The Lords Supper or, A vindication of the sacrament of the blessed body and blood of Christ according to its primitive institution. In eight books; discovering the superstitious, sacrilegious, and idolatrous abomination of the Romish Master. Together with the consequent obstinacies, overtures of perjuries, and the heresies discernable in the defenders thereof. By Thomas Morton B.D. Bp. of Duresme.

The miserable Vnconscionablenesse of the Romish Objecturs made clearely Discernable, by their owne Confessions, in granting that the Formerly alleged Testimonies of the Fathers are Not to be taken in a Literall Sense. SECT. III.

ALl the Questions betweene your Romish Disputers and Vs (concerning the Speeches of the Fathers, objected [ 20] by them, through the whole Treatise of the Masse, for proofe of a Bodily Presence) is, whether they are to be taken Literally and Properly, as they sound to the eare; or Impro∣perly and Figuratively, as they are to be apprehended by our understandings, in a qualifyed Sacramentall and Mysti∣cal Signification. And whether you can conclude from them a Properly (so called) Corporall Vnion with his sacred Body; whether by a Corporall Touch and Tast, Mixture, or Nutri∣tion and Augmentation thereby, or no. You have heard your Doctors object against Vs the naked and Symbolicall Phrases of the Fathers: will you be so good as heare them [ 30] againe, both relating the Expositions, which the Protestants make of the words of the Fathers objected, and afterwards enforced, by good evidence, to interpret the Fathers accor∣dingly.

These you Doctors certifie you (see the Margin) that Calvin indeed Expoundeth each phrase as spoken by an excesse and exuberancie of speech, for extolling, and commending the Dignity of the Sacrament. So hee, of Calvin. Likewise of your owne Romish Doctors (saith your Vasquez) Some of the Vniversity of Complutum in Spaine, did interpret the words of the Fathers, as spoken Hyperbolically. And if you [ 40] shall reject these, as the meaner Some; wee shall enquire in∣to other Some, of better eminencie. As namely your Bellar∣mine, and Tolet, both Cardinalls: your Suarez, and even Vasquez himselfe, all Iesuits in their Times.

Let them (wee pray you) make their owne Answers in order, as they have beene Cited. First Bellarmine;5 1.1 It is ordinary (saith hee) with these Fathers, to wit, Irenaeus,

Hilarie, Nyssen, Cyril, and others, to say that the Eucharist nou∣risheth our Bodies: But they did not understand a Substantiall nutrition, or augmentation of our Bodies; for so they should make it to be meat for the Belly, and not for the soule, than which nothing could be feigned more Absurd. So hee. Cardinall Tolet is the Second, wee desire to heare his Judgement.6 1.2 These Fa∣thers (saith hee) Cyril and Hilarie, when they tell us, that wee have a Corporall and Naturall Vnion with Christs Body in the Sacrament, are not to be understood, as if our Bodies and Christs [ 10] Body were made one, in Entity: this were a Doctrine unworthy of them; but they meant of the Vnion of Faith and Affection, Christ being within us Really, as the Cause thereof. So he. Observe that Cardinall Tolet noteth the Fathers to have sayd, that the Bodies of the Communicants and the Body of Christ, by this Sacrament, have One naturall Being; because of their other Sayings, that by eating of this Sacrament our Bodies are Nou∣rished and Augmented by Christs Body. All which are spoken in a Sacramentall tenour of speech, and not properly, as you heare. Francis Suarez his Course is next;7 1.3 I say (saith he) [ 20] that Cardinall Mendoza is reported to have taught (namely, as out of the Fathers) that Christ's Body is so united with our Bo∣dies, that they are both joyntly mingled in parts, one with another. Which is an Opinion Improbable, and unworthy of the Majesty and Dignity of the Sacrament, which was instituted by Christ, not for a Corporall, but for a Spirituall Conjunction: and the other Con∣junction is False and Absurd. So he. Gabriell Vasquez is now to take his turne, first to make his Preface, and then to deliver his Opinion.8 1.4 Although the Ancient Fathers, in expounding these [ 40] mysteries of Faith, use words not so usuall in our Schooles, yet ought wee to interpret their speeches so, that although at the first sight they containe some Absurdity, yet not to take them contrary to their [ 30] meaning without due advise, and that relying upon Testimonies of Antiquity. So hee. And for Instances hee bringeth divers, and

more particularly that Similitude of Conjunction, already ob∣jected out of Cyr••l; As waxe with waxe melted are joyned toge∣ther. And this (if it be taken in the Rigidity of the words) hee denyeth to note either Diffusion of Christs Body into the parts of mans Body, or else a Substantiall Conversion into them.

All these acknowledgements being so plaine and ingenuous, and delivered with so full an Assurance and Resolution of your owne Doctors, of most exquisite judgement above Others in your Church, do minister unto us matter of Astonishment, to wonder with what Consciences they could urge us with these [ 10] Sentences of the Fathers, as they goe under a Literall habit and propriety of Speech; seeing that now, after some Delibe∣ration, they find the same to be so glowing hot, that they them∣selves, not daring to touch them with their bare fingers, take hold of them with a Distinction, as it were with a paire of Tongs, saying, that9 1.5 Because there is no Naturall Conjunction between Christs Body and ours, excepting onely a Touch of the one by the other, under formes of Bread: The Vnion, spoken of by the Fa∣thers, is not Physicall, or Naturall, but Spirituall. So Suarez. Not Physicall, or Naturall, but Metaphoricall. So Vasquez. But yet [ 20] how Mysticall it is, this will be handled in the next Section.

Can there then be any thing more Odious or Vnjust, than for your Disputers to proclame their Adversaries Heretikes, for expounding the aforesayd Sentences of the Fathers, in an unproper Sense; which liberty, They themselves both now have practised, and also instructed Others to doe the like by their owne words and examples? wherein as they are gene∣rally found Contradictory to themselves, so are they more particularly one to another. For Doctor Heskins objecting the Sayings of Chrysostome and Cyril, concerning the Conjunction [ 30] of Christs Body with ours, to be like as when Waxe is melted with waxe in one Vnion, Hee himselfe waxed wroth with Protestants so farre, as to iudge them Men given over to the Devill, because they did not believe them according to the outward letter. Notwithstanding your owne Vasquez (as you have heard) taught that the same words cannot be admitted in the strict∣nesse of the Termes; as also your Suarez and Tolet in saying, that to Interpret them Literally, were to detract from the Wis∣dome of those Fathers, and from the Dignity and Majesty of the Sacrament itselfe. Lastly, albeit your* 1.6 Bellarmine presseth [ 40] much this Testimony of Cyril, wherein the Christian Com∣municants are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, Cariers of Christ; yet your Suarez expounding this, and that other of Damascen, calling them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, Ioynt Bodies with Christ, and so partakers of the Divine Nature; alloweth no more in the Continuance of this Carying of Christs Body, and Vnion therewith, but onely a Spirituall, that is, of Grace and Affection.

Notes

• 5 1.1

  Bellar. lib. 2. de Euch. cap. 4 §. Se∣cundo Respondeo. (Wherein also hee expoundeth the like words of Iustin.) Non est novum apud Ite∣naeum, Hilarium, Nyssenum, Cyril∣lum, & alios, ut Eu charistia dicatur ale∣re corpora nostra, sed non intelligunt Pa∣tres, cum hoc dicunt, Eucharistiâ nutriri vel augeri mortalem substantiam corporis nostri; sic enim fa∣cerent Eucharistiam cibum ventris, non mentis, qu•• nihil absurdius fingi possit.
• 6 1.2

  Tolet. in Ioh. cap. 6. Annot. 29. Cum dicunt Hilar & Cyril nostra corpora habere unionem cor∣poralem & natura∣lem cum corpore Christ, Doctores ••i non sunt ita intelli∣gendi, ut velin•• ex Christo sumpto & su∣men••e fieri unū Ens naturale, indigna est illis Doctrina) sed hoc dicere voluerunt, praeter unionem, quae ratione charitatis & fidei sit, adesse intra nos ipsos verè & rea∣liter Christum ipsū, qui causa est fidei e∣jusdem.
• 7 1.3

  Suarez. in 3. Tho. qu. 79. Disp 64. Sect. 3. Nihilominus haec sententia impro∣babilis, & aliena dig∣nitate & majestate hujus Sacramēti, quod non propter corpora∣lem conjunctionem, sed propter spiritua∣lem institutum est, dicente Christo, Mea verba spiritus sunt & vita. Ioh. 6. [See a∣bove, Chap. 7. Sect. 2. at the letter f.] Sua∣rez. Damascen. lib. 4 cap. 14. Hoc Sacra∣mento—nos Christi concorporei existimus—& animo & voluntate copulamur. Cyril. Hierosol. Catechis. 4. Mystag. Sumpto corpore & sanguine Christi efficimur comparticipes corporis & sanguinis, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,—cum ejus sanguinem & corpus in nostra membra receperimus, arquè ita (ut B. Pe••ius dicit) Divinae naturae consortes efficimur. [Hinc Suarez:] Vbi propter Sacramentalem susceptionem, non agnoscit aliam unionem praeter spiritualem per gratiam, &c. In 3. Tho. qu. 79. Disp. 64. quo supra.
• 8 1.4

  Vas∣quez in 3. Thom. quaest. 79. Art. 2. Disp. 204. cap. 2. Tametsi Antiqui Ecclesiae Patres in exponendis mysterijs nostrae fidei, insolita, & pa••um in Scholis usitata ratione dicendi interdum utantur, ita tamen eorum verba & sententias accipere debemus, ut licet primo aspectu aliquid Absurdi continere videantur, nihil tamen contra ipsos; nisi maturo consilio & examine, aliorumque patrum, aut conciliorum testimonijs nixi pronunciemus. Ibid. cap. 3. Aliqui omnia Patrum Testimonia, quae allegavimus, per figuram Hyperbolen interpretantur; ut ita Patres virtutem jujus Sacramenti eximiè commendare viderentur: non quôd revera fieret ita. Ex Haereticis hoc mo∣do testimonia Hilarij & Cyrilli interpretatus est Calvinus.—Neque defuerunt Complutenses aliqui, qui eodem modo per Hyperbolen illa explicarent—Ibid. cap. 4. Quidam putarunt, si sine Hyperbole explica∣rentur, sequi, ut caro Christi per omnem partem corporis nostri dissunderetur, ut cera cerae lique facta—at non sic dissunditur—Cyrillus usus est hac similitudine ad ostendendam veram & realem mixtionem corpo∣ris nostri cum corpore Christi, non tamen quoad dissusionem eam similitudimen locum habere putabat—Nec enim est Physics unio carnis nostrae cum carne Christi, sicut ex duabus ceris, neque fieri unam carn••m per conversionem unius in alteram, sicut fit in nutritione animalis naturali, neque id ullus sanae mentis, ullo modo assereret.
• 9 1.5

  Suarez. in 3. Thom. qu. 79. Art. 8. Disp. 64. Sect. 3. Ex∣istimo omnino cer∣tum, praeter conta∣ctum corporis nostri & Christi, medijs speciebus Sacramen∣talibus, non interve∣nire materialem ali∣quam unionem phy∣sicam & veram.
• * 1.6

  Vide Bellar. quo supra de Euchar. lib. 2. cap. 13. supra ci∣tat.