Of the institution of the sacrament of the blessed bodie and blood of Christ, (by some called) the masse of Christ eight bookes; discovering the superstitious, sacrilegious, and idolatrous abominations of the Romish masse. Together with the consequent obstinacies, overtures of perjuries, and the heresies discernable in the defenders thereof. By the R. Father in God Thomas L. Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield.

CHAP. VI.

The third Romish Contradiction, against the words of Christ [MY BODY,] is by making a Body Finite, to be a Body not finite.

SECT. I.

IF (as you have said) the Body of Christ is, or may be at one time in so many places, then may it be in mo••, and consequently every-where at one instant. This Consequence your ancient Schoole-men taught, and your Iesuite a 1.1 Valentia doth seeme to avow, say∣ing, What hindreth that a Body may be [Vbi{que}] every where at once, not by it's naturall power, but by the omnipotencie of God? So he. This we say is to make a finite infinite; and your old Schoole-Doctors are hereunto witnesses, who have iudged it b 1.2 Hereticall, to say, that the Body of Christ can be in divers places at once; because then he may be in infinite. So they. And heare you what your Cardinall Bellarmine hath publikely taught? To say (c 1.3 saith he) that the Body of Christ may be in infinite places at once, is to ascribe an Immensity and infinitenes unto it (namely, that) which is proper unto God. So hee, and so also your other Doctors, to whom the Evidence of Truth commandeth us to assent.

For what greater Heresie can there be against that Article of our Faith, concerning the Deity, and Godhead of Christ begotten, not made, than to beleeve that there can be a made God? for so doubt∣les doe they (whosoever they bee) that thinke a finite Body may be made Infinite.

CHALLENGE.

YOu understand the Argument, viz. To believe that Christ his Bo∣dy may be every where, is a flat Heresie: but to affirme, that the same Body is in many places at once, doth consequently inferre that it may be every where (as hath beene directly professed.) Ergo your Doctrine of attributing to the Body of Christ an Existence, in many places at once, is by the confessed generall grounds of Christianity plainly Hereticall. And from this our Conclusion your Aquinas will in no wise dissent, who himselfe concludeth d 1.4 That the Angell is not in divers places at once, because an Angell is a finite creature, and therefore of a finite power and operation; it being proper to God to be in many places at once. So hee.

That, by the iudgement of Ancient Fathers, the Being in divers places at once inferreth an Infinitenesse proper unto God: which without Heresie cannot be ascribed to any humane Body; Proved from the manner of Existence of the Holy Ghost.

SECT. II.

STill you maintaine the Reall and Corporall presence of Christ his Body in so many places, as there are consecrated Hoasts at one time in the whole world, be they ten thousand times ten Mil∣lions of Millions, or how many soever: which, say we, is to make the Finite Body of Christ Infinite. For Aquinas (as your e 1.5 Ie∣suite witnesseth) held it Hereticall, to affirme One Body to be eve∣ry where, because this is a Divine property, by which the Fathers did sufficiently prove the God-head of the Holy Ghost, (namely) Au∣gustine, Fulgentius, Ambrose, and Basil. So he.

But how did the Fathers prove this, thinke you? it were good, that where your owne Authours be silent, we heard some of them∣selves speake. f 1.6 Fulgentius his reason is, Because the Spirit of God dwelleth wholly in all the faithfull separated in divers places. g 1.7 Basil thus: The Angell, that was with Cornelius, was not at the same time with Philip, nor was he then in Heaven, when he was with Za∣chary at the Altar: But the Holy Ghost was together with the Pro∣phet Daniel in Babylon, with Ieremy in the Dungeon, and with E∣zekiel

in Chobar. h 1.8 Ambrose thus: Because the Apostles could not all be every where, Christ severed them, giving them all the Holy Ghost, which was inseparable in them: none therefore can doubt but it is a Divine Essence. i 1.9 Augustine confuteth an Arian Bishop, thus: You that prayse the holy Spirit, in sanctifying his faithfull wheresoe∣ver they are, how can you deny him to be God? k 1.10 Didymus of Ale∣xandria (whom Hierome acknowledgeth as his Master, for the understanding of Scripture) thus: The Holy Ghost (seeing it is in many places at once) may not be thought to be a Creature. Lastly upon the same ground Cyrill of Alexandria maketh the same Conclu∣sion: l 1.11 The Spirit of God is no Creature (saith hee) because things created are in one place, but of the Spirit of God it is written, Whither shall I goe from thy presence? So these holy Fathers, every one Ga∣tholique, without exception.

CHALLENGE.

ASyllogisme from these premises will set all straight. To ascribe to a Body an Omni-presency, and power of being every where, is Hereticall. But to say that a Body is in divers places at once, doth con∣sequently inferre a power of being in every place (as it doth in demon∣strating the Holy Ghost to be a divine Spirit.) Therefore to attribute to a Body, a Being in divers places at once, is a Doctrine Hereticall, and implyeth a Contradiction, by affirming a Finite thing to be infinite. Adde but hereunto the former * 1.12 Testimonies of Fa∣thers, who have distinguished the humane nature of Christ from his God-head, and their denying of all Possibilities of Existence of An∣gels in two places at once: and your Consciences must needs tell you, that it was Impossible for the Fathers to have beleeved your Romish Article of a Corporall Presence in every Hoast consecra∣ted at onetime, on divers Altars in your severall Churches. What shall we then further say concerning a Being of a Body in divers places at once? Surely (that which hath beene plentifully proved already) that such an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is egregiously 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as well in Di∣vine, as in naturall Philosophy, because (as this whole Discourse sheweth) they have verified that saying of Aristotle, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Quasi non possit creatura esse ubi{que} hoc (inquam) non obstat, nam omnipo∣tentiam illi intellex∣erunt prorsus natu∣ralem, quia si non a∣lienâ virtute, sed su∣apte naturâ res exi∣stat ubi{que} praesens, haec reverà nulli cre∣aturae convenit. Ar nos altero modo non nisi per absolutam Dei potentiam vbi∣quitatem creaturae convenire arbitra∣mur, Valent. Ies. lib. 1. de vera Christi prae∣sent. in Euch. c. 12. §. Quaesanè. pag. 241.
• b 1.2

  Veterum The∣ologorum apud D. Thomam ratio haec est, si idem corpus possit esse in duobus locis simul, potest in pluribus, at{que} adeo ubi{que}—Et unà cum codem Thoma dicunt, Haereticum esse affirmare, corpus Christi esse poss•• in duobus locis simul, quia ubi{que} esse, est pro∣prium Deo. Teste Suarez Tom. 3. qu. 75. Art. 1. disp. 48. Sect. 4.
• c 1.3

  Dicere corpus Christi esse, vel esse posse in Infinitis locis simul, immensitatem divinam requirit. Bellar. lib. 3. de Christio. c. 18.
• d 1.4

  Aquinas 1. q. 52. art. 2. Deus est essen∣tia infinita, ideo non solùm in pluribus lo∣cis est, sed ubique. An∣gelus quia est virtutis finitae non se exten∣dit nisi ad unum de∣terminatum—undè sequitur quòd non sit ubique, neque in plu∣ribus locis, sed in uno loco tantùm.
• e 1.5

  Vnum corpus es∣se ubique affirmare est Haereticum. Tho∣mas. Quia Catholici ex hac proprietate essendi ubique dicunt antiquos Patres suffi∣cienter probasse Spi∣ritus Sancti Divini∣ratem, ut patet ex Augustino, Fulgent. Ambrosio, Basil. Teste Suarez. Ies. Tō. 3. disp. 48. Sect. 4. Rat. 1.
• f 1.6

  Fulgent. ad Tra∣simund. lib. 2. pag. 325. Spiritus Sancti in no∣bis habitatio non lo∣calis est, inhabitat e∣nim Trinitas in suis fidelibus, sicut tota in cunctis: nec per separatos homines, & separata loca particu∣laritèr separatur.
• g 1.7

  Basil. de Sp. Sancto cap. 22. sub finem. Reliquae virtutes omnes in loco circum∣scriptae esse creduntur, nam Angelus qui astabat Cornelio non erat in eodem loco, quo cùm astaret Philippo: neque qui locutus est Zachariae ab Altari per idem tempus etiam in coelo suam implebat stationem. At Spiritus (Sanctus) simul & in Abaccuc operatus, & in Daniele in Babylonia creditus, & in Catarcta cùm Ieremia, & cum Ezechiele in Chobar; Spiritus enim Domini replevit orbem terrarum, [Quo ibo à Spiritu tuo?] Et Propheta; Quon••am ego, inquit, vobiscum sum, & Spiritus meusstat in medio vestri.
• h 1.8

  Ambros. de Spirit. Sancto l. 1. c. 7. Cùm igitur omnis creatu∣ra certis naturae suae circumscripta limiti∣bus, siquidem & illa invisibilia opera, quae non queunt lo∣cis & finibus compre•• hendi, substantiae ta∣men suae proprietate clauduntur, quomo. dò quis audeat crea∣turam Spi. Sanctum appellare, qui non habet circumscriptā & determinatam na∣turam?—Ideò cum Dominus servos suos Apostolos destinare voluit, ut agnosceremus aliam esse naturam, aliud gratiam spiritualem, alios aliò destinabat, quia simul omnes esse ubique non poterant; dedit autem Spirit. Sanctum, qui licet separatis Apostolis inseperabilis gratiae mun••s infunderet: quis igitur dubitat, quin divinum sit quod infunditur, simul pluribus, nec videtur? corporeum au∣tem quod videtur à singulis, & tenetur.
• i 1.9

  Aug cont. Maxim. Axian. Epist. l. 3. c. 21. Cùm sic laudetis Sp. Sanctum, ut in sanctific and is fidelibus ubique praesentem esse dicatis, tamen negare audeatis esse Deum? [The Vbique spoken of the faithfull hath the sence of Vbicunque, because the number of the faithfull is but finite, and their places distinct, here and there, and not absolutely every-where.]
• k 1.10

  Didymus Alex. lib. 1. de Spirit. Sancto, Hieron. interprete, (extat in Biblioth. S. Patrum Tom. 6. pag. 679.) Iose Spiritus Sanctus, si unus esset de creaturis, saltem circumscriptam haberet substantiam—Spiritus autem Sanctus cùm in pluribus sit, non habet substan∣tiam circumscriptam. [And he proveth it is Pluribus, idem in Prophetis & Apostolis, &c.]
• l 1.11

  Cyril. Alex. de Spirit. Sancto (quod non est Creatura.) Quum in loco & circumscriptione intelligant quae facta sunt, Spi. autem Sanctus non sit, de quo psallit David, Quo ibo à Spiritu tuo?
• * 1.12

  See above Chap. 5. & 6.