A reioindre to M. Iewels replie against the sacrifice of the Masse. In which the doctrine of the answere to the .xvij. article of his Chalenge is defended, and further proued, and al that his replie conteineth against the sacrifice, is clearely confuted, and disproued. By Thomas Harding Doctor of Diuinitie.

The .3. Diuision. (Book 3)

The Ansvvere.

THe Scripture it selfe ministring euidēt proufe for the Oblatiō of Christ to his Father by the Priestes of the New Testament, in the Institution of this Holy Sacrament, in the figure of Melchisedech, and in the Prophecie of Malachie the Prophete: the authorities of the Fathers needed not to be alleaged, were not the same Scripture by the ouerthwarte, and false interpre∣tations of our aduersaries wrested, and tourned to a cō∣trary sense, to the horrible seducing of the vnlearned.

Iewel.

Alas, vvhat toole is there so vveake, that M. Harding vvil refuse, to strike vvithal? To prooue his imagined Kind of Sacrifice, he hath brought vs forth out of his great stoare, the example of Melchisedeck, and the Pro∣phecie of Malachie: As if he vvould reason thus, God saith vnto Christ, Thou arte a Priest for euer according to the order of Melchise∣dek:* 1.1 Or, God saith by the Prophete Malachie,* 1.2 A pure Oblation shalbe offred vnto me in euery place: Ergo, The Priest hath Au∣thoritie, and power, to offer vp the Sonne of God vnto his Fa∣ther. If he had not had good choise, and stoare of Authorities, he vvould neuer haue begonne vvith these.

But he addeth further, as mater of greeuance, That these plaine Scriptures, by the ouerthwarte, and false Interpretations of his Aduersaries, are wreasted, and turned to a contrary sense, and that, (as he saith) to the horrible seducing of the vnlearned. Doubt∣lesse here is a very horrible accusation. Hovv be it, if vve happely had mis∣taken these places, and our errour therein vvere fully prooued: yet should not M. Harding in such horrible termes reprooue vs, for doing that thing once, that he, and his felovves doo so often. But by vvhat vvordes, by vvhat false Interpretation, into vvhat peruerse or Heretical Sense, haue vve so horribly vvreasted these Scriptures? M. Harding is vvise, is e∣loquente,

is vvatcheful, is circumspecte, is fast addicted vnto his cause: he dissembleth, and leaueth nothing, that any vvay may sexue his purpose. If our Errours be so horrible, he should not haue spared them: If there be none, he should not thus haue touched them. If M. Hardinge vvinke at them, vvho can see them? If M. Hardinge knovv them not, vvho can knovv them?

Harding.

Whether my tooles be weake, as you ieast, or of good strength, let it be iudged by the strokes they geue, with which doubteles the heresie that ye sustaine aganst the outward and sigular Sacrifice of the Churche, is striken downe, and quite ouerthrowen. And the same tooles haue the chiefe Doctours and auncient Fathers of the Church vsed before me. By the tooles I meane, as you doo, the Figure of Melchisedech, and the Prophecie of Malachie: by which the doctrine of the Church concer∣ning the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe, is auouched. And here to enter into that special point, litle esteming your other impertinent talke, which you thinke toucheth my person, and wise men see helpeth not your cause: directing my wordes to the Reader, of whom I may conceiue better hope then I doo of you: thus I say.

The Argument which M. Iewel here maketh as on my behalfe, albeit to the learned, who knowe and vn∣derstand the circumstances of the figure of Melchise∣dech, and of the prophecie of Malachie, concludeth suf∣ficiently and fully: yet thou maist be wel assured good Reader, I would neuer my selfe haue proponed it so na∣kedly, and without any declaration of the necessary cir∣cumstances. Although there folow hereafter more pro∣per plac••s to open the figure of Melchisedech, and the

prophecie of Malachie, where I bring them in for proufe of this intent: yet bicause M. Iewel hath by preuention abruptly fallen into them, and to the ende noman be de∣ceiued by his cutted argument, which in deede is good, if the circumstances were not guilefully conceeled: here I thinke good to vtter some of those circumstances.

To beginne therfore with Melchisedech: It may please thee Reader to vnderstand, that he is recorded in the Scripture to be a Priest of God the highest.* 1.3 Then being a Priest, it behoued him to offer Sacrifice according vnto S. Paules doctrine,* 1.4 Euery Bishop (or Priest) taken from a∣mong men, is for men appointed in those thinges that belong to God to offer vp giftes and sacrifices for sinnes. What sacri∣fice then did he offer? He offered vp bread and wine, as Arnobius that auncient Father,* 1.5 beside sundry other Do∣ctours doth witnesse, notwithstanding the Scripture make plaine and expresse mention only of bringing forth bread and wine. His wordes be these. Christus per myste∣rium panis & vinisacerdos sactus est secundùm ordinē Mel∣chisedech,* 1.6 qui panem & vinum solus obtalit in sacerdotibus, dum Abraham Victor reuerteretur de praelio. By the myste∣rie of bread and wine Christ became a Priest after the or∣der of Melchisedech, who onely among the Priestes of∣fered bread and wine, when Abraham returned conque∣rour from bataile.* 1.7 This order (saith S. Cyprian speaking of the order of Melchisedech) is here comming of that sacri∣fice, (he meaneth Melchisedeks sacrifice) and descending from thens, that Melchisedech was the priest of the highest God, that he offered bread and wine, that he blessed Abrahā.

Here it is expressely affirmed, that Melchisedech offe∣red bread and wine, and moreouer that Christ by doing

the like, was made a Priest according to the order of the same Melchisedek.

That Christe at his Supper shewed him selfe a priest after the order of Melchisedek.

But when, and where did Christe beginne to shewe him selfe a Prieste in offering sacrifice after that Order? Verely at his last Supper: For of that he did vppon the Crosse, whereof the Sacrifice of the Supper taketh his merite, now I speake not. And that he did so at his laste Supper, S. Hierome in his Commentaries vpon the .26. chapter of S. Matthew, is an euident witnesse, where he saith thus.* 1.8 Post quam typicum Pascha fuerat impletum, & Agni carnes cum Apostolis comederat, assumit panem, qui confortat cor hominis, & ad verum Paschae transgreditur sa∣cramentum, vt quomodo in praefiguratione eius Melchisedech summi Dei sacerdos, panem & vinum offerens fecerat, ipse quoque veritatem sui corporis & sanguinis repraesentaret. After that the figuratiue Passeouer had ben fulfilled, and he had eaten with his Apostles the flesh of the Lambe, he tooke vnto him breade, that strengtheneth the harte of man, and passeth ouer vnto the true Sacrament of Passeo∣uer, that like as Melchisedech the Priest of the highest God had done in offering bread and wine in a foregoing figure of him: so he him selfe also might represent the truth of his body and bloude. Who can more plainely vtter this mater, then S. Hierome hath done in these wordes, expressely saying, that Christ executed in deede at his last Supper that Priesthode, which Melchisedech did prefigurate, when hauing taken bread, he represen∣ted, that is to say, presently exhibited, not the figure or signe, as Zuinglius and Oecolampadius teach, nor the po∣wer

and vertue, as Caluine teacheth, but the truth of his body and bloude.

* 1.9S. Cyprian speaking of that Christe did at his last Sup∣per, auoucheth the same thing with woordes of like ef∣fecte. Qui magis sacerdos Dei summi, quàm Dominus noster Iesus Christus, qui sacrificiū Deo patri obtulit, & obtulit hec idem, quod Melchisedech, id est, panē & vinū, suū scilicet corpus & sanguinem? Who is more a Priest of the highest God, then our Lorde Iesus Christe, who offered a Sacri∣fice of God the Father, and offered the same, that Mel∣chisedech did that is to wit, bread and wine, as much to say, his body and bloude.

Consider Reader, when Saint Cyprian had said, that Christe offered the same sacrifice that Melchisedech had offered, which was, bread and wine: least any man shoulde mistake his meaning, and thinke, that Christe offered none other, nor better thing, then breade and wine, and in so doing should not excel Melchisedech: he addeth an interpretation of his owne woordes, to wit, that although Christes offering appeared to be bread and wine, yet in deede it was his body and bloud. Wherefore if thou wilt acknowledge Christes excellē∣cie aboue Melchisedech, and folow the interpretation, that S. Cyprian putteth vpon his owne woordes: thou must beleue Christe and Melchisedech to offer one and the same thing in outward forme, and in mysterie or sa∣crament, but not one in substance and truth. The pre∣misses considered, it is most certaine, that Christ fulfil∣ling the figure of Melchisedech at his Maundie, offe∣red his body and bloude, that is to say, him sel••e vnto his Father.

Let vs go a steppe foreward,* 1.10 and consider one circum∣stance more, whereby it may appeare, that priestes also haue auctoritie to offer vp Christ vnto his Father. How wil that appeare? Forsooth bicause Christ, after that he had offered his body and bloude him selfe, and deliuered the same vnto his Apostles, gaue them withal a cōmaun∣dement to doo the same,* 1.11 saying, Doo ye this in remem∣brance of me.* 1.12 No man, be he neuer so great an enemie vnto the continual Sacrifice of the Churche, wil denie, but that the Apostles had a warrant geuen them by this commaundement requiring them to doo, that they had sene their Lorde and Maister to haue done before them. But it is proued already by sufficient authorities, that Christe at his Supper did offer his body and bloud vnto his Father: Ergo the Apostles had warrant to offer Christes bodie and bloude vnto God his Father.

Nowe let vs descende one steppe lower, and we shal come vnto the very point, at whiche M. Iewel vn∣learnedly, and wickedly maketh suche a woondering, as if it were a monstrous, and most dangerous pre∣sumption, which is, that a priest hath auctoritie to of∣fer vp Christe vnto his Father. It is therefore to be vnderstanded, that Christe gaue not this commaun∣dement, and through vertue of the same a warrant, to doo the thing he had him selfe done before vnto his A∣postles onely, but also vnto such as should succede them in office of Priesthode (whereunto they were admit∣ted by Christe at the maundie) to the worldes ende. Which truth S. Paule doth insinuate,* 1.13 where he spea∣keth of this blessed Sacrament, shewing that it must be celebrated in remembrance of his death vntil his

last comming. Where of this argument is easily gathered.

* 1.14Our lordes Supper is to be celebrated vntil his last comming. But that can not be performed, onlesse some succede the Apostles in the office, by vertue whereof it is done: Ergo it is necessary, that some succede the Apo∣stles in that office. The first proposition is proued by S. Paule. The second is manifest, bicause the Apostles, to whom the commaundement was geuen, were not to continue a liue in the Church vntil Christes second com∣ming. That commaundement therfore was geuen as wel vnto them who should succeede, as vnto the Apostles them selues: For that any should take vpon them to exe∣cute so high an office, who haue no commaundement thereto, or that the commaundement was geuen to al in general, it is to absurde to thinke.

To whom then hath this office ben cōmitted? By what name haue these successours ben called?* 1.15 Verely it hath ben cōmitted to the Priestes of the Church, and to none els. Of this special calling and cōdition of certaine, S. Hie∣rome geueth vs an euident witnes, saying. Absit vt de ijs quicquam sinist rum loquar, qui Apostolico gradui succedētes, Christi corpus sacro ore conficiunt, per quos & nos Christiani sumus. God forbid I should speake ought amisse of them, who succeding into the degree of the Apostles, with their sacred mouth make the body of Christ, by whom al∣so we be made Christians. Thus we are taught, that it is the office of Priestes, to make or consecrate the precious body of Christe by vertue of his woorde, by them, as Ministers, and substitutes of Christe pronoun∣ced, for which S. Hierome acknowlegeth their mouth to be sacred and holy, and for the same dignitie, confesseth

them to succede the Apostles in that degree.

To the like effecte we finde in S. Cyprian a testimo∣nie worthy of note.* 1.16 Si Christus summus Sacerdos Sacrifi∣cium Deo Patri ipse primus obtulit, & hoc fieri in sui comme∣morationem praecepit: vtique ille sacerdos vice Christi verè fungitur,* 1.17 qui id quod Christus fecit, imitatur. If Christe the highest priest him self did first offer the sacrifice vnto God his Father, and cōmaunded the same to be done in remē∣brance of him: then that Priest doth truely supply the stede of Christ, which foloweth that which Christ did.

This saying of S. Cyprian goeth somwhat hygher, then the former of S. Hierome. There it was said, that Priestes succeded in Apostolike degree. Here a Priest folowing the acte of Christ in offering the Sacrifice, is said to be the substitute of Christ him selfe. By S. Hieromes verdit they may consecrate the body of Christ, as the succes∣sours of the Apostles: by S. Cyprians doctrine they may offer the Sacrifice, as the Vicars of Christ. What thinke we then? May any Christian man sauing his profession, imagine, yea beleue, and openly by preaching, and wri∣ting publish vnto the worlde, that the Apostles succes∣sours, and Christes substitutes want auctoritie and com∣mission to doo that, vnto thoffice whereof they succede, and be substitutes?

Now let these circumstances be gathered, and set to∣gether in fewer wordes, so shal the necessary sequele the better be perceiued. Melchisedech was a priest, and fi∣gure of Christ by offering bread and wine. Christ ful∣filled this figure at his Maundie by consecrating, and offering his bodie and bloude vnder the formes of Breade and Wine vnto his Father, him selfe being

the true bread of life, that came downe from heauen: and gaue commaundement and auctoritie to his Apostles, and to their successours, to do the same in remēbrance of him: The successours of the Apostles in this behalfe be the Priestes of the newe Testament: Ergo, the Priestes haue a commaundement, and thereby sufficient auctori∣ty, to doo that Christe did at his Maundie, that is, to cō∣secrate and offer the body and bloud of Christ vnto his Father. And so to conclude, these circumstances thus considered, doo clearely prooue to the detection of M. Iewels either blinde ignorance, or cankred malice against the Churche, this to be a good and true conse∣quent, which he proponed as absurde and ridiculous: God the Father saith vnto Christe, Thou arte a priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech: Ergo the Priest hath aucto∣ritie and power to offer vp Christ vnto his Father.

That the Prophecie of Malachie foresignifieth the Sacrifice of the Masse.

Touching the prophecie of Malachie, it doth in con∣clusion importe as much as the figure of Melchisedech, if the circumstances be wel weighed and cōsidered. This Prophet enspired with the holy Ghoste forsaw, that the sacrifices of the Iewes, which were grosse, and in sundry respectes vncleane, yet for a time allowable, should ceasse and haue an ende.* 1.18 And that in stede of them, God would be honoured with a pure and cleane Sacrifice, which should be offred vnto his name not only in Iewrie, but al∣so among the Gentiles, frō the rising to the going downe of the sunne. This is the effecte of that Prophecie.

Now, if we serch neuer so exactly, and seeke for that Sacrifice, which was not vsed in the olde Lawe, but suc∣ceded in the roome of al them of the olde Law, and hath ben frequented thorough out al nations: what other can we finde, but the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe? In this Sacrifice we perceiue most clearely al the conditions of that Prophecie fulfilled.* 1.19 First, it is in stede of many. Next, it is offered vnto Gods most holy name. Thirdly, it is celebrated and solemnized among the Gen∣tiles, and thereby Gods name is magnified. Fourthly, it is a most pure and syncere Sacrifice, bicause the thing that is offered, is the immaculate Lambe of God, the body and bloud of him,* 1.20 that was conceiued of the holy Ghost, borne of the pure virgin, who neuer committed synne, nor was any guyle founde in his mouth: Fiftly, it is offered through out al the worlde from East to West. Sixthly, it had beginning in the newe Testament, and was not vsed in the olde Testament, but only by figures foresignified. Sure it is, that none can be named beside this, in which al these conditions by the Prophete specified be accom∣plished.

As for the Sacrifice of Christes body vpō the Crosse, it was offered in one special place,* 1.21 in Golgoltha without the gates of Ierusalem. The sacrifices of thankes geuing, of praise, of almose dedes, of mercie, of a contrite harte, of preaching Gods wordes, these and such like, succeded not in the roome of al the olde sacrifices, nor beganne they in the newe Testament, but were vsed in the tyme of the Law, as wel as they be now in these daies, as they which be common to bothe Testamentes.

That this Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe* 1.22

succeded al the Sacrifices of the olde Law, which of the Fathers in their learned treatises haue not reported? It is needelesse to reherse many testimonies. The witnesse of S. Augustine alone for the plainenesse and auctoritie of it, might suffice. He writeth thus. Vbi ait (Eccle∣siastes) non est bonum homini,* 1.23 nisi quod manducabit & bi∣bet, quid credibilius dicere intelligitur, quàm quod ad par∣ticipationem mensae huius pertinet, quam sacerdos ipse me∣diator Testamenti noui exhibet secundùm ordinē Melchise∣dech, de corpore & sanguine suo? Id enim Sacrificium successit omnibus illis Sacrificijs veteris Testamenti, quae immolaban∣tur in vmbra futuri. Propter quod etiā vocē illam in Psalmo tricesimo nono eiusdem mediatoris per Prophetiam loquen∣tis agnoscimus. Sacrificium & oblationem noluisti, corpus au∣tem perfecisti mihi, quia pro illis omnibus sacrificijs & obla∣tionibus corpus eius offertur, & participantibus ministratur. Whereas Salomon saith,* 1.24 a man hath no good thing, but that he shal eate and drinke, what thing is more credible that he vnderstandeth in so saying, then that appertai∣neth vnto the partaking of this table, which the Priest him selfe the mediatour of the newe Testament doth exhibit according to the order of Melchisedech, of his owne body and bloude? For that Sacrifice hath succe∣ded al those sacrifices of the olde Testament, which were sacrificed in shadow of that which was to come. For whiche cause we doo acknowledge that same voice of the selfe same Mediatour speaking by prophecie in the nyne and thirteth Psalme, Sacrifice and Oblation thou refusedst, but a body thou madest perfite for me, bicause for al those sacrifices and oblations his body is offered, and ministred vnto the partakers.

The last cause of this testimonie declareth plainely, that S. Augustine meant not the bloudy Sacrifice made vpon the Crosse, but the vnbloudy Sacrifice offered by the Priestes in remembraunce of the same, as the which is not only offered vp, but also ministred vnto the parta∣kers.

If this notwithstanding any yet remaine in doubte, whether the Prophecie of Malachie be to be vnderstan∣ded of this vnbloudy Sacrifice, it may please him to heare other olde learned Fathers teaching the same doctrine. S. Chrysostome writing vpon the .95. Psalme, alleging this very Prophecie:* 1.25 In omni loco Sacrificium offeretur nomini meo, & Sacrificium purum: In euery place a Sa∣crifice shalbe offered vnto my name, and that a pure Sa∣crifice: saith forthwith:* 1.26 Vide quàm luculenter, quámque dilucidè mysticam interpretatus est mensam, quae est in∣cruenta hostia. See how plainely, and how clearely he hath declared the mystical Table, which is the vnblou∣dy Sacrifice.

S. Irenaeus likewise writing against Valentinus the He∣retike,* 1.27 S. Augustine, also, and S. Iustinus the martyr, do expounde the prophecie for the same Sacrifice. Whose sayinges here to reherse, to the proufe of so certaine a doctrine, it were more tedious, then needeful.

Wherefore this being so sufficiently witnessed by the Auncient Doctours of the Churche (against whose auctoritie no noueltie is to be heard) as a most vn∣doubted truth, that the sacrifice, which Christe made of his body and bloude at his last supper, is that pure and Vnbloudy Sacrifice, whiche Malachie prophe∣cied should be offered vp vnto God from the Easte

to the west: this also being no lesse true, that Christe ap∣pointed and auctorized some to offer the same (other∣wise to what purpose was it instituted?) and sith that we reade of none other appointed and auctorized thereto, but the Apostles, and their successours, Priestes of the newe Testament, nor haue we heard of any that lawful∣ly euer tooke vpon them to offer the same, that were not Priestes: with what impudencie is it denyed, that the Apostles had, and Priestes now haue, auctoritie to offer vp this pure Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christe vnto his Father?

Thus thou maist perceiue good reader, the argument, which M. Iewel here ascribeth vnto me, and would to seeme ridiculous, to conclude rightly for the truth, if the due consideration of the circumstances be not omitted. Withal thou vnderstandest, that who so euer allegeth the figure of Melchisedech, and the Prophecie of Malachie to prooue, that the Priestes of the new Testament haue auctoritie and power to offer vp Christe vnto his Fa∣ther, he maketh no euil choise of the stoare of authori∣ties, by witnesse of which that point is prooued and con∣firmed.

As for the mater of greeuance M. Iewel, where of you complaine so greeuously, which is, that I charge them of your syde, with wresting by ouerthwart and false in∣terpretation the wordes of the Institution of this Sacri∣fice, the figure of Melchisedech, and the Prophecie of Malachie: I vttered it vpon very iust occasion, as the learned do knowe. The same ought to be greuous in dede vnto you, not bicause ye are tolde of it by me, but bicause it is true. Neither thought I it good to exempli∣fie

the mater, staying the course of my briefe Answer to your Chalenge, by descending vnto the particulars: for that my scope and chiefe intent was, not to confute the contrary Doctrine, but to prooue and establish the truth of this Article by you most wickedly denied.

If it be pleasure vnto you to beholde paricular pla∣ces and pointes of your false Legierdemaine disclosed, by reading ouer my Confutatiō of your lying Apologie, my Reioindre to your Replie, that also which M. D. Sander, D. Heskins, M. Rastel, M. Dorman, and M. Stapleton haue written against you: your luste may happely be satisfied. Take your fyl of that, vntil more come.

Iewel.

Perhappes he vvil say, Yee expounde the Prophecie of Malachie, some∣times of Praier, and sometimes of the Preachinge of the Gospel. This vvas neuer the Prophetes meaninge: This is an horrible vvreasting of the Scriptures. Thus, no doubte, M. Harding vvil say: for othervvise he can say nothinge. And yet he knovveth and, beinge learned, can not choose but knovv, that this is the Olde learned Catholique Fathers Exposition, tou∣chinge these vvoordes of the Prophete Malachie, and not ours. He kno∣vveth, that the Ancient Father Tertullian saith thus,* 1.28 The pure Sacri∣fice, that Malachias speaketh of, that should be offered vp in eue∣ry place, Est Praedicatio Euangelij vsque ad finem Mundi: Is the Preachinge of the Gospel vntil the ende of the worlde: And in an other place, Simplex Oratio de Conscientia pura: The Sacrifice, that Malachie meante, is a deuoute Praier proceedinge from a pure Conscience. He knovveth, that S. Hierome expoundeth the same vvoordes in this vvise: Dicit, Orationes Sanctorum Domino offe∣rendas esse, non in vna Orbis Prouincia Iudaea, sed in omni loco: The Prophete Malachie meaneth hereby, That the Praiers of Holy people shoulde be offered vnto God, not onely in Iewrie,

that was one prouince of the worlde, but also in al places. He knovveth, that Eusebius calleth the same Sacrifice of Malachie,* 1.29 The Sa∣crifice, and the Incense of Praier. Thus the Holie Catholique Fathers expounded these vvoordes of the Prophete Malachie: and yet vvere they not therefore iuaged either ouerthvvarte vvreasters of the Scriptures, or horrible deceiuers of the people.

Novv, of the other side, if it may please M. Harding to shevvfoorth but one Anciēt Doctour, or Father, that either by the Exāple of Melchisedech, or by force of these vvordes of Malachie, vvil conclude, that the Priest hath Authoritie, and Povver, to offer vp Verelie, and in dede, the Sonne of God vnto his Father, he may happily vvinne some credit.

Harding.

In defence of your felowes, and of your selfe, you say, that wheras ye expound the prophecie of Malachie som∣times of Praier, and sometimes of the preaching of the Ghospel, therin ye vse no wreasting of the Scripture, nor falshod: bicause the old lerned Catholike Fathers haue so expounded the place. And here you name Tertullian, S. Hierome, and Eusebius. That the Preaching of the Gospel may be, and is called a Sacrifice, I denie not. Ma∣ry that by th'auctoritie, which here you pretend to allege out of Tertulliā it is proued, and that by the same the mea¦ning of Malachies prophecie is to be drawen quit frō the Sacrifice of th'Aulter: this I deny vtterly. And how farre your dealīg in these weighty maters cōcerning the faith of a Christē man is to be trusted by this to al it may appere.* 1.30 First, wheras you beare al men in hand, that I know, that the Ancient Father Tertullian saith, as here you reporte: it is very false. for how can I know the thing, that is not at al? Tertullian saith not so. These wordes, The pure Sa∣crifice, that Malachias speaketh of, that should be offered vp in euery place, est Praedicatio Euangelij vs{que} ad finē mundi, be

not to be found in al Tertullians booke Cōtra Iudaeos. Yet you haue put them in a distinct letter, in which the say∣inges of the Doctors be printed, that your Reader should beleue, they were the wordes of Tertulliā. This is a for∣gerie wrought in your owne shoppe, fathered vpon Ter∣tullian. Phy M. Iewel, can neither shame, nor the feare of God, withdraw you from vsing such forged sayinges of your owne, with which being by you fathered vpon som Ancient Doctor of the Church, your common manner is to face out an vntrue mater, as crafty players at Cardes doo as they say, with a Carde of ten?

Nexte, you swarue very much from the meaning and purpose of Tertullian. For he saith not, that the Preaching of the Ghospel is that cleane Sacrifice, which Malachie prophecied of, but farre otherwise. Tertullian hauing spo∣ken of the two kindes of Sacrifices of the two peoples, the Iewes and the Gentiles, foreshewed at the beginning in th' oblations of Cain,* 1.31 and Abel: demaundeth, whereas Gods law geuen by Moyses required the carnal sacrifices to be made by the people of Israel in the land of promise, and nowher els: why the holy Ghost afterward notwith∣standing by Malachie,* 1.32 and also by Dauid fortelleth, that the Iewes earthly and fleshly sacrifices should ceasse, and that spiritual Sacrifices should be offered vp to God ouer the whole world. Vnto this question he answereth him selfe,* 1.33 and saith. Indubitatè, quòd in omni terra exire habebat praedicatio Apostolorū, that is to say, Vndoubtedly, bicause the preaching of th'Apostles was to come forth ouer al the world.

This assuredly is the true abbrigement and meaning of Tertullians woordes there.* 1.34 And cleare it is, he saith not, that the Preaching of the Ghospell is the pure

Sacrifice, that Malachie speaketh of, as you vntruly re∣porte of him: but onely that the holy Ghoste foresigni∣fied by Malachie, and by Dauid, that the Iewes sacrifi∣ces being abolished, pure sacrifices should be offered a∣mong al Nations of the earth, bicause it should come to passe, that the Apostles should preach ouer the whole worlde. So that by Tertullians verdite, the preaching of the Gospel was not that pure Sacrifice it selfe spoken of by Malachie, but the Apostles preaching that then was to come, was the cause, why Malachie and Dauid enspired of the holy Ghoste, fortolde the ceassing of the Iewes carnal sacrifices, and the setting vp, or vse of the Gentiles spiritual Sacrifices. More then this, which is nothing at al, Tertulliā in that place maketh not for you.

Leaue, leaue M. Iewel for your credites sake (if no∣thing els can moue you) to deceiue vnlearned soules, whom Christe hath so derely bought, with sayinges of your owne forging, fathering them vpon the auncient Doctours. It is a manifest token what litle good stuffe ye haue to defend your new ghospel withal, whereas ye set forth your owne pelfe vnder the name of the aunci∣ent writer Tertullian. Wherein ye folow false Lapida∣nies and Goldsmithes, who sel Cristal and glasse, for true pretious stoanes, and gilted copper, for pure golde.

Your other three places, which you pretend to allege out of Tertullian, S. Hierome, and Eusebius, be not with such forme of wordes by those Fathers set forth, as you here reporte them. The sleight of falsifiyng that you so cōmonly vse, in this place for your purpose maketh but only a colourable shew to the ignorāt, who beleue what so euer you say: to the learned, who by diligent exami∣tion

wil serch what you say, a substantial proufe in dede, it maketh not.* 1.35 Al be it I graunt, wheras the Prophecie of Malachie speaketh of two thinges, thymiama, incense, and Oblatio munda, the cleane Oblation or Sacri••ice: that the best learned Fathers haue expounded the Incense, of Prayer, and the cleane Oblation, of the Sacrifice of the Aulter, that is now offered in the Churche, through the whole worlde.

Where Tertullian disputing with Marcion the he∣retike expoundeth it of Prayer,* 1.36 either it is his priuate sense, which bringeth no preiudice vnto the doctrine of the Catholike Churche:* 1.37 or he meaneth it as the other Fathers doo, of the Sacrifice of the Aulter, which is cō∣secrate with prayer. For so the olde learned Fathers cal the wordes of Consecration. Els if it should be ex∣pounded of al manner of prayer, or of prayer in general, as it is made of ech priuate man: it can not alwaies seme to be the cleane Sacrifice prophecied of by Malachie, bicause the same is made by those that be not altogether pure,* 1.38 and without spot of sinne. For so the Scripture wit∣nesseth: who can say, my hart is cleane, I am cleane frō sinne?

But the Prayer, wherewith the Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe is consecrate,* 1.39 being the wor∣des of our Lorde,* 1.40 who neuer did synne, nor was guile found in his mouth: is both in that respect pure and cleane, and also for that it is pronounced by the Priest, as the pub∣like minister of the Churche, whose priuate vncleannes what so euer it be, in that behalfe impaireth not the worthinesse of the sacrifice, nor of the prayer, where∣with it is con••ecrate. Who also at what time he offered that Sacrifice, ought specially to be of a pure cōscience.

And therefore Tertullian hauing rehersed the woordes of Malachie (though some what otherwise then either the seuenty Interpretours, or the Hebrue bookes haue, and otherwise then he him selfe rehersed them writing against the Iewes) in euery place shalbe offered vp in my name sacrifice,* 1.41 and the cleane Sacrifice: might wel adde further by way of exposition, scilicet, simplex oratio de conscientia pura, to wit simple (or pure) prayer from a cleane conscience. In which prophecie the prophete fortelleth, that God hath disposed a better Sacrifice to be offered vp vnto his name, then the sacrifices were, which the Iewes offered.

* 1.42By simple prayer, he meaneth such, as is not tempered and mingled with any sinneful infection of humane affe∣ctions, of which sorte is the prayer of cōsecration of this Sacrifice, as that which is the worde of our Lorde, and not the worde of man. Whose prayer, as al other his acti∣ons, proceding out of his corrupte harte, is steined with some spotte of synne, wereunto oure nature corrupted in Adam is thral and subiecte.

The wordes of Consecration of the Sacrament, called by the name of prayer.

If to any it seme strange, the wordes, wherewith the body and bloude of Christe are consecrate, to be cal∣led a prayer: by reading the olde learned Fathers he shal finde it so termed in sundry places.* 1.43 S. Iustine the Martyr speaking of the blessed Sacrament, nameth it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the foode which is made the Eucharist through the prayer of the worde that we haue of him, he meaneth Christe. Loe he calleth the consecration, the Prayer of the woorde, that

Christ deliuered vnto his Apostles, and consequently to their successours, Priestes of the new Testament.

S. Augustine writing vnto Paulinus, saith, Precationes accipimus dictas,* 1.44 quas facimus in celebratione Sacramentorū, antequam illud quod est in Domini mensa, incipiat benedici: Orationes, cū benedicitur & sanctificatur, & ad distribuendū cōminuitur. We take Precatiōes to be called those praiers, which we make in the celebratiō of the sacramentes, be∣fore that, which is on our Lordes table, beginne to be blessed: and Oratiōes (we take for the praiers that be said) when that (which is on our Lordes table) is blessed and sanctified, or consecrated, and broken to be distributed.

Againe he saith there, excepto nomine generali oratio∣nis, ea propriè intelligenda est Oratio, quā facimus ad votum, id est, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Vouentur autē omnia quae offeruntur Deo, maximè sancti Altaris Oblatio, &c. Beside the general name of Praier, that properly is to be vnderstāded praier, which we make at vowe. And al thinges are vowed, which be offred vnto God, chiefly the Oblatiō of the holy Aulter. Sith then that is properly a praier, which is made at vow, that is to say, when we vow ought vnto God, and what thinges so euer we offer vnto God, the same be vowed, that is to wit, by the seruice of our harte, be geuē, dedica∣ted, and rendred vnto God, thereby to protest our faith in him, to thanke him, to praise him, to honour him, to shewe ourselues myndeful of his benefites, among al thinges the Oblation of the Aulter being that which is chiefly vowed: it foloweth that the Consecration is specially to be called and accompted prayer.

S. Hierome likewise called the wordes of Consecra∣tion by the name of Praier,* 1.45 where he saith in his Epi∣stle

to Euagrius. Quid patitur mensarum minister, vt super eos se tumidus efferat, ad quorum preces Christi corpus san∣guisque conficitur? What aileth the minister of tables, (wherby he meanetha Deacō) to swel and aduaunce him selfe ouer them (he speaketh there of Priestes) at whose Prayers, the body and bloude of Christe is consecrated?

What shal I neede to allege mo Fathers for proufe of a thing so wel knowen to them, that be conuersant in their bookes? Wherefore seing the worde of Consecra∣tion is the woorde of prayer, whereby the body and bloude of Christe, the Sacrifice of our Raunsom, as S. Au∣gustine calleth it,* 1.46 is by vs offered vp and vowed vnto God, that a remembrance of his death be celebrated of our parte, and that mercie be extended vnto vs of Gods parte, for that bodies sake represented and offered vp which hath dyed for vs: and seing in the same we our selues are also offered vp, dedicated, vowed, and rendred vnto God, bicause therein Christe our head, whereof we be members, is offered: the worde of Consecration in this consideration being most properly ond truly a prayer, yea (if I may so terme it) an actual prayer, bi∣cause it is such a woorde, as fulfilleth the acte of the Sa¦crifice: it standeth with good reason and learning, that Tertullian expounding the cleane Sacrifice wherof Ma∣lachie speaketh of prayer, be vnderstanded to meane the oblation and Sacrifice of the Aulter, as being that, which is the highest kinde of prayer, and of worshipping God, that can be.

Thus that you bring out of Tertulliā, maketh nothing for excuse of them of your side, whom I noted for wre∣sting the place of Malachie, for that by their ouerthwart

and false interpretations, they racke it from the mea∣ning of the Sacrifice of the Aulter, offered vp vnto God in the new Testament in al places among the Gen∣tiles, by Priestes after the order of Melchisedek, vnder Christe.

TOuching the two other Doctours, S. Hierome, and Eusebius, whom you allege for you, as ex∣pounding this place of Malachie of praier (where∣by, though they so did, you see the Sacrifice of the Aulter is not excluded): let vs see whether in them you haue vsed a more truth and fidelitie, then you haue in Ter∣tullian. Verily were you myne Aduersarie neuer so much, yet for truthes sake I can not but geue you this commendation: You shewe your selfe alwaies in your writing one manner a man, which is a token of great constancie. I meane, that lightly you neuer recite any Doctour, but you falsifie him,* 1.47 and corrupte his meaning, by clipping away of parte, or by changing of woordes, or by adding of your owne, or by keeping close some what that goeth before, or commeth after, or by con∣ceeling the circumstances of the places alleged by one way or other. He knoweth (say you meaning of me) that Saint Hierome expoundeth the same woordes in this wise. Dicit, orationes sanctorum Domino offerendas es∣se, non in vna orbis prouincia Iudaea, sed in omni loco: The Prophete Malachie meaneth hereby (so you interprete) that the praiers of holy people should be offered vnto God, not onely in Iewrie, that was but one prouince of the worlde, but also in al places.

For the right vnderstanding of this point, I pray thee

Reader peruse the place of S. Hierome thy selfe, beleue thine owne eyes, beleue not such false iugglers. Which counsel I aduise thee to obserue not onely for trial of this one place, but also for trial of other places, which M. Iewel bringeth in defence of any his negatiue Arti∣cles. Verily neither hath S. Hierom these very wordes in such order,* 1.48 as they be here laid forth, and the whole sen∣tence vewed and considered together, maketh directly for the Catholike doctrine which I defend, and quite a∣gainst that M. Iewel saith. To thintent I be plainer, though longer, here I wil reherse the whole place, as we finde it written in S. Hierome. Thus he saith.

* 1.49Propriè ad Sacerdotes Iudaeorum sermo fit Domini, qui offerunt coecum & claudum, & languidum ad immolan∣dum: vt sciant carnalibus victimis spirituales victimas suc∣cessur as. Et nequaquam taurorum hircorum{que} sanguinem, sed thymiama, hoc est, Sanctorum Orationes Domino offerendas: & non in vna orbis prouincia Iudaea, nec in vna Iudaeae vrbe Hierusalē, sed in omni loco offerri oblationem, nequaquā im∣mundā, vt à populo Israel, sed mundā, vt in Ceremoniis Chri∣stianorum. Ab ortu enim solis vs{que} ad occasum magnum est nomen Domini in gentibus, &c. The worde of our Lord is nowe properly vttered vnto the Priestes of the Iewes, who do offer that which is blind, lame, and sickely, to be sacrificed, to thintent they might know, that spiritual sa∣crifices should succede their carnal Sacrifices: And that the bloude of bulles, and goates should no more be offe∣red vnto our Lorde, but Incense, that is to say, the Prayers of Holy men and that not in Iewrie only, which is but one prouince of the world, nor in Ierusalem only, which is but one Citie of Iewrie, but in euery place there is of∣fered

an Oblation, not an vncleane one, as was offered of the people of Israel, but a cleane one, as is offred vp in the Ceremonies of the Christians. For from the rising of the sunne to the setting, the name of our Lorde is greate among the Gentiles.

This Prophet speaketh of two things,* 1.50 the one don amōg the Iewes, and now to be leafte of, the other to be done among the Gentils. Of ech he hath a double cōsideration. Concerning the first, which is the sacrifice of brute bea∣stes, that it was done but in one prouince of the worlde, in Iewrie, and only in Hierusalem, a Citie of that Pro∣uince. Againe, that the same thing was vncleane and fil∣thy. For how filthy a thing the bloude of Bulles, goates, rammes, and other beastes, the smoke and sauour of their grese burnt in Sacrifice, was: it is sone conceiued. Con∣cerning the second, which is Sacrifice to be done among the Gentiles, the consideration thereof is also double, for that it is pure and cleane, and also for that it is frequented in euery place.

This Sacrifice is of two sortes, the one mere spiritual and internal: the orher external as touching the Ceremo∣nie of doing it,* 1.51 spiritual also notwithstanding. The one, af∣ter the maner of the Prophetes, who be wont to expresse thinges of the new Testament, with wordes of the olde Testament, he calleth Incense, and S. Hierome expoun∣deth it of praier, which ascendeth frō our hartes vnto the heauenly throne of mercie like a swete perfume of In∣cense. And so S. Iohn in his reuelation, as S. Irenaeus wri∣teth, calleth the swete perfumes, the prayers of Sainctes.

The other he termeth a pure Oblation, the which S. Hierom expoūdeth of that pure Oblation, which is offred

euery where, in the Ceremonies of the Christians. Which can be vnderstanded of none other, but of the Sacri∣fice of the Body and Bloude of Christe offered vp vn∣to God by Priestes of the newe Testament. For what other Oblation or sacrifice can be named,* 1.52 that hath these foure conditions, which S. Hierome here tou∣cheth, but the Oblation of the Aulter? The conditions be these. That it succede the Sacrifices of the olde Law, that it be pure and cleane, that it be made in al places, and that it be celebrated and solemnized in the Ceremonies of the Christians.

Of what so euer spiritual and internal Sacrifice the Gospellers wil vnderstand this place, be it laude and praise,* 1.53 thankes geuing, prayer, a contrite harte, mer∣cie, or any suche other, as Cranmare vnderstandeth it of laude, praise and thankes, and M. Iewel of prayer: it shal quite be auoided by one or other of these condi∣tions, specially by the first, and the fourth. For how can laude and praise, or praier, ar any other mere spiritual sa∣crifice v••ed in the newe Testament, seme to succede the Sacrifices of the olde Testament, seing al suche spiritual Sacrifices be cōmon̄ to both Testaments, and that thing can not be said to succede, that had place before?

And if our Aduersaries wil cauil neuer so much, ex∣pounding the pure Oblation that Malachie speaketh of,* 1.54 of some other thinge, as Cranmare in one place ex∣poundeth it in general of al the workes that Christian people doo to the glorie of God: the same shal be auoi∣ded by that it is restrained vnto that Oblation, which is made (as S. Hierom declareth) in Ceremonijs Christianorū, in the Ceremonies of the Christians. For al these spiritual

and internal sacrifices be done inwardly in the harte of man: and what other workes can they name done to the glorie of God in the publike Ceremonies of the Chri∣stians,* 1.55 which the prophete may reasonably seme to haue meant? And what meaneth S. Hierome by the Ceremo∣nies of the Christians, but the Ceremonies of the Church vsed through al the worlde in the celebration and so∣lemnitie of the Masse, wherein the Sacrifice of the Body and bloud of Christ is made and offered by the Priestes, touching ministerie, by the faithful people also, touching vowe? Which Ceremonies be the chiefe, the most aun∣cient, the most reuerent, the most mystical, and most holy Ceremonies, that Christians haue.

Wherefore, whereas Malachie, and likewise S. Hie∣rome expounding his wordes, speake of two thinges, of prayer, and of the pure Oblatiō, the same being that Ob∣lation which is offred euery where from the East to the west in the Ceremonies of the Christians by his interpre∣tation: now it appeareth how falsly M. Iuel demeaneth him selfe in this point, who maketh S. Hierome so to vn∣derstand the place of Praier, as though he vnderstode the whole saying of Prayer only, and not one parte of it of Prayer, and an other parte also of the Sacrifice of the Church, whereas in deede he vnderstandeth it of both, and most expressely speaketh of both, as I haue now de∣clared. Thus he neuer leaueth to iustle away one truth, with an other truth.

NOw to come to Eusebius, let vs see, whether you entreate him with more truth, then you haue en∣treated Tertullian, and S. Hierom. He knoweth (say

you likewise of me) that Eusebius calleth the same sacrifice of Malachie, the sacrifice and the Incence of prayer. And for some shewe of proufe for that you say, you put in the margent of your booke, this peece of a Greke sen∣tēce out of Eusebius,* 1.56 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as much to say, the incense, or perfume that is made through prayers.

For answer here vnto, It is to be remembred, as I said before, that Malachie speaketh of two thinges to be of∣fred vp vnto God in al nations from the East to the west, Incense,* 1.57 and the pure Sacrifice. Eusebius, where he alle∣geth this place of Malachie, to proue that Moses Lawe is ended, and that the new Lawe of the new Testament is come in place: by Incense vnderstandeth Prayer, as S. Hierome,* 1.58 and other olde learned Fathers doo. As for the Pure Sacrifice, whereof now we speake, that he cal∣leth it the Sacrifice, and the Incense of Prayer, it is vtter∣ly false. In that very place which you allege, Eusebius doth so expounde Malachie, as to any man of iudgement it shal euidently appeare, how vntruly you reporte of him, and how aptly he maketh for the catholike doctrine, and against you.

* 1.59The beginning of the sentence is this. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. In English the whole truely turned worde for worde, soundeth thus. That in euery place Incense, and Sacrifice is offred vp vnto God, what other thing doth it sig∣nifie, then that the time shal come, when they shal offer vp vnto God that is aboue al, the Incense which is made by Prayers, and that which is called the Pure Sacrifice, that is made not by bloude, but by Godly actions, not in Ierusa∣lem, neither in this or that determinate place, but in euery

countrie, and in al nations. Beholde Reader how he ex∣poundeth the Incense or perfume, whereof Malachie speaketh, of the Incense that is made by Prayer, as after∣ward in the ende of that first booke to that meaning he allegeth the wordes of the Psalme,* 1.60 Dirigatur Oratio mea sicut Incensum in conspectu tuo Domine: Let my Prayer ô Lorde like a perfume be brought vp into thy ••ight.

Touching the Pure Sacrifice, which is offred vp vnto God by pure and godly actions, that thereby he vnder∣standeth most specially the External Sacrifice of the Church, which is offred vpon an Aulter, the wordes fo∣lowing do manifestly declare. For immediatly to shew what he vnderstode by the Pure Sacrifice, he bringeth forth a prophecie of Esay foreshewing the same. There shal be an Aulter (saith the Prophet Esay as Eusebius re∣citeth) to our Lorde in the countrie of Egypte,* 1.61 and our Lord shal be knowen vnto the Egyptiās, and (God) shal send them a man who shal saue them: and the Egyptians shal know our Lorde in that day, and they shal offer vp sacrifices, and make vowes vnto our Lord, and shal performe the same, and they shal be conuerted vnto our Lorde, and he shal heare them, and heale them.

For the better vnderstanding of this place, by the Egy∣ptians Esay meaneth, as Eusebius there afterward expoū∣deth, al kind of mē, that before the cōming of Christ were Idolatours, as the Egyptians were. Now if Eusebius had vnderstāded the Pure Sacrifice mētioned by Malachie of prayer, or only of mere spiritual and internal sacrifices, he wold not haue alleged for further prouf and declaratiō of it, that place of Esay, wher he maketh expres mentiō of an Aulter to be set vp among the Egyptiās, that is, amōg al

the Gentiles, who were before geuen to Idolatrie. The external Aulter argueth and presupposeth an external sacrifice. For els if the Sacrifice be inward onely and spi∣ritual, to the doing of it, the building of an Aulter is void and to no purpose.

If M. Iewel to auoide the force of this place alleged by Eusebius, wil bring phrases, as his manner is, whereby to declare, that Aulters oftentimes be vnderstanded to be spiritual (which I acknowledge and confesse that the Aulters of our hartes be of the Fathers not seldom spo∣ken of) and therfore wil say, that Eusebius vnderstode this prophecie of Esay of such a spiritual Aulter: to this I answer: Eusebius vnderstandeth Esay to meane such an Aulter, as Moses lawe forbad any where els to be set vp, then in Iewrie, and that only in one citie of Iewrie. But it was neuer forbidden by Moses Lawe, but that the spi∣ritual Aulters of mēnes hartes might be prepared in moe places then in one onely Citie of Iewrie, for Ieremie, Ezechiel, Daniel, Ezdras, Tobias, and many other holy Iewes, and Israelites had such spiritual Aulters, and ther∣on offered acceptable spiritual sacrifices vnto God in other Countries besides Iewrie, and in Cities farre distāt from Ierusalem: wherefore he meant of such Aulters, as Christians haue euer had in their Churches, which be made after the manner of the Aulter appointed by Mo∣ses, though the Sacrifice be of a farre diners manner.

* 1.62Eusebius wordes be these, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 etc. Moses ordeined Aulter and sacrifices to be made in no Land elswhere, but in Iewrie only, and that in one only, Citie ther∣of. But this prophecie of Esay saith, that an Aulter shal be set vp vnto our Lorde in the Land of Egypte, and that the

Egyptians them selues shal offer vp the Sacrifices vnto the Lorde of the Prophetes, and no lenger vnto their Countrie Goddes.

After that he hath spoken what he thought good of this new manner of Aulter, and Sacrifice, of the transla∣tion of the Aulter, and priesthod appointed by Moses, and therefore consequently of the translatiō of the Law it selfe: in conclusion thus he saith. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. As much to say, Now then is the time come, that there is neede of a new lawe to be made, that the foresaid thinges may take place. But as for the spiritual Aulter of mennes hartes, and the mere spi∣ritual and inward sacrifices, as the sacrifices of prayer, of laude and praise, of thankes geuing, and such other: who vnderstandeth not, that they might wel take place, and be frequented without necessitie of any newe Lawe to be made, and that other wheres, then onely in one Citie of Iewrie? Verely the vse of such Aulters requireth not a change of Moses lawe, and priesthode. For such Aulters, and such sacrifices were in Egypte, and Chaldaea, among many thousandes of Iewes, who lyued in those Landes, long before Moses law was dissolued. The Aulter therfor and Sacrifice that Eusebius meaneth in that place for de∣claratiō of Malachies Prophecie, is the Aulter and Sacri∣fice, wherevpon and which, the faithful people by mini∣sterie of Priestes of the new Testamēt, doth continually offer vnto God, to wit the body and bloude of Christ, in remembrance of his death, after the new Decrees and ordinances of the new Testament, as he saith in * 1.63 one place, after the Decrees and ordinances of the Church, as he saith in an * 1.64 other place.

That no man should doubte of what Aulter he meant, thus there he speaketh of it.* 1.65 To our one onely Lorde an Aul∣ter of vnbloudy and reasonable hostes, after the new myste∣ries of the new Testament, throughout the whole worlde hath ben erected, both in Egypt it selfe, and in the other na∣tions being of like conditions vnto the Egyptians as tou∣ching wicked errour. Verely these wordes can not with any reason seme to be meant of the spiritual Aulter of our hartes. For though on the same we offer vp vnblou∣dy and reasonable hostes, yet that is not done after the new Mysteries of the new Testament. For in the olde Testament also no lesse then in the new, such mere spiri∣tual and internal sacrifices were offered vp vpon the spi∣ritual Aulters of good mennes hartes.

* 1.66And what other be these new Mysteries of the new Te∣stament, whereof this doctor speaketh,* 1.67 but those that Christ taught the Apostles, and deliuered vnto them at his last Supper, where he conuerted bread and wine into his body and bloud, whom, as S. Irenaeus saith,* 1.68 he taught the new Oblation of the new Testament, which the Church receiuing of the Apostles, offereth vp vnto God throughout the whole worlde?

Whereas then Eusebius expounding the prophecie of Malachie, speaking of Incense, and pure Sacrifice, vnder∣standeth it to speake of two distinct sortes of Oblations: therein appeareth either the ignorance, or the wilful ma∣lice of M. Iewel, who referreth al to one, that is to say, to Prayer, to thintent the Mystical Oblation and Sacrifice of the body aud bloude of Christ, be quite excluded. But as the weighing of that which is already alleged out of the myddest of Eusebius first booke. De Demonstratione

Euangelica, detecteth M. Iewels falshod not obscurely: so the due cōsideration of that he writeth vpon the same place of Malachie in the ende of that booke, doth the same most clearely, and putteth away al mystes and clowdes of any obiection to the contrary.

For hauing alleged the prophecie of Malachie to proue the New state of the new Testamēt, in which pro∣phecie God saith, that in euery place, Incense shal be offred vp vnto his name, and Pure Sacrifice: to declare what he vnderstādeth by either of them, first he sheweth, what is the Pure Sacrifice that we offer, next, what Incense we burne, and what perfume we make.

Concerning Incense,* 1.69 he maketh it to be Prayer, and not only Praier, but also other spiritual Sacrifices, name∣ly the sweete fruit of our right opinion touching God, the sacrificing of our selues vnto God, the puritie of our bodies and mindes, the worshipping of God with syncere affection,* 1.70 and with doctrines of truth. For these (saith he) do please him more, then the multitude of sacrifices made with bloud, smoke, and vnsweete sauours.

Touching the Pure Sacrifice,* 1.71 he saith, that we sacrifice vnto God the sacrifice of praise. And least he shuld seme to meane none other but the mere spiritual sacrifice, that is declared by wordes, he declareth with very ex∣presse and apt termes, what Sacrifice specially he meant, saying.* 1.72 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 1. Sacrificamus Diuinum, & venerandum, & sacrosanctum Sacrificium. Sacrificamus nouè secundùm Nouum Testa∣mentum Sacrificium purum. We sacrifice the Diuine, and the reuerend, and most holy Sacrifice. We sacrifice

after a new manner according to the new Testament the Pure Sacrifice.

In these wordes Eusebius, doth as it were with poin∣ting of his finger direct vs vnto the most blessed Sacrifice of the Aulter: and withal toucheth the manner how it is offred. For what other sacrifice is there in the Church, which is set forth with so special, and so high titles of ho∣nour, but the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ? For this aboue al other is Diuine, as that wherein Christ, God and man, but as man, vnto God is offred. This chief∣ly is reuerend and honorable, and most worthily to be accompted holy, wherein is conteined, Sanctum sancto∣rum, the holiest of al holy.

As for the manner of sacrificing, what is that we offer vp now in the Church of God, after a new manner, and according vnto the new Testament, but the Sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ, which Priestes vnder Christ after the order of Melchisedech offer vp vnto God, vn∣der the formes of Bread and Wine? This new manner of offering, Christ taught his Apostles, the Apostles deliue∣red it vnto the Church, to whom, after that he had taken bread into his handes, geuen thankes, broken, and blessed, saying,* 1.73 this is my body, and likewise the cuppe, saying also, this is my bloude, he gaue that he professed to be his bo∣dy and bloude, and commaunding them, and in them their successours, to doo the same in remembrance of him, he taught (as S. Irenaeas saith) the new Oblation of the new Testament.* 1.74

Let it be remembred now and considered, how many properties are attributed vnto this Sacrifice, that Malachie speaketh of, partely by the other olde

learned Fathers, but specially by S. Hierome, and Euse∣bius, whom M. Iewel hath brought for him.

First, that it succede al the sacrifices of the olde Lawe:* 1.75

Secondly, that it be offered in euery place:

Thirdly, that it be pure and cleane:

Fourthly, that it be done in the Ceremonies of the Christians:

Fifthly, (to come to Eusebius) that it be Diuine,* 1.76 reue∣rend, and most Holy:

Sixthly, that it be offered after a new manner:

Seuenthly, that it be offered according vnto the My∣steries of the new Testament:

Eightly (that I may adde certaine properties out of Eusebius fifth booke De Demonstratione) that it be done according vnto the rules, rites, and ordinances of the Churche:

Nienthly,* 1.77 that Christe doth performe it after the forme and maner of Melchisedech yet to this day amon gest men by his ministers:

Tenthly, that it be such, as was first done by our Lord and Sauiour him selfe, and afterward by Priestes that * 1.78 procede from out of him:

Eleuenthly, that the thinges which be offered con∣teined vnder the formes of bread and wine vsed in this Sacrifice,* 1.79 bee (as Eusebius saieth) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say, the very and true thinges, and the principal paternes of the Images: by which worde he meaneth the Sacrifices of Moses Law, which were Ima∣ges in respect of this truth:

Twelfthly,* 1.80 that they be the thinges, whereof being

then to come, Melchisech long before vsed the Images, as Eusebius speaketh, which Images were Breade and Wine, wherewith (as he saith) he blessed Abraham. S. Cyprian calleth this,* 1.81 veritatem praefiguratae Imaginis, the truth of the Image, that went before in figure.

Now let M. Iewel name, if he can, what sacrifice is that which we offer vp after a newe manner according vnto the newe Testament, and hath al these conditions and properties. And if he haue none to name besides the blessed Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe, whereof we speake, as we are assured he hath none: then I wish his conscience would ouercome shame, lead him to recant, and consider of the false doctrine, where∣by he enuegleth the people of God, making them to be∣leue, that this Sacrifice is to be vnderstanded only of Prayer, as he him selfe taketh Prayer: and that there is no such external Sacrifice of the body and bloude of Christe at al. This much I thinke to be yenough for answer vnto his .3. Diuision.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Psal. 110.
• * 1.2

  Malac. 1.
• * 1.3

  Gen. 14.
• * 1.4

  Heb. 5.
• * 1.5

  That Mel∣chisedek offered bread and vvine.
• * 1.6

  Arnob. in Psal. 109.
• * 1.7

  Cyprian. epist. ad Cecilium. lib. 2. epi∣stola. 3.
• * 1.8

  Hieron, in Mat. 26.
• * 1.9

  Cyprian. lib. 2. epi∣stola. 3.
• * 1.10

  That priestes haue au∣ctoritie to offer vp Christ vnto his Father.
• * 1.11

  Luc. 22.
• * 1.12

  1. Cor. 1••.
• * 1.13

  1. Cor. 11.
• * 1.14

  Conti∣nuance of Priestes necessary
• * 1.15

  Priestes by special calling succede the Apo∣stles in degree. Hieron. ad Heliodo∣rum.
• * 1.16

  Cyprian. lib. 2. ep. 3.
• * 1.17

  Priestes, substitu∣tes of Christe.
• * 1.18

  Malach. 1.
• * 1.19

  Al the conditiōs of Mala∣chies pro∣phecie founde in the Sacri∣fice of the Aulter.
• * 1.20

  1. Pet. 2.
• * 1.21

  Sacrifices common to b••••h ••esta∣ments.
• * 1.22

  That this Sacrifice succeded al the Sa∣crifices of the olde Lavve.
• * 1.23

  August. de ciuita. lib. 17. ca. 20.
• * 1.24

  Eccles. 3.
• * 1.25

  Chrysost. in Psalm. 95.
• * 1.26

  Malac. 1.
• * 1.27

  Irene. lib. 4. ca. 32. Aug. cōtra•• Aduersar. leg. et pro∣phet. lib. 1. cap. 20. Iustmusin Dialog. ad Tryphonē.
• * 1.28

  Tertull. contrae Iudaeos. Tertull. contra Marcion. lib. 4. Hieron. in 1. Caput Malach.
• * 1.29

  Euseb. De Demonst. li. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.30

  M. Ievvel forgeth a saiyng of his ovvne ād putteth it vpon Tertullian
• * 1.31

  Genes. 4.
• * 1.32

  Psal. 95.
• * 1.33

  Tertulliae. contra Iu∣daeos.
• * 1.34

  Tertuliās place tru∣ly decla∣red.
• * 1.35

  Thymia∣ma, obla∣tio mun∣da.
• * 1.36

  Contra Marcionē lib. 4.
• * 1.37

  VVhat Tertullian meant by pure prai∣er.
• * 1.38

  Prouer∣bior. 20.
• * 1.39

  1. Pet. 2.
• * 1.40

  Esai. 53.
• * 1.41

  Tertullia. aduersus Marcion. lib. 4.
• * 1.42

  Simple Prayer.
• * 1.43

  Instinus martyr in 2. Apolog.
• * 1.44

  Augustin. ad Pauli∣num. Epi∣stol. 59.
• * 1.45

  Hierony. ad Eu••∣grium.
• * 1.46

  Augustin. Confess. li∣bro 9. cap. 12.
• * 1.47

  The pra∣ctise of falsifiers.
• * 1.48

  M. Ievvel falsifieth S. Hie∣rome.
• * 1.49

  Hieron. in Commen. in Malac. cap. 1.
• * 1.50

  Tvvo thinges spoken of by Mala∣chie.
• * 1.51

  Prayer signified by In∣cense. Apoc. 5. Lib. 4. ca. 33. Augu. contra ad∣uersar. le∣gis et Pro∣phetarum lib. 1. c. 20
• * 1.52

  Foure conditiōs of the Mystical Oblatiō.
• * 1.53

  In his booke Against the B. of VVin∣chester. li. 3. fol 425. & 443.
• * 1.54

  Against the B. of Vvin∣ster. lib. 3. fol. 99.
• * 1.55

  Ceremo∣nies of the Chri∣stians.
• * 1.56

  Euseb. De Demonst. lib. 1.
• * 1.57

  Incense, Pure Sa∣crifice.
• * 1.58

  M. Ievvel falsifieth Eusebius.
• * 1.59

  Euseb. De Demonst. lib. 1.
• * 1.60

  Psal. 140.
• * 1.61

  Esai. 19.
• * 1.62

  Visible, and ex∣ternal Aulter.
• * 1.63

  Lib. 1. De De∣monstrat. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.64

  Lib. 5. De De∣monstrat.
• * 1.65

  Lib. 1. De Demonst.
• * 1.66

  Luc. 22.
• * 1.67

  1. Cor. 11.
• * 1.68

  Iren. lib. 4. cap. 32.
• * 1.69

  VVhat Eusebius vnderstā∣deth by Incense in Mala∣chie.
• * 1.70

  Ad finem lib. 1. De Demonst.
• * 1.71

  Pure Sa∣crifice.
• * 1.72

  Lib. 1. De Demonst. in fine.
• * 1.73

  Luke. 22.
• * 1.74

  Irenaeus. lib. 4. ca∣pite. 32.
• * 1.75

  Hieron. in Malachi. Cap. 1.
• * 1.76

  Euseb. de Demonst. lib. 1.
• * 1.77

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.78

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.79

  Lib. 1 De Demonst.
• * 1.80

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.81

  Gen. 14. Cyprian. lib. 2. epi∣stol. 3.