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. II.

Of the stupendious Obstinacie of the Romish Disputers, made palpable by their owne Contradictions; and of the De∣fence thereof, as being Contradictory in it selfe.

SECT. I.

ALL your Disputers shew themselves in no∣thing more zealous, than in maintenance of your Romish Masse, which they contend for by objecting Scriptures, Fathers, & Reasons: notwithstanding their Expositions of Scrip∣tures, their Inferences out of the Fathers, their devised Reasons, and almost all their Confutations are confuted, rejected, & con∣tradicted by their owne fellowes, as the Sections thorowout this whole Tractate doth plainly demonstrate. We cannot therefore otherwise judge, but that as Prejudice is the chiefe Director, so Obstinacie is the greatest Supporter of your Cause.

How much more when the Defence it selfe is found to consist upon mere Contradictories, whereof you may take a Taste out of your Doctrine of Corporall Presence, and of a proper Sacrifice. In the first, by obtruding on mens Consciences a Beleefe (upon due Consequence) of a Body of Christ Borne, and not Borne of the Virgin Mary; One, and not One; Finite, and not Finite; Divisible, and not Divisible; Perfect, and not Perfect; and also Glorious, and not Glorious, as hath beene a proved in each point.

2. In a point of properly Sacrificing of Christ's Body, your Musicke stands upon the same kinde of Discords, of b Teaching a Body Broken, and not Broken; a matter visible, not visible; of Blood shed, and not shed; and of a suffering Destruction, and not suffering Destruction. Evident Arguments of Obstinacie one would thinke, and yet behold a plainer, if it may be.

One Example, in stead of many, of a stupendious Obstinacie, in ur∣ging the Iudgement of Antiquity, for Defence of your Ro∣mish Masse, in the chiefest parts thereof; proved by instancing only in their like Sayings concerning Baptisme.

SECT. II.

THree chiefe Iesuites, besides others, have beene (as you may c remember) extremely urgent, and important with Prote∣stants

to shew, if they could, the like Phrases of the Fathers in Baptisme, as were used of them concerning the Eucharist, in the question of Sacrifice: as if the just paralleling of these Two might be a Satisfaction unto themselves, concerning that one point. Wee are to deale more liberally with them, and whereas they assume unto themselves the suffrages of Antiquity, 1. For a Literall Exposition of Christ's words [This is my Body:] 2. For a Change of Bread by Transubstantiation into his Body: 3. For a Cor∣porall Presence of the same Body in the Sacrament: 4. For a Bodily Vnion with our Bodies: 5. For a Proper Sacrifice of the Eucharist: And lastly for a Divine Adoration thereof, wee answer them from the Fathers, in their like sayings concerning Baptisme thorowout every particular.

A Synopsis of the Speeches of Fathers, objected in the Defence of the Masse-points, and paralleled (and consequently satisfied) by the like Equivalent speeches of the Fathers touching Baptisme.

SECT. III.

THe two Proper Sacraments, as the two Seales of the new Testament, Baptisme and the Eucharist, use to goe in equipage in the writings of Antiquity. The Parallel doth consist in these two; your Objections, in urging the Fathers Phrases, and wresting them to your Romish Literall Sence, concerning the Eucharist: and our Solutions, by the equivalent Termes of the same Fathers given unto Baptisme, and thereby instructing us of their Sacramen∣tall and Figurative Interpretation.

OB. 1. The Fathers, say you, called the Eucharist an a Antitype, because an Antitype is not every Signe, but that which differeth almost nothing from the Truth. Ergò the word Antitype doth not prove a fi∣gurative Sence. And againe they call Bread b The Body of Christ.

SOL. The Fathers accordingly call Baptisme a The Antitype of Christ's Passion. And againe they observe that S. Paul calleth it a b Buriall. Ergo neither of both make for a Literall Sence.

OB. 2. You contend by the Fathers to prove a Corporall Change of Bread into Christ's Body, because they say of it, after Consecra∣tion, a It is not now Common Bread. b Nor are wee to consider it as Bare Bread, yea, c no sensible thing is delivered herein: d And it is changed by Divine Omnipotencie into another nature. Ergo they meant a Corporall Presence of Christ.

SOL. Your Consequence is lame, and out of joynt in every part, because the Fathers, speaking of Baptisme, have said as much, to wit, a We are not to behold this as common Water; b Nor is it simple Water: c Nor to be discerned with our eyes, but with our mindes: d Wherein no Sensible thing is given; seeing the e Water by benediction

is made a Divine Laver; working miraculous effects: whereby the party baptized is made a f new Creature, and his Body made the g Flesh of Christ crucified.

OB. 3. You labour to prove a Corporall Presence out of the Fathers, where they say; a Christ is herein (without mention of Presence:) and where they adde saying, b Thinke not it is the Priest, but Christ that reacheth it unto ••hee.

SOL. As though such Phrases of the Fathers were still Literally meant, or that you are ignorant of their like sayings, in behalfe of Baptisme: viz. a Wee have Christ Present at the Sacrament of Baptisme; where b Not the Minister, but God holdeth the head of the party baptized.

OB. 4. To evince a Corporall Participation of Christ, in commu∣nicating of the Eucharist, and consequently the Bodily Presence, are alleaged the speeches of the Fathers, of our a Touching Christ's Body, and b Eating Christ's flesh, of c Naturall union with his Body, and that the Eucharist is our d Viaticum, and Pledge of our Resur∣rection; whereunto is added that e Contemptuous Communicants doe more injury to Christ, than they that denied him: f Eating and drinking their owne judgement.

SOL. And what of Baptisme? concerning Touching; the Fa∣thers teach that wee a Take hold of the feet of Christ: concerning Eating, that the partie Baptized may be said to b Eat the Flesh of Christ, in respect of the thing it selfe: concerning Vnion with Christ, they adde c We are hereby One with him, not only by assent of will, but even naturally; and d Incorporate in him, e made thereby bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh: Even f The flesh of Christ crucified. Concerning the Effect, they hold that g Baptisme is our Viaticum, and the Earnest of our Resurrection, and salvation: whereunto is ad∣ded out of the Apostle, concerning the Contemners of their vow of Baptisme, that h They crucifie unto themselves the Sonne of God. i And he that receiveth Baptisme unworthily, is guilty of judgement.

OB. 5. To beget an opinion of the proper Sacrifice of the Eucharist, and consequently a Corpor all Presence of Christ herein, you insist upon such Phrases of the Fathers as call it a a Sacrifice, still exacting of Protestants to shew, if ever any Father said as much of Baptisme, to name it a Sacrifice; or the Celebration thereof b The Immolation of Christ.

SOL. And you have beene plentifully satisfied, in both, out of the Testimonies of Antiquity, often calling Baptisme a a Sacrifice, and sometimes also the Passion of Christ.

OB. 6. Your last and worst Contention is in Defence of a Divine Adoration of the Eucharist, and consequently a Corporall Presence of Christ in the same, as from the judgement of Antient Fathers, by manifold Arguments, wherein you may be pleased (for Brevity sake) to let your Ob. for the Eucharist, and our Sol. for Baptisme wrastle, and grapple together. Your first Ob. is taken

from their Reverend Silence, for they instruct Communtcants not to speake of the Eucharist before Catechumenists, or Insidels, say∣ing, a The faithfull know it; pretending that the like Circumspe∣ction cannot be shewed of Baptisme. Sol. Even as upon the same Consideration they forbid speech of Baptisme, expressely saying: b The faithfull know it; and c Inhibiting All, except the Baptized, to see it. A second Note of Reverence is taken from the Ef••ects. Ob. d Miracles were wrought by the Eucharist, and at it. Sol. e They shew miracles wrought about Baptisme also. A Third Ob. is groun∣ded upon Reverence done by Angells, because they are said to be f Present, and attendant at the Celebration of the Eucharist, Sol. Namely, as they are likewise said to be g Present at Baptisme, and to honour it, with their Presence. A fourth Ob. (••o come to the Com∣municants themselves) ariseth from danger of Contempt, even h Such, as to eat and drinke judgement to themselves. Sol. i So they, who receive Baptisme unworthily, receive their owne judgement. A Fifth Ob. is (for danger begetteth Dread) from feare, where with they are moved to approach to the Eucharist, which therefore the Fathers call a k Dreadfull Sacrament, and causing horrour. Sol. To wit, as they call the words of Baptisime l Terrible, and it's Canons Dreadfull, m whereunto the Baptized are brought with feare. Ob. 6. But none (say the Fathers) n Communicateth of the Eucharist, be∣fore he Adore. And, o They first adore Christ (say they, speaking of men of yeares) who are to be Baptized in his name. Ob. 7. But the Fathers tell us p They reverence the Eucharist. Sol. True: even as they say, q We reverence Baptisme, wheresoever it is. Ob. 8. Lastly they use a forme of Invocation upon the Eucharist, thus: r Ob Di∣vine Sacrament, reveale unto us, &c. Sol. They doe so, but in the same figurative manner of speech, called Prosopapoeia, wherein they as well use the same forme concerning Baptisme, as thus: s Ob Wa∣ter! which hast washed our Saviour, when hee was imbr•…•… blood, &c.

CHALLENGE.

SO many Testimonies of Fathers, so mainly insisted upon by vour Doctors, for warrant of such Erroneous, Superstitious, Sa∣crilegious, and Idolatrous Romish Doctrines, and each one not more vehemently objected, in the Question concerning the Eucharist, than easily retorted, and confuted, by instancing in Baptisme; what greater Evidence can any desire to be made of a wi••full Ob∣stinacy (that we say not madnes) than this of your Disputers appea∣reth to be? how much more, if we should point at the other mani∣fold Instances, which we have prosecuted at large thorowout this whole Volume, wherein their Vnconscionablenesse hath beene manifested in all passages to the Conscience of every indifferent

Reader. Yet were this their Guilt not so hainous, it such their Obstinacie were not infected with some contagion of Perjury.

A Synopsis of manifold Overtures of Perjuries, in Defence of the Romish Masse.

SECT. IV.

EVery Perjury presupposeth an Oath; which you have in the a Bull of Pope Pius IV. imposed upon every Ecclesiasticke, subject to the Sea of Rome, for the ratifying of the Beleefe of the many new Romish Articles contained therein, as True, Catholique, and without which none can be saved. The due proofe that the same Oath, almost in each new Article, maketh the Swearer obnoxious to Perjury, is a Subject which would require a full Treatise; for the which we are not altogether unprovided. But we are to con∣fine our selves to the Observations promised in our former Dis∣course, in foure speciall points.

I. Overture of Perjury is in Swearing unto that, which it called The Vulgar Latine Translation.

THis is decreed in the Councell of a Trent to be Authenticall, and not to be rejected upon any Pretence whatsoever. Where∣unto (together with all other Decrees, and Declarations of the same Councell) you are sworne by the forme of Oath set downe in the foresaid Bull of the Pope. The same Vulgar Translation, pro∣fessed by you to be Authenticall, and that (as you expound it) it is b Consonant unto the Originall, the Hebrew, and Greeke Texts; hath notwithstanding beene rejected by your c Cardinall, and the Greek Translation urged for proofe of a Proper Sacrifice. Even as it hath beene frequently excepted against by other learned Doctors in your Church, after the Councell of Trent, noting Errours therein not only by fault of Print, but also such as happened by the Negli∣gence, or Ignorance of the Author thereof, as is d confessed; not∣withstanding

that Inhibition in that Decree, viz. Not to reject it upon any Pretence whatsoever. Who, to free themselves from Per∣jury, make this Comment upon it, that this restraint of Not reje∣cting it is only in matter of Faith, & good manners. Which is also your e Cardinall his Evasion; but is no better than a lurking hole, and so seemeth it to be to your two Iesuites f Azorius, and g Valen∣tia, who thinke that Oath to be violated, if the Vulgar Latine be rejected at all, as lesse true than the Originalls. And your Spanish Inquisitors finding urged, in one of your Romish Doctors, the Rule of Hierome; and Augustine, which is, that no Translation La∣tine, or other be further allowed than as it agreeth with the Origi∣nalls, they faire and cleanly wipe it out, saying that h Although that, which Hierome and Augustine taught, be true; yet now since the Councell of Trent it is not lawfull to reject the same Transla∣tion upon any pretence whatsoever. So they. And so farre unsatis∣fied are your Doctors, in taking this Oath.

We are furthermore not destitute of matter for a large Consu∣tation (first) of your assuming S. Hierome as the Author of your Vulgar Latine Translation; to manifest that it is no more the Translation of Hierome, or yet of any one Author, than the divers cloathes of a mans body from head to foot, can be called the worke of one singular work-man.

Secondly, concerning the Authority thereof, you professe it to be Authenticall (that is, as you have defined) Conformable to the Originall Hebrew and Greeke: although it may be as easily pro∣ved, not to be that Antient Vulgar, which had continued (as the Decree speaketh) from divers ages, than the Ship of Theseus, which after some ages had beene so thorowly battered and pierced, that at last the keele and bottome thereof did only remaine, which could be called the Same. But passing by all further Dispute, wee shall referre you to the judgement of the Patrones of the former Rule (so insolently contemned by the Spanish Inquisitors, as you have heard) by one Instance, which may be sufficient in it selfe for triall of the Case now in hand.

The Text of Scripture is Ephes. 1. 14. in the Latine Transla∣tion (even in that, which is set forth by Pope i Clement, as The

most accurate Edition) thus: k You are sealed with the spirit of promise, which is the Pledge of your inheritance. But in the Greeke it is: You are sealed with the spirit of promise, which is the Earnest of your inheritance. The Question is, whether of these is to be pre∣ferred; and Hierome, and Augustine are ready to resolve you here∣in, both of them correcting the Vulgar Translation in the word Pledge, and one of them giving an Absit••l against this Sence of it. The Reason of both is, because he that giveth a Pledge taketh it a∣gaine, when the Thing for which it was pledged, is received. But he that giveth an Earnest, will have it continue with him, to whom it was given. And so God assuring his Chosen, by his Spi∣rit, doth for their greater Confidence give it as an Earnest, and not as a Pledge. So they. Thereby advancing Gods gracious love, to∣wards man, and man's faith in God's love. Here will be no cor∣ner of Pretence, that this being an Errour of Print, and not of Doctrine, may be rejected by you without Prejudice to your Oath; no, for Errour of Print ariseth from some affinity of words, (as where these words; This is a sound reason, being delivered to the print, was returned from the Presse thus; This is a fond reason.) But betweene Pignus, and Arrhabo, there is no more Symphony than betweene an Horse, and a Saddle. Nor will it availe you to say that the Originall Greeke was corrupted, for it is the same Greeke word, which Hierome himselfe, (who as you know used the perfectest Greeke Text) doth here avow to be True.

II. Overture of Perjury in your Disputers is in swearing to the Romish Expositions of Scripture.

THe Tenour of the Oath, in this respect, is: a I admit the sa∣cred Scriptures in that Sense, which the Mother Church hath held, and doth hold. By [Mother Church] understanding the Church of Rome, as without which there is no salvation; which is expressed in the same Oath, as another Article therein, and which else-where we have proved to be a GRAND IMPOSTVRE, in a full Tractate, from the Doctrine of the Apostles, of Generall Councells, of severall Catholique Churches, and from such Primitive Fathers, whose memories are at this day registred in the Romish Calender of Saints. How then can the Oath for this point be ta∣ken without danger of Perjury? But to come to the Article, con∣cerning the Expositions of Scriptures According to the sence of the Church of Rome, which would thereby be thought to Hold no Sence of Scripture now, which she had not Held in more Antient Times. We, for Triall hereof; shall for this present seeke after no

other Instances, than such as in this Treatise have been discussed, and for brevity-sake single, out of many, but only Three; A first is in that Scripture Ioh. 6. Except you eat the flesh of the Sonne of man, you cannot have life.

The word [Except] was extended unto Infants in the dayes of Pope Innocent the First, continuing (as hath beene b confessed) six hundred yeares together, when the Church of Rome thereupon Held it necessary for Infants to receive the Eucharist. Contrarily the now Romane Church Holdeth it Inexpedient to administer the Eucha∣rist unto Infants, as you have heard.

Secondly, Luc. 22. Take, Eat, &c. Your Church of Rome, in the dayes of Pope Nicolas, in a Councell at Rome, Held, that by the word, Eate, was meant an c Eating, by Tearing the Body of Christ sensually with men's teeth, in a Literall sence. Which your now Romane Church (if we may beleeve your Iesuites) doth not Hold, as hath appeared.

Thirdly the Tenour of the Institution of Christ, concerning the Cup, was Held in the dayes of Pope d Gelasius to be peremptory, for the administration thereof, to prove that the Eucharist ought to be administred in both kindes to all Communicants, and judging the dismembring of them a Grand Sacrilege, as you have heard: whereas now your Romish Church Holdeth it not only lawfull, but also religious to withhold the Cup from all, but only consecra∣ting Priests. Vpon these (omitting other Scriptures, which you your selves may observe at your best leasure) we conclude. You therefore in taking that Oath, swearing to admit all Interpretati∣ons of Scripture, both which the Church of Rome once Held, and now Holdeth; the Proverbe must needs be verified upon you, viz. You hold a Wolfe by the eare: which howsoever you Hold, you are sure to be Oath-bit, either in Holding TENVIT, by TENET, or in Holding TENET, by TENVIT.

III. Overture of Perjury in your Disputers, is in swearing to the pretended Consent of Fathers, in their Expositions of Scriptures.

HEare your Oath. a Neither will I ever interpret any Scripture, but according to the unanimous consent of Fathers. Here the word [Fathers] cannot betoken Bishops and Fathers assembled in a Councell, where the major part of voices conclude the lesse; for Councell never writ Commentaries upon Scriptures, but from Scriptures collect their Conclusions. And although the word [Vnanimous] doth literally signifie the universall Consent (which would inferre an Impossibility, because that all Fathers have not expounded any one Scripture, and very few All) yet that you may know we presse not too violently upon you, we shall be con∣tent to take this word Morally, with this Diminution, For the

most part; and hereupon make bold to averre, that your Iuror by this Oath is sworne to a flat Falsity, because you cannot deny but that the Fathers, in their Expositions, dissent among themselves, sometimes a Greater part from the lesse; insomuch that you your selves are at difference among your selves, which part to side with: b With the greater (saith Valentia,) nay but sometime with the c Lesser, (saith Canus.) Can you dreame of an Vnanimity in Dispa∣rity? Sometime there is a Non-Constat, what is the Iudgement of the Fathers in some points, which you call matter of Faith. What then? d Then (saith your Iesuite) the Authority of the Pope is to take place, who being guided by other rules may propound what is the Sence. Behold here the very ground of that, which we call Popery, which is devising and obtruding upon the Church of Christ new Articles of Faith unknowen (for ought you know) to Ancient Fathers. And is it possible to finde an Vnanimity of Consent in an Individuall Vnity, or rather a Nullity? for what else is an igno∣rance, what the Sence of the Fathers is, whether so, or so?

Next, that it may appeare that this Article, touching the Vna∣nimous Consent of Fathers, is a meere Ostentation and gullery, and no better than that Challenge made by the wise man of Athens of all the Ships that entred into the Road, to be his owne: as if you should say, All the Fathers doe patronize your Romish Cause. We shall give you one or two Examples, among your Iesuites, as patternes of the Disposition of others in neglecting, sleighting, and rejecting the more Generall Consent of Fathers in their Ex∣positions of Scriptures. One Instance may be given in your Cardi∣nall, who, in his Commentaries upon the Psalmes, dedicated to the then Pope, professeth himselfe to have composed them, e Rather by his owne meditation, than by reading of many bookes; whereas he that will seeke for Vnanimous Consent of Fathers, must have a peru∣sall of them all. In the second place hearken unto the Accents of your Iesuite Maldonate, in his rejecting the Expositions of the Fa∣thers, as for Example: f So indeed said the Fathers, but I beleeve the Contrary. Item, This seemeth not to me to be the Sence of this place, which All, whom I have read, except Hilary, doe thinke. Item, Their opinions are divers, I rest upon none of them All. Item, All Antients almost doe so expound this Text, but this is no fit Interpretation. Item, Thus I expound this Scripture, and albeit I have no Author of this Exposition, yet I doe approve it rather than that of Augustine, or of others, although otherwise most probable, even because it is repugnant to the Sense and Exposition of the Calvinists. So hee, and that usually. (O dura ilia!) With what Stomach could this man swal∣low that O ath?

Salmeron the Iesuite may stand for the third upon that Text Rom. 5. In whom all have sinned, which teacheth the universall Guilt of Originall Sinne of mankinde. What the Sence of the Fathers was from this Text, your Canus will certifie you; g All they (saith he) who have formerly fallen upon this subject matter, have confessed, as it were with one mouth, that the Virgin Mary was con∣ceived in originall sinne, no one contrarying this opinon. So he of the Iudgement of A••tiquity, which notwithstanding he durst contra∣dict: but wee returne to your Iesuite, who premising that this Question doth belong to Faith, propoundeth h Objections made out of the Fathers, for proofe that the Virgin Mary hath the same Originall defect in her owne naturall Generation, and shapeth Answers full of regret, and reluctancy. For, first, To this Obje∣ction; The Fathers did consen••: Hee answereth thus; The Argu∣ment from Authority is infirme. 2. To this; The Fathers were An∣tient: Thus; The younger Divines are more quicke of understanding. 3. To this; The Fathers were many: hee answereth; Hee is but a poore man that can number his Cattell. And againe confronting the Antient Fathers, and preferring novell Divines, he saith; Wee oppose multitude to multitude. 4. But The Fathers were Devout: he answereth; Yet all Devotion towards the Blessed Virgin resteth not in the Fathers. And when one of the Devoutest of them (Ber∣nard by name) is objected, who had said of the point now in Question; i To ascribe the prerogative of the Sonne to the Blessed Virgin is not an honouring, but a dishonouring her: wherein the same holy Bernard appealeth to Antiquity, saying, Are wee either more learned, or more Devout than the Fathers? Your Iesuite answering to him by name, casteth him off with the Rest.

Here we see an Oath exacting a Consent to the Vnanimous Ex∣positions of Fathers, & heare notwithstanding as plaine a Dissent of your Iesuites opposition unto Vnanimous Consent of Fathers which is the ordinary guise of your Disputers in their expounding of Scriptures: and yet behold you (forsooth) the native children, and heires of the Doctrine of Antient Fathers. Your Fathers of the Councell of Trent have set it downe for a Canon, whereunto you are also sworne, that the words of Christ his Institution, concer∣ning the giving of his Body, and Blood, Have a plaine, and proper signification without Tropes; which notwithstanding, the same words of Christ have beene evinced to be Figurative, not only by the Vnanimous Consent of k Antiquity, but also by the expresse l Confessions of your owne Iesuites, in the words [Eate, Breake, Cup, &c.] and wherein your selves have acknowledged divers Tropes. Besides, the whole former Treatise is but a displaying of your unconscionable wresting of the Testimonies of ancient Fa∣thers.

Ponder you these Observations with your selves, and then judge whether your Swearing be not Perjury it selfe.

IV. Overture of Perjury, in the Defenders of the Romish Masse, is in respect of the pretended Necessity of their Doctrine.

IN the last Clause of the Oath, prescribed in the Bull of Pope Pius IV. you are sworne that every Article therein is the a True Catholique Faith, without which none can be saved; among which is the Article already mentioned, swearing to whatsoever was de∣clared in the Councell of Trent; by which Councell your now Ro∣mane b Missall, or Masse-booke is approved. Now take a Taste of your Oath in every Epithet. First, [True:] and hereby are you sworne that in the dayes of Pope Innocentius the third, the Admi∣nistration of the Eucharist to Infants was not held necessary; which your owne Authors have c confessed, and proved to be false. Se∣condly, that the presence of them, who, at the administration of the Eucharist, doe not communicate, is Commendable, and held a Doctrine Catholique (that is) antiently Vniversall: which was generally condemned by Ancient Fathers; and, even in the Church of Rome it selfe, abandoned by two d Popes.

Lastly, in the point of Necessity to Salvation; To sweare that whosoever beleeveth not that one may be said to e Communicate alone, is damned; that whosoever beleeveth not that the Priest in the Masse, being alone, cannot duly say, The Lord be with you, he is damned; or that the f Body of Christ may not be run away with Mice, & be blowen away with the wind, he is damned; and a number other like extreme foolish Crotchets, set downe in your Missalls, which wee willingly omit. The Summe of all these is, that the same your Oath, made to damne others, doth serve chiefly to make the Swearers themselves most damnable. If peradventure any of you shall oppose, saying that none of you within this Kingdome (which never admitted of the Councell of Trent, nor of the Bull of Pope Pius IV.) are yet bound to that Oath, let him know that although this may excuse him from an Actuall Perjury, yet can it not free him from the Habituall, which is, that hee is disposed in himselfe to take it, whensoever it shall be offered unto him in any Kingdome, that doth imbrace and professe the same.

Our Last Advertisement followeth.

Of the Mixture of many old Heresies with the former Defence of the Romish Masse.

SECT. V.

THe more odious the Title of this Section may seeme to be, the more studious ought you to shew your selves in exami∣ning the proofes thereof; that so you may either confute, or con∣fesse them, and accordingly re-assume, or renounce your Romish Defence.

Heresie hath a double aspect: One is when it is direct, having the expresse termes of Heresie; the Other is oblique, and by consequence, when the Defence doth inferre, or imply necessarily the same Hereticall Sence, even as it may be said of Treason. For to say that Caesar is not King, is a Treasonable speech Directly, in a plaine Sence; and to say that Tribute money is not due to Cae∣sar, is as Treasonable in the Consequence. Thus much being premi∣sed, we are now to recognize such Errrours, wherein your Dispu∣ters may seeme to have accordance with old Heretiques, which point we shall pursue according to the order of the Bookes.

BOOKE I. Wherein your Church is found altering almost the whole forme of Christ his Institution, and the Custome of the Catholique Church, descended from the Apostles; which Pre∣sumption Pope a Iulius condemned in divers, who sopped the Bread in the Chalice, and squeezed Grapes in the Cup, and so received them: even as did the Artoryritae in mingling Bread with Cheese, censured for Heretiques by your Aquinas. In which Comparison your Aberration from Christ's Example is so much greater than theirs, as you are found Guilty in defending b Ten Innovations, for one.

2. Your Pope Gelasius condemned the Hereticall Manichees, for thinking it lawfull not to receive the Cup in the Administration of the Eucharist, judging it to be c Greatly Sacrilegious: notwith∣standing your d Church authorizeth the same Custome of forbid∣ding the Administration of the Cup to fit Communicants.

3. As e you pretend Reverence, for withdrawing the Cup; so did the f Aquarii forbeare wine, and used only Water, under a pre∣tence of Sobriety.

4. Sometime there may be a Reason to doe a thing, when as yet there is no right, nor Authority for him that doth it: Wee therefore exact of you an Autority for altering the Apostles Cu∣stomes, and Constitutions; and are answered that g your Church hath Authority over the Apostles Precepts. Iumpe with them, who being asked why they stood not unto the Apostles Traditions,

replyed that h They were herein above the Apostles, whom there∣fore Irenaeus reckoneth among the Heretikes of his Time.

BOOKE II. It is not nothing, which hath beene observed therein (to wit) your Reasoning, why you ought not to interpret the words of Christ [This is my Body] i literally; and why you urge his other saying [Except yo•…•… eat my flesh] k for proofe of Bo∣dily Eating; so that your Priest may literally say in your Masse, that The Body of Christ passeth into your bellies and entr••ils, be∣cause (forsooth) the words of Christ are l Doctrinall. And have you not heard of one Nicodemus, who hearing Christ teach that every man must be Borne againe, who shall be partaker of God's Kingdome; and that hee expounding them in a Literall Sence conceited a new Entrance into his Mothers wombe, when as nothing wanted to turne that his Errour into an Heresie, but only Obstinacie? But of the strong and strange Obstinacies of your Disputers, you have received a full m Synopsis.

BOOKE III. After followeth your Article of Transubstan∣tiation. I. Your direct profession is indeed to beleeve no Body of Christ, but that which was Borne of the Virgin Mary. But this your Article of Transubstantiation of Bread into Christs Body, ge∣nerally held, according to the proper nature of Transubstantion, to be by n Production of Christs Body out of the Substance of Bread, it necessarrly inferreth a Body (called, and beleeved to be Christ's) which is not Borne of the Blessed Virgin, as S. Augustine hath plain∣ly o taught; diversifying the Bodily thing on the Altar from the Body of Christ borne of the Virgin. Therefore your Defence sym∣bolizeth with the heresie of Apollinaris, who taught a p Body not Borne of the Virgin Mary.

Secondly, you exclude all judgement of q Senses, in discer∣ning Bread to be tr•…•… Bread, as did the r Manichees in discerning Christ's Body, which they thereupon held not to have beene a True, but a Phantasticall Body. Tertullian also challengeth the Verity of Sense, in judging of Wine in the E••charist (after Consecration) in confutation of the same Errour in the Mar∣cioni••es.

Thirdly, for Defence of Christ his invisible Bodily Presence, you professe that (after Consecration) Bread is no more the same, but changed into the Body of Christ: which Doctrine in very ex∣presse words was bolted out by an E••tychian Heretique, and in∣stantly condemned by s Theodoret, and as fully abandoned by Pope Gelas•…•….

BOOKE IV. Catholique Fathers were in nothing more zea∣lous, than in defending the distinct properties of the two natures of Christ his Deity, and Humanity, against the pernicious here∣sies of the Manichees; Marcionites, E••tychians, and E••nomians; all of them diversly oppugning the Integrity of Christ's Body,

sometime in direct tearmes, and sometime by irrefragrable Con∣sequences; whether it were by gaine-saying the Finitenesse, or So∣lidity, or else the compleat Perfection thereof: wherein ••ow farre yee may challenge affinity or kindred with them, be you pleased to examine by this which followeth.

1. The Heretiques, who undermined the property of Christ's Bo∣dily Finitenesse, said that it was in divers places at once, (as is u con∣fessed) even as your Church doth now attribute unto the same Body of Christ, both in Heaven, and in Earth, yea, and in Millions of distant Altars at the same time; and consequently in all places whatsoever. Now whether this Doctrine of Christ's Bodily Pre∣sence in many places at once was held of the Catholique Fathers for Hereticall, it may best be seene by their Doctrine of the Exi∣stence of Christ's Body in one only place, not only Definitively, but also Circumspectively: both which doe teach an absolute Impossi∣bility of the Existence of the same in divers places at once. And they were as zealous in professing the Article of the manner of Christ's Bodily Being in place, as they are in instructing men of the Article of Christ's Bodily Being, lest that the deniall of it's Bodily manner of being might destroy the nature of his Body. To which end they have concluded it to be absolutely but in one place, some∣time in a x Circumspective Finitenesse, thereby distinguishing them from all created Spirits; and sometime by a Definitive Ter∣mination, which they set downe first by Exemplifications, thus: y If Christ his Body be on Earth, then it is absent from Heaven; and thus, Being in the Sunne, it could not be in the Moone: Se∣condly, by divers Comparisons, for comparing the Creature with the Creator God, they a conclude, that The Creature is not God, be∣cause it is determinated in one place; and comparing the humane, and divine Nature of Christ together, they b conclude, that they are herein different, because the humane and Bodily Nature of Christ is necessarily included in one place: and la••tly comparing Creatures with the Holy Ghost, they c conclude a difference by the the same Argument, because the Holy Ghost is in many places at once; and all these in confutation of divers Heretiques. A thing so well knowen to your elder Romish Schoole, that it confessed the Doctrine of Existence of a Body in divers places at once (in the judgement of Antiquity) to be d Hereticall.

2. The property of a Solidity likewise was patronized by An∣tient Fathers, in confutation of Heretiques, by teaching e Christ's Body to be necessarily Palpable, against their Impalpabilitie: and to have a Thicknesse, against their feigned subtile Body, as the Aire: and furthermore controlling these opinions following (which are also your Crotchets) of a Bodies f Being whole in the whole space, and in every part thereof; and of Christ's Body g taking the Right hand, or left, of it selfe.

3. The property of Perfection of the Body of Christ, where∣soever, in the highest Degree of Absolutenesse. This (one would thinke) everie Christian heart should assent unto, at the first hearing; wherefore if that they were judged Heretiques by Antient Fathers, who h taught an Indivisible Vnion of mens soules with their Bodies naturally, still subiect to corruption after the resurrection; who can imagine that the holy Catholique Fa∣thers would otherwise have judged of this your generall Tenet, (viz. to beleeve a Body of Christ, now since his Glorification, which is destitute of all power of naturall motion, sence, appetite, or understanding) otherwise than of a senslesse, and Antichri∣stian Deliration, and Delusion? Yea and that which is your only Reason you alleage, to avoid our Objection of Impossibilities in such cases, (to wit) i The Omnipotencie of God, the same was the Pretence of Heretiques of old, in the like Assertions, which occasioned the Antient Fathers to terme the Pretence of Omnipo∣tencie, k The Sanctuary of Heretiques: albeit the same Heretiques, (as well as you) intended (as a Father speaketh) to magnifie God thereby; namely, in beleeving the Body of Christ, after his Ascension, to be wholly Spirituall. To which Heretiques the same Father readily answered, (as wee may to you) saying, l When you will so magnifie Christ, you doe but accuse him of falshood: not that wee doe any whit detract from the Omnipotencie of Christ, (farre be this Spirit of Blasphemy from us!) but that (as you have beene instructed by Antient Fathers) the not attributing an Impossibility to God, in such Cases of Contradiction, is not a di∣minishing, but an ample advancing of the m Omnipotencie of God.

BOOKE V. Your Orall Eating, Gutturall Swallowing, and Inward Digestion (as you have n taught) of the Body of Christ into your Entrails hath beene proved out of the Fathers to be in each respect sufficiently Capernaiticall, and termed by them a Sence both o Pernicious, and Flagitious. Besides you have a Con∣futation of the Hereticall Manichees, for their p Opinion of Fast∣ning Christ to mens guts, and loosing him againe by their belchings: Consonant to your Romish Profession both of Christ's q Cleaving to the guts of your Communicants, and r Vomiting it up againe, when you have done.

BOOKE VI. This is spent wholly in examining the Romish Doctrine of Masse-Sacrifice, and in proving it to be Sacrilegiousnesse it selfe, as you have seene in a former s Sy∣nopsis.

BOOKE VII. This containeth a Discoverie of your Masse-Idolatry, not onely as being equall with the Doctrine of some He∣retiques, but in one respect exceeding the in••atuation of the very t Pagans; besides the Generall Doctrine of the power of

your Priests u Intention, in consecrating, hath beene yoaked, by your owne Iesuite, with the Heresies of the x Donatists.

When you have beheld your owne faces in these divers Synop∣ses, as it were in so many glasses, we pray to God that the sight of so many and so prodigious Abominations in your Romish Masse may draw you to a just Detestation of it, and bring you to that true worship of God, which is to be performed in Spirit and in Truth, and to the saving of every one of your soules, through his Grace in Christ Iesus. AMEN.

Notes

• a

  Booke 4. thorow∣out.
• b

  See Booke 6. tho∣rowout.
• c

  Booke 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 13.
• a

  Booke 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 6. (in the first Challenge.)
• b

  Booke 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 9.
• a

  Cyrillu•• Hieros. my∣••ag. Catech. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• b

  Booke 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 9.
• a

  Booke 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 3.
• b

  Booke 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 3.
• c

  Ibid. Sect. 5.
• d

  Ibid. Sect. 2.
• a

  Booke 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 3.
• b

  Booke 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 3.
• c

  Ibid. Sect. 8.
• d

  Ibid. Sect. 5.
• e

  Ibid. Sect. 2.
• f

  Ibid.
• g

  Ibid. Sect. 7.
• a

  Booke 4.
• b

  Booke 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 6.
• a

  Booke 4. Chap. 1. Sect. 2.
• b

  Booke 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 6.
• a

  Booke 5. Chap. 5. Sect. 3.
• b

  Booke 5. thorow∣out.
• c

  Ibid.
• d

  Ibid. Chap. 8. Sect 3.
• e

  Ibid. Chap. 2. Sect. 4.
• f

  Booke 5. Chap. 3. Sect. 1.
• a

  Booke 5. Chap. 5. Sect. 3.
• b

  Hieronymus ad E∣di•…•…. Nos in baptis∣mo, sanguine & Cor∣pore Christi vesci∣mur.
• c

  Booke 5. Chap. 8. Sect. 3.
• d

  Ibid.
• e

  Ibid.
• f

  Ibid.
• g

  Ibid.
• h

  Ibid. Chap. 2. Sect. 4.
• i

  Booke 5. Chap. 3. Sect. 4.
• a

  Booke 6. thorowout.
• b

  Ibid. Chap. 5. Sect. 13.
• a

  Ibid.
• a

  Booke 7. Chap. 3. Sect. 4.
• b

  Ibid.
• c

  Ibid.
• d

  Booke 4. Chap. 2. Sect. 2.
• e

  Ibid. Sect. 5.
• f

  Booke 7. Chap. 2. Sect. 2.
• g

  Ibid.
• h

  Booke 5. Chap. 2. Sect. 7.
• i

  Ibid.
• k

  Booke 7. Chap. 2. Sect. 1.
• l

  Booke 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 8.
• m

  Booke 7. Chap. 2. Sect. 2.
• n

  Ibid. Sect. 3.
• o

  Ibid.
• p

  Booke 7. Chap. 2. Sect. 3.
• q

  Ibid.
• r

  Ibid. Chap. 3. Sect. 4.
• s

  Ibid.
• a

  Bulla Pii Quarti super forma Juramenti—Profiteor omnia declarata in Concilio Tridentino, & hanc esse fidem veram Ca∣tholicam, extra quam nemo salvus esse po∣test.
• a

  Synod. Trid. Sess. 4. Decretum de Editio∣ne statuit, ut haec vul∣gata editio, quae tot saeculorum usu appro∣bata in Ecclesia in publicis. lectionibus, disputationibus, & expositionibus pro Authentica habeatur, ut nemo illam rejice∣re quovis praetextu audeat—statuit & decrevit ut haec vetus editio quàm emenda∣tissimè imprimatur.
• b

  Sacrobosc. Defens. Decreti Trid. part. 2. cap. 4. Quandò in hac Disputatione Au∣thenticam dicimus versionem, nihil aliud volumus, quam eam esse omninò confor∣mem suo fonti, sive fidelem esse, ac synceram, &c. Possevin. Bib•…•…th. part. 2. lib. 12. cap. 16. Sanè Authenticam prore certae fidei poni constat. Greg. Valent. Anal. lib. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. cap. 5. Esse Authenticam, nihil aliud est hoc in loco quàm conformem esse Originali.
• c

  Booke 6. Chap. 1. Sect. 2.
• d

  Azorius Moral. Tom. 1. lib. 8. cap. 3 §. Quartò. &c. Quaeritur an Vulgata in reliquis extra fidem & mores (in quibus pro cerro habendum, Eam omni vacare cr∣rore,) errorem aliquem contineat. Inter Catholices dubi•…•… est; quib•…•… asserentibus c••m esse à Concilio approbatam, tanquam immunem abo•…•…i errore in fide & motibus, non tamen ab aliis, & proinde aliqua in ea esse vitia, item aliqua, quae significantius, proprius, verius, & melius verri po•…•…: aliqua esse in contrarium & alienum sensum conversa, idque prob•…•…o C•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉, qui post Concilium Tridentinum scripserant, viz. Vega, lib. 15. cap. 9. super Conc. Trid. Senensis lib. 8. ad finem. Canus loc. Theol. lib. 2. cap. 13. Andradius Payva Defens. Trid. lib. 4. Lindanus de optimo gen. interp. lib. 3. cap. 10. &c. Hi omnes fa∣tentur aliquos esse errores non solum vitio Scriptorum, sed etiam incuriâ & neg•…•… ipsius Interpretis.
• e

  Bellarm. lib. 2. de verbo Dei, cap. 12. Ec∣clesia tantúm hanc versionem appellavit, non ita tamen ut as∣seruerit nullos Libra∣riorū errores in ea re∣periri, sed certos nos reddere voluit, in iis presertim quae ad fi∣dem & mores perti∣nent, multa esse in hac versione Inter∣pretum errata. Eodem modo Sacrebosc. Defens. fid. Trid. & Salmeron. Tom. 1. Prolegem. 3.
• f

  Azorius qo sup. Mihi verò verior videtur eorum esse sententia, qui opi∣nantur vulgatam Edi∣tionem non solùm in rebús fidei, & morum, sed in coeteris quoque omnibus omni errore carere: quia licet a∣liquando aliqua signi∣ficantius, proprius, ac latius reddi potuerit; non tamen verius, aut simpliciter certius.
• g

  Greg. Valent. A∣nalys. lib. 8. cap. 4. §. Etenim &c. Quod au∣tem Ecclesia addit: Ne ullus illam quovis praetextu audeat re∣jicere, id profecto e∣videnti argumento est, in omnibus om∣ninò locis, & quod at∣tinet ad omnes scrip∣turae sententias esse hanc ut Authenti∣cam (i. e. Conformem Scripturae Originali) à Concilio approba∣tam. Secus enim praetextus aliquis superesset, quò, non obstante hac definitione Concilii, posser aliquandò ea Editio in Disputa∣tionibus rejici, nempè si diceretur in hoc certe aut in illo loco, non esse hujus Authorem Editionis Spiritus San∣cti mentem assequntum—In omnibūs igitur locis v•…•…t Concilium Eam haberi pro Authenticâ, excep∣tis erroribus Typographorum—(Vt Judic. cap. 11. pro▪ Altera Matr••s loctum fuisse Adultera Matre, ut quidam objiciunt)—Nam Concilium probavit veterem benè Typis impressam—Post. §. Porrò. Nullo modo audiendi sunt it, qui; post Concilium Tridentinum, contendunt, Editionem Vulgatam aliquibus in locis, quod ad ipsam sententiam 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉; Qui•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••raeti, & H•…•…ci Codices, siquidem diffide∣ant à nostra, sunt per eam cornigendi.
• h

  Index. Expurg•…•…ius Hi•…•… a•• nomen Martinz.—Quam∣vis haec, quae Hieronymus, & Augustinus docuerunt, vera sunt, tamen post Concilii Tridentini Decretum, non licet Vulgatae Latinae. Testimonia quovi•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in ipsius Concilii Decreto constitutum est. fol. 145.
• i

  Clem. Octarus—In 〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•…—〈◊〉〈◊〉 accuratissimè mendis pur∣gatus.
• k

  Ephes. 1. 14. Lat. Vulg. Spiritu figna∣ti promissionis, quae est pignus haeredita∣tis. Graecè, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: in quem locum Hiero∣nym. Pignus Latinus interpres pro Arrha∣bone posuit: Arrha∣bo futurae emptionis quasi quoddam testi∣monium, & obliga∣mentum datur: Pig∣nus verò pro mutuâ pecuniâ ponitur, & cùm illa reddita fue∣rit, reddenti debitum pignus à Creditore. Aug. Serm. de visime Dei, ••om. 10. pag. 1687. Accipis Codicem ab amico, cui das pig∣nus, cum reddideris quod accepisti, ille, cui reddis, habebit, tu pignus accipies, non enim habebit ambas res: sed quando pre∣tium paras dare pro care, quam tenes bo∣nae fidei contractu; de ipso pretio das ali∣quid, & exit Arrha, non pignus, quod sit complendum, non quod sit auferendum. Sed si Deus charitatem dar, tanquam pignus per spiritum suum, cum eam rem ipsam reddiderit. quâ promissâ pignus dedit, auferendum est à nobis Pignus? Absit! Sed quod dedit, hoc implebit: ideo meliùs Arrha, quàm Pignus—hoc enim implebitur, cum Arrha data est.
• a

  Bulla eadem. Sa∣cram Scripturam ad∣mitto juxta eum fen∣sum, quem Tenuit, & Tenet Mater Ecclesia—extra quam nemo salvus, &c.
• b

  Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 11.
• c

  Booke 5. Chap. 4. Sect. 2.
• d

  Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 13.
• a

  Bulla ••ad. Nec Scripturam ullam, ni∣si juxtà unanimem Consensum Patrum interpretabor.
• b

  Valent. Ies. Anal. l••b. 8. cap. 8. Patet no∣bis via urgendi unum aut alrerum Docto∣rem authoritate reli∣quorum.
• c

  Canus lo••. theol. lib. 7. cap. 3. num. 8. Plurium Sanctorum authoritas, reliquis li∣cet paucioribus re∣clamantibus, firma Argumenta sufficere, & praestare non valet.
• d

  Valent. quo supra. Quod si per Senten∣tiam Doctorum ali∣qua fidei controver∣sia non satis commo∣dè componi posset, co quòd de corum consensu non satis constaret, sua tunc constet Autoritas Pō∣tifici, ut consult is aliis ad definiendum regu∣li••, de quibus est di∣ct••m, Ecclesiae pro∣ponat, quid sit senti∣endum.
• e

  Bellarm. Epist. De∣dic. Paulo Quints, an∣tè Comment. in Psal. Psalmorum ego tra∣ctationem magis pro∣priâ meditatione, quā multa librorum lecti∣one composui.
• f

  Maldon. Ies. in Matth. 20. Existimant Patres filios Zebedaei temerè respondisse, ego vero credo eos verè esse locutos. I∣tem in Matth. 16. 18. Non praevalebunt] Quorum verborum sensus non videtur mihi esse, quem om∣nes praeter Hilarium, quos legisse memini, Authores putant. I∣tem in Matth. 11. 11. Variae sunt Patrum opiniones, sed (ut li∣berè fatear) in nul a carum aquiesco. Item in Matth. 11. 13. Pro∣phetae & lex] Omnes fere ve••eres ita exponunt, sed non est apta satis interpretatio. Item Matth. 19. 11. Non omnes capiunt, i. e. non omnes capimus: Sic omnes fere veteres exponunt, quibus equidem non assentior. Item in Iob. 6. 62 Sic qui∣dem expono, & licet Expositionis hujus Autorem nullum habeo, hanc tamen magis probo, quam illam Augusti∣ni, caeterarumque alioqui probabilissima•••• quia hoc cum CALVINISTARUM sensu magis pugnat.
• g

  Canus loc. Theol. lib. 7. cap. 3. Sancti omnes qui in ejus rei mentionem incidêre, uno ore asseruerunt B. Virginem in origi∣nali peccato concep∣tam fuisse. And then hee reckoneth, adding: Et si nullus contrave∣net it; infirmum ta∣men cx omnium au∣toritate Argumentū.
• h

  Salmeron Ies. in Rom. 5. Disp 49. In quo omnes peccave∣runt.] Mariam con∣ceptam in originali peccato, e••si•• non si•• haeresis daninata, nempè tam•…•… ad fi∣dem spectat. Item Disp. 51. A qua multitudine Patrum, locum ab autoritate infirmum, &—Pauperis est nu∣merare pecus—Exod. 13. In judicio plurimorum non ac∣quiesces sententiae, ut à vero demas: & multitudinem mul∣titudini opponimus. At Devoti erga D. Virg. Resp. Totam Devotionem e••ga il∣lam non consiste••e in Patribus, ut in Ber∣nardo, &c. At Anti∣qui. Resp. Quilibet se∣nex laudator tempo∣ris acti: sed & illud as∣serimus quo juniores, eo perspicaciores Do∣ctores esse. After hee wrangleth, and wresteth some savings of Fathers to his part, In celeber∣rimâ Parisiensium A∣cademiâ nullus in theologia titulo Do∣ctoris dignus habe∣tur, qui non primum jusjurandi religione se adstrinxerit ad hoc Virginis privilegium tuendum.
• i

  Bernard. Epist. 174. Hanc prolis praero∣gativam B. Mariae tribuere non est honorare Virginem, sed honori detrah••re. Et Paulò ante—Nunquid pa∣tribus doctiores, aut devotiores sumus?
• Booke 2. Chap. 1. Sect. 1.
• k

  Booke 2. Chap. 1. Sect. 6. and Chap. 2. Sect. 6, & 7.
• l

  Booke 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 4. See also Booke 3. Chap. 3. in the words, [The fruit of the Vine.] Sect. 5.
• a

  See above in this Sect. 4. initio, at the letter (a).
• b

  Synod. Trident. Sess. 1••.
• c

  Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 11.
• Ibid. Sect. 5. & Sect. 10.
• d

  Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 9.
• e

  Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 5.
• f

  See Booke 4.
• a

  Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 3.
• Ibid.
• b

  Booke 1. thorow-out.
• c

  Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 7.
• d

  Ibid.
• e

  Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 10.
• f

  Ibid. Sect. 10.
• g

  Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 4.
• h

  Ibid.
• i

  Booke 2. Chap. 3. thorowout.
• k

  Ibid.
• l

  Booke 2. Chap. 3. Sect. 2.
• Iohn 3.
• m

  See above in this Booke, Chap. 2. Sect. 3.
• n

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 2.
• o

  Booke 4. Chap. 4. Sect. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• p

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 2.
• q

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 9.
• r

  Manichaei dice∣bant Christum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 esse verum hominem, sed phantasma quod∣dam. Pr•…•…l. Ele••ch. Haret.
• s

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 12.
• Ibid. Sect. 13.
• u

  Booke 4. Chap. 4. Sect. 6. & Chap. 5. Sect. 3. & Chap. 6. Sect. 1.
• x

  Chap. 4. thorowout.
• y

  Ibid. Sect. 6.
• a

  Ibid.
• b

  Chap. 4. Sect. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• c

  Chap. 6. Sect. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• d

  Ibid.
• e

  Chap. 7. Sect. 6.
• f

  Chap. 7. Sect. 6.
• g

  Chap. 4. Sect. 9.
• h

  Prateol. El••nch. ••••res. Tit. Philoponus Alexandrinus. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Sta∣tuit mor•…•…m re∣surrectionem esse, viz. rat••onalium animarū cum corruptibili cor∣pore indissolubilem unionem.
• i

  Booke 4. Chap. 4. Sect. 6.
• k

  Ibid. Chap. 3. Sect. 2.
• l

  Chap. 4. Sect. 6. at (b & c).
• m

  Ibid.
• n

  Booke 5. thorowout.
• o

  Chap. 5. Sect. 2.
• p

  Booke 5. Chap. 6. Sect. 3.
• q

  Booke 5. Chap. 7. Sect. 4.
• r

  Booke 5. Chap. 7. Sect. 1.
• s

  See above in this Booke, Chap. 1. Sect. 2.
• t

  Booke 7. Chap. 8. Sect. 2.
• u

  Chap. 5. Sect. 3.
• x

  Chap. 9. Sect. 5.