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.

THE EIGHTH BOOKE,

Of the Additionalls: by a Summary Discovery of the many-fold Abhominations of the Romish Masse; and of the Iniquities of the Defenders thereof.

THese may be distinguished into Principals, which are Three, the Romish Superstitiousnesse, Sacrilegious∣nesse, and Idolatrousnesse of your Masse: and Acces∣saries, which are These; Obstinacies, manifold Over∣tures of Perjuries, Mixture of many ancient Heresies in the De∣fenders thereof.

CHAP. I.

Of the peremptory Superstitiousnesse of the Romish Masse, in a Synopsis.

SECT. I.

MAny words shall not need for this first point. Superstition is described by the Apostle, in this one word, * 1.1 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, Man's will-worship; as it is opposite to the wor∣ship revealed by the will of God. What the will of Christ is, concer∣ning the Celebration of the Sacra∣ment of his Body, and Blood, wee have learned by his last will and Te∣stament, expressely charging his Church, and saying, [DOE THIS:] pointing out thereby such proper Acts, which concerned either the Administring or the Participating of the same holy Sacra∣ment. But now commeth in Mans's will-worship, ordained in the Church of Rome; as flatly contradictory to the same Command of Christ, by Ten notorious Transgressions, as if it had beene in di∣rect Termes countermanded thus, [Doe not This] (as hath beene * 1.2 proved:) notwithstanding the former direct Injunction of Christ, or conformable Observation of the holy Apostles, or Consent,

and Custome of the Church Catholique; and that without respect had to the due Honour of God, in his worship; or Comfort, and Edification of his People.

And then is Superstition most bewitching, when it is disguised under the feigned vizard of false Pretences (which have beene ma∣ny) devised by the new Church of Rome, in an opinion of her owne wisdome, to the befooling and vilifying of the Antient Cathólique Church of Christ: which never esteemed the same Reasons rea∣sonable enough, for making any Alteration; but (notwithstan∣ding such imaginations) precisely observed the Precept, and Or∣dinance of Christ.

But that, which exceedeth all height of Superstition, is, when upon the will-worship of man are stamped counterfeit Seales of forged Miracles, as if they had beene authorized by the immedi∣ate hand of God; whereof your Legendaries have obtruded upon their Readers * 1.3 Thirteene Examples, to wit, of Fictitious Appari∣tions of visible Flesh, and Blood of Christ, in the Eucharist: which ma∣keth your Superstition Blasphemous, as if God should be brought in for the justifying of Falshood; a Sinne abhorred by holy Iob, say∣ing to his Adversaries, * 1.4 You are Forgers of Lies: will you speake deceitfully for God? And furthermore how Sacrilegious, and Ido∣latrous your Romish Superstition is, you may behold in the Secti∣ons following.

Of the Sacrilegiousnesse of the Romish Masse, and Defence thereof, in the point of Sacrifice; comprized in this Synopsis.

SECT. II.

SAcrilege is whatsoever Violation of any sacred Person, Place, or Thing. Now omitting to speake of your Dismembring the Eucharist, by administring it but in One kinde (which your Pope a 1.5 Gelasius condemned for Grand Sacrilege) or of the like points for∣merly discovered, we shall insist only in your Churches Doctrine of Sacrifice, wherein your Sacrifice is found to be grossely Sacrile∣gious in the Tractate of the Sixth Booke.

I. By Creating a new Sacrifice, as Proper, and thereby assu∣ming to her selfe that b 1.6 Excellencie of Prerogative, which is proper to Christ alone the high Priest, and Bishop of our Soules (namely) the power of ordaining Sacraments; or (if need were) Sacrifices in his Church. Which Guiltinesse we may call a Counterfeiting of the Seale of Christ.

II. By making this Sacrifice, in her pretence, Christian; but but indeed c 1.7 Earthly, and Iewish.

III. By dignifying it with a Divine property of d 1.8 Meritorious, and Satisfactorie Propitiation.

IV. By professing another properly Satisfactorie and e 1.9 Propi∣tiatory

Sacrifice, for Remission of sinnes, besides that which Christ offered upon the Crosse. As if after one hath paid the Debts of many at once, upon condition that such of those Debters should be discharged, whosever submissively acknowledging those Debts to be due, should also professe the favour of their Redeemer; It cannot but be extreme folly for any to thinke, that the money once paid should be tendred, and offered againe, as often as One or Other of the Debters should make such an acknowledgement, the Surety having once sufficiently satisfied for all. So Christ having once for all satisfied the justice of God, by the price of his blood, in the behalfe of all penitent Sinners, who in Contrition of heart and a living Faith apprehend the Truth of that his Redemp∣tion; it cannot but be both injurious to the justice of God, and to the merit of Christ, that the same satisfactory Sacrifice, as it were a new payment, ought againe, by way of Satisfaction, be personally performed and tendred unto God.

V. By detracting from the absolute Function of Christ his f 1.10 Priesthood now eminent, and permanent before God in Heaven; and thereupon stupifying the mindes of Communicants, and (as it were) pinioning their thoughts, by teaching them so to gaze, and meditate on the matter in the hands of the Priest, that they cannot (as becommeth Spirituall Eagles) soare alost, and contem∣plate upon the Body of Christ, where it's infallible Residence is, in that his heavenly Kingdome.

VI. By transforming (as much as they can) the Sacrament, ordained for Christians to eat with their owne mouthes, into a g 1.11 Theatricall Sacrifice, wherein to be fed with the mouth of the Priest.

VII. By abasing the true value of Christ his Blood, infinitely exceeding all valuation, in making it but h 1.12 finite; whereas Christ being 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, God and Man in one person, every propitiatory worke of his must needs be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and therefore of an infinite price, and power.

VIII. By denying the Effect of his * 1.13 Propi••iation for Sinne to be plenary, in the Application thereof.

IX. There hath beene noted (by the way) the Portion appro∣priated to the Priest, out of your Sacrifice, and to be applyed to some particular Soule for money: being an Invention, as hath beene confessed, voyd of all i 1.14 Warrant, either by Scripture, or by Antient Tradition. To say nothing of your fine Art of cheating mens Soules by Priestly Fraud; whereof, as also of the Rest, wee have discoursed at k 1.15 large.

A New Instance, for proofe of Romish Sacrilegiousnesse, in the Prayer set downe in the Liturgie of their Masse.

SECT. III.

IN your Missall, after Consecration, it is prayed thus: a 1.16 Wee offer unto thy Majesty, O Lord, this immaculate Host, this holy Bread of eternall life, this Cup of everlasting salvation, upon which vouchsafe to looke with a propitious and favourable Countenance, as thou didst accept the gifts of thy holy servant Abel, and command these to be caried up into thy celestiall Altar, &c. So the Canon of your Masse. Some Protestants, in their zeale to the glory of Christ, impute unto you hereupon a Sacrilegious Profanenesse, whilest you beleeving That Host, and That Cup to be the very Body, and Blood of Christ, and a Propitiatory Sacrifice in it selfe, yet doe so pray God to be propitious unto it, and to accept it, as hee did the Sacrifice of Abel; yeelding thereby no more estimation to Christ, than to a vile sheepe, which was offered by Abel.

At the hearing of this, your Cardinall (See the b 1.17 Margent) 1. Prefaceth, 2. Answereth, 3. Illustrateth, 4. Reasoneth. First of his Preface. The Answer (saith he) is easie. As if that Objection, which seemeth to us a huge logg in your way, were so little an ob∣stacle, that any might skip over it. But have you never seene men, in trusting too much to their nimblenesse, to over-reach them∣selves in their leape, stumble, fall, and breake their limbes?

Sembably he in his Answer (which is the second point,) The meaning of our Church (saith he) is not to pray for Christs reconciliá∣tion, who was alwayes well pleasing to God, but in respect of the infir∣mity of the Priest, and people, that the offering may be accepted from them. So he. But whatsoever the meaning of the Priest in his praying is, sure we are this cannot be the meaning of the Prayer; for the matter prayed for is set downe to be Holy Bread of life, and Cup of Salvation, which you interpret to be substantially the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament; and the tenour of prayer expressely is, [Vpon which Lord looke propitiously] wee say, upon which, not upon whom; which point is confirmed in that which followeth.

Thirdly therefore he illustrateth. The Comparison (saith he) is not absolutely betweene the Sacrifice of Abel, and of Christ, but in respect of the faith and devotion of the Priest, and people, that they with like faith may offer, as Abel did. But this piece of Answer is that, which is called in Musicke Discantus contra punctum, for the prayer is directly: Looke downe propitiously upon these, as thou didst upon the gifts of Abel. The Comparison then is distinctly be∣tweene the Gifts, and not betweene the Givers. Yea but not abso∣lutely

so meant (saith he:) be it so, yet if it be so meant but in part, that Christ, who is Propitiation it selfe, shall be prayed for to be propitiously, and favourably looked upon by God, the prayer is Sacri∣legious in an high degree.

Fourthly his Reason. It is knowen (saith he) that the Sacrifices of sheepe and Oxen had nothing in themselves, whereby to pacifie, or please God, the Scripture saying, that Abel offered a better Sacrifice than Cain. And againe, God had respect to Abel, and to his Gifts. So he. Which is the very Reason that perswadeth Protestants to call that your Prayer most Sacrilegious, because whereas the Gifts of Abel were but Sheepe, &c. you, notwithstanding, compare them with the offering up of Christ, saying, As thou didst the Gifts of Abel. For although it be true, that the Gift of Abel was accepted for the faith of the Giver, and not the Giver for his Gift; yet if you shall apply this to the point in Question, then your Gift (in your Opinion) being Christ, and your Givers but simply men, (whom you have called Priest, & People) it must follow that Christ is accepted for the faith of the Priest, and People; and not the Priest and People for Christ, which maketh your Prayer far more abominably Sacrilegious. And not much lesse is that which fol∣loweth, praying God to command his Angell to cary (if the Gift be He) Christ into heaven; contrary to the Article of our Catho∣lique Faith, which teacheth us to beleeve his perpetuall Residence in heaven, at the right hand of the Father. Hee answereth: c 1.18 It is not meant, that God would command his Angell to cary Christs Body, but our prayers and desires, by their intercession unto God for us. So he. Which is as truly a false Glosse, as the former; for, in the Te∣nour of your Masse, the Subject of your prayer is [Holy Bread of life, and Cup of salvation.] The prayer is plainly thus▪ Vpon which, O Lord, looke propitiously: and immediately after, Command [These] to be caried by thy Angell. Marke, [These] viz. That Bread of life, and Cup of salvation, even that, which you call, The Body, and Blood of Christ, as corporally Present: which maketh your prayer to be Sacrilegious still, and your Expositors (that we may so say) miserably Ridiculous.

That the former Romish Prayer, as it was Antient, doth in the (then) true meaning thereof condemne the now Romish Church of the former Sacrilegious Innovation.

SECT. IV.

FOR to thinke that it should be prayed, that God would be propitious to Christ, were an Execrable opinion, even in the Iudgement of our Adversaries themselves; who for avoi∣dance thereof have obtruded an Exposition, as farre differing from the Text, as doth This from That, or Christ from the Priest, as you have heard. But whither will hee now? Your Cardinall telleth

you, that the words of your Romish Canon are antient, such as are found in the a 1.19 Missalls of S. Iames, of Clement Pope of Rome, of Basil, of Chrysostome, and of Ambrose. You will hold it requi∣site that wee consult with these Liturgies, set out by your selves, for the better understanding of the Tenour of your Romish Masse. The Principall Quaere will be, whether Antiquity in her Liturgies, by praying to God for a propitious Acceptation, and admittance into his celestiall Altar, meant (as your Cardinall answered) Propitious∣nesse towards Priest, and People, in respect of their faith, and devo∣tion; and not towards the Things offered distinctly in themselves.

In the pretended Liturgie of S. b 1.20 Iames (before Consecration) the prayer to God is, To accept the Gifts into his celestiall Altar; even the Gifts, which he called The fruits of the earth. And then after, for the Parties, as well Priest, as People, To sanctifie their soules.

In the Liturgie of c 1.21 Basil (before Consecration) it is prayed to God, that the Receiving the Gifts into his celestiall Altar, would also (concerning the Parties) send his Gra••e, and Spirit upon them.

And no lesse plainly Pope d 1.22 Clemens teaching (before Conse∣cration) to pray God, who received the Gifts of Abel gratiously, to behold these Gifts propounded to the honour of his Sonne Christ; ex∣pressely differenceth this Sacrifice done, in honour of Christ, from Christ himselfe, who is honoured thereby. And after Consecration to Beseech God through Christ to accept the Gift offered to him, and to take it into his Celestiall Altar; where the prayer to God is not to accept of Christ, but of the Gift for Christ's sake, and to the honour of Christ, in whom God is Propitious unto us: wee say againe, the Gift for Christ, and not Christ for the Gift, (what can be more plaine against all Corporall Presence of Christ in the Sacrament?) and to receive it into his Celestiall Altar, but how? by intercession of Angells? No, but expressely thus: By Christ the Mediatour.

In the Liturgie of e 1.23 Chrysostome (before Consecration) God is prayed unto, and supplicated thus: We beseech thee to send thy Spirit upon us, and upon the Gifts set before us.

Even as f 1.24 Ambrose explaineth his Supplication (after Conse∣cration)

for God, To accept this Oblation, namely that, which hee called Holy Bread, and Cup.

If therefore these former Formes may interpret your Romane Li∣turgie, as it was Antient, the prayer therein to God, desiring him to be Propitious, must have relation to the things above specified called Holy Bread of life, and Cup of Salvation, as distinguished from Priest, and People. Wherefore your Romane Missalls being so Antient in this one point, in praying God (after Consecration) to be Propitious to that, which is called the Bread of life eternall, and Cup of everlasting salvation; lest it might carry a Sacrilegious Sence, to wit, that the Body of Christ is here the proper Subject of the Eucharist, and consequently to need a Propitiation to God, by virtue of mens prayers (thereby greatly derogating from the meri∣torious Satisfaction of Christ:) you ought to reduce this your Ro∣mane Canon to the Orthodox meaning of Antient Liturgies above mentioned; and to understand it Sacramentally only, (namely) our Objective Representation, Commemoration, and Application thereof by us, which is our Act of Celebration.

To the former vast heape of Sacrilegious Positions, and Practi∣ces, wee may adde your other many vile, and impious g 1.25 Indigni∣ties offered to the all-glorious Sonne of God, in making his sacred Body, in your owne opinions, obnoxious to the Imprisoning in Boxes, Tearing with mens Teeth, Devouring, Vomiting it by the Communicants, and the Transmittance into your guts, together with the Eating, and Feeding thereupon by Dogs, Mice, Wormes, and (which transcendeth, if it may be, all your other Absurdities) to be deprived of all naturall power of Motion, Sence, and Vnderstan∣ding. O Abominable! Abominable!

A Synopsis of the Idolatrousnesse of the Romish Masse, and Defence thereof; by many Evidences from Antiquity.

SECT. V.

OVR first Argument is against the foundation thereof, which is your Interpretation of the Article [HOC] by denying it to have Relation to Bread; contrary to the verdict of an Inquest of Antient Fathers, shewing that the same pointeth out Bread, as you have a 1.26 heard; whereby the monstrous Conception of Tran∣substantiation is strangled in the very wombe.

Insomuch that sometimes they expressely * 1.27 interpret it thus; Christs Body, and Blood, that is, (say they) The Bread, and Wine: Item, Hee gave the name of the Signe to the thing signified. Item, Bread the Signe of his Body: And lastly, Bread is called Christs Body, because it signifieth his Body.

Secondly (in the point of Transubstantiation it selfe) they calling

the Eucharist (which you dare not) b 1.28 Bread, and c 1.29 Wine, after Con∣secration, and naming them * 1.30 Earthly materialls, and Matter of Bread, and also (as you have heard out of the Antient Liturgies) d 1.31 Fruits of the Earth; and yet more plainly, by way of Periphrasis, describing them to consist of e 1.32 Divers graines, and Divers grapes. After, by approving the Suffrage and judgement of our f 1.33 Senses, in discerning all Sensible things; and in speciall the Eucharist it selfe; and at length affirming, that there remaineth therein the g 1.34 Substance of Bread, and Wine, which are the Subject matter of your Divine Adoration. All which are other Three Demonstra∣tions of their meanings; every singular point being avouched by the Suffrages of Antiquity.

Thirdly against your Faith, concerning the manner of Corporall Presence of Christ in the Eucharist; because so farre were the Fa∣thers from beleeving that the Body of Christ could be in h 1.35 divers places (as you say in Millions) at one time, that by this pro∣perty of Being in many places at once, they have discerned Angells to be Finite Spirits, and not God. They have distinguished the Godhead of Christ from his Manhood; and they have proved the Holy Ghost to be God, and no Creature by the same Reason. Than which Three Arguments none can be more Convincent. Where∣unto you may adde the Fathers speeches, contradicting your Dreame of a Body whole in every part, in whatsoever space, or place: by judging it Impossible; and also concluding Christ his Ascension into Heaven, to argue his Absenc•• from Earth; all which have i 1.36 been discussed from point to point.

Our Fourth Generall Argument is, that whereas your Corporall Presence must needs inferre Corporall Eating thereof by the Com∣municants, notwithstanding you have heard the contrary Sen∣tences of Antient Fathers, against k 1.37 Tearing, and Swallowing of Christ's Body, and Bodily Egestion: next concerning the Eaters, that only the Godly faithfull are partakers thereof; insomuch that even the Godly under the old Testament did eat the same. Then, of the Remainders of the Consecrated Hosts, that they were l 1.38 Eaten (by the ordinance of the Church) by Schoole-boyes, and sometimes Burnt in the fire: besides they called them m 1.39 Bits, and Fragments of Bread broken, (after Consecration) and diminished: and lastly in respect of the End of Eating, n 1.40 They held the thing present to be a pledge of Christ's Body absent, and also o 1.41 allowed such a Touch of his Body by Faith, that whosoever so toucheth him is Sanctified. Which Observations, concerning our Fourth Generall Argument, doe minister unto us five particular Reasons, which make our De∣fence to be Impregnable.

Fifthly, forasmuch as you teach the Subject matter of the Eu∣charist to be the Body of Christ, as a proper Sacrifice propitiatory; wee, upon due inquisition into the doctrine of Antiquity, have p 1.42 found the Antient Fathers 1. Noting that, which they called

Sacrifice herein, to be Bread, and Wine, saying thereupon that Melchizedech in that his Bread and Wine offered the Body and Blood of Christ. 2. Such a Subject, which being taken in great Quantity doth q 1.43 nourish and satiate mans Bodily Nature. 3. Such as needeth prayer to God, that it may be r 1.44 Acceptable to God, as was the Sacrifice of Abels sheepe. 4. Sonaming it an Vnblo••dy Sa∣crifice, as meaning thereby s 1.45 void of Blood, which cannot agree to the Body of Christ now risen from death. 5. So qualifying their other Exuberances, and Excesse of speech (wherein they named it The same Sacrifice of Christ once offered) by an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, corre∣cting it thus; t 1.46 A Sacrifice, or rather a Memoriall thereof. 6. By pla∣cing the Sacrifice of Christ his Body, as now Presentative only in Heaven; and the thing offered on Earth but a Signe. 7. In all your objected Testimonies, for proofe of the same Body of Christ in the Eucharist, which suffered on the Crosse, they understood the same as the u 1.47 Object of our Remembrance, and not as the Subject of Offe∣ring, which make up so many Arguments moe. 8. By paralleling x 1.48 Baptisme with the Eucharist, in like tenour of speech, from point to point. 9. By praying God to be y 1.49 Propitious to that which is offered.

Sixthly, upon the same Doctrine of Corporall Presence you have erected and fastened the roofe of all your Building, which is, Di∣vine Adoration of the Host: yet notwithstanding have you not beene able, by the testimonies of any ancient Father, to free your selves from Formall Idolatry, by any of your z 1.50 Pretences (devised for your excuse) either of Good Intent, Morall Certainty, or of Ha∣bituall Condition: especially seeing that the Fathers (by that their universall Invitation, [Lift up your Hearts] abstracted still the thoughts of the Communicants from contemplating of any Sub∣ject present here Below, that they might be drawen to the medita∣tion of the Body of Christ, as it is in Heaven.

Lastly, in your owne Romish Masse, praying (after Consecra∣tion) God to be propitious to the thing offered, as to Abel's Sacrifice, which was but a sacrificed Sheepe.

Compute all these Particulars, and you shall finde about six∣teene Arguments, to prove you to be absolutely Idolaters. Wee having thus revealed these Three Principall, and Fundamentall Abominations, doe now proceed to their Concomitants and Conse∣quences, which are Mixtures of Heresie in many, Overture of Per∣jury in some, and Obstinacie in all. We begin at the last.

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 1.51 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 1.52 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 1.53 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 1.54 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 1.55 The Body of Christ.

SOL. The Fathers accordingly call Baptisme a 1.56 The Antitype of Christ's Passion. And againe they observe that S. Paul calleth it a b 1.57 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 1.58 It is not now Common Bread. b 1.59 Nor are wee to consider it as Bare Bread, yea, c 1.60 no sensible thing is delivered herein: d 1.61 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 1.62 We are not to behold this as common Water; b 1.63 Nor is it simple Water: c 1.64 Nor to be discerned with our eyes, but with our mindes: d 1.65 Wherein no Sensible thing is given; seeing the e 1.66 Water by benediction

is made a Divine Laver; working miraculous effects: whereby the party baptized is made a f 1.67 new Creature, and his Body made the g 1.68 Flesh of Christ crucified.

OB. 3. You labour to prove a Corporall Presence out of the Fathers, where they say; a 1.69 Christ is herein (without mention of Presence:) and where they adde saying, b 1.70 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 1.71 Wee have Christ Present at the Sacrament of Baptisme; where b 1.72 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 1.73 Touching Christ's Body, and b 1.74 Eating Christ's flesh, of c 1.75 Naturall union with his Body, and that the Eucharist is our d 1.76 Viaticum, and Pledge of our Resur∣rection; whereunto is added that e 1.77 Contemptuous Communicants doe more injury to Christ, than they that denied him: f 1.78 Eating and drinking their owne judgement.

SOL. And what of Baptisme? concerning Touching; the Fa∣thers teach that wee a 1.79 Take hold of the feet of Christ: concerning Eating, that the partie Baptized may be said to b 1.80 Eat the Flesh of Christ, in respect of the thing it selfe: concerning Vnion with Christ, they adde c 1.81 We are hereby One with him, not only by assent of will, but even naturally; and d 1.82 Incorporate in him, e 1.83 made thereby bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh: Even f 1.84 The flesh of Christ crucified. Concerning the Effect, they hold that g 1.85 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 1.86 They crucifie unto themselves the Sonne of God. i 1.87 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 1.88 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 1.89 The Immolation of Christ.

SOL. And you have beene plentifully satisfied, in both, out of the Testimonies of Antiquity, often calling Baptisme a a 1.90 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 1.91 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 1.92 The faithfull know it; and c 1.93 Inhibiting All, except the Baptized, to see it. A second Note of Reverence is taken from the Ef••ects. Ob. d 1.94 Miracles were wrought by the Eucharist, and at it. Sol. e 1.95 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 1.96 Present, and attendant at the Celebration of the Eucharist, Sol. Namely, as they are likewise said to be g 1.97 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 1.98 Such, as to eat and drinke judgement to themselves. Sol. i 1.99 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 1.100 Dreadfull Sacrament, and causing horrour. Sol. To wit, as they call the words of Baptisime l 1.101 Terrible, and it's Canons Dreadfull, m 1.102 whereunto the Baptized are brought with feare. Ob. 6. But none (say the Fathers) n 1.103 Communicateth of the Eucharist, be∣fore he Adore. And, o 1.104 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 1.105 They reverence the Eucharist. Sol. True: even as they say, q 1.106 We reverence Baptisme, wheresoever it is. Ob. 8. Lastly they use a forme of Invocation upon the Eucharist, thus: r 1.107 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 1.108 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 1.109 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 1.110 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 1.111 Consonant unto the Originall, the Hebrew, and Greeke Texts; hath notwithstanding beene rejected by your c 1.112 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 1.113 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 1.114 Cardinall his Evasion; but is no better than a lurking hole, and so seemeth it to be to your two Iesuites f 1.115 Azorius, and g 1.116 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 1.117 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 1.118 Clement, as The

most accurate Edition) thus: k 1.119 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 1.120 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 1.121 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 1.122 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 1.123 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 1.124 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 1.125 With the greater (saith Valentia,) nay but sometime with the c 1.126 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 1.127 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 1.128 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 1.129 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 1.130 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 1.131 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 1.132 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, * 1.133 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 1.134 Antiquity, but also by the expresse l 1.135 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 1.136 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 1.137 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 1.138 confessed, and proved to be false. Se∣condly, that the presence of them, who, at the administration of the Eucharist, doe not communicate, is * 1.139 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 1.140 Popes.

Lastly, in the point of Necessity to Salvation; To sweare that whosoever beleeveth not that one may be said to e 1.141 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 1.142 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 1.143 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 * 1.144 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 1.145 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 1.146 Greatly Sacrilegious: notwith∣standing your d 1.147 Church authorizeth the same Custome of forbid∣ding the Administration of the Cup to fit Communicants.

3. As e 1.148 you pretend Reverence, for withdrawing the Cup; so did the f 1.149 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 1.150 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 1.151 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 1.152 literally; and why you urge his other saying [Except yo•…•… eat my flesh] k 1.153 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 1.154 Doctrinall. And have you not heard of one Nicodemus, who hearing Christ teach that every man must be * 1.155 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 1.156 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 1.157 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 1.158 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 1.159 Body not Borne of the Virgin Mary.

Secondly, you exclude all judgement of q 1.160 Senses, in discer∣ning Bread to be tr•…•… Bread, as did the r 1.161 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 1.162 Theodoret, and as fully abandoned by Pope Gelas•…•….

BOOKE IV. Catholique Fathers were in nothing more zea∣lous, * 1.163 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 1.164 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 1.165 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 1.166 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 1.167 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 1.168 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 1.169 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 1.170 Hereticall.

2. The property of a Solidity likewise was patronized by An∣tient Fathers, in confutation of Heretiques, by teaching e 1.171 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 1.172 Being whole in the whole space, and in every part thereof; and of Christ's Body g 1.173 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 1.174 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 1.175 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 1.176 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 1.177 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 1.178 Omnipotencie of God.

BOOKE V. Your Orall Eating, Gutturall Swallowing, and Inward Digestion (as you have n 1.179 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 1.180 Pernicious, and Flagitious. Besides you have a Con∣futation of the Hereticall Manichees, for their p 1.181 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 1.182 Cleaving to the guts of your Communicants, and r 1.183 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 1.184 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 1.185 Pagans; besides the Generall Doctrine of the power of

your Priests u 1.186 Intention, in consecrating, hath beene yoaked, by your owne Iesuite, with the Heresies of the x 1.187 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

• * 1.1

  Coloss. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.2

  Booke 1. thorow∣out.
• * 1.3

  Booke 4. Chap. 2. and 3.
• * 1.4

  Iob 13. 4, & 7.
• a 1.5

  Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 7. in the Challenge.
• b 1.6

  Booke 6. Chap. 1. Sect. 5.
• c 1.7

  Booke 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 1.
• d 1.8

  Ibid. Chap. 10.
• e 1.9

  Ibid. and after, &c.
• f 1.10

  Ibid. Chap. 3. Sect. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• g 1.11

  Ibid.
• h 1.12

  Ibid. Chap. 10. Sect. 4.
• * 1.13

  Ibid. Chap. 11.
• i 1.14

  Ibid. Chap. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Sect. 4.
• k 1.15

  Booke 6. 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ ••ut.
• a 1.16

  Missal. Rom. Of∣ferimus Majestati tuae, Domine, Imma∣culatam Hostiam san∣ctum panem vi••ae ae∣ternae, & Calicem sa∣lutis perperuae—su∣pra quae propitro vul∣tu respicere digneris, sicut dignatus es mu∣nera justi pueri tui Abel. And in the next place. Jube hae•• per∣ferri per manus sancti Angeli in sublime Al∣tare tuum coeleste.
• b 1.17

  Bellarm. lib. 2. de Missa, cap. 24. Facilis est respensio: Non petimus pro Christi reconciliatione apud Patrem, sed pro no∣stra infirmitate: etsi enim oblatio conse∣crata ex parte rei, quae offertur, & ex parte Christi princi∣palis offerentis sem∣per Deo placebat, ta∣men ex parte Mini∣stri & populiastantis, qui simul etiam offe∣runt, fieri potest ut non placeat—Paulò 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Comparatio non est inter Sacrificium nostrum, & Sacrificiū Abelis, sed tantùm ratione fidei, & devo∣tionis offerentium, ut nimirum tanta fide offerant, quantâ Abel—quod Sacrificium Abelis non habetet in se, quod Deo pla∣cere, cumque placare possit, quare dicitur Heb. 11. per fidem ob∣tulit Abel Deo Sacri••∣ficium melius—Ratio. Gen. 4. Respe∣〈◊〉〈◊〉 Deus a•••• Abel, & Sacrificium. Post. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Porrò.—Deferri Sacrificium per ma∣nus Angeli nihil aliud est, quam intercessi∣one Angeli commendari Deo nostrum obsequium, & cultum. So also Suarez Tem. 3. Disp. 83. Art. 4. Jube hae••, i. e. ••o••a nostra. Et Salmeron ••es. Tom. 9. Tract. 32. sub. finem.
• c 1.18

  Bellarm. sup.
• a 1.19

  Bellarm. lib. 2. de Missa, cap. 24. Super quae propitio, &c. ha∣bentur apud Ambro∣sium post consecrati∣onem. Lib. 4. de Sa∣cram. cap. 6. R•…•…s••s Bellar. ibid. Haec ver∣ba posita sunt post consecrationem apud Ambrosium lib. 4. de Sacram. cap, 6. in Li∣turg•…•…s Jacobi, Cle∣mentis, Basilii, Chry∣sostomi.
• b 1.20

  Liturgia Iacobi an∣tè Consecratienem. Di∣aconus. Oremus pro sanctificatis tremen∣dis donis—ut Do∣minus acceptis ••is in super-coeles••e spiritu∣ale Altate suum in o∣dorem suavitatis mit∣tat nobis divinam gratiam. Tum Sacer∣dos. Deus, ac Pater Domini Dei, & Ser∣vatoris—qui tibi oblata munera fru∣gum oblationes acce∣pisti in odorem suavi∣tatis—sanctifica animas nostras. Post Sacerdos consecra••s ver∣ba Consecrationis adhi∣bet: Sancte qui in san∣ctis requi••scis—suscipe hymnum in∣corruptum in sanctis & incruentis Sacrifi∣ciis tuis.
• c 1.21

  Liturgia Basilii an∣tè Consecrationem. Pon∣tifex—Suscipe nos, ut simus digni offerre rationabile illud abs{que} sanguine Sacrificium—& vide super ser∣vitutem nostram•…•… ••t suscepisti munera Abel, sic ex manibus nostris suscipe ista ex benignitate tuâ. Et rursus Diac. Prooblatis, sancti∣ficatis, & honorificentissimis muneribus Deum postulemus, ut qui accepit ea in sancto & supercoelesti Altari suo in odorem suavitatis, emittat gratiam & spiritum nobis, &c. P••st, sequitur Cons•…•…ratis. Po••tifex: Respice Domine Iesu. Et post Consecrationem; Gratias agimus.
• d 1.22

  Clement. Constitut. lib. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. cap. 16. called, Constitutio Jacobi, a∣pud Binium. Tu, qui Abelis Sacrificium suscepisti—And after, Pro omnibus tibi gloria, &c. cap. 17. Benignè aspicere dig••eris super haec dona propo••ita in conspectu tuo—& complaceas tibi in eis, in honorem Christi, & mittas spiritum super hoc Sacrificium, testem passionum ejus—ut ostendas hun•• panem corpus ejus, &c. Po•…•… Consecrationem, cap. 19. Etiam rogemus Deum, per Christum suum, pro munere oblato Domino, ut Deus, qui bonus est, suscipiat illud pe•• Medistorem Christ•…•… in coele••••e Altare suum in odorem suavitatis pro hâc Ec∣clesiâ, &c.
• e 1.23

  Missa Chrysostomi antè Consecrationem. Adhuc o••ferimus tibi rationabile, & incruentum hoc obse∣quium, Deposcimus ut mittas Spiritum sanctum super nos, & super apposita muneta. Sequitur Consecratio. Fac Panem istum preciosum Corp••s, &c. Post Consecrationem. Adhuc offerimus tibi rationabile hoc obsequium pro fi∣deliter dormientibus, &c. Post. Dominum deprecemur, ut qui s••scepit ea in sancto & coelesti Altari suo, mittat nobis propterea gratiam, & donum Spiritus Sancti.
• f 1.24

  A•…•…s. de Sacram. lib. 4. cap. 6. post Consecrationem. Offe∣rimus tibi hunc Panem ••anctum, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Calicem, & petimus ut hanc Oblationem suscipias in sublimi Altari tuo per manus Angelorum, sicu•• ac••ipere dignatus es munera pucri tui Abel, &c.
• g 1.25

  Booke 5. thorow∣out.
• a 1.26

  Booke 2. Chap. 1. Sect. 6.
• * 1.27

  Ibid.
• b 1.28

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 5. & 11. & Sect. 14. in Chryso•…•…. and by Cyprian his Confutation of the Aquarii, ibid. Sect. 5. & Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 3.
• c 1.29

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 5.
• * 1.30

  Ibid. Sect. 13.
• d 1.31

  Above in this Booke Chap. 1. Sect. 4.
• e 1.32

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 6.
• f 1.33

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 8, 9, &c.
• g 1.34

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 11.
• h 1.35

  Booke 4. thorow∣out.
• i 1.36

  Ibid. Chap. 7. Sect. 6. and Booke 5. Chap. 3. thorowout.
• k 1.37

  Booke 5. thorow∣out.
• l 1.38

  Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 10.
• m 1.39

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 11. and Booke 7. Chap. 3. Sect. 2.
• n 1.40

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 11.
• o 1.41

  Booke 5. Chap. 5. Sect. 3.
• p 1.42

  Booke 6. Chap. 3. Sect. 2. thorowout, and else-where.
• q 1.43

  Booke 4. Chap. 10. Sect. 1.
• r 1.44

  In this Booke 8. Chap. 1. Sect. 3.
• s 1.45

  Booke 6. thorow∣out, more especially Chap. 5. Sect. 9, & 10.
• t 1.46

  Booke 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 6.
• u 1.47

  Booke 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 1, 2, 3, 4, &c.
• x 1.48

  In this Booke, Ch•…•… 2. Sect. 2, & 3.
• y 1.49

  Above in this Book Chap. 1. Sect. 3.
• z 1.50

  Booke 7. thorow∣out.
• a 1.51

  Booke 4. thorow∣out.
• b 1.52

  See Booke 6. tho∣rowout.
• c 1.53

  Booke 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 13.
• a 1.54

  Booke 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 6. (in the first Challenge.)
• b 1.55

  Booke 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 9.
• a 1.56

  Cyrillu•• Hieros. my∣••ag. Catech. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• b 1.57

  Booke 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 9.
• a 1.58

  Booke 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 3.
• b 1.59

  Booke 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 3.
• c 1.60

  Ibid. Sect. 5.
• d 1.61

  Ibid. Sect. 2.
• a 1.62

  Booke 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 3.
• b 1.63

  Booke 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 3.
• c 1.64

  Ibid. Sect. 8.
• d 1.65

  Ibid. Sect. 5.
• e 1.66

  Ibid. Sect. 2.
• f 1.67

  Ibid.
• g 1.68

  Ibid. Sect. 7.
• a 1.69

  Booke 4.
• b 1.70

  Booke 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 6.
• a 1.71

  Booke 4. Chap. 1. Sect. 2.
• b 1.72

  Booke 3. Chap. 4. Sect. 6.
• a 1.73

  Booke 5. Chap. 5. Sect. 3.
• b 1.74

  Booke 5. thorow∣out.
• c 1.75

  Ibid.
• d 1.76

  Ibid. Chap. 8. Sect 3.
• e 1.77

  Ibid. Chap. 2. Sect. 4.
• f 1.78

  Booke 5. Chap. 3. Sect. 1.
• a 1.79

  Booke 5. Chap. 5. Sect. 3.
• b 1.80

  Hieronymus ad E∣di•…•…. Nos in baptis∣mo, sanguine & Cor∣pore Christi vesci∣mur.
• c 1.81

  Booke 5. Chap. 8. Sect. 3.
• d 1.82

  Ibid.
• e 1.83

  Ibid.
• f 1.84

  Ibid.
• g 1.85

  Ibid.
• h 1.86

  Ibid. Chap. 2. Sect. 4.
• i 1.87

  Booke 5. Chap. 3. Sect. 4.
• a 1.88

  Booke 6. thorowout.
• b 1.89

  Ibid. Chap. 5. Sect. 13.
• a 1.90

  Ibid.
• a 1.91

  Booke 7. Chap. 3. Sect. 4.
• b 1.92

  Ibid.
• c 1.93

  Ibid.
• d 1.94

  Booke 4. Chap. 2. Sect. 2.
• e 1.95

  Ibid. Sect. 5.
• f 1.96

  Booke 7. Chap. 2. Sect. 2.
• g 1.97

  Ibid.
• h 1.98

  Booke 5. Chap. 2. Sect. 7.
• i 1.99

  Ibid.
• k 1.100

  Booke 7. Chap. 2. Sect. 1.
• l 1.101

  Booke 6. Chap. 5. Sect. 8.
• m 1.102

  Booke 7. Chap. 2. Sect. 2.
• n 1.103

  Ibid. Sect. 3.
• o 1.104

  Ibid.
• p 1.105

  Booke 7. Chap. 2. Sect. 3.
• q 1.106

  Ibid.
• r 1.107

  Ibid. Chap. 3. Sect. 4.
• s 1.108

  Ibid.
• a 1.109

  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 1.110

  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 1.111

  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 1.112

  Booke 6. Chap. 1. Sect. 2.
• d 1.113

  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 1.114

  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 1.115

  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 1.116

  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 1.117

  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 1.118

  Clem. Octarus—In 〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•…—〈◊〉〈◊〉 accuratissimè mendis pur∣gatus.
• k 1.119

  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 1.120

  Bulla eadem. Sa∣cram Scripturam ad∣mitto juxta eum fen∣sum, quem Tenuit, & Tenet Mater Ecclesia—extra quam nemo salvus, &c.
• b 1.121

  Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 11.
• c 1.122

  Booke 5. Chap. 4. Sect. 2.
• d 1.123

  Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 13.
• a 1.124

  Bulla ••ad. Nec Scripturam ullam, ni∣si juxtà unanimem Consensum Patrum interpretabor.
• b 1.125

  Valent. Ies. Anal. l••b. 8. cap. 8. Patet no∣bis via urgendi unum aut alrerum Docto∣rem authoritate reli∣quorum.
• c 1.126

  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 1.127

  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 1.128

  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 1.129

  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 1.130

  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 1.131

  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 1.132

  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?
• * 1.133

  Booke 2. Chap. 1. Sect. 1.
• k 1.134

  Booke 2. Chap. 1. Sect. 6. and Chap. 2. Sect. 6, & 7.
• l 1.135

  Booke 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 4. See also Booke 3. Chap. 3. in the words, [The fruit of the Vine.] Sect. 5.
• a 1.136

  See above in this Sect. 4. initio, at the letter (a).
• b 1.137

  Synod. Trident. Sess. 1••.
• c 1.138

  Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 11.
• * 1.139

  Ibid. Sect. 5. & Sect. 10.
• d 1.140

  Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 9.
• e 1.141

  Booke 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 5.
• f 1.142

  See Booke 4.
• a 1.143

  Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 3.
• * 1.144

  Ibid.
• b 1.145

  Booke 1. thorow-out.
• c 1.146

  Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 7.
• d 1.147

  Ibid.
• e 1.148

  Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 10.
• f 1.149

  Ibid. Sect. 10.
• g 1.150

  Booke 1. Chap. 3. Sect. 4.
• h 1.151

  Ibid.
• i 1.152

  Booke 2. Chap. 3. thorowout.
• k 1.153

  Ibid.
• l 1.154

  Booke 2. Chap. 3. Sect. 2.
• * 1.155

  Iohn 3.
• m 1.156

  See above in this Booke, Chap. 2. Sect. 3.
• n 1.157

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 2.
• o 1.158

  Booke 4. Chap. 4. Sect. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• p 1.159

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 2.
• q 1.160

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 9.
• r 1.161

  Manichaei dice∣bant Christum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 esse verum hominem, sed phantasma quod∣dam. Pr•…•…l. Ele••ch. Haret.
• s 1.162

  Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect. 12.
• * 1.163

  Ibid. Sect. 13.
• u 1.164

  Booke 4. Chap. 4. Sect. 6. & Chap. 5. Sect. 3. & Chap. 6. Sect. 1.
• x 1.165

  Chap. 4. thorowout.
• y 1.166

  Ibid. Sect. 6.
• a 1.167

  Ibid.
• b 1.168

  Chap. 4. Sect. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• c 1.169

  Chap. 6. Sect. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• d 1.170

  Ibid.
• e 1.171

  Chap. 7. Sect. 6.
• f 1.172

  Chap. 7. Sect. 6.
• g 1.173

  Chap. 4. Sect. 9.
• h 1.174

  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 1.175

  Booke 4. Chap. 4. Sect. 6.
• k 1.176

  Ibid. Chap. 3. Sect. 2.
• l 1.177

  Chap. 4. Sect. 6. at (b & c).
• m 1.178

  Ibid.
• n 1.179

  Booke 5. thorowout.
• o 1.180

  Chap. 5. Sect. 2.
• p 1.181

  Booke 5. Chap. 6. Sect. 3.
• q 1.182

  Booke 5. Chap. 7. Sect. 4.
• r 1.183

  Booke 5. Chap. 7. Sect. 1.
• s 1.184

  See above in this Booke, Chap. 1. Sect. 2.
• t 1.185

  Booke 7. Chap. 8. Sect. 2.
• u 1.186

  Chap. 5. Sect. 3.
• x 1.187

  Chap. 9. Sect. 5.