OVr next Reason of the Insufficiencie meeteth with the Cardinalls Reason, enforced by the First Horne of his Dilemma, thus:* 1.1 If Iustine (saith hee) could have sayd that Christs flesh is eaten in the Eucharist, onely in a Signe; then did hee praevaricate in the Case of Christians, and make their faith most odious, in increasing the Suspicion of the Crime objected [ 20] against them. Wee Answer, that although hee might have sayd, that Christs flesh is eaten Bodily, onely in a Signe, yet was not this necessary for the freeing of the Christian Faith from that Suspicion of Eating a Child. One Reason may be, Because nothing was more familiar, even unto the Heathen themselves, than to use the like language, in calling their Sacramentall and Mysticall, Signes, by the names of the Things signifyed thereby, whereof you have heard a Me∣morable example out of* 1.2 Homer; where, even as Christ sayd of Consecrated Bread, [This is my Body;] So those [ 30] Heathen, in Sacrifising of Lambes, for Ratification of their Oaths and Covenants, called those Sacrifices their Oaths. And that nothing was more familiar among the Heathen, you may know by that Proverbiall speech; Sine Cerere & Libero friget Venus: without Ceres and Bacchus Lust doth lan∣guish: where they give to Bread the name of the Goddesse Ceres, and the name of God Bacchus to Wine.
Secondly, and more especially may this appeare out of Iustine, immediatly after the place now objected, thus: 15 1.3 Christ (saith Iustine) receiving Bread, saith [This is my [ 40] Body:] and taking the Cup, sayd [This is my Blood:] and delivered them onely in those words; the which also even the wicked Devils, by Imitation, have taught to be done in the My∣steries of their Mithra, (namely) for that Bread and a Pot of Water is put in the Sacrifices of him that is initiated unto their Communion, in the Sacrifices, by Addition of certaine words, as you either know, or might have knowne. So Iustine,