii . if this may any-whit worke to your lordships satisfaction ; besides other explications , which ( god willing ) i shall adde upon the like occasions . the lord baron himselfe . vvhich is so christian and noble a saying , as that i am encouraged to send you this part of my replie to your letter , which i will finish ere long , and send it according to your direction ; rather choosing to send this abrupt part , then by delay to give you the least cause of suspition , that i either brake my promise , or was unwilling to give satisfaction to your just and conscionable motion . the lo : b ps . answer . and i wish the replie had beene as christian , just , and conscionable ; but your suggester is not the man ( i dare assure your lordship ) from whom i may expect any conscionable dealing ; after this experience which i have had of his so many doublings and jugglings . nor may i say i have beene cleerely dealt with by your lordship , in promising a full replie concerning my allegations , in the time of the late whole vacation , and returning me a long replie only to that one small particle [ &c. ] now if your answere , in satisfiing but one onely falshood of your suggester , in his first exception , hath beene now almost halfe a yeare in finishing , your lordship can tell , by the rule of proportion , how long i must stay for a replication to the other , wherein his ( or if you will your lordships ) other calumnious and false taxations have beene discovered in my answere to your lordship , the which hee shall be never able to expunge . a tree is knowne by his fruit , and the fruit which hitherto wee have found in the replie , now made , may tell your lordship ( concerning that which remaineth , if ever it come to ripenesse ) that wee are not to looke for grapes of thornes , nor for figs of thistles . the lord baron himselfe . and as for the privatenesse of our entercourse by writing , if your lordship will be pleased to keepe it private , it shall not be published by mee . the lo : b ps . answer . it shall not — saith your l pp : and it needeth not , say i , because you your selfe published it long agoe , although not in copies ( it may bee ) yet in your verball ostentations . so that if the publishing of this tractate can doe you any pleasure , you must be beholding to your selves . the second principall exception taken against my allegations . the lords suggester . in the same dedicatory epistle , speaking of the body of christ , you say ; corpus ( ut ipsi aiunt ) omni movendi , sentiendi , intelligendique facultate destitutum ; id est , coecum , surdum ; intellectionis expers . and pag. 203. you have written thus : christs body in the sacrament is ( you say ) without power of motion of sense , and of understanding . and i rest unsatisfied both of your ( ipsi aiunt ) in the latine , and your ( you say ) in english : for these words sound as if catholikes taught this doctrine , or at least the major part of them : but in your quotation , pag. 196. ( where this point is handled ) you produce suarez onely . the lo : b ps answer . svarez only ? i will not bee so unmannerly as to tell your suggester that this is one lie , but sure i am it is as evident an untruth as could be uttered : because in the objected place , ( book 2. pag. 196. ) when suarez is cited , he is alleaged as a contest , both he himselfe confessing that christ , as hee is said to bee in this sacrament , is voide of sense , &c. and testifying of other doctors of your church , saying ; ( in the margin ) alii , & nonnulli ; and by name reckoneth among those others , thomas aquinas , your angelicall doctor ( to whom he might have added scotus . ) and therefore was not your ies. suarez the only witnesse , no more then the fore-man of a jury may be said to be alone , when hee giveth in his verdict in the name of other his fellowes , bee they eleaven , or more . therefore this last part of your suggester his exception , which concerneth the authors words , is ( as you see ) most false ; and as faithlesse will he be found in his exception against the sense of the words of the same iesuite . the lords suggester his exception , touching the sense of suarez . whose words ( as your selfe cite them ) beare another sense , far different from what he is here cited . the lo : b ps . answer . surely then have i beene exceedingly to blame ; but then shall i beleeve you , when you shall shew it . the lords suggester . for he only affirmeth that the body of christ in the sacrament is destitute of those faculties ( naturally considered ) but saith plainely ; corpus christi ( ut est in sacramento ) potest per se moveri localiter à deo. and this is no new doctrine , neither doth this prove that the body of christ is coecum , surdum , exanime . the lo : b ps . answer . svarez meant ( saith hee ) that the body of christ , in this sacrament , is destitute of these foresaid faculties , as naturally considered : which i confesse to be truely affirmed by your suggester . and this being true , i furthermore affirme , that he hath as falsely accused me to have alleaged suarez his words in a far different sense : for , i delivered the very same sense of your suggester in his owne expresse words thrice , thus ; no power naturally , of himselfe , to move himselfe : no naturall faculty of sense , without a miracle , to move and see . not able without some miracle , to apprehend things past in his understanding . and so are to be expounded his words objected , potest per se moveri localitèr à deo : ( adding , which your suggester like a slie youth passed by ) loquor de potentia dei absoluta , i speake ( saith he ) of the absolute power of god ; signifying that alalthough by his divine power hee could , yet by his humane and naturall power hee could not move himselfe , or see , or heare , or understand things past . which i called then a brutish ( i might have added a brain-sicke and impious ) doctrine , derogating from the article of christian faith , concerning the glorified body of christ. what more ? the lords suggester . christs body walked upon the waters , not naturally , but by the omnipotency of his godhead . the like may be said of his comming to his disciples , the doores being shut : his issuing out of the tombe , the stone being not removed : and his penetrating of the heavens . which because they were not done naturally , it doth not therefore follow that the body of christ was coecum , surdum , intellectionis expers . the lo : b ps answer . if it follow not that he , who naturally , and without a miraculous power , cannot possibly see , heare , or feele , is therefore to be said to be naturally dumbe , deafe , and senselesse , then may he as well deny , that either bartimaeus , whose eyes christ miraculously opened , had beene blinde ; or hee in the gospell , to whom christ restored miraculously his hearing had beene deafe ; or that lazarus , when hee was miraculously raised out of his grave , had beene so long senselesse , who naturally , and without a miracle , had not seene , heard , or used any faculty of sense . which proveth your suggester , in his objection , to be , indeed , void of common sense , as well as hee is in that which followeth . christs body ( saith hee ) walked miraculously on the water : and passed through the doores of the house , yet for all that could not be said to be blinde or deafe . as much as to say , a man cannot be said to be blinde in his eyes , who hath agility in his legges to move himselfe , albeit blindnesse be not incident to the eyes , more then sight is to the heeles . surely , that party is truly blinde in himselfe , who is onely miraculously made to see ? this did never any deny , that was in his right minde ? the lords suggester . besides , in divers places of your booke , your selfe accuse us for praying unto it , ( namely , the sacrament ) as to a living thing : but for us so to pray unto it , and yet affirme it to be coecum , surdum , intellectionis expers , are two positions so opposite the one to the other , and yet both affirmed by your selfe , as that i must needs affirme that i am not satisfied therein . the lo : b ps answer . assuredly ; my lord , neither can i be satisfied , when i heare so absurd a contradiction as this is ; no more than i can be satisfied with the impudent boldnesse of your suggester , in putting this grosse contradiction upon mee . for your romish church holdeth both that christ , as hee is in the sacrament , is senslesse ( as was proved out of the place now objected out of my booke concerning the masse : ) and the same church of * rome also prescribeth a manner of praying to the same host. she then is the author of this contradiction , whatsoever it be , and you kisse , and adore her ; i am but onely a true relater , and i must be buffetted . say , my lord , where is the vertigo now ? the third principall exception , against the allegations , by the lords suggester . in the same epistle dedicatory you have these words : ad nostram quod attinet sacratissimam eucharistiam , quia à ministro elementa consecrantur , & benedicuntur , non minùs sacramenta sunt quàm baptismus . yet pag. 117. of your 7. booke you pretend that the sacrament worketh as the preaching of the word of god doth , ad modum recipientis : which ( were it by judas , or by a transformed devill ) yet the seed being gods it may be fruitfull , whatsoever the seedman be . and pag. 116. of your first booke you say that it is no sacrament before it is consecrated : which positions being so opposite , i cannot frame any due construction to my satisfaction . the lo : b ps answer . i must againe necessarily complaine both of the ignorance and malignity , which your suggester bewrayes in this exception . for , first , none but an ignorant would have objected a contradictiō in these two positions , because they were spoken in a different respect . for speaking of an ordinary case , i said ( and truly ) that the sacrament ought to be consecrated by a lawfull minister : but in an extraordinary case , wherein it is not possible to understand the lawfull calling and ordination of the minister , it is otherwise . and this sense i sufficiently explicated ( booke 7. pag. 117. ) by calling this second , a case perplexed , and indeprehensible . in which difference of respects , i may say of king saul , that he was , and was not a prophet . because if the word , prophet , be taken for one , whose ordinary office and function is to prophesie , so was saul never accounted a prophet . but if , by prophet , be understood onely an extraordinary rapt and act of prophesying , so is it true which is written of him , and saul was reckoned among the prophets . next , the scope and ayme of the suggester is ( as he hath professed ) to charge mee with wrong allegations of my authors , yet he saw no more in this , but ( as his imagination seduced him ) a contradiction only to my selfe ; which discovereth a maligne itch to have made mee a falsificator like himselfe , but this his humour is hectick in him , and breaketh further out in his next exception . the fourth principall exception against my allegations , by the lords suggester . pag. 4. you say , that it is granted of all sides , that the mingling of water with the wine is not of the essence of the sacrament , but of its own nature indifferent . and for proofe thereof you alleage bell. li. 4. de euch. cap. 11. § quinto . where bellarmine speaketh of cyprians opinion therein . it is true , that bellarmine seemeth not to allow that opinion , that the mingling of the water with the wine is so of necessity to be used in the sacrament , as that without it there is no sacrament : but that it is a thing indifferent , bellarmine denieth , and saith plainly , lib. 4. cap. 10. that the catholique church hath ever believed that the mingling of water with the wine is so necessary , as that without a deadly sinne it cannot be omitted . and tilemannus heshusius , in his booke de erroribus pontificiorum , condemneth the catholikes for teaching , that mingling the water cannot be omitted without a mortall sinne ; and by consequent that the catholikes hold it is not a thing indifferent . the lo : b ps answer . in alleaging the sentence of bellarmine , i went no further then bellarmine his owne words , set downe in the place objected ( booke 1. pag. 4. ) saying , mixture of water is not of the essence of the sacrament . as for the words following , to say of this , that it is indifferent , was mine owne words , and no part of the allegation , as the divers character of writing , which is different from the other , doth manifestly declare : which being also but spoken obiter , to meet with some refractory spirits among our selves , who thinke nothing indifferent , which was used of christ , & not in any opposition to any romish doctrine , deserveth not your suggesters exception against it . otherwise i might easily have confuted your romish tenet , by proving that nothing can be justly denyed to be of the essence of a sacrament , which is a materiall part thereof . and i could have confirmed mine owne assumption , by proving it to be indifferent , in respect of christs institution , as ( god willing ) the second edition will shew ; when i shall have occasion to thank your suggester for drawing mee into a further consideration of this point , occasioning mee to finde a testimony in bellar : which wil utterly condemne all your ten romish transgressions , discovered in the first booke . in the interim , your owne romish interpreter of the romish masse may stay your appetite a while . he plainly telleth you , that * the mixing of water with wine , in this sacrament , is commanded onely by the church ; alleaging his authority , for so saying . and none of your doctors will deny , but that whatsoever ceremony is commanded onely by the church , the same is in its owne nature indifferent . the fift principall exception against my allegations , by the lords suggester . there hath beene of long time a difference betweene us , whether the lay-people ought to receive in both kindes . and your lo. pag. 5. to make the truth appeare to be of your side herein , hath these words : there are but two outward materiall parts of this sacrament , the one concerning the element of bread , the other touching the cup. the acts concerning both , whether in administring , or participation thereof , are charged by christs canon upon the church catholike unto the ends of the world . the tenor of his precept , or command , for the first part is , [ do this : ] & concerning the other likewise saying , [ this doe yee as often ] whereof your owne doctors , as well iesuites , as others , have rightly determined with a large consent . though these words bee plaine enough , yet lest wee might mistake the meaning , pag. 42. your l : writeth thus : that in the publique and set celebration of the eucharist the communion in both kindes might be given to all sorts of communicants that bee capable of both. and pag. 43. you affirme , the precept of christ to be for the use of both kindes to all lawfull communicants . and for the proofe hereof you referre us to your marginall notes set downe pag. 6. now if the doctors and iesuites cited pag. 6. doe , as you say , with a large consent determine those positions , which you have set downe pag. 5. pag. 42. & 43. then have i no reason but to be satisfied . the lord b ps . answer . it is very true , that booke 1. pag. 43. the title of the sect. is this , viz. proving the precept of christ , for the use of both kindes , to all lawfull communicants : which in the same sect. i seeke to make good , first by proving those words of christ [ do this , ] whether they be spoken of the bread , or of the cup , to be words of precept : and for proofe hereof i referre the reader , in the margin , to booke 1. pag. 6. where your iesuites and others expound the words [ do this ] to be words of precept . what 's wrong now ? marry your suggester imagineth that i would perswade you , that i meant hereby to prove , that all the testimonies ( which i alleaged p. 43. ) acknowledged that christ had given a precept , for all communicants , as well laicks as ecclesiasticks , to participate of both kindes , which is notoriously false , as the objected place it selfe doth make manifest in these expresse words ; [ do this ] spoken of the bread , and [ do this as often ] spoken of the wine , are words of command : but of what ? this is our next inquisition . so then our first inquisition was onely to determine , that by those testimonies of bellar : and of others , the words [ do this ] concerning either kinde , are words of command ; but whether they commanded both kindes to all persons , or no , it distinctly belonged to the second inquisition , and was performed in the same sect. afterwards , in confutation of bellarm ▪ his third evasion . and certainly except some strong intoxication had possessed your suggesters braine , he could never have quarrelled so vainly : and that more especially , because supposing that i had promised to have proved the words [ do this ] to be confessed by the romish doctors , to teach a command for the use of both kindes , as well to laicks as priest ; yet this also was justly and fully performed in the very place here objected ( booke 1. pag. 6. ) where your card. bell : and iesuite barradius teach a cōmand , in behalfe of laicks , in the words [ do this ] for the bread. and your card. allen , with the ies. valentia maintaining the like command in the other words [ do this ] touching the cup , for laicks also . yet let us trie what instances he giveth for colour of his former exception . the lords suggester . your first quotation is out of barradius , whom you alleage to say [ facite ] viz. quod feci — christus accepit panem , gratias egit , benedixit &c. idipsumque praecepit discipulis suis , eorumque successoribus sacerdotibus . whence i conceive that barradius did not , by the word , sacerdotibus , meane the lay-people , not that the lay-people were successors to the apostles . the lo : b ps answer . surely , friend suggester , this can be no argument of any great learning in you , that you will have it knowne , that you know the word , sacerdotes , to signifie priests & not the lay-people , w ch every accedentiarie boy in schooles knoweth as well as you . but your minde is to prove , that barradius his testimonie was falsely cited , namely for proofe , that laicks aswell as ecclesiasticks are commanded to communicate in both kindes , by vertue of that command of christ , in saying of both [ doe this : ] which i have shewed to be your vast untruth , as both the reference proveth ( pag. 43. ) which is only to prove that the words [ doe this ] are commandatorie ; as also the place , whereunto the reference is made , ( pag. 6. ) confirmeth , where barradius , speaking of christs words , concerning the bread , said , [ doe this ] is spoken commandatorily . your next instance will bee as impertinent . the lords suggester . your next quotation is out of bellarmine lib. 4. de euch. cap. 25. § . resp. mirab . whom you make to say , illud [ hoc facite ] posuit post datum sacramentum , ut intelligeremus jussisse dominum ut sub &c. but the true words of bellarmine are , lucas illud [ hoc facite ] posuit post datum sacramentum sub specie panis , post datum autem calicem illud non repetivit , ut intelligeremus , jussisse dominum sub specie panis omnibus distribueretur sacramentū , sub specie autem vini non item . where i note , that in the first part of this sentence all those words ( sub specie panis , post datum autem calicem illud non repetivit ) in which words the whole substance of bellarmines sentence consisteth , and which is directly opposite to what bellarmine is alleaged to say , are omitted . and in the second part of this sentence , which bellarmine hath purposely set downe , to confirme and make plaine his former opinion , the essentiall part thereof is also omitted , for he is alleaged only to say , ut intelligeremus jussisse dominum ut sub &c , whereas bellarmines words are : ut intelligeremus jussisse dominum , ut sub specie panis omnibus distribueretur , sub specie autem vini non item . the lo. b ps answer . if the divell himselfe should winnow me , by his examination in this point , he could not finde any fault either of commission , or omission , in my citing the words of bellarmine . and this would bellarmine his ghost tell this your suggester , if it should appeare unto him , saying : sir , my adversary ( the bishop ) hath not mistaken my meaning , but you his , who intending nothing else ( pag. 4. ) than to prove that the words of christ , in saying [ doe this as often &c. ] are also words of command , and i affirmed as much . as for the other part , concerning the cup , and the words which you say he omitted ( sub specie autem vini non jussisse , that is , christ did not likewise commād concerning the cup ; ) you could not inferre that he omitted the effectuall part of his proofe : for his proofe was onely to shew that [ doe this ] were words of command whether wee understand [ doe this ] spoken of the bread , or [ doe this as often as &c. ] spoken of the cup , both which are words of command ( as every man of common sense will confesse ; ) although non item ( as i said ) not to command alike , because [ doe this , ] spoken of the bread , i said were simply words of command . but [ doe this as often &c. ] spoken of the cup , although they were words of command , yet not simply so , but conditionally only , as thus , [ doe this , as often as you doe it , in remembrance of mee . ] and ( friend suggester ) you must further know that he was so farre from omitting my objection against protestants , touching christs conditionall speech [ doe this , as often as you shall doe it , in remembrance of me ] that ( which you conningly forbeare to acknowledge ) hee did fully confute ( in the same sect. pag. 45. ) that which you now object against him . so would bellarmine have told your suggester , whom i must further challenge for a double fault . first , for his charging mee falsely , with a fraudulent omission of words , when there was no cause at all to cite them . secondly , for that he himselfe omitted my confutation of bellarmine , when it served directly for my justification . the lord baron his owne epilogue , pleading charitie . these particulars i have set downe both to satisfie your lordships desire , that i should set downe somewhat in writing , that a triall might be made whether i had reason not to rest satisfied in those allegations ; wherein i must acknowledge , that your lordship shall doe a worke of charity to give me satisfaction . the lo : b ps answer , justifiing himself in all his other proofes , even by the exceptions now taken against him . it were to bee wished , your lordship had sought satisfaction in charity ; but they , that can discerne of qualities , will say that there is a great gulfe between charity and malignity . the one seeketh the reformation of him , whom he impeacheth , the other worketh , as much as may be , his ignominie and blemishment ; which was your ayme ( my lord ) in all your exceptions , which notwithstanding may in some sort plead for mee . for were it , they were five , or if you will five times five , errors committed in the number of two thousand other testimonies , sincerely alleaged , shall not the exceptions against so few be an approbation of all the rest ? and if so ; what then must become of your romish church , in her masse , but that ( as the seaventh booke of that treatise proveth ) it is to bee counted a vile brothel-house of superstition and idolatrie ? my lord , i should proceed to the second charge , but i give you to wit , that i am now arrested in the way , by a romish priest : i shall make a present dispatch with him ; onely be you pleased to afford me your presence , for the time , and judge what discharge i can make . feare not ( my lord ) i shall not desire any to be surety for me . a late slanderous crimination , made by a romish priest against the lo : bp. by objecting m. parsons his sober reckoning against him . the words of the romish priest , in his letter to his friend , are as followeth : let that knight take heed , how hee trusteth him , who was never brought to a sober reckoning , but was fond , false , or impertinent . so he , alluding to the book of m r. parsons , called , the sober reckoning . the lord bishops answere to the romish priest , shewing the faithlesnesse of his crimination . the objector , doubtlesse , had reason to conceale his name , even for his owne faithlesnesse sake : which is decernible enough , in his fradulent concealing of my answere to m. parsons . who writ a book called a sober reckoning , full fraught with many vile and ougly aspersions , and imputations of falsities aganst me ; and i returned him an answere , in a booke intituled an encounter , satisfying , from point to point , every exception , and leaving m. parsons on the score for so many , and as many moe falsifications , as he in that his reckoning did charge mee with . both the bookes have been now aboue twenty yeares extant ; yet hath there not appeared any one priest , out of the multitude of their romish seminaries , that upon examination of both our reckonings , did , or could except against any one farthing of my accompts ; or would allow as much as one word in writing , for the clearing of your s. robert , in the least parcell of his reckoning . i doe not thinke but your lordship ( who will bee knowne to have read all our protestant bookes ) can testifie this which i say . so that this tenebrio , by objecting against me a false and perfidious reckoning , were it never so sober , ( for the divel can be a lyar , although hee cannot bee unsober ) and by concealing my just iustification , falleth into that double condemnation , whereof it is written ; he that justifieth the wicked , and he that condemneth the righteous , they are both abomination to the lord. now this tenebrio is become both , hee , and hee . and although this slander were written but by one , yet i know , it hath been in the mouthes of many of your romish professors , who , when they can say nothing else , to my latter booke of the masse , they gull one another with the mention of imputations of false allegations , set downe in m. parsons his sober reckoning . therefore have i apprehended this occasion , to deliver somewhat concerning m. parsons ; the rather , because he is one , whom your lordship hath singled out , as a patterne of moderation : to the end that you may see the miserablenesse of your cause , which must be supported by such frauds and falshoods , as his have beene . the lo : b ps justification of himselfe , against m. parsons ; first , in generall , inserting , for his readers delight , m. parsons his syllogisme , and notable trick of not answering . the aegyptian dogge , passing by the river nilus , is said cautelously to licke here and there of the water , not daring to lappe any space of time any one where , for feare some crocodile catch hold of him , and devoure him . i once published a booke called a full satisfaction , written for the discovery of the rebellious positions and practises of romish priests . m. parsons fell upon it , with all the strength of his wit , singling out here and there that which he thought might seem to impeach my sincerity in some allegations of authors ; but the most materiall points , concerning the rebellious doctrine it selfe , he commōly pretermitted in , i think , an hundred places : and was not this to lappe here and there , and runne away ? and good reason , for in these pretermitted places were solid proofes of romish rebelliousnesse , a crocodile , which he durst not meddle with in that his dispute . his nimblenesse and agility in frisking in this kinde , was manifold . one i may not omit , which may recempence , in some part , your merry tale with a mad trick , which hee plaid mee , in answering to a confutation of his syllogisme . i made a prosyllogisme , which m r parsons in his ignorance called my syllogisme ; and then in his insolency tooke upon him to correct it , and to condemne mee for want of logicke ; after , in his scurrility , to send mee to cambridge , to learne more : howbeit out of his kindnesse , he willingly taught mee himselfe by a forme of syllogisme , of his own framing , which hee calleth a true forme of syllogisme , and a good forme of reasoning , according to the true rules of logick . notwithstanding , in this forme of syllogisme , wherein hee meant to expresse the greatest skill hee had , hee bewrayed the grossest errors he could , if he had studied to be absurd . for besides three other faults , which were repugnant to all rules of logick , the master-peece of his ignorance , or monster rather , was his fourth errour , by changing of the copula , in the premisses , which was maketh , as [ maketh competent iudges . ] and turning it into , are , in the conclusion , to wit , [ are competent iudges ] the absurdity wherof i illustrated by the like , as if one should argue thus . every one in framing his last will and testament [ maketh ] his own executor . but william cade frameth his last will and testament , therefore william cade [ is ] his owne executor . or else thus . every good huswife [ maketh ] a good pudding . but alice webb is a good huswife , therefore alice webb [ is ] a good pudding . your l p : professeth some schollership , say then , was it not reason that i should call m r parsons to a further account , for this his mis-shapen creature , which hee called a true forme of reasoning ? he therefore comming to make ( as he called his book ) a sober reckoning , reckoneth indeed after his fashion ; for the first , second , & third errours , saying ; lastly , his third quarrell is &c. as if the third had been the last , whereas the fourth , of changing the copula , was the last . but m r parsons skipping by the fourth , taketh his heeles at the first sight of this other crocodile , & answereth nothing at al , knowing that the absurdity thereof , if it had been published , would have exposed him to the hisses and scorne of all the sophisters in his owne colledge at rome . as for that his reckoning , there is not any conscionable man , whom i will not invite with all earnestnesse to reade , and examine , but yet with both his eyes ; by comparing it , and my encounter together . i shall , before i finish this first part of my discharge , give you a sufficient scantling of m r parsons his disposition , in calumniating mee , which i must doe by degrees . the excellency of m r parsons his penne , in respect of others of his order . the english seminaries of romish priests abroad never harboured a more excellent scribe , then was m r parsons , whether we observe his elegancie in style , dexterity in invention , subtilty in contrivance , audacity in undertaking , or acerbity and scurrility , in his invectives against his adversaries ; as all of his profession have witnessed , by their admiring , and in a manner onely not adoring , certainly in doating on him . the vnrulinesse of whose pen , and the virulency thereof , none hath more felt than my selfe ; aswell in his booke of mitigation , as in his ( antiphrastically so called ) sober reckoning . that m r parsons his pen , by reason of falsity and bitternesse , made him unworthy to object falsifications to any other ; by the censure of romish priests . by the law of nations , no infamous person may be admitted for a competēt accuser of any other ; much lesse when the infamy hee laboureth of , is the faculty of lying . but who shall now accuse this accuser m r parsons of lying , which is the fowlest of crimes , as that wherewith god himselfe ( such is the transcendencie of his truth ) cannot possibly dispense ? but it seemeth hee hath met with the pen of some as bitter and unruly as his owne ; for the romish priests have blazoned him ( summarily ) saying : m r parsons was expelled out of his colledge in oxford for libelling . an infamous libeller he was ; nor was there a lewder to be found , or more scurrulous : of the tribe of dan , coluber in via . for cogging and lying , as notorious a wretch as was in his age : a cosening mate , a caitiffe , who might be set on the pillory for forgery : a most barbarous fellow , using machavilian atheisme . so they , besides many other-like noble emblems ; yet is this the man , whom this lord presented ( among foure more ) as a president of moderation , void of bitternes . but upon this decyphering of him , i might justly require , that a man of no credit may not be admitted to discredit another . yet i shall intreat your l p. to esteeme of all those their invectives , as of fiery flashes of intemperate braines , except i shall be able to confirme as much , by an experto crede , in verifying as much from his owne vnruly pen against my selfe . ten particvlar instances of such false imputations of falsities , by m r parsons , unto the lord b p : which any sensible man may discerne at the first view . i shall forbeare all repetition of any other falsifications , which may require an intelligent and rationall reader to be our iudge ; i confine my selfe wholy to such accusations of his , which are obvious to sense , and which any vulgar man , who understands the language , at the first sight may cry out upon , and condemne , both of galsome bitternesse , and of wilfull fraud and falshood . i. out of polydore virgil , i alleaged an observation shewing how the names of some popes fell out to be assumed per antiphrasin ; as being homo maleficus , to be called bonifacius ; being timidus , to have the name of leo , and divers other the like . the bitternesse of m. parsons his accusation against me , because of this allegatiō , was this ; it is a malicious minister , having neither simplicity nor truth , but of a lost cōscience by a manifest & malitious cavillation . harken now to his falshood ; for , whē it was made known that i alleaged that passage out of the genuine book of polydore , wherein originally it was set down by himselfe , and not in the after-editions , corrupted by their romish inquisitors : wherein the former sentence of polydore ( as most of all his other ingenuous confessions ) have beene since effaced and cancelled , which made any whit for advantage to protestants causes ; m. parsons ( a sober reckoner forsooth ) maketh no other reckoning but this * : i had not ( saith hee ) that part of polydore by mee . do you marke , my lord , hee could not say , that hee was ignorant of that perfect edition of polydore , which might have justified mee , but that hee had it not by him . so then the case is this ; the accuser m. parsons hath by him a false knave ( that i may so call their corrupted edition of polydore ) to witnesse against mee , and knoweth of another witnesse , an honest fellow ( namely true polydore in his owne first edition ) who would have justified mee to the full , whom hee passeth by and neglecteth , because hee is not at hand . and what is , if this be not a wilfull blindnesse ? which may deserve his own bitternesse to be retorted upon himselfe , whereby he traduced mee for a man of no truth , and of a lost conscience . ii. out of carerius i delivered these words , verè celsus , whereunto m. parsons thus : nay , but it should have beene , verò ; and there is but one edition of the booke of carerius . harken now how upon this it thundereth and lighteneth ; where is this mans innocency ? ( saith m. parsons ) can this be ignorance ? can it be done but of purpose ? and consequently by a guilty conscience : what may a man beleeve of all that he saith , when we see him intangled in such foolish trechery ? this is his bitter vomit ( as your l p : seeth ) but now observe his falshood ; for i alleaged the colen edition of carerius , where it did appeare to the view of many romish professors , that came greedily to see it , and found the word , verè , and not verò . and at length m. parsons was willing to credit mee thus much , after he had said , there was but one edition of carerius . therefore was his former invective the venome of an unruly pen. iii. emanuel sa was produced , saying , et fortè potiori cum ratione . m. parsons his bitter exception ; it is to be englished thus , perhaps with better reason : but m. morton left out the word [ perhaps , ] which was craftily done . behold now his owne egregious fraud and craft ; for although i had not the word , perhaps , in my translation , yet might he have seen that i used the word , peradventure , thus : peradventure with better reason . what then but blindnesse it selfe would have made that accusation ? but yet blindnesse of the worst kinde , which is wilfull , not seeing that which hee saw : for in the same booke of his , he one where repeated those my very words , and peradventure with better reason . iv. i am accused to have said nothing to the practises of protestants . this omission he calleth , in his bitternesse , dissimulation and hypocrisie . observe his falshood , for he afterwards was compelled to confesse , that * i did endeavour both before and after to discourse of their practises . what disease will your l p : call that in him , who could not , or would not see that which any man , that hath a true sight and a temperate brain , could not but see ? v. i chanced to cite the text of the prophet esay 29. 9. you are blinde , and make others blinde . m. parsons bitternesse : m. morton hath cited a text , noting the chapter and verse , wherein his fraud might be discovered ; wherein i note a rare singularity in this man , above all others , by false alleaging , corrupting , and mangling a text of scripture : let any man read the place of esay it selfe , and hee shall finde no such matter , either in words or sense . as though i had devised a text for a purpose . marke his falshood , for they are the expresse words of our english translation ; yea and he that then raised this lewd clamour against mee , when hee commeth to reckon for this , answereth ; i saw not ( saith hee ) nor looked not on the english translation . do you heare ? hee saith not , that he could not have seene , or looked on the english translation : but he looked not , ( that is ) hee would not , and notwithstanding hee would accuse mee . a more perfect character of a malicious calumniator there cannot be . vi. lambertus schaffnaburgensis was brought in , saying , all the bishops of italie ; &c. m. parsons exerciseth his bitternesse : here the word , all , is fraudulently urged , so that he dealeth not sincerely scarcely in any thing so he , for only citing the word [ all ] albeit ( see his falshood ) the word , omnes , all , are the expresse words of the author , as manifestly , as in that saying of christ , come unto me all yee that are beavy laden . vii . the testimonie of salmeron the iesuite is used , to prove the supremacie of kings . m. parsons groweth to be bitter , as followeth . this is a trick of m. mortons art , to adde , in spirituall affaires , which is notably false . but hearken to the evidence , for my words , which are yet extant in that booke , were these , in civill causes . the words , spirituall , and civill , one would thinke might have as easily beene discerned by any man of sobriety , as the sunne from the moone . vii . tolossanus is cited ; as a witnesse only ; m. parsons commeth upō me with a tart invective : can any thing be more fraudulently alleaged ? yet see his falshood ; he could not say that i had done my witnesse tolossanus wrong , in alleaging his testimonie , but not taking so much leasure as to looke at him in the margin ; hee falleth foule upon me , as if i had beene the author my selfe . some disease sure it was in his eyes , that he could not discerne the producer of a witnesse from a witnesse himselfe , especially in a case of an accusation . viii . to make me like himselfe , in fostering traiterous positions , he saith ; m. morton justifieth the saying of goodman . bitterly , as you see , & as blindly outright ; for my words were thus : if i should justifie goodman , my heart would condemne my selfe . was not this sensible enough , my lord , to any man of common sense ? ix . in the question about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , m. parsons venting his acerbity , saith ; m. morton hath a shift to deceive his reader . bitterly and brain-sickly too , by your leave , for afterwards he was compelled to confesse , that the letters set downe , for his direction , in the margin , were so dimme , that hee mistooke them . the tenth instance is touching the oration of q. marie , which i expressed out of hollinshead , but what of this ? the minister lyeth openly , citing him contrary to his meaning . thus exasperate he is ; but why contrarie to hollinsheads meaning ? because ( forsooth ) foxe reporteth that oration otherwise . what is , if this bee not open lying indeed ? like to a juglers trick of legerdemaine , in deluding his beholders , when he conveyeth a ring into another mans pocket , and then calleth the man cozener when hee hath done . each one of these falshoods , wherein m. parsons hath beene deprehended , might impeach his credit much ; but all together , what doe they , but proclaime to the world , that hee was either wittingly , or at least witlesly false in his accusations against mee ? m. parsons his griefe , before his death , published by a romish priest. mr. warmington a romish priest , in his booke called a moderate defence of the oath of allegeance , pag. 65. hath these words ; it was reported from a gentleman present in the citie , in his life time , and at his death , upon the acknowledgement , that hee was the author of the catholike letter ( whether with sorrow and griefe for some points unadvisedly and erroneously written , and brought in question in his old age ; or somewhat else , in one of the bookes of dr. morton , touching the lawfulnesse of the oath of supremacie in some cases ) soone after fell sicke , and died within eight dayes . so your priest. some others , who will be knowne to have knowne somewhat , have said , it was because he had justified the base and bainfull trick of mentall reservation out of eight speeches of christ , in the eight chapter of s. iohns gospell . which being knowne to some of the learned at rome , they held that his collection was blasphemous ; even as i also did , by an argument grounded upon his owne confession , wherein he held mentall reservation unlawfull in points of doctrine and faith . which being granted , it must follow that it could be no lesse than blasphemy to assume that the same mentall reservation should bee found in such speeches of christ , in his holy gospell , which are the fundamentall grounds of our christian faith . i have not mentioned all these particulars against m. parsons , in the spirit of insultation , upon an adversarie deceased , ( god forbid ! ) nay , so farre was i from desiring his death , that ( as one yet living can well witnesse , who brought me the first knowledge of it ) i wished , that god had lēgthned his dayes , that he might have seene his owne errors , before his death ; i meane his reckoning of fifty fals allegatiōs , just as unjustly , as did the unjust steward in the gospell , when he would have his masters debtors write down fiftie , but yet in a farre different manner . for that steward reckoned fiftie , by subtraction , to deceive his master : but our reckoner , by addition and multiplication , reckoneth fiftie , to deceive his reader . notwithstanding , such was my christian respect unto him , that i wished hee had grieved for them , as well as he is said to have done for his blasphemous abuse of scripture . i hope with that sorrow , which causeth repentance to salvation , never to be repented of , as the apostle speaketh . it will be time , to draw to an end of this first part of my discharge , after i have acquainted your l p : with that which followeth in the next place . that the romish church hath provided , that her clergie can scarce possibly be legally accused , be they never so criminall . pope silvester decreed that no laick should accuse a clergie man. there might be some reason for this , in some cases : but he furthermore constituted , and ordained , that a b p : should not be held convicted vnder seaventy two witnesses ; nor a priest , under 44 ; nor a deacon , vnder 27 ▪ by which meanes it was provided , that , were b ps , priests , or deacons , never so wicked or dishonest , yet laicks ( lest they should seeme to slaunder them with a matter of truth ) durst give no other censure or report of them , than of pious and honest men . what vitious clerke would feare to dwell there , where all the crows are white , be they never so blacke ; and where flat nosed people , are the most comely ? but yet are not these wise men in their generation ? they are . but alas seely wee ; one laicke , if a lord , shall be of more credit , in the opinion of romish professors , against a b p , than seaventy two others of our religion , that should stand for his iustification . but the best is , the b p : shall never need any proctor or advocate for him , so long as god in his goodnes shall give him power and liberty to defend his owne innocencie . and now , leaving those faithlesse accusers , i shall more precisely attend your lordship in the next part of this discharge , in answering your exceptions against my style , by applying my speech unto your selfe . the second part of this discharge , against the exceptions taken to the lord bishops acerbity of style , by the lay lord himselfe . the lord baron himselfe . i am not satisfied in the bitternesse of your stile . the lord b ps answer . it may seeme somewhat strange , that your lordship , having as it were surfeited of the bitternesse of the stile , should complaine , notwithstanding , that you are not satisfied . but you require that i should discharge my selfe of this your taxation of bitternesse . before i answer , i must aske , whether you except against any one bitter word , as unjustly applied to your romish doctors ? surely i find not one , and so it must follow , that you quarrell a just bitternesse . or is it because the words are vnseemely ? then i take my answer from philip king of macedon , who when lasthenes and olympius , with their complices , complained unto him , that they had beene called traytors , by some of his subjects ; made them this answer : my macedonians ( quoth he ) are but rustiques , who can call a spade by no other name than a spade . as well may i say , the bitternesse of my stile , was plainnesse , not calumniousnesse ; but what 's that , you are about to object ? the lord barons first instance . let any man peruse card. perron his volumes , whereof sundry parts are lately translated out of the french into english , card. allen , card. bellarmine , reynolds , parsons , campian , fitzherbert , brerely , and others ; and i am confident he shall find not any of them to say , that the protestant church playeth the bawd , or that the protestant communion is the strumpet , or that they charge the protestants with sacrilegious and idolatrous abominations , as is in the first page of your lordships booke , and in the epistle dedicatorie . the lord b ps answer . this observation is in deed of very great importance , whereby you may seeme to deserve praise and thankes of the protestants , for this ingenuous acknowledgement , ( to wit ) that although protestants charge the romish church with sacrilegious and idolatrous abominations , ( upon reasons , which your lordship hath read in the eighth booke of the treatise of the masse , in two full sections ) yet card. bellarmine , reynolds , parsons , campian , and others , never charge the protestants with any sacrilegious and idolatrous profanation at all . which their silence ( as once i said ) as it is an argument of their owne guiltinesse , so may it bee a proofe of our integrity : otherwise wee our selves should not deny , but that if they could justly impute any such idolatrous impiety unto us , they might as justly call our church , in that respect , strumpet and whore ( every idolatry being a spirituall adultery ) as well as did the holy * prophets use the same bitter termes against iuda and israel in the same respect ; yet with mouthes sanctified by the holy spirit of god. and i cannot make my selfe more perfect than were the prophets of god. the l. barons second instance . or that the protestant writers use odious vncharitablenesse , intolerable arrogancy , vile perjury , extreme madnesse and folly , and plaine blasphemie , pag. 67. the lord b ps answer . in the place , now quoted , i promised a discovery of crimes , which i laid to the charge of romish writers , and in the section it selfe i performed as much . for , their preferring a custome in your church , which ( as they confesse ) worketh lesse grace to the soules of christian men , before a custome of christ and his apostles , confessed to operate more grace ; i termed an odious vncharitablenesse . their open and professed extolling of the wisdome of the romish church , above the wisdome of the apostles , and the practice of the most primitive church universall , as well greeke as romane , i called an intolerable arrogance . their swearing to admit all apostolicall traditions , and yet to reject some , i named vile perjury ( whereof there is a full section in the eighth booke . ) their advancing , in point of antiquity , their custome of three , or at most foure hundred yeares old , above the contrary custome , before that , for above a thousand yeares , even to the dayes of christ and his apostles , i judged to bee plaine madnesse . and lastly , your iesuites allowing a power to your pope , to dispense with the divine law of god , i held to be blasphemie it selfe . all these points were truly discovered , and now my style is challenged of bitternesse by you . who perceiving the proofes , whereby i made evident such doctrines to be sacrilegious , idolatrous , &c. are you more offended with me , for calling them so , than with them for making them such ? say now , upon your second thoughts , is this a conscionable taxation , my lord ? i would gladly have learned what termes your lordship would have supplied in this case ? would it have pleased you that i had called vncharitablenesse amiable ; the arrogancy tolerable ; the perjury noble ? so indeed doe they , who masque the visages of sins with the vizard of virtues ; calling drunkennesse , good-fellowship ; pride , comelinesse ; rage , valour ; bribery , gratification ; a society of promiscuous lust , the family of love . not i , my lord , i leave that faculty to them , who can delight in transformed devils . the l. barons third instance . or that the protestant historians are uncleane beasts , flat liars , and the beleevers of them starke fooles . 157. pag. the lord b ps answer . the matter was this , ( but you will bee loath to heare it . ) your romish historians reckon up some thirteene miraculous apparitions of true flesh , and true blood seene ( as they say ) in the eucharist ; and of the separation of one from the other , the blood being shed , and dropping out , and the like . to these i oppose your romish theologues and divines , confuting such kinde of relations by good and solid reasons ; saying that in such apparitions there could not be true flesh : and others denying absolutely that christs blood can bee properly said to be shed out of his body , after his resurrection , as you have heard in the first part of this discharge . hereupon i came to conclude saying ; if therefore credit may be given to your judicious divines , then are , and were the authors of those apparitions flat liars , their reporters incredible writers , and their beleevers stark fooles . what have i here said , which your divines ( who have avouched as much as i alleaged ) will not justifie in condemnation of such delusions ? only i called the historians , because of their indiscretion , ( metaphorically ) vncleane beasts , accordingly as ancient fathers haue done the beleevers of fables . and did i not contrarily call your divines , by way of commendation , cleane beasts that can chew the cud ? that is , discerne truth from falshood , as likewise the holy fathers have taught ; in which respect ( as you see ) i named them also iudicious divines . i demand therefore why your lordship should bee more displeased with mee , for calling those historians liars , and their beleevers fooles , than with your owne learned divines , who proved them to be such ? true zeale and jealousie for god would hate all feinings of miracles , as the worst kinde of lying , being indeed the counterfeiting of the seales of god almighty ; and whereby the transgressor becommeth guilty of highest treason . the lord barons reply . let mee intreat you not to discourage me so much by this your intimation , to make it faire play to call women bawds , or whores , or men vncleane beasts , starke fooles , arrant liars , if we think we can by argument prove them so . i may doubt lest i my selfe differing from your lordship in many of those opinions ( for which i heare others thus pitifully taxed ) should incur the same censure , which if i thought would bee , i would rather choose to sleepe in a whole skin , and leave ere i began . the lord b ps answer . never shall i seeke to discourage your lordship from any good indevour , howsoever you may dissent from that which i thinke . but i must confesse that i wish you had knowne what you did , when you writ thus : for the proofe which i brought , to make them appeare to bee such , was not mine , but the confessions of your owne romish authors . and had it not beene better for you suavitâr curasse cutem , in quiet silence , than to have become so unjustly taxatious , and put your selfe upon so desperate an enterprise ? the l ds instance in his letter . with divers such like phrases , pag. 27. 41 , 42. 101. 106. 123. 126. 131. 137. 151. 177. 197. 223. 213. 200. and many others in the first booke , besides what is in the second booke , which ( as yet ) i have not thorowly perused . the lord b ps answer . peruse the rest , i pray you , and when you have done , i shall desire you to set them downe expresly , and so i am sure the intelligent reader will find , that you had as much reason to conceale these , as you had little cause to reveale the former . i adde , that your lordship after your much raking , sifting , and winnowing of the parts of the eight bookes of that treatise of the masse , have found but onely five sowre grapes , which hath set your teeth on edge , and are angry therewith , albeit you met with five hundred other passages , wherein i , having the like occasion to use vexatious , and stinging termes , yet forbare , and blunted the style of my pen. what shall i say in this case , my lord ? onely i say as the apostle said unto such partialists , you will forgive me this wrong . the lord barons objection , in his replie . my objections , against bitternesse of speech were not grounded upon , whether those termes might be in our owne judegments sufficiently proved , but whether in a treatise publiquely printed concerning one of the highest articles of faith , set forth by an eminent person for learning and dignity , such bitter termes , and so many of them , were either charitable or seemely . the lord b ps answer . here are two as odde and uncouth instructions , as i have heard of . the first is , that no writer may use bitter speeches against a crime , which he , in his owne judgement , deemeth may deserve such bitternesse : so that it must bee a crime , now , to name a crime : to see one reeling in the street , and after wallowing in his owne vomit , and to call him drunkard ; to heare one swearing outragiously , and to say he is profane ; to know one lead a lewd & filthie life , and to cōdemne him of iasciviousnesse . the second advice is , that no person of eminence ought to censure any publikely with termes of bitternesse , in case of an high article of faith. this would make well for arians , pelagians , yea and atheists themselves , if in denying of one , or other , or all articles of faith , they should not bee therefore censured , according to their deserved appellations ; both charitably , to reduce them from erring , yea and seemely too , because there is no better seemlinesse , than congruity , as of manners , so of words . and this is , when epithets are sutable to the things and persons of whom we speake . s. paul was a person of great eminence , and so was peter also , yet paul reprehended peter to his face , for that , which if it had not beene reformed , might occasionally have brought in schisme into the church , and errour in the faith of some . the lord barons objection . he , whose example ought to be preferred before all examples , and whose precept bindeth above all other , saith , estotemites , quià ego sum mitis . the woman that was brought before him , for being found in adultery , though there wanted no proofes thereof , yet did not hee call her strumpet , because it was a just imputation , but mercifully and mildly dismist her , salved her credit , only warning her to sin no more . s. paul witnesseth of him , that when he was reviled , he did not revile againe : s. luke writing of s. mary magdalen , did not , under colour of a just imputation , call her strumpet , but only saith , erat mulier in civitate peccatrix . the lord b ps answer . christ was not onely mitis , but even ipsa mansuetudo ; and to his faithfull penitents , propitiation it selfe ; notwithstanding hee called the pharisees blinde , the malicious iewes hee termed children of the devill ; peter ( for tempting him ) satan ; and iudas ( because of his obduration of heart in sinning ) a devill . the woman , deprehended in adultery , he indeed called not strumpet , for shee carried her name printed in her forehead , ( being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) shee was taken in adultery . if then he had named her so , had it beene an epithet either vncharitable , or vnseeemely , as you have pretended ? so should you have blasphemously condemned the law of god , deut. 22. 12. the prophets , ezech. 16. ose 3. the apostles , rom. 7. 3. and s. iames 4 4. yea and christ himselfe , matth. 5. 28. luk. 16. 18. mary magdalen is not called in the gospell adultresse , it is true , but yet worse , a woman in the city a sinner , by way of aggravation ( namely ) such a sinner , in that trade of sinning , that there was not another in the whole city comparable unto her , as your owne commentaries will tell you . yea and s. paul , who himselfe would not answer the reviler with reviling , yet held it a part of christian justice to denominate wicked men by their owne vices , naming the galathians , foolish , and the sorcerer elymas , the childe of the devill . the lord barons objection . and though i alleage these examples to one that can much better teach mee my duty , yet i hope you will hold mee excused , as being enforced thereunto , for the defence of my being not satisfied in the bitternesse of the style . the lord b ps answer . except you had held me unworthy to be your teacher , you would have beene satisfied with the distinction of bitternesse , which i gave you , without which none shall ever be able to reconcile the speeches of the prophets , apostles , or of christ himselfe . there is a bitternesse ( said i ) medicinall , and there is a bitternesse pernicious and vindicative . the medicinall bitternesse hath its ' ingredients , truth , and charity , used either for correcting manners and errors in the parties reproved ; or as antidotes to others , to preserve them from morall or dogmaticall contagions . the pernicious bitternesse i call that , which is envenomed either with vntruth or maliciousnesse , and is exercised onely in virulencie , for revenge , against them whom we seeke to vexe , which is every-where condemned in scripture . take unto you a similitude . the iewes , who offered vinegar and gall unto christ , if they had done it ( as some ghesse ) to stupifie his senses , thereby to free him from extremity of paine , that vinegar and gall might have relished somewhat of charity : but if it had beene done to adde unto him a greater vexation , it must needs bee judged a iewish cruelty . neverthelesse , if you adde a second member of lawfull bitternesse , which may bee called iudiciall , you shall not doe amisse ; in which kinde may bee reckoned christs invectives , to wit , o you scribes and pharises , hypocrites , and such like , by way of condemnation . my lord , if you would be so docible , as to take out this distinction , it would both satisfie you , concerning my bitternesse , and preserve you from blasphemy against the speeches of christ , and his holy apostles . the lord baron his fifth instance , and most urgent , bitter , and gallfull exception against bitternesse . to my exception against your saying in your booke , intituled romish positions , viz. that it is as hard a thing to finde a loyall catholique , as a white aethiopian , wherein you except against the word , catholike . the lord b ps answer . the word catholike , simply taken , i never excepted against , ( for i have not forgot my creed ) but against your romish appropriation of it to your selves ; to whom it belongeth farre lesse ( as i have proved in the romish grand imposture ) than unto protestants . i returne to your exception . the lord barons objection . your owne words being , we may as well expect grapes from thornes , or a white aethiopian , as loyall subjection from this religion . the lord b ps answer . whereunto i answered you by letters , that i was ever farre from terming all papists disloyall , and i desired you to consider the place againe , and i doubt not but it alone will perswade your selfe , that i did not note all your romish professors of disloyaltie , but spake restrainedly ; applying my speech to them , who were inspired with the spirits of those priests and iesuites , whose positions were in that booke discovered to be fully rebellious . thus much i then answered in presumption of mine owne sinceritie , having not seene that place , in that my booke , not almost in twenty yeeres space : and yet i thinke i shall not erre in that my divination , being now called to a further reckoning . the lord barons objection . to which , i having perused the place againe , i reply first that no man ( who hath read your books , or knowne your readinesse in writing or arguing ) will easily beleeve that your words ( generally and without exception ) denying loyall subjection to bee found in that religion , doe notwithstanding restraine your generall position to such onely as are discovered to bee fully rebellious : as if you only meant , that they onely of the romish religion are disloyall , who are discovered to bee fully rebellious : or that they are disloyall who are disloyall . no , my lord , this savours not of your wit and learning , neither is this your manner of arguing . the lord b ps answer . thanks , my lord , that you thinke i would not argue so absurdly , or otherwise than i have done in other cases , rationably , i hope ; conscionably , i am sure . observe then , that the tenth reason there given is expresly against romish priests only , who were possessed with those former seditious positions therein discovered . this was the subject of the question in the same book ( pag. 47. ) confirmed by the examples of your doctors and iesuites ( pag. 50. ) together with the practices of your popes , in the place objected ( pag. 51. ) the conclusion was , that no loyall subjection could be expected ( said i ) from this religion , ( to wit ) this of that rebellious doctrine of your romish priests and popes there specified ; and of no other . which you might as well have seene , at the first reading , by distinguishing the persons to whom , from the persons against whom i writ . the former were the romish laicks only , whether they were of the nobilitie , or commonaltie , to whom the epistle dedicatorie was directed , whom i called seduced , because of their popish religion ; and sought to perswade them to beware lest they also might be intangled in this other point of romish rebelliousnesse ; telling them that i had presented unto them that discovery of such doctrines of their priests , to the end that you ( said i ) through the detestation of their ( viz. priests ) practices , might be brought to a suspicion of their inchantments , not doubting but when you have perceived the damnablenesse of their doctrine , you will easily avoid the danger of their charme . and in the end of the same epistle ( pag. 52. ) immediately after the words now objected against mee , i added , saying : thus have i proved , deare brethren , the dogmaticall doctrine of these men , ( viz. romish priests ) not confuting them , for this i understood was not your desire , but revealing them . wherein any , at the first sight , may observe that i produced the romish laicks , as men altogether ignorant of such rebellious positions , and practices ; when i said , not doubting but when you have perceived the damnablenesse of their doctrine : but what doctrine ? what but that , which was there proved to be rebellious ? as yet therefore i held them guiltlesse , and plainly distinguished them , in this respect , from romish priests and doctors , who were proved to be the authors of both ; and thereupon also , in the end of the same epistle , saying to the foresaid laicks ; be you exhorted ( my brethren ) to take this ( meaning that discoverie ) as an antidote to preserve you against all such poisonable positions and practices , ( viz. of romish priests . ) your friends ( my lord ) of your owne profession , would give you small thankes , if they should see here rehearsed the whole speech , which you use in a vouching the full interest that you have in your romish priests . i chuse rather the defensive part for my selfe , than the offensive against you ; and therefore i expect what you can further object . the lord barons objection . you saying , there could not bee expected any subjection from this religion , could not bee restrained to the treasonable point onely , because one traiterous act cannot be a religion in it selfe . the lord b ps answer . true , one act cannot bee a religion it selfe , but yet one position and doctrine may . the position of the manichees , forbidding the communion of the cup in the sacrament of the lords supper , upon an opinion that there is a devillish spirit in wine , was but one of many of their heresies : and yet may it bee lawfull for us to say of this one position of theirs , this is the religion of the manichees . and my discourse , you know , was as well of your priests positions , as of their practices . the lord barons objection . neither doth this extend onely to priests , for that all that are of the romish religion are as fully of that religion , as the priests . the lord b ps answer . as fully as the priests ? god forbid ! for so should they also hold the traiterous opinions of bellarmine , allen , reynolds , stapleton , creswell , and parsons , besides many others detected in the same booke ; against which allegations m. parsons himselfe ( a man knowne unto you for his malignity and adversenesse ) could take no exception . my lord , be advised , peruse this your objection againe , and then tell mee whether i have not deserved well of you , by my not rehearsing your speech to the full , by a figure ( that you may better like of figurative speeches ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . the lord barons objection . i was only troubled to finde my selfe condemned , not for that i have any disloyall thought in my heart , but only for being of the romish religion . the lord b ps answer . i answer as did once our saviour , doth no man condemn you ? neither doe i ; farre bee it from mee , that i should impeach your loyalty , which i shall hope is that , which the apostle s. paul taught of a subjection , not for feare only , but for conscience sake also : and then may it not bee the subjection , approved by pope paulus , and maintained by your cardinall bellarmine , and other romish priests , which is to bee subject with a [ donec ] that is , vntil there may be power to resist ; ( as you have read in that booke of romish rebellious positions , wherewith you are so much offended . ) which kind of subjection king david would have called brutish , as that of the horse and mule ; which are to bee held in with bit and bridle . onely i cannot but be sensible of the injury done unto mee , by your violent enforcing upon mee a purpose to have condemned all lay romanists for being of that religion there discovered and condemned , which was direct treason . you ought to have consulted with the college of sorbon , and those parisian doctors would have taught you to distinguish even of romish religion : discerning romish , in respect of the romish court , from romish , in respect of the romish church in generall . the first , they know , hath often harboured seditious documents , which they have alwayes impugned , for the defence and preservation of the gallicane regalities and liberties . besides , there are two wayes to free your laicks from suspition of that doctrine , which your priests hold , and professe among themselves . the one is their owne ignorance , in not knowing it ; the other their incredulity , in not beleeving it . i could give instance in that answer , which i had from an honourable personage , of knowne and experienced loyalty to his king and state , saying , that notwithstanding his much acquaintance with iesuites , yet they never uttered any doctrine to him savouring of deposing of kings , or disturbing of kingdomes for religion-sake . this , said i , as it may bee an argument of their subtilty in concealing their pernicious positions ; so much more may it bee an evidence of your lordships integrity , which ( as it were ) commanded them silence . secondly , the not beleeving your priests , in such doctrines , is the next point of security , which i will presume many of your laicks ( albeit otherwise professedly of the romish religion ) doe detest , even from the unnaturall heinousnesse thereof , as a naturall turke or iew would abhorre a parricide . the lord barons objection . neither am i the only catholike who hath beene offended with that booke of romish positions , but all that have read it . the lord b ps answer . if you or any other have taken offence , which was not given , it cannot be my fault : i must not thinke my selfe so farre privileged , as that in defending the truth , i should not incurre the offence of some others . habent sua fata libelli : and you know who expostulated , saying , am i your enemy because i tell you the truth ? wee reade of them , who were hearers of the apostles of christ , that some scorned , and some beleeved . i wish you had rather beene of this some . but what 's next ? the lord barons objection . there is a booke intituled , the converted iew , written by a iesuite , who spareth not to print his great dislike thereof : and i doubt not but the same is printed in other bookes also . the lord b ps answer . why , my lord ? could your lordship conceive , that when i writ this booke , intituled a discovery of the rebellious positions and practices of romish priests and iesuites , that i expected or intended to please any iesuite ? a iesuite disliketh it ! and i dislike his disliking . this is yet but a paritie . iesuites are offended with the discovery of their disloyalty , and so were , often , the iewes with christs discovery of their hypocrisie . there is a parity in this al-also . how-ever , i stand sufficiently armed with that harnesse , which s. augustine once lent mee ; malim ut scandalum committatur , quàm ut veritas amittatur . the lord barons objection . bvt by the speech i had with your lordship at london , i finde that you are not now of that mind ; of which i am very glad , and doe acknowledge my selfe satisfied , and will endevour to give the same satisfaction to others . the lord b ps answer . bvt stay a while , my lord ( i pray you ) and tell mee what minde you thought mee to bee of , when i writ so unto you ? if you imagine that i was of any other , than i had beene , at the writing of that booke of discoverie , and of those words therein , whereunto you have laid your whole battery , to oppugne them , you are much deceived ; and that you may know i have good evidence for mee , to say thus much , and for your lordship to be perswaded thereof , in my next booke ( written in the defence of that booke of discovery ) i gave this expresse acknowledgement , viz. i have writ against our romish adversaries , but not without note of difference and distinction ; being verily perswaded that divers , even the zealous among them , partly by light of the ingrafted law of reason , and partly from some glimpse of the gospell of christ , doe abhor such doctrines and practices , which have beene discovered in cases of rebellion and equivocation . how like you this , my lord ? doth this please you ? then may it satisfie you for my then-meaning , when i said , no loyall subjection can be expected from this religion , ( namely , of those popes and priests . ) and accordingly may it remove the scandall conceived from thence by your lordship and others . as for your subsequent requests , which you make , they are no way pertinent to our discourse ; i chuse rather to heare of your friendly inclination . the lord barons accommodation . you are an english man , and for that i must esteeme you ; you are a man of great reading , and for that i must respect you : you are a bishop of the english church and religion , which next to that religion i professe , i preferre above all other . the lord b ps answer . each of these respects i account as so many obligations upon mee , and such as deserve a correspondence ; 1. to embrace your lordship , in the name of english. 2. to wish that i were so learned , as to give you a full satisfaction . 3. to pray to god for his spirituall benediction upon you , as i am a bishop . 4. to tell you that the bosome of the english church lieth open to receive you , upon your profession of the truth of religion , so happily established therein ; which i wish may be to your eternall comfort . the lord barons tacit menacing . and therefore i shall be sorry that any vnruly pen should put it selfe in competence with yours , which could shew it selfe most bitter . the lord b ps answer . your lordship should not have threatned , as thinking to affright me with the mention of an unruly pen ▪ i have not so long borne the brunt and violence of the most enraged of all your pen-men , as to feare in any just cause , any mans pen , that is but made of a goose-quill . nor shall i seeke a supersedeas against him that threatneth : use your discretion , my lord , in inciting some man of indiscretion against mee ; for such he must be , that shall be unruly in his pen : the proverbe is , dementi gladium porrigere . the lord barons admonition . you know what becomes a great person to doe , and in your epistle dedicatory you commended that saying of artaxerxes to his souldier , non ut maledicas te alo , sed ut pngnes . good my lord doe as you say . the lord b ps answer . what is then maledicere , thinke you , my lord ? if you take it as opposite to benedicere , then may your romish church assume this as her proper character , shee being above all others the mother of cursings and maledictions . and if you take it for downright reviling and railing , then may the encounter , which i writ against m r parsons his scurrilous , calumnious , and bitter invectives against mee , witnesse my extreme patience and moderation ; as in the former part of this discharge hath already beene made manifest . the lord b ps conclusion . the apostle , when hee extolled his owne privileges , in comparing them with others , which hee did for the honouring of his apostolicall function , against the calumnies of his adversaries , hee , lest hee might incurre the suspition of arrogancy , preoccupated , saying , i speake foolishly , you have compelled me . so he , instructing thereby every minister of christ , of the lawfulnesse of a selfe-commendation , whensoever it shall be extorted from him by the iniquity of an envious and detractive adversary , upon a necessity of justifying and dignifying his owne calling . in which respect , selfe-praise , although it may seeme foolish in the outward sound and eares of carnall men , yet doth it relish of true prudence , in it's propersense , and in the apprehension of every conscionable christian. wherefore if any words have fallen from my quill , which may seeme to savour of a like affectation , i shall desire it may receive the like construction ; even for that i can , in like manner , excuse my selfe , saying , you have compelled mee , who have charged mee so unjustly with mis-allegations . to conclude , let mee aske you first what creature that is , which comming among the varieties of flowers , sucketh sweetnesse out of them ; next how different it is from another creature , which feedeth wholly upon venomous herbs and flowers . i would i had not cause to give you this protasis . notwithstanding i pray to god for each of you , that by the knowledge and sight of your owne errors , you may be brought to the acknowledgement of gods truth , to the glorie of his saving grace in christ iesus . all glorie be to god. finis . notes, typically marginal, from the original text notes for div a07804-e110 k. j. notes for div a07804-e1040 rom. 2. 1. notes for div a07804-e3020 num. 1. n. 2. n. 3. n. 4. notes for div a07804-e3790 n. 5. n. 6. deut. 5. mar. 1. matt. 28. 1. ioh. 5. n. 7. n. 8. n. 9. n. 10. n. 11. n. 13. notes for div a07804-e5880 n. 14. notes for div a07804-e6330 n. 15. n. 16. n. 17. n. 18. n. 19. n. 20. n. 21. n. 22. n. 23. n. 24. n. 25. n. 26. n. 27. n. 28. n. 29. * see above n. 20. * innocent . de offic . missae l. 3. c. 29. dicunt quidam , quòd panis convertitur in corpus christi , quia corpus sub eisdem panis accidentibus loco panis incipit esse : sicut dicitur à grammaticis , quando mutatur a , in e , cum à praesenti ago , formatur praeteritum egi. n. 30. n. 31. n. 32. n. 33. * suarez ies : tom. 3. disp : 75. sect 2. prima sententia est , sacerdotal●m sūptienem ess● de necessitate sacrificii , quatenus est perfecta consumptio , & inntatio victimae oblatae , sic moderni thomistae , soto . ledesima , quos secutus est bellar. l 1. de missa . c. ult . but salmeton ies. to : 9. tract . 29. p 223. at hoc non pertinet ad esseatiam sacrificii . n. 34. n. 35. n. 36. n. 37. n. 39. n. 40. n. 41. n. 42. n. 43. n. 44. n. 45. n. 46. n. 47. n. 48. notes for div a07804-e17910 n. 50. n. 51. n. 52. * treatise of the masse , book 4. pag. 196. and booke 7. pag. 100. notes for div a07804-e18950 n. 53. notes for div a07804-e19230 * barthol . gaventius cōment . in rubricas missalis breviarii romani in rubrica [ sit admixta aqua . ] miscere aquam vino ( inquit ) est de praecepto ecclesiae tantū . conc. trid. sess. 22. and he citeth also suares . see b●rth ▪ also part . 3. tit . 4 pa. 142. lib. missalis . notes for div a07804-e19640 n. 56. n. 57. n. 58. n. 59. notes for div a07804-e21070 n. 60. prov. 17. 15. n. 62. notes for div a07804-e22330 polyd. virgil. de invent. rerum . lib 4. cap. 10. ( before it was purged by the romish inquisitors ) * see the encounter , cap. 14. p. 229. mitigation . cap. 6. pa. 234. encount . cap. 12. p. 183. see the encounter . c. 13. pag. 219. mitigat . c. 4. pa. 131. * sober reckoning . see my encount . cap. 11. p. 173. mitigat . c. 2. pag. 88. see my preamble . p. 12 and the encount . cap. 12. p. 181. encount . c. 14. pag. 208. 1 encount . b. 2. pag. 15. & 16. preamb. p. 26. and encount . pag. 191. preamb. p. 72. & encount . cap. 12. p. 167. preamb. p. 75. encount . c. 12. p. 169. preamb. p. 80. encount . c. 12. p. 117. n. 64. encount . b. 2. cap. 10. n 65. notes for div a07804-e24340 n. 66. n. 67. * ezech. ch . 16. & chap. 23. ose chap. 3. n. 68. n. 69. n. 70. n. 71. n. 72. n. 73. n. 74. n. 74. n. 75. n. 76. n. 77. n. 78. n. 79. n. 80. n. 81. n. 82. n. 83. n. 84. 1 cor. 11. 17. &c. 12. v. 11.