ONely give us leave to speer you a Question, before wee end this third Booke. Seeing that Transubstantiation cannot properly be, by your owne Doctrine, except the Substance of Bread ceasing to be, there remaine only the Accidents thereof (this Position of the continuance of Onely Accidents, without a Subject, being your Positive Foundation of Transubstantiation) Why is it that none of all your Romish Disputers was hitherto [ 30] ever able to produce any one Testimony out of all the Volumes of Antiquity, for proofe of this one point, excepting onely that of Cyril, which* 1.1 hath bin (as yoe have heard) egregiously abused and falsified? Learne you to Answer this Question, or else shame to object Antiquity any more; but rather con∣fesse your Article of Transubstantiation to be but a Bastardly Impe.
Wee might inlarge our selves in this point of your Vncons∣cionablenesse, in your objecting Testimonies of Fathers, for proofe aswell of Transubstantiation, as of the other Articles [ 40] above-mentioned; but that they are to be presented in their proper places, to wit; in the following Treatises, concerning Corporall Presence; Corporall Vnion, Corporall Sacrifice of Christ's Body in the Sacrament, and the Divine Adoration thereof; so plainly that any man may be perswaded, our Opposites meane no good Faith, in arguing from the Iudgement of Ancient Fa∣thers.
Hitherto of the First Romish Consequences.